alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 22 (Tuesday, February 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01998]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 9685-030]


Trafalgar Power, Inc.; Ampersand Cranberry Lake Hydro, LLC; 
Notice of Application for Transfer of License and Soliciting Comments 
and Motions To Intervene

    On December 5, 2014 and supplemented on January 13, 2015, Trafalgar 
Power, Inc. (transferor) and Ampersand Cranberry Lake Hydro, LLC 
(transferee) filed an application for transfer of license of the 
Cranberry Lake Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 9685. The project is 
located on the Oswegatchie River in St. Lawrence, County, New York.
    The transferor and transferee seek Commission approval to transfer 
the license for the Cranberry Lake Hydroelectric Project from the 
transferor to the transferee.
    Applicant Contact: For Transferor: Mr. Arthur Steckler, President, 
Trafalgar Power, Inc., 11010 Lake Grove Blvd., Suite 100, Box 353, 
Morrisville, NC 27560-7392. For Transferee: Mr. Lutz Loegters, 
Ampersand Cranberry Lake Hydro LLC, c/o Ampersand Hydro, LLC, 717 
Atlantic Avenue, Suite 1A, Boston, MA 02111.
    FERC Contact: Patricia W. Gillis, (202) 502-8735.
    Deadline for filing comments and motions to intervene: 30 days from 
the issuance date of this notice, by the Commission. The Commission 
strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene 
and comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief 
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the 
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You 
must include your name and contact information at the end of your 
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f9bfbcabbab6979590979caa8c8989968b8db99f9c8b9ad79e968f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e8aeadbaaba7868481868dbb9d9898879a9ca88e8d9a8bc68f879e">[email protected]</span></a>, (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: 
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include 
docket number P-9685-030.

    Dated: January 27, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01998 Filed 2-2-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
            IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

            In connection  with the annual report of New Century Equity Holdings
Corp.  (the  "Company")  on Form 10-K for the year ended  December 31, 2004,  as
filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof, I, Steven
J. Pully, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the
best of my knowledge that:

(1)         The Form 10-K report for the year ended  December  31,  2004,  filed
            with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2005, 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 Form 10-K report for the year ended
            December 31, 2004 fairly  presents,  in all material  respects,  the
            financial  condition and results of operations of New Century Equity
            Holdings Corp.

By:  /s/ STEVEN J. PULLY                         Date:  March 31, 2005
   ----------------------------                         ---------------
Steven J. Pully
Chief Executive Officer
```
EXHIBIT 99



                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-QSB for the quarter ended  September 30, 2002
(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/ Joseph J. Bouffard
                            ----------------------------------------------
                            Name: Joseph J. Bouffard
                            Title:   President and Chief Executive Officer


                         By:/s/ Michael J. Dee
                            -----------------------------------------------
                            Name:    Michael J. Dee
                            Title:   Chief Financial Officer and Controller
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1999 

To require an annual report on offsets and pay-fors, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 6, 2017 

Mr. BUCK (for himself, Mr. PALMER, Mr. BIGGS, Mr. MEADOWS, Mr. GOSAR, 

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia, Mr. DESJARLAIS, Mr. BABIN, Mr. BRAT, 

Mr. GROTHMAN, Mr. POLIS, Mr. GRIFFITH, Mr. RENACCI, Mr. SANFORD, 

and Mr. PERRY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To require an annual report on offsets and pay-fors, and 

for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Federal Budget Ac5 countability Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. OMB REPORT ON AND SYSTEM FOR OFFSETS AND 

7 PAY-FORS. 

8 (a) REPORT.—Not later than March 1 after the first 

9 full year following the date of the enactment of this Act, 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1999 IH

1 and annually thereafter, the Director of the Office of Man2 agement and Budget shall submit to Congress a report 

3 on the effect of provisions of legislation for the previous 

4 congressional session that were enacted to offset or pay 

5 for the costs of carrying out such legislation, including 

6 provisions that increase revenue, rescind budget authority, 

7 or reduce direct spending for the previous congressional 

8 session. Any such provision shall be analyzed and included 

9 in the report for at least 10 years. 

10 (b) TRACKING SYSTEM FOR OFFSETS AND PAY-FORS

11 REQUIRED.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the 

12 enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Man13 agement and Budget shall establish a system to track the 

14 accuracy of the offsets and pay-fors and submit to Con15 gress a report on the system. 

16 (c) OFFSET AND PAY-FOR DEFINED.—The term 

17 ‘‘offset and pay-for’’ means an estimate by the Congres18 sional Budget Office for a provision of legislation that re19 duces spending, increases revenue, or reduces the deficit. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
P. 1


# OAR Box 1103 Prepped by Ryan Dugan



### Document

Number: 

# 89 ) IV-C- 1 Docket Number: 

# A-83-4 1

Printed 4/11/20081:50:51 PM

Sheet 89of 174P. 2 

# /Uw / UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 1 ^|/^ L¥

WASHINGTON ; D.C . 20460 ~yTj ^ d, ' J^



### F B - 6 [99

5 OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N Mr . Jame s E . Gilchris t Vic e Presiden t America n Mining Congres s 192 0 NStreet , NW , Suit e 300 . Washington , D C 20036-753 5 Dea r Mr . Gilchrist : Thi s i s i n respons e t o you r lette r o f February1 , 19. 9 5 , requesting a n extensio nof
- sixt yday s i nthe commen t perio d o n the Environmenta l Protectio nAgency' s (EPA ) propose d recommendation s o n Federa l Radiatio n Protectio nGuidanc e fo r Exposur e o f the Genera l Public . W e hav e carefull yconsidere d you r reques t fo r a n extensio n .o f the forma l period " o f commen t o n thes e propose d recommenda-tions , an d hav e decide d no t t o gran t you r reques t a t thi s time . W e wil l re-evaluat e thi s decisio n following the publi c hearing t o b e hel d February22-23 , 1995 , i n Washington , DC . Pleas e b e assured , however , tha t w e wil l mak e everyeffor t t o consider " comment s receive d afte r the expiratio n o f the forma l commen t period , an d tha t the proces s o f developing fina l recommendation s wil l extend wel l pas t the extensio n yo u have ' requested . Sincerely ,
Alla nC.B . Richardso n Deput yDirecto r fo r Federa l Guidanc e Criteri a & Standard s Divisio n Offic e o f Radiatio nPrograms ' Enclosur e

Printed on Recycled

Paper
Title,PRM_Number,Docket_ID,Petitioner,Petitioner_Type,Affected_CFR_Parts,Date_PRM_Received,Date_PRM_Docketed,Date_of_Notice_of_Docketing,FR_Citation_for_Notice_of_Docketing,NRC_Office,NRC_Contact_Name,NRC_Contact_Email,NRC_Contact_Phone,Status,Abstract,PRM_Disposition_Notice_Publication_Date,FR_Citation_for_PRM_Disposition_Notice,Associated_Rulemaking,Associated_PetitionsAlternative Method for Calculating Embrittlement for Steel Reactor Vessels,PRM-50-120,NRC-2019-0180,"Thomas A. Bergman on behalf of NuScale Power, LLC",Licensee,50,08/19/2019,09/11/2019,11/19/2019,84 FR 63819,Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,Aaron Kwok,aaron.kwok@nrc.gov,,Open PRM,"On August 19, 2019, Thomas A. Bergman on behalf of NuScale Power, LLC, submitted a petition requesting that the NRC revise its regulations to alleviate a requirement for calculating the embrittlement for advanced reactor designs and that it add the formula for calculating the mean value of the transition temperature shift for the embrittlement trend curve (ETC) described in American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E900-152 to its regulations and guidance documents.",,,,Licensing Safety Analysis for Loss-of-Coolant Accidents,PRM-50-124,NRC-2022-0178,Ralph O. Meyer,Private Citizen,50,08/12/2022,10/11/2022,11/23/2022,87 FR 71531,Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,Soly Soto Lugo,Soly.SotoLugo@nrc.gov,301-415-7528,Open PRM,The petitioner requests that NRC revise its regulations at Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) regarding the licensing safety analysis for loss-of-coolant accidents.,,,,Public Protective Actions During a General Emergency,PRM-50-123,NRC-2020-0155,Thomas McKenna,Private Citizen,50,06/01/2020,06/24/2020,08/31/2020,85 FR 53690,Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,Philip Benavides,Philip.Benavides@nrc.gov,301-415-3246,Open PRM,"On June 1, 2020, Thomas McKenna submitted a petition requesting that the NRC revise its regulations so that protective actions implemented during a General Emergency at a nuclear power plant will most likely do more good than harm when both the possible physical health effects of radiation exposure and protective actions are taken into consideration.",,,,Voluntary Adoption of Revised Design Basis Accident Dose Criteria,PRM-50-121,NRC-2020-0055,John G. Parillo,Private Citizen,50,11/23/2019,02/19/2020,05/27/2020,85 FR 31709,Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,Tyler Hammock,Tyler.Hammock@nrc.gov,301-415-1381,Open PRM,"The petitioner requests that NRC develop a voluntary rule allowing licensees to adopt revised the current design basis accident for the dose acceptance criteria that will reflect modern health physics recommendations and modern plant designs, better balance the protection of the control room operator and of the public, and relieve the regulatory burden associated with meeting the current control room dose criterion.",,,,
#### ELIZA BLANKENSHIP and others v JAMES HUNT.

*Parties*— Action *ly Personal Representative.*

An action upon a note executed to a deceased person during his life-time for land sold by him, should be brought in the name of his personal representative.

Civil ActioN, tried at Spring Term, 1876, of Rutherford. Superior Court, before *Schenck, J.*

The plaintiffs are tlie widow and heirs at law of one William Blankenship, who previous to his death executed a deed for certain lands to the defendant in consideration of about. $1,500, the greater part of which remains due and unpaid, as appears by notes of defendant. The plaintiffs insisted that said deed conveyed only a life estate, and by the terms thereof, the title remained in said Blankenship and his heirs until all the purchase money was paid and demanded that said deed be surrendered, the land be sold and the proceeds, applied to the payment of the purchase money, &e.

The defendant demurred to the complaint and assigned as cause: .

1. That the action should have been brought by the personal repi’esentative of the deceased.

2. That said deed conveys to defendant, either an estate in fee, or for the life of defendant, and that the same has been paid for by him in money and notes and that he is in. possession of said land.

His Honor held that defendant was entitled to judgment upon said demurrer, and adjudged that plaintiffs pay the costs of the action. From which ruling the plaintiffs appealed.

*Mr. B. G. Foiole,*for plaintiffs.

*Messrs. W. J. Montgomery*and *M. H.*Justice, for defendant-

*378RyNüm, J.

It is unnecessary to decide what estate in the land was passed to the defendant, by the deed of W. W. Blankenship. He certainly should be content with his title, if he claims to have the fee simple. The notes for the land were executed by the defendant to Blankenship, and «.pon his death, they devolved upon his personal representative.

They can be collected by suit only in the name of the administrator.

The plaintiffs who are the wife and children of the intestate, have no interest in the notes or their proceeds, legal •or equitable, until the debts and liabilities of the estate are •discharged and. there shall remain a surplus for distribution.. How that will be, there is no allegation or proof. Why the "notes were not sued on by an administrator of the estate it is hard to conceive. The defendant is not entitled to a homestead as against the debt for the purchase 'of the land . on the contrary the land is liable to sale under execution for the debt, at least all the estate which the defendant acquired by the deed. Whether the estate is a fee simple or a life «state, we not decide. Whatever it is, it is a legal estate 'unaffected by any trust for the benefit of the plaintiffs un•der which they can enforce a sale by a decree of this Court, according to the prayer of the complaint. The demurrer must therefore be sustained upon both grounds.

• There is no error.

.Per C-uriam. Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION


REQUIRED
BY RULE 13a-14(b) or


RULE
15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


(AS
ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)




I, Richard W. Lucas, as Chief Financial
Officer of KSW, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:





(1) the accompanying Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) on the date hereof fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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





Dated:  November
12, 2009








/s/ Richard W.
Lucas


Richard
W. Lucas


Chief
Financial Officer
#### Gilbert, Respondent, vs. Popp, Appellant.

For the appellant: Stephens, *Sletteland & Sutherland*of Madison.

For the respondent: *R. R. Williams*of Marshfield, attorney, and *Brown, Pradt & Genrich*of Wausau of counsel.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 21 - 0624

_________________ ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KENNETH WAYNE DALY,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified 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 r ecord and to the Honorable John W. Larson , Distri ct Judge . For the Court,

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

June 7 2023

06/07/2023
Case Number: DA 21-0624
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001003740
<NAME>                        Ashton Technology Group, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                         3,250,947
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  977,084
<ALLOWANCES>                                   12,500
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               4,513,568
<PP&E>                                         868,617
<DEPRECIATION>                                 207,280
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 6,075,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          983,629
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       75,625
<OTHER-SE>                                     4,711,227
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   6,075,412
<SALES>                                        3,162,088
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3,162,088
<CGS>                                          2,408,768
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,408,768
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               3,852,063
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (98,760)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,081,051
<INCOME-TAX>                                   71,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            3,152,551
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   3,152,551
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.44)
        


</TABLE>
Month, Year

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Conservation Practice Overview

Cross Wind Trap Strips (Code 589) 

Herbaceous cover established in one or more strips

typically perpendicular to the most erosive wind events. 

Practice Information 

Cross wind trap strips are strips of grass or other

herbaceous cover established to provide protection to

crops from wind-borne soil. 

Conservation benefits include, but are not limited to: 

• Reduced soil erosion from wind. 

• Improved moisture management from snow deposition. 

• Protection of growing crops from damage by wind-borne soil particles. 

• Reduced airborne particulate matter (dust). 

Design herbaceous wind barriers to reduce wind energy and wind erosion using current NRCS wind

erosion prediction technology. 

After establishment, perennial trap strips may need to be fertilized to maintain plant vigor. Noxious

weeds must be controlled. 

Trap strips need to be mowed, grazed, or otherwise managed so that the vegetation attains the

planned height before expected periods of wind erosion, when crop damage is likely to occur. Over

time, wind-borne sediment accumulated in trap strips may need to be removed and redistributed over

the surface of the field. 

Every few years, depending on the soil, crops grown, and frequency of high wind events, trap strips

need to be reestablished or relocated to maintain the desired plant density and height. 

Common Associated Practices 

Cross Wind Trap Strips (589C) are commonly associated with conservation practices such as

Conservation Cropping Rotation (328); Cover Crop (340); Residue and Tillage Management, No Till

(329); Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till (345); Upland Wildlife Habitat Management

(645); and Herbaceous Weed Control (315). 

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
----

Action brought on 28 May 2004 by the Regione Autonoma della Sardegna against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-200/04)

(2004/C 217/45)

Language of the case: Italian

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 28 May 2004 by the Regione Autonoma della Sardegna, represented by Domenico Dodaro, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

In the contested decision, the Commission initiated the procedure under Article 88(2) of the Treaty declaring that aid granted by Article 5 of Regional Law 22/2000, providing for ‘interventions in favour of breeders to confront the epizootic disease of blue tongue’, was incompatible with the common market. That law provided for a series of interventions in favour of breeders who had suffered the negative effects of blue tongue.

In support of its claims the applicant pleads the following grounds:

----
Filed 2/3/16 P. v. Walker CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication 

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

DARNELL DAVONE WALKER,

Defendant and Appellant.

 B268122

 (Los Angeles County

 Super. Ct. No. BA180270)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles, Morris B. Jones, 

Judge. Dismissed.

Paul R. Kleven, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant.

Steven Mercer, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
2

Defendant, Darnel Davone Walker, appeals from an order denying his motion to 

modify the judgment. We previously affirmed the judgment. (People v. Walker (Feb. 15, 

2001, B137988) [nonpub. opn.].) Defendant seeks to modify the judgment to convert 

certain fines into days of custody. We recognized that an order denying such a motion 

may not be appealable. We have a duty to raise issues concerning our jurisdiction on our 

own motion. (Jennings v. Marralle (1994) 8 Cal.4th 121, 126; Olson v. Cory (1983) 35 

Cal.3d 390, 398.) We thus issued an order to show cause and placed the matter on 

calendar. The denial of a motion to modify the judgment is ordinarily nonappealable. 

(People v. Mendez (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 32, 34, fn. 1; People v. Cantrell (1961) 197 

Cal.App.2d 40, 43.) Thus, we have no jurisdiction over defendant’s purported appeal. 

(In re Mario C. (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1303, 1307 [“a reviewing court is ‘without 

jurisdiction to consider an appeal from a nonappealable order, and has the duty to dismiss 

such an appeal upon its own motion’”]; People v. Benavides (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 100, 

103 [“We dismiss the appeal as taken from a nonappealable order.”].)

The appeal is dismissed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

TURNER, P. J.

We concur:

KRIEGLER, J.

BAKER, J.