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

.... 

mtlR§S!*l't.blO 

he:i 4 

W&lllWR 

~ f - .- .;: ,/ :;;~ ,_ I - ......... I.............. • ~ , ... _ .a • ft • I • I 

l, OD 1' Jan~r 1'54 8ICDi.P le•~'-' \ho J)trf:ctor. 1$.t\, • '\ho V.s- .autb02.'it:y 'ri.th llhom the SACUft try otticer (C4r' .. Ceol"i• loo.ck,, UBI) 

CD o~1cato oa DI' •ttei-a. On l:T ~Tl 1 W.• autbortty vaa 

Weaatect "° C'IO. 

a .. lbff tbat iiiM, •vat Hp:'eOentGt!:ve• of~ U.S.!L.!•tc• d 

t:ana.d• ba.'19 met v:lUL the SActAlR "t" Otttca to 4eve1op a 81l1' P"OIJ'iia 

tor &Act..m. tki• »1.amdne vu COllduct-1 in CONllflt eJ•Jarus.tl•. 

· J• lben '\'bo aJb7 JrOF'• vu __,lned, the M.CfA'l "1'11 Otf!ca 

ati\ ~ trUttaa a dul.rt.er tor- SACLAft "r"' ~1iionl1 'bNe4 m IN:/1/a/7, 

Qpl"O'f'd "1 Weit I ram. ..... CltO, u4 - tbe GAn , • Ollar\et' raitt!cd 

lW' u.1., v.1:. -1_ lcutari aiithori\iee. 

'Eo 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

" --- & N1 ,.,,. • .,,6. F,::.';. (:..~~ " r I 

_.. .. - .._ - '"' I - ... r, ._ JI - t I 

... ~·.. ..~ ... ·-·-- - ... 

- --·-- Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 03-13-2014 pursuant to E. 0. 1352B 
I 

REF ID:A58223 

~JrtH.llAGll !MF 

Xt• 4 (continued.) 

- I _,- I 

E.o 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

plannlna.. 1n t.he !td.t.ial ..n. .tape ot IACLA!IT ftJ1" pl.armin& wUl help 

t.o il101 sq wqiolon ot pric)r oolla'borat.ion Ulll\g the o.s., u.1. • .r.d. 

Canada. 

8,. IAC/f/K/7 dee: llf't. inolude trJ¥ prov:t.~ fer p:rQCe4.ur•• 'Nh4treb1 

npr1nsori.t.at:l.Yea ot MATO cations other t.ban the u.s,, u.1, •\and Canadt. ld1l 

particd.pat~it/fll" plau.tng. P.ece t.he reeommendatien···· ..... to haw taCD 1PP · . art.idpati.on 80 t.bat Addral ~ v111 ti.'" the 

autbori.t,y c conddere nece•Nr'J• 

IR!f£~Tl9J! 

9. 1\ i• :r.oca:ene!ed that, USC:tB approve part.1e4>ation bJ" the.II 

!n 

(VII) 

the 

be 

Sld.\.lal 

taatru.cted 

SACI.AliT 

to mtif;y 

..Y. plar.nlng 

1.ACUNT 

oont_...., 

er thi• approval. 

1114 \hat t.he lfa'7 ~
----

            COMMISSION DECISION         

of 4 August 2006         

on the purchase by the Community of marker vaccine against classical swine fever to increase the Community stocks of those vaccines

(notified under document number C(2006) 3461)

(2006/553/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (1), and in particular Article 6(2) and Article 8(2) thereof,

Having regard to Council Directive 2001/89/EC of 23 October 2001 on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever (2), and in particular Article 18(2) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

1.   The Community shall purchase as soon as possible 7 000 000 doses of marker vaccine against classical swine fever.

2.   The Community shall make arrangements for the storage and distribution of the vaccine referred to in paragraph 1.

Article 2

The maximum cost of the measures referred to in Article 1 shall not exceed EUR 7 500 000.

Article 3

The measures provided for in Article 1(2) shall be carried out by the Commission in cooperation with the suppliers designated by call for tender.

Article 4

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 4 August 2006.

For the Commission

Markos KYPRIANOU            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 19. Decision as last amended by Decision 2006/53/EC (OJ L 29, 2.2.2006, p. 37).

(2)OJ L 316, 1.12.2001, p. 5. Directive as amended by the 2003 Act of Accession.

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

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-50925 Conference Calendar

OTIS BELSER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus GARY L. JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-98-CV-409

-------------------- April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Otis Belser (TDCJ # 286377) appeals the dismissal of his pro
se civil rights complaint wherein he asserted that his calendar time and good-time credits unconstitutionally were forfeited after he was reincarcerated on a parole violation. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim in accordance with Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). To recover monetary damages for an allegedly unconstitutional imprisonment, a § 1983 plaintiff must prove that his conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal,No. 00-50925 -2- expunged by executive order, declared invalid by an authorized state tribunal, or called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Heck , 512 U.S. at 486-87. A § 1983 plaintiff also must prove that a sentence imposed as a result of a revocation proceeding has been invalidated by a state or federal court. McGrew v. Texas Bd. of Pardons & Paroles , 47 F.3d 158, 161 (5th Cir. 1995);

see also Littles v. Board of Pardons and Paroles Div. , 68 F.3d 122, 123 (5th Cir. 1995). Because Belser has not shown that the sentence imposed upon the revocation of his parole was invalidated by any court, the district court did not err by dismissing Belser’s complaint for failure to state a claim. See Blackburn v. City of Marshall , 42 F.3d 925, 931 (5th Cir. 1995). AFFIRMED.
```

[Federal Register: February 4, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 23)]
[Notices]               
[Page 5846]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04fe10-100]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

 
Deadline for Notification of Intent To Use the Airport 
Improvement Program (AIP) Primary, Cargo, and Nonprimary Entitlement 
Funds for Fiscal Year 2010

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice, correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On January 25, 2010, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
published a notice in the Federal Register. (75 FR 3954). This action 
corrects an error in two dates in that document. The notice announced 
that February 22, 2010, is the deadline for each airport sponsor to 
notify the FAA whether or not it will use its fiscal year 2010 
entitlement funds available under Public Law No. 111-117 to accomplish 
Airport Improvement Program (AIP)-eligible projects that the sponsor 
previously identified through the Airports Capital Improvement Plan 
(ACIP) process during the preceding year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Frank J. San Martin, Manager, 
Airports Financial Assistance Division, APP-500, on (202) 267-3831.

Correction

    In Notice document (Federal Register Doc. 2010-1291) published on 
January 25, 2010 (75 FR 3954) make the following correction:
    On page 3955, the first Column, in paragraph one the date October 
1, 2008, is corrected to read, October 1, 2009. On page 3955, the first 
Column, in paragraphs one and two, the date March 3, 2010, is corrected 
to read, March 17, 2010.

Frank J. San Martin,
Manager, Airports Financial Assistance Division, Office of Airport 
Planning and Programming.
[FR Doc. 2010-2463 Filed 2-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
1

Nesky, Anthony

From: Rosencrantz, Ingrid

Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 11:26 AM

To: Nesky, Anthony

Subject: FW: ISL mining

Please put this in the docket. Thanks!

From: Gardner Gray [mailto:gb.gray@yahoo.com]  

Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 4:15 PM

To: A‐AND‐R‐DOCKET; Rosencrantz, Ingrid

Subject: ISL mining

Dear EPA: 

Let me first say how important your recent proposal to regulate the ISL 

mining in this country. You are to be congratulated for your efforts in 

this regard. 

I am writing to you to express my deep concern about ISL mining in general 

and the Dewey Burdock proposed uranium mining by Azarga in South Dakota 

specifically. That concern is based on the fact that no ISL operation has 

been able to return the water to baseline thus allowing 

continuous contamination and toxic pollution to damage aquifers and quite 

possibly, for all intents and purposes, forever. My concerns also include 

the lack of ISL mining experience on the part of Azarga, the 

investigations by the British Columbia Securities Commision and the 

financial problems now current. Here is a quote from a recent audit of 

Azarga. "Without qualifying our opinion, we draw attention to Note 1 in the consolidated financial 

statements, which indicates that the Company has not yet achieved profitable operations, has a 

working capital deficit of $1,567,300, an accumulated deficit of $6,272,029. These condition along 

with other matters as set forth in note 1, indicate the existence of a material uncertainty that may cast 

significant doubt upon the Company's ability to continue as a going concern." 

Azarga has neither the expertise nor the economic wherewithal to operate 

within existing regulations. I hope that the new regulations from EPA 

will clearly require that the mining will not take place unless there are 

absolute guarantees that Azarga can perform properly. 

You have stated your recognition that water sources in the west are of 

concern and that they should be protected for possible future use. South 

Dakota is thought to be one of the western states that will see a decrease 

in rainfall and aquifer replenishment. We simply cannot risk the loss or 

abuse or damage or contamination of our water resources by allowing 

ISL uranium mining to threaten these precious supplies. Water, 

obviously, is our life's blood. To risk it's quantity and/or quality is, 

to put it bluntly, insane. 

As much as your suggested regulations are a vast improvement over current 

oversight, I urge you to strengthen these new regulations to include: 

stiff penalties for those operations that fail to protect the water: the 
2

use of independent overseers and monitors: the requirement for a realistic 

bond to cover the cost of cleanup. 

Consider as well, the possibility of denying this application by Azarga 

outright on the grounds that decontamination of the water and the mine 

sight is impossible and therefore not in the public interest. 

Thank you for your efforts on behalf of our water resources. I look 

forward to the public hearings in Wyoming. 

Sincerely, 

Gardner Gray 

PO Box 153 

Pringle, SD 57773 

605 673 3730
USCIB: 5.4/20 

10 February 1954 

MEMORANDUM FOR TUE MEMBERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: Semi-Annual Report of the EKecutive Secretary, USGIB. 

Reference: USCIB 5.4/19 dated 11 January 1955. 

1. USCIBEG considered the reference at its 24th meeting and, 

noting en amendment presented orally by the Ex:ecutive Secretary, 

approved the report 'Without .further change. 

2. The Executive Secretary's amendment was based on later 

information and pertained to paragraph 5 of SECTION IIA, and reworded that paragr21.ph to read as follows: 

n5. The security of electrical transmissions of CCl~INT is 

still not satisfactory. It is considered that it is too soon to 

tell what beneficial effect, if !lllY, has resulted from GIBD #9, 

and the report by the Director, NSA, contained as en enclosure 

with USCIB 13.5/81, dated 3 September 1954.11 

3. The decision of USGIBEC, reported in paragraph 1, above, 

is forwarded for USCIB consideration. In the absence of objection 

on the part of any member prior to 1200, Wednesday 23 February 1955, 

the USCIBEC decision will be considered approved. 

USCIB: 5.4/20 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 07-23-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

CO 11 1\Tf'IDE ~4\J u~'A L
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the 
Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 
1998, 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-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          56,763
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  294,620<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    116,533
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               496,160
<PP&E>                                         412,211
<DEPRECIATION>                                 277,863
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 704,869
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          278,036
<BONDS>                                         50,876
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,736
<OTHER-SE>                                     369,788
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   704,869
<SALES>                                        513,394
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               746,055
<CGS>                                          367,918
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  513,562
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               333,697<F2>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,854
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,781
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,281
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,281
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
<FN>
<F1>Accounts receivable in the Consolidated Balance Sheet is shown net of
allowances for doubtful accounts.
<F2>Other expenses include Product development expenses, Sales and marketing
expenses, General and administrative expenses, and Nonrecurring charges.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6693

ARCHIE W. COOPER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JAMES PEGUES, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA02-2855) Submitted: July 24, 2003 Decided: July 31, 2003 Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Archie W. Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Archie W. Cooper seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Cooper has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Winthrop
Partners 81 Limited Partnership and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>      1
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                      MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                560,000
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            0
<PP&E>                                554,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      1,118,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       0
<BONDS>                                     0
<COMMON>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                            994,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        1,118,000
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       27,000
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        15,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    15,000
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                           15,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             .56
<EPS-DILUTED>                             .56
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1498 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1498

To amend title 10, United States Code, to require that military working 
     dogs be retired in the United States, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 3, 2015

   Mr. Wyden introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 10, United States Code, to require that military working 
     dogs be retired in the United States, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REQUIREMENT FOR RETIREMENT OF MILITARY WORKING DOGS IN THE 
              UNITED STATES.

    (a) In General.--Section 2583 of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 
        (g) and (h), respectively;
            (2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new 
        subsection (f):
    ``(f) Retirement of Military Working Dogs Within the United 
States.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the retirement of a 
military working dog under this section shall occur at a location 
within the United States.
    ``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the retirement of a military 
working dog abroad if a United States citizen living abroad adopts the 
dog at the time of retirement.
    ``(3) Amounts available to the military department concerned shall 
be available for the costs of the transport of military working dogs to 
the United States for retirement in accordance with the requirement in 
paragraph (1).''; and
            (3) in subsection (g), as redesignated by paragraph (1)--
                    (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by 
                striking ``the Secretary of the military department 
                concerned'' and all that follows through ``may'' and 
                inserting ``a military working dog is to be retired in 
                accordance with the requirement in subsection (f)(1) 
                and no suitable adoption is available at the military 
                facility where the dog is located at the time of 
                retirement, the Secretary of the military department 
                concerned shall''; and
                    (B) by inserting ``within the United States'' after 
                ``another location''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply to 
retirements of military working dogs pursuant to section 2583 of title 
10, United States Code, that occur on or after that date.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 99

                    WINTHROP PARTNERS 81 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                               SEPTEMBER 30, 1996

Supplementary  Information  Required  Pursuant to Section 9.4 of the Partnership
Agreement

     1.   Statement of Cash Available for Distribution for the three months
          ended September 30, 1996:

          Net Income                                                $ 58,000
          Add:   Depreciation charged to income not
                 affecting cash available for distribution            12,000
                 Minimum lease payments received, net of interest
                 income earned, on leases accounted for under the
                 financing method                                      9,000
                 Prepaid rent                                        (21,000)

          Less:  Cash to reserves                                    (58,000)
                                                                    --------
                 Cash Available for Distribution              $      0
                                                                    ========

     2.   Fees and other compensation paid or accrued by the Partnership
          to the General Partners, or their affiliates, during the three
          months ended September 30, 1996:


Entity Receiving                        Form of
 Compensation                        Compensation                        Amount
 ------------               ---------------------------------------      ------

 Winthrop
 Management                 Property Management Fees                    $ 1,000

 WFC Realty Co., Inc.
(Initial Limited Partner)   Interest in Cash Available for              $    23
       Distribution

                                    12 of 12