alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18375]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-286-000]


Granite State Gas Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Tariff Filing

July 6, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 30, 1998 Granite State Gas Transmission, 
Inc. (Granite State) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, Seventh Revised Sheet No. 289, to 
be effective on August 1, 1998.
    Granite State asserts that its tariff filing is submitted in comply 
with Order No. 587-G, issued April 16, 1998 (Docket No. RM96-1-007) 
which directed interstate pipelines to adopt Gas Industries Standards 
Board Version 1.2 in their tariffs prior to August 1, 1998.
    Granite State asserts that copies of its filing have been served on 
its firm and interruptible transportation customers and on the 
regulatory agencies of the states of Maine, Massachusetts and New 
Hampshire.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18375 Filed 7-9-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION & SERVICES (GI&S) ACCOUNT DATA

c. Commercial and DSN Telephone Number 

b. NEW ADDRESS (Include 9-digit Zip Code) 

SECTION III - CHANGE OF ADDRESS

DLA Form 1832, JUL 1999 (EG) PDF (DLA)

1. ACCOUNT NUMBER (DODAAC/FEDAAC) 2. DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) 3. TYPE OF SUBMISSION

a. INITIAL b. CHANGE c. CLOSE

4. COMMAND/ ADMIN ADDRESS TAC 1 5. SHIP TO/ BULK ADDRESS TAC 2 

SECTION I - GENERAL

6. Which address do you want administrative mail and products mailed to? a. TAC 1 b. TAC 2

7. REQUEST A GI&S ACCOUNT BE ESTABLISHED FOR THE FOLLOWING SERVICE:

REQUISITIONS AUTOMATIC DISTRIBUTION FLIP AUTOMATIC DISTRIBUTION 

8. UNIT DESCRIPTION DATA

a. Component (Contractors must complete Block 8c and/ or 8d.)

Army Air Force Coast Guard Foreign Military Sales DoD Activity

Navy Marine Corps Foreign Exchange Other Government Agency OTHER

b. Unit Identification Code (UIC) c. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) d. Contract Number (if applicable) 

9. GI&S OFFICER FOR THIS ORGANIZATION WILL BE:

a. Typed Name, Grade and Title b. E-Mail Address c. Signature 

d. Commercial Phone Number e. DSN Phone Number f. Commercial FAX Number DSN FAX Number 

SECTION II - ACCOUNT CLASSIFICATION LEVEL

10. REQUEST THE FOLLOWING CLASSIFICATION LEVEL FOR THIS ACCOUNT:

UNCLASSIFIED SECRET

a. Typed Name, Grade and Title b. Signature 

11. THIS ORGANIZATION HAS ADEQUATE EQUIPMENT AND PROPERLY CLEARED PERSONNEL TO RECEIVE AND SAFEGUARD MATERIAL ACCORDING

 TO THE CLASSIFICATION REQUESTED FOR THIS ACCOUNT. IF CLASSIFIED SERVICE IS APPROVED, THE SECURITY OFFICER WILL BE:

12a. OLD ADDRESS (Include 9-digit Zip Code) 

REMARKS (All change of address must also be forwarded to Defense Automated Addressing System (DAAS) through your service point): 

SECTION IV - AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL (O-5/GS-14 or higher)

13a. Typed Name, Grade and Title of Commander b. Signature D. Commercial and DSN Phone Number 

(Must match TAC 1 Address loaded with DAAS) (Must match TAC 2 Address loaded with DAAS)

Code (Contractors) 

Effective Date (MM/DD/YYYY):
Field Name    				Length  
------------  				--------
FIIG_4065				VAR/DLM(|)
INC_4080				VAR/DLM(|)
INC_LOCKT_IND_0583			VAR/DLM(|)
TAIL_ACT_CD_2513			VAR/DLM(|)
INC_APPL_IND_4405  			CHAR(1)
_c

il2|alalstel7 peodesaep road ached secs esos espe Hr qed 1 TOTAL PRICE 2. SHIP FROM 3. SHIPTO
WT4I80
= 7 - ap)
Boal ea =| ENE] * PEN eed
N T | 5 | TON i) DOLLARS | CTS Siye5eo

foo)

$100 $/00 4. MARK FOR

DD FORM 1348-1A, JUL 91 (EG) ISSUE RELEASE/RECEIPT DOCUMENT

24. DOCUMENT NUMBER
& SUFFIX (30-44)

ge
Z g § co
O28
sg 4235 DSHAZSUIT
abs
Oat
sianis
eS Sore
e>6285
oO
< Item has been sanitized and contains no hazardous material. [Name/Initial and Date:
x
: POC INFORMATION:
io email
a cell:
s DS

WT4 380 Biol COL]

5. DOC DATE | 6. NMFC 7. FRT RATE, 8

TYPE CARGO 9.PS

PREVIOUS EDITION MAY BE USED

10. QTY. RECD | 11.UP ] 12, UNIT WEIGHT 13. UNIT CUBE =| 14. UFC 15. St

16. FREIGHT CLASSIFIGATION NOMENCLATURE

HOY A

17. TEM NOMENCLATURE,

HAZMAT CHEM PROTECTIVE SUITS

18. TY CONT | 19.NO CONT 20. TOTAL WEIGHT

Pt. TOTAL cuBE

| 23. DATE RECEIVED

IS At

FormFlaw (DLA)
*DoD 4000.25-7-M, March 2004*

DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

**DIC FW1/FW2/GW1/GW2 FORMAT**

**CASH DISCOUNTS**

144

APPENDIX 3.27

1
##### 



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
  (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
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Dated: April 19, 2007
    /s/ Darrell WebbDarrell WebbPresident and Chief Executive Officer /s/ James KerrJames KerrExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY 

HEADQUARTERS 

8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD 

FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060-6221 

1 4 M~’( 2024 

MEMORANDUM FOR DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA) EMPLOYEES 

SUBJECT: Policy Statement on Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities 

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is committed to ensuring all qualified employees 

and applicants with disabilities are provided benefits and privileges of employment equal to 

employees and applicants without disabilities. It is DLA’s policy to provide reasonable 

accommodations in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and all relevant Federal laws and regulations. DLA 

ensures equal access and employment opportunities to otherwise qualified individuals with 

disabilities by providing Reasonable Accommodations (RA) unless doing so would cause undue 

hardship. It is further the policy of DLA to, absent undue hardship, provide affirmative action for 

people with disabilities as specified in applicable EEOC regulations, including by providing 

Personal Assistance Services (PAS) to eligible employees with targeted disabilities. 

A reasonable accommodation is a change in the work environment that would enable an 

individual to do his or her job despite having a disability. Examples of reasonable 

accommodation include modifications or adjustments that enable an individual to apply for a job, 

perform ajob, or have equal access to the workplace, and employee benefits. 

It is an employee’s or applicant’s responsibility to request a reasonable accommodation 

either orally or in writing. Employees should request a reasonable accommodation from their 

immediate supervisor or the servicing Disability Program Coordinator. Applicants can request a 

reasonable accommodation through the point of contact identified in the Job Opportunity 

Announcement. 

The interactive process for reasonable accommodation is a collaborative effort between 

the immediate supervisor and employee. Supervisors and employees must engage in the 

interactive process to ensure that all requests are processed within the established 45-day 

timeframe unless extenuating circumstances are present. 

Any DLA employee, who believes that he she was unlawfully denied a reasonable 

accommodation, may file a discrimination complaint through his/her local EEO office within 45 

calendar days of the denial. For more detailed guidance on requesting a reasonable 

accommodation, employees and applicants should review DLA Instruction 1440.01, located at 

htt s~ www dla mil/EEO/Business/Policues.as x. 
DLA is committed to providing reasonable accommodations to qualified employees with 

disabilities to transform disabilities into enabling abilities and improve DLA productivity and 

employee cohesiveness. 

LTG, USA 

DLA Director 

2
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 Quarterly Report of Sun River Energy, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending July 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, JF Hoover, Chief Financial Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief.
  (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 financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Dated: September 19, 2011
 /s/ JF Hoover

JF Hoover,Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-2092

CHUAN PENG CAI, Petitioner,
versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A77-353-883) Submitted: April 8, 2005 Decided: April 29, 2005 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Yueh-Mei Wu Rowan, ROWAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Fairfax, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Jennifer L. Scheller, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Cai does not seek review of that part of the order that denied protection under the Convention Against Torture. Therefore, he has abandoned any such claim. SeeUnited States v. Al-Hamdi , 356 F.3d 564, 571 n.8 (4th Cir. 2004); Edwards v. City of Goldsboro , 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Chuan Peng Cai (“Cai”), a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (Board) order denying him asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. * We will reverse the Board only if the evidence “‘was so compelling that no reasonable fact finder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.’” Rusu v. INS , 296 F.3d 316, 325 n.14 (4th Cir. 2002) (quoting INS v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992)). We have reviewed the evidence of record, the immigration judge’s decision, and the Board’s order and find substantial evidence supports the conclusion that Cai failed to establish the past persecution or well-founded fear of future persecution necessary to establish eligibility for asylum. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(a) (2004) (stating that the burden of proof is on the alien to establish eligibility for asylum); Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. at 483 (same). Moreover, because Cai cannot sustain his burden on the asylum claim, he cannot establish his entitlement to withholding of removal. See Camara v. Ashcroft , 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004) (“Because the burden of proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even though the facts that must- 3 - be proved are the same--an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).”). Accordingly, we deny Cai’s petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
No. 10-11250.

#### Sherif Elkady, Petitioner v. James Conway, Superintendent, Attica Correctional Facility.

565 U.S. 875, 132 S. Ct. 234,

181 L. Ed. 2d 131,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6911.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
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 Quarterly Report of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jack D. Massimino, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



|(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 financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                 |  |  |  |                                      
|---------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|November 6, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ JACK D. MASSIMINO                
|                 |  |  |  | Jack D. Massimino                    
|                 |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                 |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
No. 11-5861.

#### David Mendez, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

565 U.S. 965, 132 S. Ct. 458,

181 L. Ed. 2d 298,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7531.

October 17, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
No. 11-5901.

#### Chaya C. Thomas, Petitioner v. Richard A. Wieland, United States Trustee, et al.

565 U.S. 925, 132 S. Ct. 356,

181 L. Ed. 2d 224,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6897.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
#### ANNISTON SOIL PIPE COMPANY, Appellant, v. CENTRAL FOUNDRY COMPANY, Appellee. Huey WHITE et al., Appellants, v. CENTRAL FOUNDRY CO., Appellee.

No. 20831.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

March 13, 1964.

Abe Berkowitz, Don M. Jones, and David J. Vann, Birmingham, Ala., Ber-kowitz & Lefkovits and Vann & Patrick, Birmingham, Ala., of counsel, for appellants.

Stuart A. Jackson, New York City, Perry Hubbard and Clement, Rosen, Hubbard & Waldrop, Tuscaloosa, Ala., for appellee.

Before MAGRUDER* and JONES, Circuit Judges, and ELLIS, District Judge.

*

 Senior Circuit Judge of the First Circuit, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

The only question on this appeal is whether the appellee corporation has its principal place of business in New York or in Alabama. If its principal place of business is in New York there is the diversity of citizenship requisite for federal jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332(c). If the principal place of business is Alabama there is no federal jurisdiction. The district court decided that the principal place of business was in Alabama and dismissed the action. Anniston Soil Pipe Co. v. Central Foundry Co., D.C., 216 F.Supp. 473. We are in agreement with the district court in its decision and the reasons set forth in its opinion. The judgment is

Affirmed.
No. 11-6083.

#### Roy L. Ellis, Petitioner v. Nebraska.

565 U.S. 967, 132 S. Ct. 463,

181 L. Ed. 2d 302,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7570.

October 17, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Nebraska denied.

Same case below, 281 Neb. 571, 799 N.W.2d 267.
<page>


EXHIBIT 32.01

CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Quarterly Report of Morgan Stanley Charter
Graham L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Walter Davis,
President of Demeter Management Corporation, the general partner
of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(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 financial condition and
results of operations of the Partnership.









By:   /s/ Walter Davis

Name:		Walter Davis
Title:	President of Demeter Management Corporation,
			the general partner of the Partnership

Date:		November 13, 2007
No. 10-10652.

#### Jeffrey L. G. Johnson, Petitioner v. Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.; and Joseph L. G. Johnson, Petitioner v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security.

565 U.S. 937, 132 S. Ct. 398,

181 L. Ed. 2d 251,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7297.

October 11, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U.S.C. § 1, and since the only qualified Justice is of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment is affirmed under 28 U.S.C. § 2109, which provides that under these circumstances “the court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affir-mance by an equally divided court.”

The Chief Justice, Justice Scalia, Justice Kennedy, Justice Thomas, Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Alito, and Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 414 Fed. Appx. 887.
No. 11-5424.

#### Allen Ward Cox, Petitioner v. Kenneth S. Tucker, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

565 U.S. 906, 132 S. Ct. 309,

181 L. Ed. 2d 189,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5759.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 638 F.3d 1356.
No. 11-5030.

#### Jason Lee Bowers, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 886, 132 S. Ct. 260,

181 L. Ed. 2d 152,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5441.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 638 F.3d 616.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
R.H. DONNELLEY INC.'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE
30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001065310
<NAME> R.H. DONNELLEY INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,341
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   67,844
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,027
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                89,536
<PP&E>                                          61,379
<DEPRECIATION>                                  43,276
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 379,862
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           69,571
<BONDS>                                        451,750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,002
<OTHER-SE>                                   (221,994)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   379,862
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                82,209
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   58,341
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,530
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,866
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 42,487
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,139
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             25,348
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,348
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.74


</TABLE>
No. 11-5553.

#### Damon Asberry, Petitioner v. Texas.

565 U.S. 914, 132 S. Ct. 328,

181 L. Ed. 2d 203,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6177.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
DLA LAND AND MARITIME

HALL OF FAME

All fields in the Hall of Fame Nomination Form are required to submit a nomination. In addition to the 

nomination form, the nominator must submit write-up/supporting documentation of the specific work 

and/or achievements that merit consideration, and a one-paragraph citation that specifically highlights 

the nominee’s accomplishments. The citation will be read at the induction ceremony. Additional 

information pertaining to eligibility, selection criteria and the nomination process can be located in the 

DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame Policy Letter.

NOMINEE INFORMATION Date of Nomination:

Nominee’s Name:

Nominee’s Title:

Dates Employed at DLA Land and Maritime (or its earlier versions, e.g., DCSC, DESC, etc.)

Nominee’s Address or Next of Kin’s Address:

Nominee’s/Next of Kin’s Phone Number: 

Nominee’s/Next of Kin’s Email: 

2018 HALL OF FAME NOMINATION FORM 

Please indicate if the nominee is 

deceased. Please provide any 

information that would help locate a 

living descendent if none is known.

Highlight Nominee’s Notable Accomplishments (Attach write-up/supporting documentation, including a 

one-paragraph citation that specifically highlights the nominee's accomplishments): 

NOMINATOR INFORMATION

Nominator’s Name: 

Title: 

Telephone Number: 

Email Address: 

Relationship to the Nominee (Former co-worker, supervisor, etc.):

Nomination submissions must be sent to the DLA Land and Maritime Protocol Officer: richard.bechand@dla.mil