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

Bamber, Amy 

t

o

:

Jordan Page 02/04/2010 02:01 PM

Hi Jordan,

I recently sent you our pesticides in water data. In response to the email from 

Jack today:

Here is the reports section of our website: 

http://agr.mt.gov/pestfert/groundwater/reports.asp There is a summary

report for our statewide groundwater monitoring well network--but that is 

prob. not of interest to you. Going into the individual reports you can gain 

more information about those projects and the surface water sites. We do not 

have any reports available on the POCIS results, or our sediment sampling for 

pyrethroids (still have contract lab issues with that). The data I sent you 

includes many more sites that what is covered in the reports. The reports do 

however cover some of the questions Jack brought up--they should give you a 

good idea of use patterns, use sites, typical uses for the products (of course 

many span homeowner/ag/industrial uses), general timing info, and they will 

give you all the previous work done regarding pesticides in the project area. I 

don't know if you all think about this too much, but here in Montana, in many 

cases we consider ground and surface water to be one resource (Trout 

Unlimited vs State of Montana), and many of our gw sites are strongly 

'communicating' with the nearby surface water. If you really want to 

understand the surface water, I would not discount the gw findings.

We will not be writing a special report specific to the npdes permits. 

In our data, if you see the use of ID in the site Id codes, that represents 

irrigation district-we do evaluate intake and outtake for some of the districts. 

Additionally, our Region 8 lab is just getting the results from a cooperative 

study we did on the lower yellowstone irrigation district to us. We will be 

providing these data to USFWS for their use in an assessment of potential 

impacts to pallid sturgeon. We worked with our state fish, wildlife and parks, 

ND Dept of Ag and EPA Region 8 on this project.

I may have mentioned this in my previous email, so sorry if this is redundant, 

but we are required to request an interim numerical standard for all detections 

in water. I think I did mention this, actually, and sent you a link. If you'd like 

more info on how we evaluate human and aquatic life impacts from pesticides, 

please just let me know.
Amy Bamber

Montana Department of Agriculture

303 N. Roberts

Helena, MT 59620-0201

406-444-3676

abamber@mt.gov
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 215

To amend the Agricultural Act of 1949 to eliminate the loan origination

fee for oilseeds, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. PRESSLER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

A BILL

To amend the Agricultural Act of 1949 to eliminate the

loan origination fee for oilseeds, 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. ELIMINATION OF LOAN ORIGINATION FEES

4 FOR OILSEEDS.

5 Section 205 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C.

6 1446f) is amended—

7 (1) by striking subsection (m); and

8 (2) by redesignating subsection (n) as sub9 section (m).

Æ
October 2, 2015

Mr. D. Andy Willis

Professional Engineer

ECSI, LLC

336 Town Mountain Road

Suite 4

Pikeville, KY 41501

Dear Mr. Willis:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from 

§§ 21, 45.23, 45.29, 61.133(a), 91.7(b), 91.9(b)(2), 91.109(a), 91.119, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) 

and (b), Subpart E (91.401- 91.417) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It 

explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We received your June 17, 2015, exemption request on behalf of ECSI, LLC filed in Docket 

No. FAA−2015−2805, but we are unable to process your request any further. Your petition 

does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the 

request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosures
3
4
SERVED SEPTEMBER I, 20 

OFFy\RT?^^ENT OF 

n^ANSPORTATION 

-GCKEr OPERATIONS 

2m SEP - 2 A q: 3 8 

u s DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

T H E MAGNI GROUP , INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. CPIOSOOOIO 

(Civil PciKilly Action) 

DMSFAA-2010-I0«U 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

On November 23. 2010, the Fedenil Aviation Adminislralion ("Complainiinl") 

filed a Coniplainl. Respondent Magni Industries, Uic. ("Respondent") had on November 

15, 2010 filed a Request for Hearing. 

On August 31, 2011, Complainant filed a Motion to Withdraw its Complaint, 

citing settlement of the matter. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

' attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw-a request for.ajiearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Motion to Withdraw Complaint having been read 

and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

Complainant's Motion to Withdraw Complaint is hereby granted; and 
2 

2. This pi-Qceeding l)c and is hcrcliy dismissed wJLh prejudice. 

SO ORDERED. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CPIOSOOOIO 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention; Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Todd R. Palmer, General Manager 

Magni Industries, Inc., Respondent 

109250 Toebben Drive 

Independence Avenue, KY 41051 

TEL: 859-746-1777 

FAX: 859-746-1170 

Gerald A. Ellis, ComplainaiU's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Southern Region, ASO-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, GA 30320 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-51-21 Legal Assistant. 

-FAX:-"202-3'66-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For seh-'ice in person or by expedited courier, use Uie following address: 

Federal Aviation Adininislralion, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 

2Wt000, Washington, DC 20591; Anenlion: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
# L_2011177EN.01002701.xml

| 6.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 177/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 177/27

---

Corrigendum to Council Decision 2011/323/EU of 19 May 2011 designating the European Capital of Culture for the year 2015 in the Czech Republic

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 146 of 1 June 2011
  )

This Decision should be considered as published under Section L II, Decisions.

---
# C_2011162EN.01000601.xml

| 1.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 162/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 162/6

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 27 May 2011

appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

2011/C 162/02

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of 10 February 1975 establishing the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, and in particular Article 4 thereof (1),

1

Having regard to the nominations submitted by the Portuguese Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 14 September 2009 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2009 to 17 September 2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 14 September 2009 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2009 to 17 September 2012.

2

| (2) | A member's seat on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Government representatives has become vacant as a result of the resignation of Mrs Maria da Conceição AFONSO. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Government representatives has become vacant as a result of the resignation of Mrs Maria da Conceição AFONSO.

| (3) | The member of the Governing Board of the aforementioned Centre should be appointed for the remainder of the current term of office, which expires on 17 September 2012, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The member of the Governing Board of the aforementioned Centre should be appointed for the remainder of the current term of office, which expires on 17 September 2012,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The following person is hereby appointed as a member of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the remainder of the term of office, which runs until 17 September 2012:

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE:

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE:

| PORTUGAL | Dr Nuno PESTANA |
| --- | --- |

PORTUGAL

Dr Nuno PESTANA

Done at Brussels, 27 May 2011.

For the Council

The President

NYITRAI Zs.

---

(1)  OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 226, 19.9.2009, p. 2.

2

---
2016-1197.

#### In re D.H.

Montgomery App. No. 27075. On appellant’s motion for appointment of the Office of the Ohio Public Defender as counsel. Motion.granted.
#### People v Nieves

2d Dept: 149 AD3d 881

denied*
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7510

ELDON GUY BELL, Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus RALPH THOMAS, Sheriff; BARRY JOHNSON, Jailer; FRANK GALIZIA, Invest igator; BOYCE FLOYD, Investigator, Defendants - Appellees, and
DAVID LEOMANS, County Commissioner; BETTY BELL, County Commissioner; CAROL LONG, County Commis sioner; KIM BENNETT, County Commissioner; OPAL HILL, County Commissioner; JOHN MORRIS; County Commissioner; BILLY SMITH, SR.,County Commissioner; ARCHIE PAGE, County Commissioner; CARL TILGHMAN, County Commissioner; WALTER HOUSE, SBI Agent; ANTHONY DENNIS, Investigator, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-94-857-5-BR) Submitted: December 19, 1996 Decided: January 6, 19972 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eldon Guy Bell, Appellant Pro Se. Cheryl A. Marteney, WARD & SMITH, P.A., New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order dated August 30, 1996, which adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. In an order entered September 23, 1996, the district court set aside the August order and granted the Appellant's motion for an extension of time in which to file objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district court retains jurisdiction pending the disposition of the underlying action. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. We grant the Appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We further note that the appeal is frivolous. 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
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner

v.

TODD JOSEPH LETA,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2801 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 153 DB 2021

Attorney Registration No. 307965

(Lycoming County)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this of 4

th day of August, 2023, upon consideration of the

Recommendation of the Three-Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board, the Joint Petition 

in Support of Discipline on Consent is granted, and Todd Joseph Leta is suspended on

consent from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of one year and one day. 

Respondent shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the

Disciplinary Board. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
# Veteran law enforcement officer promoted to deputy police chief at Defense Supply Center Richmond

/ Published May 13, 2021
RICHMOND, VA, 
As part of National Police Week virtual observances, Defense Logistics Agency Aviation and DLA Installation Management at Richmond recognize Police Lt. Col. Mark Bowen, who selflessly secures and protects Defense Supply Center Richmond, its people and our neighbors every day.

Bowen was promoted to the rank of Lt. Col. and deputy police chief at DSCR in March of this year. He’s been in law enforcement for approximately 35 years, including 11 years as a military police officer in the Marine Corps and 21 years with the Chesterfield County, Virginia Police Department. After retiring from Chesterfield in 2017, he started at DSCR as a police officer and has been with DLA Police Department for almost four years.

“I have the responsibility for ensuring the supervisors and officers he leads as the number two in command, understand the purpose, direction and motivation for what I am asking them to do and that they have the tools and training necessary to accomplish it,” Bowen said.

He also said he has four pillars of expectations: always be ready, look professional, act professional, and take care of each other.

“We have a great department and my goal as the new lieutenant colonel is to make us the best,” he said. 

Related article:  Police Week 2021 Spotlight: Police Officer Scott Wiseman
2017-1651.

#### State v. Hale.

Muskingum App. No. CT2016-0048, 2017-Ohio-2844. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Kenneth L. Hignett, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Morgan’s Foods, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:   a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;   b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of November 4, 2007, based on such evaluation; and   c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):   a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and   b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: December 19, 2007 /s/ Kenneth L. Hignett   Kenneth L. Hignett,   Senior Vice President,
#### Marc Fishman, Appellant, v Jennifer Solomon, Respondent.

[55 NYS3d 670]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme *571Court, Westchester County (Paul I. Marx, J.), dated February 24, 2015. The order granted the defendant’s application for an award of an attorney’s fee in the sum of $46,138.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, he waived his right to a hearing on the defendant’s application for an award of an attorney’s fee by agreeing that, although “each party retains the right to appeal any order of this court with respect to counsel fees,” the parties’ respective applications for an award of an attorney’s fee would be “done simultaneously without a right to oppose or reply” *(see Dow v Dow,*80 AD3d 848 [2011]; *Stricos v Stricos,*263 AD2d 659 [1999]; *Brodsky v Brodsky,*214 AD2d 599 [1995]; *see also Matter of Zaydenverg v Zaydenverg,*151 AD3d 871 [2d Dept 2017]; *Bengard v Bengard,*5 AD3d 340 [2004]).

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant’s application for an award of an attorney’s fee in the sum of $46,138 *(see*Domestic Relations Law § 238; *Mollah v Mollah,*136 AD3d 992, 994 [2016]; *Le v Le,*82 AD3d 846 [2011]). The detailed billing records submitted by the defendant’s attorney established that the fees were reasonable, and the amount of the award did not constitute an improvident exercise of discretion *(see Mons Pinto v Pinto,*151 AD3d 715 [2d Dept 2017]; *Pelgrim v Pelgrim,*127 AD3d 710 [2015]).

Dillon, J.P., Cohen, Duffy and Barros, JJ., concur.
|                                                                         
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                         
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                           
|View History:                                                            
|                                                                         
|Buffalo, NY Natural Gas Pipeline Imports from Canada (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         
|                                                                         
|Buffalo, NY Natural Gas Pipeline Imports from Canada (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                         

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
|2023                                                                                                                              |     |     |     |     |     | 1   | 1   |     |     |     |     | 3  
|2024                                                                                                                              | 0   | 3   |     | 3   | 2   |     |     |     |     |     |     |    
|                                                                                                                                 
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
#### Davila v City of New York

2d Dept: 139 AD3d 890

denied