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

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 44238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18390]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R07-SFUND-2012-0584; FRL-9704-9]

Proposed Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement Under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, as 
Amended, Big River Mine Tailings Superfund Site, St. Francois County, 
MO

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, as amended 
(CERCLA), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative 
settlement with The Doe Run Resources Corporation, St. Louis, Missouri, 
for recovery of past response costs concerning the Big River Mine 
Tailings Superfund Site in St. Francois County, Missouri. The 
settlement requires The Doe Run Resources Corporation to pay 
$42,077.71, to the Hazardous Substance Superfund. The settlement 
includes a covenant not to sue the settling party pursuant to Section 
107(a) of CERCLA. For thirty (30) days following the date of 
publication of this notice, EPA will receive written comments relating 
to the settlement. EPA will consider all comments and may modify or 
withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose 
facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is 
inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. EPA's response to any comments 
received will be available for public inspection at the EPA Region 7 
office located at 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 27, 2012.

ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is available for public inspection 
at the EPA Region 7 office, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas, 
Monday through Friday, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m. 
A copy of the proposed settlement may be obtained from the Regional 
Hearing Clerk, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas, (913) 551-7567. 
Requests should reference the Big River Mine Tailings Superfund Site, 
EPA Docket No. CERCLA-07-2011-0013. Comments should be addressed to: 
Julie M. Van Horn, Senior Assistant Regional Counsel, 901 N. 5th 
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie M. Van Horn, at telephone: (913) 
551-7889; fax number: (913) 551-7925/Attn: Julie M. Van Horn; email 
address: vanhorn.julie@epa.gov.

    Dated: July 13, 2012.
Cecilia Tapia,
Director, Superfund Division, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2012-18390 Filed 7-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-02-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-04-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-26-1997
<CASH>                                           5,255
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,423
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     77,694
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                99,031
<PP&E>                                         316,430
<DEPRECIATION>                               (147,262)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 284,931
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          104,986
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           59,508
<PREFERRED>                                      8,663
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                   (160,097)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   284,931
<SALES>                                        288,978
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               288,978
<CGS>                                          216,464
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  277,294
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,241
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,443
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,284)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,159
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,159
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .92
        


</TABLE>
### Note to Docket

Subject: Meeting with Doe Run Company

Location: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RTP, NC

Date: October 19, 2010

Participants:

Doe Run Company
Aaron Miller Rusty Keller
Louis Marucheau U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Sharon Nizich
Colin Boswell

RTI International
Ronnie Hanzel Mike Laney

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) met via telephone with re presentatives of the Doe Run Company. The Doe Run Company (Doe R un) operates a primary lead smelter located in Herculaneum, MO. The purpose of the mee ting was to provide information to Doe Run representatives on the Risk and Technology Revi ew (RTR) rulemaking process and to discuss current and future lead production operations at the Herculaneum smelter. The topics discussed and a brief summary of key points is outlined below.

1. Overview of EPA’s RTR program and plans to amend existing NESHAP for primary lead smelting.

2. Future Plans for Lead Production

 Plans for the Flubor process were discussed.

3. Refining Operation

 EPA explained that refining will be covere d under the amended rule. Doe Run questioned whether the current rule applied when the smelting operation no longer exists. EPA will provide to Doe Run a copy of 1992 description of the primary lead smelting category.

 The refining kettle heat stacks exhaust emi ssions from natural gas used to heat the refining kettles. Lead is emitted via the heat stacks only when there is a crack in the kettles, at which point the kettle is taken o ff line and repaired. The kettle heat stacks are
uncontrolled.

 After the existing smelter is shutdown and the Flubor process is operating, refining emissions are expected to be lower than current refining emissions.4. Blast Furnace

 The consent decree has a date of April 2014 for the blast furnace to cease operation (compared to a December 2013 date for the accept ance of lead concentrate and sintering).

 The later date for ceasing operation of the blas t furnace is to provide some extra time to complete processing of any stockpiled si nter and other remain ing lead containing materials. Unlikely that the blast furnace will be operated until April 2014.

5. Monitoring

 The number of ambient monitors has b een increased in recent years.

 Monitors to the north and south of Doe Run ha ve been running at about one-half of the 0.15 ug/m3 NAAQS limit.

 There are 8 monitors in Herculaneum.

 Under new monitoring plan, the nu mber of monitors will go from nine to six in the town. Three or four monitors are near (within about 60 ft) the fenceline.

 Monitoring plan was submitted to EPA region 7.

6. Site Remediation

 Site investigation work and study is planned to be completed by December 2013.

 The potential future uses of the current Doe Run site to include use as a port facility.

 Smelter equipment will be dismantled/demolished as part of the remediation.
CERTIFICATIONI, Kokmeng Koh, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-Drequired to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K ofPrincipal Life Income Fundings Trust 2006-74 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and otherinformation required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by thisreport is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required inthis report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the ExchangeAct period reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 28, 2007   /s/ Kokmeng Koh     Kokmeng Koh  Second Vice President
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6081 

To amend the short title of the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act to be the 

Dianne Feinstein Lake Tahoe Restoration Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 26, 2023 

Mr. GARAMENDI (for himself, Ms. PELOSI, Ms. LOFGREN, Mr. COSTA, Mr. 

ROBERT GARCIA of California, Ms. PORTER, Ms. LEE of California, Mr. 

HARDER of California, Mr. RUIZ, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Ms. BROWNLEY, 

Mr. TAKANO, Mr. DESAULNIER, Mr. CORREA, Mrs. TORRES of California, Mr. AGUILAR, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. PANETTA, Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE, 

Mr. LIEU, Ms. MATSUI, Ms. SA ́NCHEZ, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. VARGAS, Ms. 

JACOBS, Mr. CARBAJAL, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. BERA, Mr. PETERS, Ms. 

BARRAGA ́N, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. GOMEZ, Ms. WATERS, Mr. 

LEVIN, Mr. SWALWELL, Ms. ESHOO, Ms. CHU, Mr. KHANNA, Mr. 

CA ́RDENAS, Mr. HUFFMAN, Ms. TITUS, Mr. AMODEI, Mr. HORSFORD, 

and Ms. LEE of Nevada) introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, and Agriculture, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the short title of the Lake Tahoe Restoration 

Act to be the Dianne Feinstein Lake Tahoe Restoration 

Act. 

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


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6081 IH

1 SECTION 1. DIANNE FEINSTEIN LAKE TAHOE RESTORA2 TION ACT. 

3 (a) SHORT TITLE AMENDMENT.—Section 1 of the 

4 Lake Tahoe Restoration Act (Public Law 106–506) is 

5 amended to read as follows: 

6 ‘‘SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

7 ‘‘This Act may be cited as the ‘Dianne Feinstein 

8 Lake Tahoe Restoration Act’.’’. 

9 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg10 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

11 States to the ‘‘Lake Tahoe Restoration Act’’ (as a ref12 erence to Public Law 106–506) shall be deemed to be a 

13 reference to the ‘‘Dianne Feinstein Lake Tahoe Restora14 tion Act’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
# EUR-Lex - 32001D0379 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32001D0379

**2001/379/EC: Council Decision of 4 April 2001 on the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Heavy Metals **

*
Official Journal L 134 , 17/05/2001 P. 0040 - 0040 *

Council Decision

of 4 April 2001

on the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Heavy Metals

(2001/379/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 175(1), in conjunction with Article 300(2), first sentence of the first subparagraph, and (3), first subparagraph, thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission(1),

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(2),

Whereas:

(1) The Community signed in Aarhus on 24 June 1998 the Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Heavy Metals (hereinafter "the Protocol").

(2) The Protocol aims at controlling emissions of heavy metals caused by anthropogenic activities that are subject to long-range transboundary atmospheric transport and that are likely to have significant adverse effects on human health or the environment.

(3) The Protocol stipulates the reduction of total annual emissions into the atmosphere of cadmium, lead and mercury, and the application of product control measures.

(4) The measures envisaged in the Protocol contribute to achieving objectives of the Community policy on environment.

(5) The Community and the Member States cooperate, in the framework of their respective competences, with non-member countries and the competent international organisations.

(6) The Community should approve the Protocol,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Heavy Metals, signed on 24 June 1998, is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community.

The text of the Protocol is attached to this Decision.

Article 2

The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person empowered to deposit the instrument of approval with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in accordance with Article 16 of the Protocol.

Article 3

This Decision will be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Luxembourg, 4 April 2001.

For the Council

The President

B. Rosengren

(1) OJ C 311 E, 31.10.2000, p. 136.

(2) Opinion given on 24 October 2000 (not yet published in the Official Journal).
STEAM ELECTRIC

C B I R E P L AC E M E NT P A G E

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 20 09

- 0819

DCN:

________________________________________

T H E FO LL OW ING H AS BEE N R E M O V E D BE CAUSE IT

C O N T AINS C O N F ID E N T IAL B USIN E SS IN FO RMA T I O N

(C B I) P E R 4 0 C F R P ART 2

, SU B P ART B

. SE 04 331A0 29
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 Annual Report of Golden Health Holdings, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended September 30, 2005 filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), we, Hoi-ho Kiu, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, and Maggie Kwok, Chief Financial Officer
      of
      the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented
      and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods
      presented.








/s/
      Hoi-ho Kiu


Hoi-ho
      Kiu


Chief
      Executive Officer


April
      24,
      2006








/s/
      Maggie Kwok


Maggie
      Kwok


Chief
      Financial Officer


April
      24,
      2006
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 5, 2016

No. 04-16-00378-CV

Sandra Lynn BURGER,

Appellant

v.

Daryl Glenn BURGER,

Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Bandera County, Texas

Trial Court No. CV 15-0000124

Honorable M. Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Because appellant filed an affidavit of indigence and a contest was filed, we abated this 

appeal to the trial court pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1(h)(4). The trial court 

has now filed findings of fact and conclusions of law. In its findings, the trial court sustained the 

contests filed by the trial court clerk and court reporter. It then denied appellant’s claim of 

indigence. We REINSTATE this appeal on the docket of this court. 

If appellant intends to appeal the trial court’s not indigent finding, we ORDER appellant 

to provide written notice to this court of such intent on or before August 15, 2016. If appellant 

fails to timely file any written notice of her intention to appeal the not indigent finding, then 

appellant is ORDERED to provide written proof to this court on or before August 25, 2016 that 

the clerk’s fee for the preparation of the clerk’s record has been paid or arrangements have been 

made to pay the clerk’s fee. Additionally, if appellant fails to timely file any notice of her 

intention to appeal the not indigent finding, then appellant is ORDERED to provide written proof 

to this court on or before August 25, 2016 that the court reporter’s fee for preparation of the 

reporter’s record has been paid or arrangements have been made to pay the reporter’s fee. If 

appellant fails to respond within the time provided, this appeal will be dismissed for want of 

prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c) (allowing dismissal of 

appeal if appellant fails to comply with an order of this court).
_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 5th day of August, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-24-00189-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.R.C., A CHILD

On Appeal from the

36th District Court of Bee County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. B-22-1329-CV-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. No costs are assessed, due to 

appellant’s inability to pay costs.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 20, 2024
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Alden Patton HOUSE, Defendant-appellant.

No. 16-1413

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Filed April 27, 2017

James C. Murphy, Office of the United States Attorney, District of Colorado, Denver, CO, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Josh Lee, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Districts of Colorado and Wyoming, Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellant

Before HARTZ, HOLMES, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Jerome A. Holmes, Circuit Judge

Mr. Alden P. House pleaded guilty to one count of being a Prohibited Person in Possession of a Firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). He was sentenced to sixty-four months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release, grounded in part on an increased base offense level under § 2K2.1(a)(2) of the 2011 edition of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (the “Guidelines”). Section 2K2.1(a)(2) relies in turn on Guidelines § 4B1.2(a)’s definition of “crime of violence.” Mr. House did not directly appeal his sentence.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in *Johnson v. United States,*— U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015), Mr. House moved the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado to vacate his sentence. He argued that *Johnson,*which had struck down the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act as void for vagueness under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, rendered his sentence under identical language in Guidelines § 4B 1.2(a) invalid. In *695response, the government argued that *Johnson*did not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review concerning sentences under the residual clause of the Guidelines. Agreeing with the government, the district court denied relief but granted a certificate of appealability. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, we affirm.

In *Welch v. United States,*— U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 1257, 194 L.Ed.2d 387 (2016), the Supreme Court made *Johnson’s*holding retroactive to cases on collateral review. *Id.*at 1265. However, in *Beckles v. United States,*— U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 886, 197 L.Ed.2d 145 (2017), the Court established that the Guidelines are not subject to a void-for-vagueness challenge under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. *Id.*at 890; *see also United States v. Snyder,*852 F.3d 972 (10th Cir. 2017) (following *Beckles).*Thus, *Beckles*forecloses Mr. House’s argument that his Guidelines sentence violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause under *Johnson.*

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument.

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.

*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and Tenth Circuit Rule 32.1.
#### John Thrall et al., Appellants, *v.*Simon Krum, Respondent.

*John A. Mopes*for the respondent.

Judgment affirmed by default, with costs.
**SPAR Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries**

 

EXHIBIT 32.2 

**Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 (this “report”), of SPAR Group, Inc. (the “registrant”), the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge: 

1.         The report 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 registrant. 

 

|   | /s/ James R. SegretoJames R. SegretoChief Financial Officer, Treasurer andSecretaryMay 15, 2009 |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SPAR Group, Inc. and will be retained by SPAR Group, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.**

 

 

Ex-4
**Exhibit 14.1**

** **

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-188624 on Form F-3 of our reports dated April 27, 2016, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Grupo Aeroportuario del Centro Norte, S.A.B. de C.V. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph referring to the translation of Mexican peso amounts into U.S. dollar amounts in conformity with the basis stated in note 3 d), and the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2015.

 

Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.

Member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited

 

/s/ Emeterio Barrón Perales

 

 

C.P.C. Emeterio Barrón Perales

Monterrey, Nuevo León, México

April 27, 2016

 

----