alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.19

                            PROMISSORY NOTE (#9)


$5,000.00                                                  September 21, 1995


     FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned promises to pay to Painter Group
Corporation "PGC", at San Diego, California, or such other place as the holder
of this Note may from time to time in writing direct, the principal sum of
Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) with interest from the above date at the
rate of ten percent (10%) per annum.  Interest shall be calculated on the
basis of a three hundred sixty (360) day year and, if the principal sum is
paid earlier than the date due, on the actual number of days that such
principal was outstanding. Principal and interest will be payable in
six months.

     Principal and interest shall be payable in lawful money of the United
States of America and all or any part of the unpaid balance of principal may
be repaid at any time, without premium or penalty.

     The undersigned hereby waives presentment, protest, notice of protest,
demand for payment, notice of dishonor and any and all other notices and
demands in connection with the delivery, acceptance, performance, default or
enforcement of this Note.  No delay by the holder in exercising any power or
right hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any power or right.

     The entire sum shall become immediately due and payable without further
notice, demand or presentment, at the option of the holder of this Note, upon
the occurrence at any time of any one or more of the following events
("events of default"): (a) an assignment by the undersigned for the benefit
of its creditors; (b) the initiation of involuntary bankruptcy proceedings
against the undersigned, which proceedings are not dismissed within 60 days
thereafter of (c) the filing by the undersigned of a petition under the
Federal Bankruptcy Code or comparable state laws for the reorganization,
arrangement or other judicial protection upon insolvency.

     The foregoing option to accelerate the indebtedness evidenced by this
Note may be exercised by PGC at any time after the occurrence of any of
the events of default.  The failure to exercise the foregoing option on the
occurrence of one or more of such events of default shall not prevent the
exercise upon the reoccurrence of such events of default or upon the
occurrence of any other event of default.

     The undersigned agrees to pay all out-of-pocket expenses (including
reasonable attorneys' fees and legal expenses) incurred by PGC hereunder
in connection with enforcing the obligations of the undersigned hereunder.

     This Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of California.

                                                 TCS ENTERPRISES, INC.



9-21-95                                          /s/ James B. Kylstad
--------------------                             --------------------------
Date                                             James B. Kylstad
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 681

 760

 737

 737

 753

 768

 810

 763

 741

 785

 769

 693

 594

 630

 712

 700

 687

 760

 749

 779

 918

 663

 778

 558

 452

 444

 405

 363

 345

 408

 434

 212

 229

 219

 217

 227

 244

 248

 241

 250

 228

 235

 227

 228

 217

 234

 218

 222

 223

 232

 220

 243

 212

 200

 200

 189

 178

 188

 168

 164

 176

 199

 411

 467

 492

 485

 507

 531

 555

 516

 498

 507

 506

 485

 447

 445

 466

 438

 416

 447

 477

 485

 561

 429

 449

 369

 322

 304

 305

 272

 264

 277

 297

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2012 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 16, 2012

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

SAN ANDREAS ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
Independent
      Accountants' Report




To
      the
      Board of Directors


Allied
      Capital Corporation




We
      have
      examined management's assertion about Allied
      Capital Corporation's compliance with the minimum servicing standards identified
      in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation
      Program for Mortgage  Bankers (USAP)  for the  period
      f rom
      January 1, 2005 through July 13, 2005 included in the accompanying management
      assertion.  Management is responsible
      for Allied Capital Corporation's compliance with those applicable minimum
      servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express
      an opinion on management's assertion about the entity's compliance
      based on our examination.




Our
      examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
      American Institute
      of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a
      test
      basis, evidence about
      Allied Capital Corporation's compliance with the applicable minimum servicing
      standards and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in
      the
      circumstances. We
      believe that our examination provides a reasonable
      basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination
      on
      Allied Capital
      Corporation's compliance with the applicable minimum servicing
      standards.




In
      our
      opinion, management's assertion that Allied Capital Corporation, in its
      capacity as Special Servicer, complied with the
      aforementioned applicable minimum servicing standards for
      the
      period from January 1, 2005 through July 13, 2005 is fairly stated, in all
      material respects,
      as set forth in the criteria attached.




/s/MATTHEWS,
      CARTER AND BOYCE, P.C.




March
      10,
      2006












11320
      Random Hills Road • Suite 600 • Fairfax, Virginia 22030-7427 • TEL: 703-218-3600
• FAX: 703-218-1808
§ 404.956 Removal of a hearing request(s) to the Appeals Council. ( a ) *Removal.* The Appeals Council may assume responsibility for a hearing request(s) pending at the hearing level of the administrative review process.
( b ) *Notice.* We will mail a notice to all parties at their last known address telling them that the Appeals Council has assumed responsibility for the case(s).
( c ) *Procedures applied.* If the Appeals Council assumes responsibility for a hearing request(s), it shall conduct all proceedings in accordance with the rules set forth in §§ 404.929 through 404.961, as applicable.
( d ) *Appeals Council review.* If the Appeals Council assumes responsibility for your hearing request under this section and you or any other party is dissatisfied with the hearing decision or with the dismissal of a hearing request, you may request that the Appeals Council review that action following the procedures in §§ 404.967 through 404.982. The Appeals Council may also decide on its own motion to review the action that was taken in your case under § 404.969. The administrative appeals judge who conducted a hearing, issued a hearing decision in your case, or dismissed your hearing request will not participate in any action associated with your request for Appeals Council review of that case.
( e ) *Ancillary provisions.* For the purposes of the procedures authorized by this section, the regulations of part 404 shall apply to authorize a member of the Appeals Council to exercise the functions performed by an administrative law judge under subpart J of part 404.
[85 FR 73157, Nov. 16, 2020]
Shasta

Gross Gen. 1,743,409 MWH

Sta. Serv. 3,552 MWH

Net Gen. 1,739,857 MWH

Trinity

LN Gen. 1,855 MWH

TR Gen. 203,418 MWH

Gross Gen. 205,273 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,750 MWH

Net Gen 203,523 MWH

JF Carr

Gross Gen. 111,508 MWH

Sta. Serv. 120 MWH

Net Gen. 111,388 MWH

Spring Creek

Gross Gen. 205,375 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,048 MWH

Net Gen. 204,327 MWH

Folsom

Gross Gen. 900,223 MWH

Sta. Serv. 5,181 MWH

Net Gen. 895,042 MWH

O'Neill

Gross Gen. 1,042 MWH

Net Gen. 803 MWH

Federal Share of San Luis

Out Meter 70,813 MWH

Total Gross

Generation 4,043,498 MWH

With Federal Share of San Luis 4,114,311 MWH

Total Net

Generation 4,028,427 MWH

With Federal Share of San Luis 4,099,240 MWH

Stampede (Washoe Project)

Gross Gen. 6,790 MWH

Sta. Serv. 292 MWH

Net Gen. 6,498 MWH

Nimbus

Gross Gen. 70,339 MWH

Sta. Serv. 465 MWH

Net Gen. 69,874 MWH

New Melones

Gross Gen. 468,985 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,534 MWH

Net Gen. 467,451 MWH

Keswick

Gross Gen. 337,344 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,182 MWH

Net Gen. 336,162 MWH

Historical Archive and Report Database

Annual Power System Generation Summary

 Run Date: 5/24/2024

Calendar Year 2023 : 01/01/2023 - 12/31/2023
Shasta

Gross Gen. 1,573,699 MWH

Sta. Serv. 4,100 MWH

Net Gen. 1,569,599 MWH

Trinity

LN Gen. 2,065 MWH

TR Gen. 172,621 MWH

Gross Gen. 174,686 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,820 MWH

Net Gen 172,866 MWH

JF Carr

Gross Gen. 83,924 MWH

Sta. Serv. 269 MWH

Net Gen. 83,655 MWH

Spring Creek

Gross Gen. 174,090 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,087 MWH

Net Gen. 173,003 MWH

Folsom

Gross Gen. 861,094 MWH

Sta. Serv. 5,747 MWH

Net Gen. 855,347 MWH

O'Neill

Gross Gen. 2,229 MWH

Net Gen. 308 MWH

Federal Share of San Luis

Out Meter 62,685 MWH

Total Gross

Generation 3,708,343 MWH

With Federal Share of San Luis 3,771,028 MWH

Total Net

Generation 3,690,121 MWH

With Federal Share of San Luis 3,752,806 MWH

Stampede (Washoe Project)

Gross Gen. 6,731 MWH

Sta. Serv. 299 MWH

Net Gen. 6,432 MWH

Nimbus

Gross Gen. 70,748 MWH

Sta. Serv. 353 MWH

Net Gen. 70,395 MWH

New Melones

Gross Gen. 456,468 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,654 MWH

Net Gen. 454,814 MWH

Keswick

Gross Gen. 311,405 MWH

Sta. Serv. 1,271 MWH

Net Gen. 310,134 MWH

Historical Archive and Report Database

Annual Power System Generation Summary

 Run Date: 5/24/2024

Water Year 2023 : 10/01/2022 - 09/30/2023
Editorial Note on Part 416
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 416 appear at 68 FR 53509, Sept. 11, 2003.

§ 416.938 What we mean by approved institutions or facilities. Institutions or facilities that we may approve include— ( a ) An institution or facility that furnishes medically recognized treatment for drug addiction or alcoholism in conformity with applicable Federal or State laws and regulations;
( b ) An institution or facility used by or licensed by an appropriate State agency which is authorized to refer persons for treatment of drug addiction or alcoholism;
( c ) State licensed or certified care providers;
( d ) Programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) and/or the Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) for the treatment of drug addiction or alcoholism;
( e ) Medicare or Medicaid certified care providers; or
( f ) Nationally recognized self-help drug addiction or alcoholism recovery programs (e.g., Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous) when participation in these programs is specifically prescribed by a treatment professional at an institution or facility described in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section as part of an individual's treatment plan.
[60 FR 8151, Feb. 10, 1995]
### subpart v—application to related personnel
#### § 404.966 [Reserved]
###### Editorial Note on Part 53

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 53 appear by T.D. ATF-447, 66 FR 19088, Apr. 13, 2001.

#### §§ 53.163-53.170 [Reserved]
§ 9.231 Moon Mountain District Sonoma County. ( a ) *Name.* The name of the viticultural area described in this section is “Moon Mountain District Sonoma County”. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter, “Moon Mountain District Sonoma County” is a term of viticultural significance.
( b ) *Approved maps.* The four United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the Moon Mountain District Sonoma County viticultural area are titled: ( 1 ) Rutherford, CA, 1951; photorevised 1968;
( 2 ) Sonoma, CA, 1951; photorevised 1980
( 3 ) Glen Ellen, CA, 1954; photorevised 1980; and
( 4 ) Kenwood, CA, 1954; photorevised 1980.
( c ) *Boundary.* The Moon Mountain District Sonoma County viticultural area is located in Sonoma County, California. The boundary of the Moon Mountain District Sonoma County viticultural area is as described below: ( 1 ) The beginning point is on the Rutherford map at the 2,188-foot elevation point located on the Sonoma-Napa County boundary line in section 26, T7N/R6W. From the beginning point, proceed southerly along the meandering Sonoma-Napa County boundary line, crossing onto the Sonoma map, to the intersection of the county line and Lovall Valley Road, Huichica Land Grant; then
( 2 ) Continue along the Sonoma-Napa County boundary line approximately 0.2 mile to the intersection of the county line and the end of an unnamed light-duty road; then
( 3 ) Proceed southwesterly in a straight line approximately 1.2 miles, passing through the marked 692-foot peak, to the intersection of the line with an unnamed light-duty road known locally as Thornsberry Road; then
( 4 ) Proceed north-northwesterly in a straight line approximately 1 mile to the intersection of two unnamed light-duty roads known locally as Castle Road and Bartholomew Road (marked by the 218-foot elevation point); then
( 5 ) Proceed west in a straight line approximately 1.4 miles, passing through the southern-most quarry marked on Schocken Hill, to the intersection of the line with the 400-foot elevation line, Pueblo Lands of Sonoma; then
( 6 ) Proceed northwesterly along the meandering 400-foot elevation line for approximately 7.4 miles, crossing onto the Glen Ellen map and then the Kenwood map, to the intersection of the contour line with Nelligan Road, near the mouth of Nunns Canyon, T6N/R6W; then
( 7 ) Proceed northerly on Nelligan Road approximately 0.6 mile to the intersection of the road with the 600-foot elevation line; then
( 8 ) Proceed northwest along the 600-foot elevation line approximately 1.8 miles to its second intersection with a marked trail (near a marked quarry and approximately 0.2 mile southeasterly of a marked 973-foot peak), Los Guilicos Land Grant; then
( 9 ) Proceed east-northeasterly in a straight line approximately 0.8 miles to the marked 1,483-foot peak; then
( 10 ) Proceed east-southeasterly in a straight line approximately 1.5 miles, crossing onto the Rutherford map, returning to the beginning point.
[T.D. TTB-117, 78 FR 60692, Oct. 2, 2013]
Twisp

Mazama

Carlton

Winthrop

SR20

SR153

T34R19E

T30R21E

T34R18E

T33R19E

T34R17E

T35R19E

T33R21E

T38R20E

T34R20E

T31R21E

T38R18E

T34R21E

T33R20E

T37R18E

T35R20E

T38R21E

T35R21E

T35R18E

T36R19E

T37R17E

T36R21E

T38R19E

T39R18E

T37R19E

T39R17E

T31R20E

T36R18E

T38R17E

T39R19E T39R20E

T35R17E

T39R21E

T36R20E

T36R17E

T32R21E T32R20E

T37R21E T37R20E

T32R19E

T40R17E

T36R16E

T40R18E

T35R16E

T39R22E

T30R20E

T40R19E T40R20E

T38R22E

T37R16E

T38R16E

T39R16E

T40R21E

T37R22E

T40R16E

T33R18E

T31R19E

T36R22E

T40R22E

T35R22E

T34R22E

T33R22E

T34R16E

T32R22E

T31R22E

T32R18E

T30R22E

T29R20E T29R21E T29R22E

T33R16E T33R17E

T30R19E

T37R14E

T38R14E

T36R14E

T39R14E

T40R14E

T35R14E

T41R14E

Gilbert Trailhead

Foggy Dew Trailhead

War Creek Trailhead

Chickadee Trailhead

Blue Lake Trailhead

Cutthroat Trailhead

Easy Pass Trailhead

Billygoat Trailhead

Wolf Creek Trailhead Rainy Pass Trailhead

East Creek Trailhead

Harts Pass Trailhead

Slate Creek Trailhead

Eagle Creek Trailhead

Cedar Creek Trailhead

Crater Creek Trailhead

Bridge Creek Trailhead

Canyon Creek Trailhead

Scatter Creek Trailhead

Andrews Creek Trailhead

Williams Creek Trailhead

Monument Creek Trailhead Robinson Creek Trailhead

Farewell Creek Trailhead

West Fork Buttermilk Trailhead

Legend

Trailhead

LSR

Trails

Forest Bdy

Lake

Management Area

7

15B

15A

4

5

10

14

17

24

25

26

This product is produced from information prepared by USDA, Forest Service, or from other suppliers.

The Forest Service can not assure the reliability or suitability of this information for a particular purpose.

The data and product accuracy may vary due to compilations from various sources, including modeling

This information may be used, corrected, or otherwise modified without notification.

The USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer

Map 1-6.

1:268,082

NAD 1983 Datum; Projected in USFS R6 Albers

Pack and Saddle Stock Outfitter-Guide

Special Use Permit Issuance DEIS

Map 1-6. North Cascades Management

Areas, Trails, and Trailheads ---------------------------------------------------------------

Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest

Methow Valley Ranger District

Winthrop, Washington

0 4,400 8,800 17,600 26,400 Feet

0 1,0002,000 4,000 6,000 Meters
#### § 404.1255 State's liability for contributions—for wages paid prior to 1987.

A State's liability for contributions equals the sum of the taxes which would be imposed by sections 3101 and 3111 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, if the services of the employees covered by the State's agreement were employment as defined in section 3121 of the Code. The State's liability begins when those covered services are performed, for which wages are actually or constructively paid to those individuals, including wages paid in a form other than cash (see § 404.1041(d)). If an agreement is effective retroactively, the State's liability for contributions on wages paid during the retroactive period begins with the date of execution of the agreement or applicable modification. Where coverage of a coverage group has been terminated, the State is liable for contributions on wages paid for covered services even if the wages are paid after the effective date of termination of coverage.
Editorial Note on Part 416
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 416 appear at 68 FR 53509, Sept. 11, 2003.

§ 416.1456 Removal of a hearing request(s) to the Appeals Council. ( a ) *Removal.* The Appeals Council may assume responsibility for a hearing request(s) pending at the hearing level of the administrative review process.
( b ) *Notice.* We will mail a notice to all parties at their last known address telling them that the Appeals Council has assumed responsibility for the case(s).
( c ) *Procedures applied.* If the Appeals Council assumes responsibility for a hearing request(s), it shall conduct all proceedings in accordance with the rules set forth in §§ 416.1429 through 416.1461, as applicable.
( d ) *Appeals Council review.* If the Appeals Council assumes responsibility for your hearing request under this section and you or any other party is dissatisfied with the hearing decision or with the dismissal of a hearing request, you may request that the Appeals Council review that action following the procedures in §§ 416.1467 through 416.1482. The Appeals Council may also decide on its own motion to review the action that was taken in your case under § 416.1469. The administrative appeals judge who conducted a hearing, issued a hearing decision in your case, or dismissed your hearing request will not participate in any action associated with your request for Appeals Council review of that case.
( e ) *Ancillary provisions.* For the purposes of the procedures authorized by this section, the regulations of part 416 shall apply to authorize a member of the Appeals Council to exercise the functions performed by an administrative law judge under subpart N of part 416.
[85 FR 73159, Nov. 16, 2020]
1 Ogulei, David

From: Garnett, Kim Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 10:25 AM To: Ogulei, David Subject: FW: Question

From: Andrea Geiger [mailto:andreag@cooperenvironmental. com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:53 PM
To: Garnett, Kim
Cc: 'John Cooper' Subject: Question

Hello Kim,

Please accept my apologies for the delay in our res ponse. I have filled in the blanks below as well as offered a little bit of extra information, just in case. It’s always difficult to give a price without a few qua lifiers on instruments like these...

The first costs for purchase/installation/certifica tion/training of a MM CEMS are anticipated to be approximately $365,000 - $400,000*. The instrument runs about $260,000 of that cost. Annual costs wi ll likely be about $25,000.**

*Factors such as transport length, remote control/p olling options, sampling interval (i.e. shorter sam pling intervals require more tape), and installation comp lexities will have an impact on the overall initial budget for MM CEMS. **Annual costs depend largely on sampling interval. For a 30 minute sampling interval, filter tape cos ts run about $19,500/year. 15-minute sampling intervals do uble that amount annually. In addition, we recommen d that companies budget for an annual X-ray tube repl acement and re-calibration (appx $5-6K). Annual lab or generally requires one technician approximately 8-1 0 hours per month for tape changes and general oper ation and maintenance tasks.

I hope this helps. Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have questions.

Best Regards, Andrea Geiger Project Manager/Environmental Scientist Cooper Environmental Services, LLC 10180 SW Nimbus Ave, Suite J6 Portland, OR 97223 503-670-8127, ext 0 andreag@cooperenvironmental.com www.cooperenvironmental.com Innovation in Monitoring

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail and any attachm ents may contain confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not th e intended recipient, any distribution, copying, or use of this e-mail or its attachments is prohibited. If you received this message in err or, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this message and any copies. Thank you.2