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

46534 

Vol. 72, No. 160 

Monday, August 20, 2007 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–806] 

Notice of Initiation of the 

Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order on Silicon 

Metal From the People’s Republic of 

China 

Correction 

In notice document E7–15203 

beginning on page 43597 in the issue of 

Monday, August 6, 2007, make the 

following correction: 

On page 43597, in the table, under the 

heading ‘‘Period to be reviewed’’, ‘‘June 

1, 2007 through May 31, 2007’’ should 

read ‘‘06/01/06–05/31/07’’. 

[FR Doc. Z7–15203 Filed 8–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Part 202 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Technical 

Amendments 

Correction 

In rule document E7–14897 appearing 

on page 42313 in the issue of Thursday, 

August 2, 2007, make the following 

correction: 

§202.101 [Corrected] 

In the second column, in section 

202.101, under the heading ‘‘Army’’, 

correct ‘‘Headquarters, U.S. Army 

Contracting Agency’’, and ‘‘Joint 

Contracting Command–Iraq/ 

Afghanistan’’ to be listed as two 

separate agencies. 

[FR Doc. Z7–14897 Filed 8–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

Upon Written Request, Copies 

Available from: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of Investor 

Education and Assistance, Washington, 

DC 20549-0213. 

Extension: Rule 302, SEC File No. 

270-453, OMB Control No. 3235-0510. 

Correction 

In notice document E7–14842 

appearing on page 42138 in the issue of 

Wednesday, August 1, 2007, make the 

following correction: 

In the second column, the document 

heading is corrected to read as set forth 

above. 

[FR Doc. Z7–14842 Filed 8–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES2
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

65394 

Vol. 72, No. 223 

Tuesday, November 20, 2007 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 774 

[Docket No. 070105004–7050–01] 

RIN 0694 AD95 

December 2006 Wassenaar 

Arrangement Plenary Agreement 

Implementation: Categories 1, 2, 3, 5 

Part I, 6, 7, 8, and 9 of the Commerce 

Control List; Wassenaar Reporting 

Requirements; Definitions; and 

Statement of Understanding on Source 

Code 

Correction 

In rule document E7–21247 beginning 

on page 62524 in the issue of Monday, 

November 5, 2007, make the following 

corrections: 

PART 774—[CORRECTED] 

1. On page 62545, in Supplement No. 

1 to Part 774 (the Commerce Control 

List), Category 6 Sensors, Export Control 

Classification Number (ECCN) 6A005, in 

the second column, in paragraph b.6.a., 

in the first line, ‘‘μs’’ should read ‘‘ns’’. 

2. On page 62547, in Supplement No. 

1 to Part 774 (the Commerce Control 

List), Category 6 Sensors, Export Control 

Classification Number (ECCN) 6A995, in 

the second column, the second 

occurrence of paragraph ‘‘d.1.a.’’ should 

read ‘‘d.1.a..1.’’. 

3. On the same page, in the same 

Supplement, in the same Category, in 

the same ECCN, in the same column, 

paragraph ‘‘d.1.a.2.1.’’ should read, 

‘‘d.1.a..2.’’. 

[FR Doc. Z7–21247 Filed 11–19–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES2
Charles Vernon SMITH, Jr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0441

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 26, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Terry PETRASH, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. FLORIDA GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY, LLC, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-2334

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Robert DICK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1380

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 24, 2018 Rehearing Denied August 27, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 156 (Thursday, August 13, 1998)]
[Corrections]
[Page 43449]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X98-50813]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Inspector General

42 CFR Part 1008

RIN 0991-AA85


Medicare and State Health Care Programs: Fraud and Abuse; 
Issuance of Advisory Opinions by the OIG

Correction

    In rule document 98-18874, beginning on page 38311, in the issue of 
Thursday, July 16, 1998, make the following correction:


Sec. 1008.39  [Corrected]

    On page 38325, in the third column, the section heading following 
amendatory instruction 11 should read ``Sec. 1008.39 Additional 
Information.''
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

M. GARZA ENTERPRISES, INC. and 

EVERETT HOLDINGS, LLC,

Appellants,

v.

JULIA PEREZ,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-23-00354-CV

Appeal from

131st Judicial District Court

of Bexar County, Texas

(TC# 2022CI00753)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be 

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We 

further order Appellant to pay all costs of this appeal and that this decision be certified below for 

observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2024.

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Arizona

Filters

              - products_publications(6)

## By Location

              - alabama(4)
              - alaska(18)
              - arizona(2601)
              - arkansas(7)
              - california(451)
              - colorado(420)
              - commonwealth of the northern mariana islands(1)
              - connecticut(4)
              - delaware(1)
              - florida(14)
              - georgia(8)
              - guam(2)
              - hawaii(8)
              - idaho(163)
              - illinois(5)
              - indiana(6)
              - (-)iowa(6)
              - kansas(41)
              - kentucky(2)
              - louisiana(5)
              - maine(6)
              - maryland(6)
              - massachusetts(7)
              - michigan(5)
              - minnesota(11)
              - mississippi(4)
              - missouri(8)
              - montana(125)
              - nebraska(57)
              - nevada(426)
              - new hampshire(4)
              - new jersey(5)
              - new mexico(533)
              - new york(10)
              - north carolina(4)
              - north dakota(36)
              - ohio(3)
              - oklahoma(31)
              - oregon(136)
              - pennsylvania(5)
              - puerto rico(4)
              - rhode island(5)
              - south carolina(4)
              - south dakota(50)
              - tennessee(3)
              - texas(95)
              - u.s. virgin islands(2)
              - utah(551)
              - vermont(4)
              - virginia(8)
              - washington(98)
              - west virginia(1)
              - wisconsin(11)
              - wyoming(225)

## By Year

publication        May 5, 2016        Contamination with bacterial zoonotic pathogen genes in U.S. streams influenced by varying types of animal agriculture

publication        June 25, 2021        Evaluating establishment of conservation practices in the Conservation Reserve Program across the central and western United States

publication        October 1, 2015        Black-tailed and white-tailed jackrabbits in the American West: History, ecology, ecological significance, and survey methods

publication        January 1, 1999        Biogeographical profiles of shorebird migration in midcontinental North America

publication        September 3, 2013        Golden eagle population trends in the western United States: 1968-2010

publication        July 15, 2020        Assessing the vulnerability of military installations in the coterminous United States to potential biome shifts resulting from rapid climate change
RO 11148 

9432.1986(08) 

April 30 1986 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Standards Applicable to Pipelines 

FROM: Marcia Williams, Director, Office of Solid Waste 

TO: Barry Seraydarian, Director, Toxics and Waste 

 Management Division (T-1) 

This is a follow-up to my interim response of March 19 

(attached) concerning standards applicable to transportation by 

pipeline. 

Since my interim response, Carolyn Barley has been in 

contact with Mostafa Badmand of your staff to discuss the 

questions you raised in your memorandum of February 21. 

Specifically, you ask whether transportation of hazardous waste 

by pipeline is acceptable under RCRA when the definition of 

transportation contained in 40 CFR 260.10 includes only "the 

movement of hazardous waste by air, rail, highway, or water." 

The fact that the definition of transportation does not 

include pipeline as a mode for the transportation of hazardous 

waste does not mean that hazardous wastes via pipeline is not 

acceptable under RCRA. Rather, because the definition of 

transportation does not include pipeline transport, the 

provisions of 40 CFR §263 do not apply to the transportation of 

hazardous waste by pipeline. 

While the §263 regulations do not apply to the transport of 

hazardous waste by pipeline, there are other provisions under 

RCRA and CERCLA which may apply. For example, a release of 

hazardous waste from a pipeline which is not immediately cleaned 

up could constitute an imminent and substantial endangerment to 

health or the environment under RCRA §7006, and, therefore, be 

subject to a §7003 action. Such a release may also be reportable 

under §103(a) of cercla. The generator or owner/operator of the 

pipeline could be liable under §107 of CERCLA for clean-up costs 

and damages to natural resources, and may also be subject to a 

§106 administrative order to clean up the release. 
 RO 11148 

-2- 

If you have other concerns or questions regarding 

transportation by pipeline, please call Carolyn Barley on 8-382- 

2217. 

Attachment 

cc: Nostafa Radmand 

cc: OSW 

 PSPD
Docket Operations M-30 

West Building Ground Floor W 12-140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Monday, April 08, 2013 

United Sates of American 

Department of Transportation 

Office of Secretary 

Washington, D.C. Washington DC 20590;3 

RE. Docket DOS-OST-1997-2605 

. ---~-It would nm be in the best interest of tbe-7.communities being.:.served-by-Silv.er 

Airwa'is in Montana to suspend service to Miles City, Montana and Lewistown, 

Montana at this time. If this were to happen, the entire system of service could be 

in jeopardy for the rest of the Montana communities being served by Silver Airways. 

A continuation of at least the next two year period would give these two 

communities ample time to make adjustments and form a new plan for increasing 

ridership. Yes, the law has changed; Lewistown and Miles City have not had ample 

time to address the impeding loss of their air carrier. The impact to both 

communities, if this service is terminated, would be monumentally devastating and 

tragic leaving the communities transportation-less; no rail service! no bus service! 

Once Essential Air Service is gone it may never return. Montana is a huge state and 

distances are very large in the scope of being able to move people to a destination 

hub. Certainly there needs to be some latitude for the two communities to work 

toward a solution to their existing lack of boarding's and cost of the subsidy per 

passenger. 

At the Montana Essential Air Service Task Force meeting in Billings on April 4, 2013, 

some interesting documentation was presented to demonstrate when Denver was 

the hub. Their boarding's were far greater than having Billings as their hub. This 

should be investigated and a determination needs to be made based on the prior 

ridership from both communities. Before a judgment is made, look at all the facts 

that may affect these and the other communities that will be impacted by 

eliminating the EAS service now being provided. The dynamics of Montana are 

changing and the purpose of the EAS program that began in 1978 was and still is to 

provide air service to the seven communities in Montana that the system was 

designed for. 

Thank you for your prompt attention to this Montana state-wide problem; it is hoped 

this Order of Show Cause will not be enforced at this time, to give the Montana 

Essential Air Service Task Force time to address this issue. There is a solution that 

needs to be worked out by the communities in Montana and not a Washington 

solution that is far removed from the real problems in Montana. 

With Respect, 

Fred 

~~ 

Lark 

Montana Essential Air Service Task Force-Media Representative
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

RICHARD F. HUSSEY, P.A.,

Appellant,

v.

DAVID STEPHEN REIDY, et al.,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-1350

[November 23, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Linda A. Alley, Judge; L.T. Case No. FMCE14-006256 

(38) (90).

Richard F. Hussey of Richard F. Hussey, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellant.

Natalie P. Mescolotto and Carla Lowry of Lowry at Law, P.A., Fort 

Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 185 (Wednesday, September 24, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 49908]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X97-20924]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 177


Indirect Food Additives: Polymers

CFR Correction

    In Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 170 to 199, 
revised as of April 1, 1997, make the following correction:

    On page 263, in Sec. 177.1520, in the paragraph (b) table, the 
third entry under the heading ``Substance'' is corrected to read 
``Polymethylsilsesquioxane (CAS Reg. No. 68554-70-1)''.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Occupancy modeling of autonomously recorded vocalizations to predict distribution of rallids in tidal wetlands      

      February 6, 2018    

Conservation and management for a species requires reliable information on its status, distribution, and habitat use. We identified occupancy and distributions of king (Rallus elegans) and clapper (R. crepitans) rail populations in marsh complexes along the Pamunkey and Mattaponi Rivers in Virginia, USA by modeling data on vocalizations recorded from autonomous recording units (ARUs). Occupancy probability for both species combined was 0.64 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.75) in marshes along the Pamunkey and 0.59 (0.45, 0.72) in marshes along the Mattaponi. Occupancy probability along the Pamunkey was strongly influenced by salinity, increasing logistically by a factor of 1.62 (0.6, 2.65) per parts per thousand of salinity. In contrast, there was not a strong salinity gradient on the Mattaponi and therefore vegetative community structure determined occupancy probability on that river. Estimated detection probability across both marshes was 0.63 (0.62, 0.65), but detection rates decreased as the season progressed. Monitoring wildlife within wetlands presents unique challenges for conservation managers. Our findings provide insight not only into how rails responded to environmental variation but also into the general utility of ARUs for occupancy modeling of the distribution and habitat associations of rails within tidal marsh systems.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Todd E Katzner

##### Supervisory Research Wildlife Biologist

Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center

tkatzner@usgs.gov

## Related Content

#### Todd E Katzner

##### Supervisory Research Wildlife Biologist

Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center

tkatzner@usgs.gov

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center (FRESC) Headquarters          

777 NW 9th StSuite 400Corvallis, OR97330United States

fresc_outreach@usgs.gov

541-750-1030

541-750-1069

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - mattaponi river
                  -  Pamunkey River
                  - Virginia

View All **
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

2338 

Vol. 72, No. 11 

Thursday, January 18, 2007 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

[Docket No. 2006N–0036] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Experimental 

Study of Possible Footnotes and 

Cueing Schemes to Help Consumers 

Interpret Quantitative Trans Fat 

Disclosure on the Nutrition Facts Panel 

Correction 

In notice document E6–21486 

beginning on page 75762 in the issue of 

Monday, December 18, 2006, make the 

following correction: 

On page 75762, in the first column, 

under the heading DATES, in the second 

and third lines, ‘‘December 18, 2006’’ 

should read ‘‘January 17, 2007’’. 

[FR Doc. Z6–21486 Filed 1–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES3
EXHIBIT 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

         In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of
IceWEB, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, I, John R. Signorello,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of IceWEB, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

         (1) such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of IceWEB, Inc. for the
quarter ended June 30, 2004, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
of IceWEB, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of IceWEB,
Inc.

                                        /s/ John R. Signorello

                                        John R. Signorello
                                        Chairman and CEO
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Asteroids

Filters

              - (-)products_publications(1)

## By Location

              - colorado(1)
              - south dakota(1)
              - (-)utah(1)
              - virginia(3)

## By Year

publication        July 1, 1995        Roberts rift, Canyonlands, Utah, a natural hydraulic fracture caused by comet or asteroid impact
William VAUGHN, Appellant, v. Meghan VAUGHN, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2895

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[July 25, 2018]

Michael Rebuck of Michael Todd Rebuck, P.A., Palm City, for appellant.

Karen O'Brien Steger and Lori I. Steger of Steger Law, Stuart, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

The former husband appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage and equitable dissolution of marital assets. Because the trial court failed to make statutorily required factual findings in support of its distribution scheme, it erred as a matter of law.1*See**Callwood v. Callwood* , 221 So.3d 1198, 1201 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Therefore, we reverse.

Section 61.075(3), Florida Statutes (2017), which governs the instant dispute, *127requires that "any distribution of marital liabilities ... be supported by factual findings in the judgment or order based on competent substantial evidence with reference to the factors enumerated in subsection (1)." That section also requires specific written findings with regard to "any other findings necessary to advise the parties or the reviewing court of the trial court's rationale" for its distribution. § 61.075(3)(d), Fla. Stat.

Here, the trial court failed to make the requisite section 61.075(3)(d) findings and did not refer to the section 61.075(1) factors in its final judgment as required by the statute. Instead, its final judgment included only a general conclusory statement that certain items were determined to be marital and others non-marital. Most of the contested assets were not specifically discussed, nor was the evidence supporting distribution identified so as to "advise the parties or the reviewing court" of the basis for the distribution. *See* § 61.075(3)(d), Fla. Stat.

Reversible error occurs where "the equitable distribution in the final judgment is not supported by factual findings with reference to the factors listed in section 61.075(1), as required by section 61.075(3) when 'a stipulation and agreement has not been entered and filed.' " *Richardson v. Knight* , 197 So.3d 143, 146 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (quoting § 61.075(3), Fla. Stat.). We therefore reverse and remand for the trial court to incorporate the requisite factual findings into its final judgment.

*Reversed and remanded with instructions.*

Damoorgian, Levine and Kuntz, JJ., concur.

1

Further, the trial court failed to make these findings even though the former husband generally requested such findings in his motion for rehearing.