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

-  Home 
-  Document Search 
-  Andrew's Business Plan Template - Traditional 

# Andrew's Business Plan Template - Traditional

## About this document and download

This example business plan is provided by the Small Business Administration.

  Download  .doc

##                 Translations            

-                                   Name	Operations Ejemplo de plan de negocios tradicional de Andrew                             

##                 Download translations            

**Disclaimer**: Translations are for informational purposes only. Applications must be submitted in English.

Español
Download

##                 Related documents            

-        Support          Rebecca's Business Plan Template - Traditional 
-        Support          Andrew's Business Plan Template - Lean
From: Hastry, Mike

To: Tripp Burwell

Subject: NJ CESQG info

Date: Friday, October 19, 2012 3:54:50 PM

Attachments: NJ CESQG 2010.xls

Trip,

Attached pls find an excel workbook. The first sheet lists the CESQG’s we have on file and their

 SIC/NAICs codes/description (if available). The second sheet id’s the waste volumes and waste

 codes based on manifest data. ‘Multiples’ indicate that the company made more than one manifest

 shipment for 2010. The two sheets won’t match in number as not all our CESQG’s use a manifest

 nor are they required. Anything else, just let me know - thanks

Michael R. Hastry , Chief

Bureau of Hazardous Waste & UST Compliance and Enforcement

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

Tel. No. (609) 943-4989

Fax. No. (609) 292-3970

For information on the Hazardous Waste program, click

http://www.nj.gov/dep/enforcement/hw.html

For information on the Underground Storage Tank program, click

http://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/bust/bust.htm

For information on the Medical Waste program, click 

http://www.nj.gov/dep/dshw/rrtp/rmw.htm

For information on no cost Compliance Assistance Seminars, click

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/enforcement/hw_seminar.html
### §1245. Connecting or side trails; establishment, designation, and marking as components of national trails system; location

Connecting or side trails within park, forest, and other recreation areas administered by the Secretary of the Interior or Secretary of Agriculture may be established, designated, and marked by the appropriate Secretary as components of a national recreation, national scenic or national historic trail. When no Federal land acquisition is involved, connecting or side trails may be located across lands administered by interstate, State, or local governmental agencies with their consent, or, where the appropriate Secretary deems necessary or desirable, on privately owned lands with the consent of the landowner. Applications for approval and designation of connecting and side trails on non-Federal lands shall be submitted to the appropriate Secretary.

(Pub. L. 90–543, §6, Oct. 2, 1968, 82 Stat. 922; Pub. L. 95–625, title V, §551(16), Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3515; Pub. L. 98–11, title II, §206, Mar. 28, 1983, 97 Stat. 45.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1983—Pub. L. 98–11 substituted "marked by the appropriate Secretary as components" for "marked as components" and ", or, where the appropriate Secretary deems necessary or desirable, on privately owned lands with the consent of the landowner. Applications for approval and designation of connecting and side trails on non-Federal lands shall be submitted to the appropriate Secretary" for ": Provided, That such trails provide additional points of public access to national recreation, national scenic or national historic trails".

1978—Pub. L. 95–625 substituted ", national scenic or national historic" for "or national scenic," and ", national scenic, or national historic" for "or scenic".
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, *v.*John Rockwell, Defendant-Appellant.

(No. 70-153;

Fifth District

November 3, 1971.

Paul Bradley, of Defender Project, of Mt. Vernon, (Robert E. Farrell, of Defender Project, of counsel,) for appellant.

Robert H. Rice, State’s Attorney, of Belleville, for the People.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated battery and filed a petition for probation which after hearing was denied. The prosecution, in view of the circumstances of the incident which led to prosecution, recommended a sentence of one to two years. The court sentenced defendant to a minimum of two years and a maximum of five years.

The 23-year-old defendant had served in the U.S. Navy from which he had been honorably discharged and soon thereafter joined the Army and was sent to Viet Nam. During his- time in the Army he was twice decorated with a Bronze Star, and awarded a Purple Heart as a result of wounds suffered in action. During the time he was in the Armed Services he completed his high school education and while in the Army completed a course in the Finance Procedure School for which he was awarded a diploma by the Army Finance School. While in the Army *879there was some incident, the details of which are undisclosed by the record, which resulted in an undesirable general discharge. By testimony offered, it appears that he chose to accept such discharge rather than stand a court martial. Since Ms discharge, he had prepared Mmself to enter college, by enrollment in a junior college, supported Mmself there by working, and had passed a test for acceptance as a trainee of a national retailer. Defendant had no record of prior conviction.

Events which have occurred since his sentence, including the completion of approximately one year of college work in the pemtentiary, make it unnecessary for us here to consider whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying probation, although much of what we pointed out in *People v. McClendon*(Ill.App.2d, 265 N.E.2d 207, would be here applicable. After serving approximately 15 months of Ms sentence, application was made to this Court for bond pending appeal, which was granted. Thereafter defendant enrolled in a umversity and during the pendency of this appeal has been so enrolled. From defendant’s attitude before the trial court, evidence there offered, his contrition and other circumstances, we consider his to be a proper case for a reduction of sentence, so that defendant may be allowed to continue normal commurnty contacts without further exposure to the “* * * stultifying effects of confinement which often * * * complicate the reintegration of the offender into the community * * *." *People v. McClendon, supra.*

We therefore modify the sentence imposed, reducing the minimum from two years to one year and reducing the maximum from five years to the time served.

Judgment affirmed, sentence modified.
----

| ·   | Customary      fees paid at closing on the sale of your current  residence |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ·   | Realtor      fees up to 6% on the sale of your current  residence |
|--------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ·   | Moving      expenses including packing, but notunpacking |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|

| ·   | Temporary      housing through August 2009 |
|--------------------|--------------------------------------------|

| ·   | Customary      fees paid at closing on your new residence, but not  points |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ·   | Two      house hunting trips for you and/or yourfamily |
|--------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|

| ·   | Travel      back and forth to Ohio through August 2009 as agreed with the      CEO |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
1

John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Seventh Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment. Tex. Gov’t

Code Ann. §75.002(a)(1) (Vernon Supp. 2003). 

NO. 07-02-0297-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

APRIL 10, 2003

______________________________

IVY JOHNSON,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 217TH DISTRICT COURT OF ANGELINA COUNTY;

NO. CR-22,904; HON. DAVID V. WILSON, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Before QUINN and REAVIS, JJ. and BOYD, S.J.1

Appellant, Ivy Johnson, contends on appeal that his plea of guilty to the charge of

robbery, was involuntary because it was based on misinformation provided by his counsel.

So too does he allege that this purported misinformation rendered his counsel ineffective.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
2

The identical issues and circumstances were considered by this court in Cause No.

07-02-0296-CR, styled Ivy Johnson v. State. We now overrule the issues at bar for the

reasons stated in our opinion rendered this day in Cause No. 07-02-0296-CR. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Brian Quinn

 Justice 

Do not publish.
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-09-02T01:24:34-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
EXHIBIT NO. 99.3

WRITTEN STATEMENT

 PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, Shawn M. Harrington, the Chief Financial Officer of Gerber Scientific, Inc. (the "Company"), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, hereby certifies that:

(i)	the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2003 of the Company (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii)	the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:  July 28, 2003

/s/ Shawn M. Harrington
§ 2.61 Qualifications of representatives. ( a ) A prisoner or parolee may select any person to appear as his or her representative in any proceeding, and any representative will be deemed qualified unless specifically disqualified under paragraph (b) or (c) of this section. However, an examiner or examiner panel may bar an otherwise qualified representative from participating in a particular hearing, provided good cause for such action is found and stated in the record (e.g., willfully disruptive conduct during the hearing by repeated interruption or use of abusive language). In certain situations, good cause may be found in advance of the hearing (e.g., that the proposed representative is a prisoner in disciplinary segregation whose presence at the hearing would pose a risk to security, or has a personal interest in the case which appears to conflict with that of the parole applicant).
( b ) The Commission may disqualify any representative from appearing before it for up to a five-year period if, following a hearing, the Commission finds that the representative has engaged in any conduct which demonstrates a clear lack of personal integrity or fitness to practice before the Commission (including, but not limited to, deliberate or repetitive provision of false information to the Commission, or solicitation of clients on the strength of purported personal influence with U.S. Parole Commissioners or staff).
( c ) ( 1 ) In addition to the prohibitions contained in 18 U.S.C. 207, no former employee of any Federal criminal justice agency (in either the Executive or Judicial Branch of the Government) with the exception of the Federal Defender Service, shall be qualified to act as a representative for hire in any case before the Commission for one year following termination of Federal employment. However, such persons may be employed by, or perform consulting services for, a private firm or other organization providing representation before the agency, to the extent that such employment or service does not include the performance of any representational act before the Commission.
( 2 ) No prisoner or parolee may serve as a representative before the Commission, at the hire of individual clients, in any case.
[48 FR 14377, Apr. 4, 1983, as amended at 48 FR 44528, Sept. 29, 1983]
Prelimin ary Regulatory Determinations 3 - 1,3 - Dinitrobenzene References
Exhibit 31-1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 200215 U.S.C. SECTION 7241

 

I, John H. Sottile, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of The Goldfield Corporation;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a.   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b.   (paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986)

c.   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d.   Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.  The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a.  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b.  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date: March 23, 2004

 

 

/s/  John H. SottileJohn H. Sottile Chairman of the Board of Directors,    President and Chief Executive Officer
sec10k123115_ex10-7e.htm




EXHIBIT 10.7(e)







SCHEDULE A TO EXHIBIT 10.7(b)







The following individuals entered into a First Amendment to the Ohio Valley Bank Company Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement with The Ohio Valley Bank Company which are identical to the First Amendment to the Ohio Valley Bank Company Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement, dated January 26, 2016, filed herewith.








	
Executive’s Name

	
Date of Amendment


	  	  
	
Katrinka V. Hart-Harris

	
January 26, 2016


	  	  
	
Scott W. Shockey

	
January 26, 2016


	  	  
	
Jeffrey E. Smith

	
January 26, 2016


	  	  
	
Thomas E. Wiseman

	
January 26, 2016
Amendment to Restricted Stock Award Contract between Paresh Patel and HCI Group



 Exhibit 10.90 

AMENDMENT TO RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD CONTRACT 

The Restricted Stock Award Contract between HCI Group, Inc. (formerly Homeowners Choice, Inc.) and Paresh Patel having a grant date of May 16, 2013 and
by which 400,000 shares of HCI Group, Inc. restricted stock were awarded to Mr. Patel is hereby amended so that the portion of the award relating to 100,000 shares that would vest one year after the Fair Market Value equals or exceeds $50 per share
for 20 consecutive trading days is cancelled effective March 2, 2016. 
  

			
	Agreed to this 2nd day of March 2016.
	
	  

	Paresh Patel
	
	HCI Group, Inc.
		
	By:	 	  

		 	Richard Allen, Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,217
<SECURITIES>                                   245,861
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,142
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,108
<INVENTORY>                                      1,212
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               327,079
<PP&E>                                         165,025
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,080
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 494,844
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           50,215
<BONDS>                                        347,248
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           331
<OTHER-SE>                                      94,824
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   494,844
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               123,599
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   73,681
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,792
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,216
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,860)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,302)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,558)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,558)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)


</TABLE>
### §1a–5. Repealed. Pub. L. 113–287, §7, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3272

Section, Pub. L. 91–383, §8, as added Pub. L. 94–458, §2, Oct. 7, 1976, 90 Stat. 1940; amended Pub. L. 95–625, title VI, §604(1), Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3518; Pub. L. 96–199, title I, §104, Mar. 5, 1980, 94 Stat. 68; Pub. L. 96–344, §8, Sept. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 1135; Pub. L. 103–437, §6(b), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4583; Pub. L. 104–333, div. I, title VIII, §814(d)(1)(I), Nov. 12, 1996, 110 Stat. 4196; Pub. L. 105–391, title III, §303, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3501, related to additional areas for National Park System. See section 100507 of Title 54, National Park Service and Related Programs.
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned, Chun Lu, the Chief Executive Officer of TEC Technology, Inc. (the
Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the
Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.
Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement this 16thday of August, 2010.

/s/ Chun
LuChun Lu Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Highland Ridge, Inc. and will be retained by TEC
Technology, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
### **CHAPTER 81A—NATIONAL FOREST ORGANIZATIONAL CAMP FEE IMPROVEMENT**

Sec.
6231.
Findings, purpose, and definitions.
6232.
Fees for occupancy and use of National Forest System lands and facilities by organizational camps.
6233.
Implementation.
6234.
Relationship to other laws.
6235.
Deposit and expenditure of use fees.
6236.
Ministerial issuance, or amendment authorization.
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 0 appear at 73 FR 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008.

#### § 0.180 Documents designated as orders.

All documents relating to the organization of the Department or to the assignment, transfer, or delegation of authority, functions, or duties by the Attorney General or to general departmental policy shall be designated as orders and shall be issued only by the Attorney General in a separate, numbered series. Classified orders shall be identified as such, included within the numbered series, and limited to the distribution provided for in the order or determined by the Assistant Attorney General for Administration. All documents amending, modifying, or revoking such orders, in whole or in part, shall likewise be designated as orders within such numbered series, and no other designation of such documents shall be used.
*

Judge Duncan did not participate in consideration of this

case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 46(d).

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7785

TOMMY FARRAR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LT. HODGE; OFFICER ELLIS; OFFICER CURTIS; LIEUTENANT ALFORD;

LIEUTENANT MERIDITH; SERGEANT MCCORMICK; OFFICER DIPONTE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III,

District Judge. (5:06-ct-03079-D)

Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: September 10, 2008

Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN,* Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tommy Farrar, Appellant Pro Se. John A. Maxfield, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S

OFFICE FOR THE COUNTY OF WAKE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Tommy Farrar appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the district court. Farrar v. Hodge, No.

5:06-ct-03079-D (E.D.N.C. Nov. 27, 2007). 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.

AFFIRMED
### SUBCHAPTER XX—GLACIER NATIONAL PARK