alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 2 (Monday, January 5, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 165-166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-140]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-120; RM-9054]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Gideon, MO

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Action in this document allots Channel 280A to Gideon, 
Missouri, as that community's first local service in response to a 
petition filed by Gideon Radio Company. See 62-FR 22901, April 28, 
1997. The coordinates for Channel 280A at Gideon are 36-32-10 and 89-
49-18. There is a site restriction 12.9 kilometers (8 miles) northeast 
of the community. With this action, this proceeding is terminated. A 
filing window for Channel 280A at Gideon, Missouri, will not be opened 
at this time. Instead, the issue of opening a filing window for this 
channel will be addressed by the Commission in a subsequent order.

DATE: Effective January 26, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order, MM Docket No.97-120, adopted December 3, 1997, and released 
December 12, 1997. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the Commission's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW, 
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC. 
20036, (202) 857-3800, facsimile (202) 857-3805.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Missouri, is 
amended by adding Gideon, Channel 280A.


[[Page 166]]


Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 98-140 Filed 1-2-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
# L_2011183EN.01003101.xml

| 13.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 183/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 183/31

---

Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2011/122/EU of 22 February 2011 on a derogation from the rules of origin set out in Council Decision 2001/822/EC as regards certain fishery products imported from Saint Pierre and Miquelon

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 49 of 24 February 2011
  )

On page 39, in the table of the Annex, Serial No 09.1625, in the column ‘HS Code’:

for:

‘
  ex 0307 39

ex 1605 90
  ’,

read:

‘
  ex 1605 90
  ’.

---
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2008

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located

at 100 East Houston Street in Marshall, Texas, as the ‘‘Sam B. Hall,

Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 11, 1994

Mr. GRAMM (for himself and Mrs. HUTCHISON) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

A BILL

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 100 East Houston Street in Marshall,

Texas, as the ‘‘Sam B. Hall, Jr. Federal Building and

United States Courthouse’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building located at 100 East Houston

5 Street in Marshall, Texas, shall be known and designated

6 as the ‘‘Sam B. Hall, Jr. Federal Building and United

7 States Courthouse’’.
2

S 2008 IS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 building and United States courthouse referred to in sec5 tion 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sam B.

6 Hall, Jr. Federal Building and United States Court7 house’’.

Æ
# Land and Maritime receives, distributes 1,500 cloth face masks to inhibit virus spread

/ Published May 1, 2020
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
The Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime received a shipment of approximately 1,500 cloth masks April 23 that are being issued to first responders and other essential members of the workforce as an additional protective measure against the spread of the COVID-19 virus.

Providing this augmented level of protection to DLA’s front-line response professionals will continue to ensure timely and sustained logistics support operations vital to the tenants on the Defense Supply Center Columbus installation while helping individuals to minimize the spread of the COVID virus. The immediate intention is to assist members of the workforce who are unable to maintain the 6-foot social distancing guidelines established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Both the Department of Defense and DLA have issued guidance to the workforce to wear masks on DOD property, installations and facilities. The CDC has numerous examples on their website for innovative techniques to create personal cloth face masks designed to help meet this DOD requirement.

“To comply with DOD guidance these shipments are taking place throughout the DLA,” said DLA Land and Maritime Commander Navy Rear Adm. John T. Palmer.  “Land and Maritime is focusing efforts to provide additional levels of protection among our associates. We’ve identified Land and Maritime’s detachment operations for priority distribution because of their specific work environments, it’s a little harder for them to navigate the social distancing guidelines throughout daily operations.”

Future plans include provisions for the procurement of additional cloth face masks to sites as DOD and DLA transition to the phased workforce return.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              MAR-2-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                NOV-8-1998
<CASH>                                       2,612,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   86,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    331,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,121,000
<PP&E>                                      30,293,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,014,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,708,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,283,000
<BONDS>                                     15,237,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,158,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,708,000
<SALES>                                      9,972,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,972,000
<CGS>                                        5,961,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,765,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (28,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             360,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (125,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (132,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (132,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.05)
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Jeremiah D., a Child Alleged to be Abused and Neglected. Deon D., Appellant; Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent.

[62 NYS3d 799]—

Purported appeal from decision of fact-finding after a hearing, Family Court, New York County (Susan K. Knipps, J.), entered on or about July 8, 2016, which found that respondent father abused and neglected the subject child, deemed a premature notice of appeal *(see*CPLR 5520 [c]; *Matter of Tyler W. [Janice B.],*149 AD3d 968 [2d Dept 2017]) from the order of factfinding, same court (Ta-Tanisha D. James, J.), entered on or about July 11, 2016, and, so considered, said order unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We note that the fact-finding order apparently erroneously omitted the finding of abuse made in the decision and, consistent with the approach taken by the parties, deem it reconciled with the decision.

Petitioner proved by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent neglected and abused the subject child *(see*Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [ii]). Medical evidence and testimony established that the almost three-month-old child’s injuries were the result of an abusive head trauma sustained while he was in the father’s exclusive care *(Matter of Philip M.,*82 NY2d 238, 243 [1993]; Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [ii]).

Respondent failed to rebut petitioner’s case with any credible explanation for the child’s condition. The Family Court’s credibility findings are entitled to deference and are supported by the record. The court properly rejected respondent’s expert’s theory that the child’s injuries were the result of benign enlargement of the subarachnoid spaces, as this diagnosis, among other things, did not explain the child’s retinal hemorrhages or other symptoms, including his having gone limp and stopped breathing (see *Matter of I-Conscious R. [George S.],*121 AD3d 566 [1st Dept 2014], *lv dismissed*24 NY3d 1205 [2015]).

Concur—Tom, J.P., Renwick, Mazzarelli, Oing and Singh, JJ.
No. 12-7842.

#### Fraser *v.*GMAC Mortgage, LLC.

Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.
15A NCAC 02D .0410 is amended as published in 23:18 NCR 1888 as follows:

15A NCAC 02D .0410 PM2.5 PARTICULATE MATTER (a) The ambient air quality standards for PM2.5 particulate matter are: (1) 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), annual arithmetic mean concentration; and (2) 65 35 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), 24-hour average concentration.

These standards are attained when the annual arithmetic mean concentration is less than or equal to 15.0 ug/m3 and when the 98th percentile 24-hour c oncentration is less than or equal to 65 35 ug/m3, as determined according to Appendix N of 40 CFR Part 50. (b) For the purpose of determining attainment of the sta ndards in Paragraph (a) of this Rule, particulate matter shall be measured in the ambient air as PM2.5 (particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers) by either: (1) a reference method based on Appendix L of 40 CFR Part 50 and designed according to 40 CFR Part 53; or (2) an equivalent method designed according to 40 CFR Part 53.

History Note: Authority G.S. 143-215.3(a)(1); 143-215.107(a)(3); Eff. April 1, 1999. 1999; Amended Eff. January 1, 2010.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Stephen Bolt, Appellant.

[54 NYS3d 851]—

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Denis J. Boyle, J.), rendered February 9, 2015, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him a term of 22 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims are unreviewable on direct appeal because they generally involve matters not reflected in, or fully explained by, the record *(see People v Rivera,*71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]). Therefore, since defendant has not made a CPL 440.10 motion, the merits of the ineffectiveness claims may not be addressed on appeal. Alternatively, to the extent the record permits review, we find that defendant received effective assistance under the state and federal standards *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; *see also Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668 [1984]). At most, the alleged errors of counsel constitute inart-fully phrased remarks that could not have affected the court’s verdict or deprived defendant of a fair trial.

Defendant’s challenges to testimony by the People’s expert forensic psychologist are unpreserved, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Even if the People’s expert exceeded the foundation necessary for his testimony, there was no reasonable possibility that the court, as the finder of fact, was usurped in its role of independently determining defendant’s reliability or whether extreme emotional disturbance was proved *(see People v Pavone,*26 NY3d 629 [2015]; *People v Diaz,*15 NY3d 40 [2010]). In any event, we find that any error *409was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt *(People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230 [1975]), particularly since this was a nonjury trial.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur— Tom, J.P., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Mazzarelli and Gische, JJ.
#### In the Matter of David S. Finkler, an Attorney.

[52 NYS3d 239]

Per Curiam.

David S. Finkler was admitted to practice by this Court in 2008 and lists a business address in Baltimore, Maryland with the Office of Court Administration. Finkler now seeks leave to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons *(see*Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.22 [a]). The Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department advises that it does not oppose Finkler’s application.

Upon reading the affidavit of Finkler sworn to December 1, 2016, and upon reading the correspondence in response by the Chief Attorney for the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined that Finkler is eligible to resign for nondisciplinary reasons, we grant his application and accept his resignation.

Egan Jr., J.P., Lynch, Rose, Devine and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that David S. Finkler’s application for permission to resign is granted and his nondisciplinary resignation is accepted; and it is further ordered that David S. Finkler’s name is hereby stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately, and until further order of this Court *(see generally*Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.22 [b]); and it is further ordered that, effective immediately, David S. Finkler is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form in the State of New York, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and Finkler is hereby forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto, or to hold himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law in this State; and it is further ordered that David S. Finkler shall, within 30 days of the date of this decision, surrender to the Office of Court Administration any Attorney Secure Pass issued to him.
No. 09-1366.

#### Mihae Lee and Jungil Lee, Petitioners v. William J. Policastro, et al.

562 U.S. 830, 131 S. Ct. 95,

178 L. Ed. 2d 28,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6426.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, denied.
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 August 12, 2007, based on such evaluation; andc) 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; andb) 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: September 26, 2007 /s/ Kenneth L. Hignett        Kenneth L. Hignett,        Senior Vice President,
**EXHIBIT 8.1**

 

**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES**

 

**The Company presently wholly owns Far East, a Hong Kong corporation, which, in turn, owns the**following corporations:**

 

**Wholly-Owned**

 

·                  Euro Tech Trading (Shanghai) Limited — a People’s Republic of China corporation

·                  Euro Tech (China) Limited — a Hong Kong corporation

·                  ChinaH2O.com Limited — a Hong Kong corporation

·                  Shanghai Euro Tech Limited — a People’s Republic of China corporation

·                  Shanghai Euro Tech Environmental Engineering Company, Ltd. — a People’s Republic of China corporation

·                  Chongqing Euro Tech Rizhi Technology Company, Limited— a People’s Republic of China corporation

·                  Rizhi Euro Tech Instrument (Shaanxi) Company Limited— a People’s Republic of China corporation

·                  Guangzhou Euro Tech Environmental Equipment Company Limited — a People’s Republic of China corporation

 

**Majority Owned**

 

·                  Yixing Pact Environmental Technology Company Limited — a PRC corporation

·                  Pact Asia Pacific Limited — a BVI corporation

 

----
EX-23
                              Independent Auditors' Consent




                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
-----------------------------

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference  in  Registration  Statement  No.
333-16603 of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. on Form S-3 of our reports dated March
28, 2002 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust I and Merrill Lynch  Preferred  Funding I, L.P. for the year ended
December 28, 2001.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

New York, New York
March 28, 2002
|                                                                          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                            
|View History:                                                             
|                                                                          
|Waddington, NY Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                          
|                                                                          
|Waddington, NY Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 30,731 | 38,791 | 25,121 | 39,196 | 8,775  | 9,864  | 7,526  | 6,021  | 14,615
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 15,615 | 12,754 | 10,076 | 22,606 |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
164 A.3d 388

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. KENNETH CRUMBLE(A/K/A KENNETH J. CRUMBLE, JR.), DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

March 16, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.