alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 126 (Friday, June 28, 1996)]
[Corrections]
[Page 33800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X96-50628]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Weather Observation Service Standards

Correction

    In notice document 96-16046 beginning on page 32887 in the issue of 
Tuesday, June 25, 1996, make the following correction:
    On page 32887, in the second column, under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT:, the last line should read ``telephone (202) 366-4474.''

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 19525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9810]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


William S. Middleton VA Hospital, et al., Notice of Consolidated 
Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron Microscopes

This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 
(Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR 
part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 
P.M. in Room 3705, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution 
Avenue., NW, Washington, D.C.
Docket Number: 09-004. Applicant: William S. Middleton Veterans 
Administration Hospital, Madison, WI 53706. Instrument: Electron 
Microscope, Model H-760-III. Manufacturer: Hitachi High Technologies 
Corporation, Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 11527, March 18, 
2009.
Docket Number: 09-006. Applicant: Bergen County Technical Schools/
Bergen County Academies, Hackensack, NJ 07601. Instrument: Transmission 
Electron Microscope, Model JEM-2100. Manufacturer: JEOL, Ltd., Japan. 
Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 11527, March 18, 2009.
Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as these instruments are intended to be used, was being 
manufactured in the United States at the time the instruments were 
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and 
is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an 
electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other 
instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in 
the United States at the time of order of each instrument.

    Dated: April 23, 2009.
Christopher Cassel,
Acting Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-9810 Filed 4-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
exv10w36






Exhibit 10.36




ASSIGNMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNITS




     THIS ASSIGNMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNITS (this “Assignment”) dated as of January 25, 2012
(the “Effective Date”), is made by and among J. HORD ARMSTRONG, III, an individual residing in the
State of Missouri (“Assignor”), and ARMSTRONG RESOURCE PARTNERS, L.P, a Delaware limited
partnership (“Assignee”);



W I T N E S S E T H:



     WHEREAS, Assignor and Assignee have entered into that certain Restricted Unit Award Agreement
dated October 1, 2011 (the “Award Agreement”); and



     WHEREAS, pursuant to the Award Agreement, Assignor agreed to deliver to Assignee that number
(or fraction thereof) of Restricted Units necessary to satisfy the obligations of Assignor under
subparagraph 5(a) of the Award Agreement to Assignee; and



     WHEREAS, the total number of Restricted Units necessary to satisfy such obligations set forth
in the foregoing paragraph is 9,405 Restricted Units (the “Assigned Units”); and



     WHEREAS, in exchange for the assignment of the Assigned Units herein, Assignee has previously
agreed to pay any federal, state or local taxes arising from the Award Agreement, the total amount
of which has been determined to be equal to $1,288,485.00 (the “Tax Liability”); and



     WHEREAS, capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have those meanings
assigned to them in the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership dated October 1, 2011
and the Award Agreement;



     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants and agreements
contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, Assignor and Assignee do hereby agree as follows:



     1. Assignment. Subject to the terms and conditions hereof, Assignor hereby transfers
and assigns the Assigned Units to Assignee, effective as of the Effective Date, together with all
rights and obligations pertaining thereto, in exchange for the payment or reimbursement of the Tax
Liability set forth above.



     2. Successors and Assigns. This Assignment shall be binding upon and inure to the
benefit of each of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors
and assigns.



     3. Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of
which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same document.



 









 





     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Assignment on the Effective Date.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	ASSIGNOR:


 	 
	 	/s/ J. Hord Armstrong, III
 
	 
	 	J. HORD ARMSTRONG, III 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	ASSIGNEE:



ARMSTRONG RESOURCE PARTNERS, L.P.

 	 
	 
	 	     By:  	ELK CREEK GP, LLC, as General Partner
 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	By:  	/s/ Martin D. Wilson
 
	 
	 	 	Name: Martin D. Wilson, President 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 




2
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4881 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4881

      To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to require that 
    supplemental nutrition assistance benefits be used to purchase 
 supplemental foods that are eligible for purchase under section 17 of 
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (commonly known as the WIC program) and 
                       certain additional foods.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 23, 2016

Mr. Roe of Tennessee introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                    to the Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to require that 
    supplemental nutrition assistance benefits be used to purchase 
 supplemental foods that are eligible for purchase under section 17 of 
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (commonly known as the WIC program) and 
                       certain additional foods.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Healthy Food Choices Act of 2016''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT.

    Section 3(k) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 
2012(k)) is amended to read as follows:
    ``(k) `Food' means a supplemental food of the kind prescribed by 
the Secretary under section 17(b)(14) of the Child Nutrition Act of 
1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(b)(14)), except that such term includes--
            ``(1) meat, fish, and poultry;
            ``(2) beans, soups, and immature varieties of legumes (such 
        as those used in canned green peas, green beans, snap beans, 
        yellow beans, and wax beans); and
            ``(3) baked beans with meat (e.g., beans and franks).''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This Act shall take effect on January 1, 2017.
                                 <all>
```
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Reconnaissance for uranium in asphalt-bearing rocks in the western states      

      January 1, 1955    

View Report

An appraisal of asphalt-bearing rocks as potential sources of uranium was made during 1953 and 1954 by examining deposits in 45 areas in California, Utah, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, and Missouri.  A total of 202 samples from these areas was analyzed for uranium. The oldest rocks sampled are Ordovician in age, and the youngest are Recent. Although none of the deposits are of value at this time as a source of uranium, some of the deposits may constitute a low grade uranium resource whose recovery will depend upon the primary use to which the asphalt is placed.

Significant amounts of uranium in the ash of the extracted oil were found in samples from 7 of the 45 areas examined. These areas are Chalone Creek, McKittrick, Edna, and Los Alamos areas, California: Vernal area, Utah; Sulphur area, Oklahoma; and the Ellis area, Missouri. The average uranium content of samples from these seven areas ranges: from 0.028 to 0.376 percent in the ash of the extracted oil.  All except the Chalone Creek area contain large estimated reserves of asphalt-bearing rock, ranging from 15,000,000 to almost 2,000,000,000 tons.  The average uranium content of samples from 13 additional areas ranges from 0.020 to 0.068 percent in the ash of the extracted oil.  Many of these areas contain very large reserves of asphalt-bearing rocks.

Evaluation of field data indicates that naturally occurring asphalts with a relatively high uranium content probably originated in, or migrated through, rocks that contain more than average amounts of uranium. It is believed that some of the uranium was present as an original constituent of the oil but that some uranium may have been introduced during migration of the oil.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - california
                  -  Missouri
                  -  Montana
                  -  New Mexico
                  -  Oklahoma
                  -  Texas
                  -  Utah
                  -  Wyoming

View All **
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Shorebird monitoring using spatially explicit occupancy and abundance      

      April 11, 2023    

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Data           
                  -              Connect           

September 22, 2023

####                 Evaluating if abundance and behavior of shorebird species are related to restoration and habitat at Whiskey Island and Caminada Headland, Louisiana from 2012 to 2020              

Wetland and Aquatic Research Center 

#### Hardin Waddle, Ph.D.

##### Research Ecologist

Wetland and Aquatic Research Center 

waddleh@usgs.gov

337-262-7671

## Related Content

September 22, 2023

####                 Evaluating if abundance and behavior of shorebird species are related to restoration and habitat at Whiskey Island and Caminada Headland, Louisiana from 2012 to 2020              

Wetland and Aquatic Research Center 

#### Hardin Waddle, Ph.D.

##### Research Ecologist

Wetland and Aquatic Research Center 

waddleh@usgs.gov

337-262-7671

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Wetland and Aquatic Research Center - Gainesville, FL          

7920 NW 71st St.Gainesville, FL32653United States

352-378-8181

352-378-4956

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Louisiana
                  - Whiskey Island

View All **
Fedlin LIMAGE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2203

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[June 21, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains editorial corrections of previously

published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule,

and Notice documents. These corrections are

prepared by the Office of the Federal

Register. Agency prepared corrections are

issued as signed documents and appear in

the appropriate document categories

elsewhere in the issue.

Corrections Federal Register

31190

Vol. 62, No. 109

Friday, June 6, 1997

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Availability of Appealable Decisions

Correction

In notice document 97–9709

beginning on page 18582 in the issue of

Wednesday, April 16, 1997, make the

following corrections:

1. On page 18583, in the second

column, the Sedona District section

should read ‘‘Sedona District: Red Rock

News, published weekly Wednesday

and Friday in Sedona, Coconino

County, Arizona.’’

2. On page 18583, in the second

column, the The Arizona Daily Star

section should read ‘‘The Arizona Daily

Star, published daily, Monday-Sunday,

in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona.’’

3. On page 18583, in the second

column, the Douglas District section

should read ‘‘Douglas District: Daily

Dispatch, published daily TuesdayFriday, and Sunday in Douglas, Cochise

County, Arizona.’’

4. On page 18583, in the second

column, the Nogales District section

should read ‘‘Nogales District: Nogales

International, published weekly on

Tuesday and Friday in Nogales, Santa

Cruz County, Arizona.’’

5. On page 18583, in the second

column, the Safford District section

should read ‘‘Safford District: Eastern

Arizona Courier, published weekly on

Wednesday, in Safford, Graham County,

Arizona.’’

6. On page 18585, in the first column,

the Dated Line should read

‘‘April 3, 1997.’’

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[PP 0E3853/R2223; FRL-5358-6]

RIN 2070-AC78

Hexaconazole; Pesticide Tolerance

Correction

In rule document 96–8946 beginning

on page 15895 in the issue of

Wednesday, April 10, 1996, make the

following correction:

§ 180.488 [Corrected]

On page 15896, in the third column,

in § 180.488, in the seventh line,

‘‘[insert date 3 years after the signature

date]’’ should read ‘‘March 26, 1999’’.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS

ADMINISTRATION

Records Schedules; Availability and

Request for Comments

Correction

In notice document 97–13686,

beginning on page 28735, in the issue of

Tuesday, May 27, 1997, make the

following correction:

On page 28735, in the third column,

in the DATES: section, in the second

and third lines, ‘‘June 11, 1997’’ should

read ‘‘July 11, 1997’’.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Special Emphasis Panel in Materials

Research; Notice of Meeting

Correction

In notice document 97–11389,

appearing on page 24141, in the issue of

Friday, May 2, 1997, in the third

column, the signature was omitted and

should read as set forth below:

M. Rebecca Winkler,

Committee Management Officer.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           "Ribbon rock", an unusual beryllium-bearing tactite      

      October 7, 1944    

The beryllium deposits at Iron Mountain, near the northern end of the Sierra Cuchillo in Sierra and Socorro Counties, New Mexico, are unusual products of contact metamorphism. They occur in irregular bodies of tactile formed by replacement of Paleozoic limestone, generally at or near contacts with small intrusive masses of rhyolite, aplite, and fine-grained granite. The metamorphism took place in mid-Tertiary time. Beryllium is present chiefly in the complex silicate minerals helvite and danalite, and is a minor constituent of the garnet grossularite, a boron-bearing idocrase, and chlorite. These minerals are known to occur in noteworthy concentrations in only one type of rock, a peculiar rhythmically layered variety of tactile to which the name "ribbon rock" is given.

The structure of such tactite is very conspicuous, and appears in section as thin, finely crenulated bands of magnetite alternating with similar bands of silicate minerals and finely crystalline fluorite. Concentric banding about fluorite-rich pod-like masses is common. Bodies of "ribbon rock" range in size from inch-thick lenses to large masses amounting to thousands of tons; most appear to have been formed along contacts between re-crystallized limestone and massive magnetite-andradite tactite, chiefly by replacing fluids penetrating the limestone from fractures. The layered structure is interpreted as a diffusion effect.The formation of massive and "ribbon rock" tactites can be traced through a range of falling temperature from a stage characterized by deposition from iron-rich vapors to a stage in which hydrothermal solutions were dominant. Both vapors and liquids appear to have been acid. Reducing conditions undoubtedly existed during the latter part of the hydrothermal stage. The occurrence of beryllium in "ribbon rock," but not in typical massive tactite, may signify that its compounds in deposits at or near intrusive contacts are confined to rocks of hydrothermal origin. The occurrence of "ribbon rock" is suggested as a potentially useful clue for recognition of beryllium-bearing contact deposits elsewhere; at least two other occurrences of what apparently is "ribbon rock" have been described in the literature.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Iron Mountains
                  - new mexico

View All **
Exhibit 32.02



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 on Form 10-K for
NetScreen Technologies, Inc. (the Company) for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Remo E. Canessa, Chief Financial 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 results of operations of the Company.



By:

/s/    REMO E.
CANESSARemo E. Canessa Chief Financial Officer NetScreen Technologies, Inc.Date:

December 24, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1393

JENNIFER L. WILSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SUNTRUST BANK, Incorporated in Georgia; SUNTRUST MORTGAGE 

INC.; RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANY, LLC, f/k/a Residential 

Funding Corporation,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

HUTCHENS, SENTER, BRITTON, PA; JOHN/JANE DOE 1-10,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, 

District Judge. (3:11-cv-00580-FDW-DSC)

Submitted: July 30, 2012 Decided: August 13, 2012

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jennifer L. Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Julia Bright Hartley, 

Christina Rampey Hunoval, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, 

LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Jennifer L. Wilson seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing her claims as to some, but not all, of 

the Defendants in her civil action. This court may exercise 

jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), 

and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. 

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Wilson seeks 

to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable 

interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the 

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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
AAM-11-217-E March 23, 2011

Exemption No. 10229 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0228

Mr. Roy Currier

President Currier’s Flying Service, Inc.

P.O. Box 351 Greenville Junction, ME 04442

Dear Mr. Currier:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated March 9, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Currier’s Flying Service, Inc. (Currier) for an exemption from § § 120.117(b)(2)(ii), (iii) and 225(b)(2)(ii), (iii) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow Currier, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one drug and alcohol program.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Currier.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that2

provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Currier’s Flying Service, Inc. an exemption from 14 CFR § § 120.117(b)(2)(ii), (iii) and 225(b)(2)(ii), (iii) to the extent necessary to allow Currier, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one drug and alcohol program, subject to the conditions and limitations

described below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of Currier are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of the Currier part 135 operation, not under part 91.

This exemption terminates on April 30, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/
James R. Fraser, M.D. Deputy Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure