alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### McKinney v. Commonwealth.

May 7, 1943.

*232Hector Johnson for appellant.

Hubert Meredith, Attorney General, and Arthur T. Iler, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Opinion op the Court by

Chiep Justice Fulton

Reversing.

The appellant, Harvey McKinney, appeals from a sentence of one year to the penitentiary for stealing-chickens of the value of $2 or more in violation of section 1201c of the Kentucky Statutes (now KRS 433.250). His complaint is, in effect, that he is a victim of the trial court’s failure to heed the adage, “Don’t count your chickens before they hatch.”

A hen, the property of Sunshine Gabbard, feeling the urge to motherhood, “stole a nest” in the woods some distance from the house. When last seen by Sunshine she was setting on seventeen eggs. The entire outfit, hen and eggs, disappeared and the hen was found several days later by Sunshine at Harvey’s home surrounded by a brood of chicks. Harvey claimed to have bought the hen from his mother for 50c and the mother, in turn, claimed to have acquired her from a brother for and in consideration of some pans and skillets but the evidence amply justifies the jury’s finding that Harvey’s longing for poultry had gotten the better of him and that he had removed the hen from Sunshine to outer darkness.

But, while the jury were warranted in finding Harvey guilty, thus bringing home to him the truth of another adage, “Chickens come home to roost,” there was no basis for the felony conviction. In fixing the value of the stolen property Sunshine said, “Figuring the eggs at 10c and them hatching and the hen at a dollar it comes to $2.70.” Under the instructions the jury were authorized to find the defendant guilty of the felony if they believed he stole “a lot of chicken, to wit: one hen and seventeen eggs of the value of $2 or more.” Thus, it is' seen, the court in permitting the jury to consider eggs as chicken for purposes of value did, in truth, "count chickens before they hatched. The statute authorizes conviction for a felony only if chickens of the value of $2 or more are stolen. The evidence was sufficient to show only that appellant was guilty of the included misdemeanor of stealing a chicken of the value of $1 and the *233verdict finding Mm guilty of the felony was unauthorized.

"We may add that the Attorney General admits error • and suggests that the judgment be reversed.

Reversed with direction to grant the appellant a new trial and for further proceedings consistent with this .opinion.
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 ELEV

 512.90

 513.50

 514.22

 514.75

 515.16

 515.35

 515.69

 515.83

 515.97

 516.30

 516.60

 517.00

 517.70

 518.62

 519.40

 520.40

 521.45

 522.39

 523.21

 524.13

 525.03

 525.78

 526.62

 527.81

 528.90

 529.80

 530.80

 531.80

 532.70

 533.70

 534.60

 1,658,128

 1,665,244

 1,673,797

 1,680,103

 1,684,987

 1,687,251

 1,691,307

 1,692,978

 1,694,649

 1,698,591

 1,702,177

 1,706,963

 1,715,350

 1,726,393

 1,735,776

 1,747,830

 1,760,517

 1,771,903

 1,781,856

 1,793,045

 1,804,014

 1,813,173

 1,823,450

 1,838,044

 1,851,446

 1,862,538

 1,874,889

 1,887,268

 1,898,434

 1,910,867

 1,922,081

STORAGE

+7,106

+7,116

+8,553

+6,306

+4,884

+2,264

+4,056

+1,671

+1,671

+3,942

+3,586

+4,786

+8,387

+11,043

+9,383

+12,054

+12,687

+11,386

+9,953

+11,189

+10,969

+9,159

+10,277

+14,594

+13,402

+11,092

+12,351

+12,379

+11,166

+12,433

+11,214

CHANGE

4,049

4,302

5,022

3,516

2,892

1,498

2,437

1,141

1,138

2,234

2,206

2,867

4,445

6,404

5,372

6,439

6,554

6,221

5,576

5,947

5,819

5,188

5,934

8,017

7,021

6,397

7,672

7,520

7,317

7,240

6,940

PUMPING

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

POWER

 159

 172

 167

 176

 180

 190

 187

 181

 175

 167

 156

 145

 155

 163

 143

 106

 103

 100

 102

 99

 90

 88

 78

 81

 70

 66

 81

 81

 96

 124

 132

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

TUNNEL

-307

-542

-542

-161

-250

-167

-205

-118

-121

-79

-242

-309

-62

-674

-499

-256

-54

-380

-456

-206

-199

-482

-675

-578

-195

-740

-1,364

-1,198

-1,591

-849

-1,155

OR

 35

 58

 77

 31

 35

 35

 27

 23

 8

 8

 8

 4

 4

 16

 12

 8

 51

 39

 16

 16

 24

 0

 44

 28

 0

 16

 44

 60

 60

 36

 24

C.F.S.

 .09

 .15

 .20

 .08

 .09

 .09

 .07

 .06

 .02

 .02

 .02

 .01

 .01

 .04

 .03

 .02

 .13

 .10

 .04

 .04

 .06

 .00

 .11

 .07

 .00

 .04

 .11

 .15

 .15

 .09

 .06

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .29

 .02

 .08

 .07

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .27

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .24

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

CONSOLIDATED STATE-FEDERAL SAN LUIS RESERVOIR April 11, 2007

DAILY OPERATIONS

DECEMBER 2006 RUN DATE:

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S. LOSS(-)

SAN LUIS

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +271,059 155,325 0 4,013 0 -14,656 847 2.15 1.01

ACRE-FEET +271,059 308,087 0 7,960 0 -29,070 1,680

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 0

PACHECO TUNNEL 7,960 TOTAL 7,960

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

JULY 1, 2006 TO DATE = 1.88

 1,651,022

SPILL 0 1.01

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE RESOURCES AGENCY

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES

STATE WATER PROJECT

PACHECO

GAIN(+)

C.F.S.

Table 17
#### In the Matter of Wickwire Spencer Steel Company, Judgment Creditor, Respondent, v. Kemkit Scientific Corporation, Judgment Debtor. George F. Picken, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Judgment Debtor, Appellant.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.; Townley and Dore, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm the determination of the Appellate Term. [See *post,*p. 948.]
§ 670.990 What procedures are available to resolve complaints and disputes? ( a ) Each Job Corps center operator and service provider must establish and maintain a grievance procedure for filing complaints and resolving disputes from applicants, students and/or other interested parties about its programs and activities. A hearing on each complaint or dispute must be conducted within 30 days of the filing of the complaint or dispute. A decision on the complaint must be made by the center operator or service provider, as appropriate, within 60 days after the filing of the complaint, and a copy of the decision must be immediately served, by first-class mail, on the complainant and any other party to the complaint. Except for complaints under § 670.470 or complaints alleging fraud or other criminal activity, complaints may be filed within one year of the occurrence that led to the complaint.
( b ) The procedure established under paragraph (a) of this section must include procedures to process complaints alleging violations of WIA section 188, consistent with DOL nondiscrimination regulations implementing WIA section 188 at 29 CFR part 37 and § 670.995.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Ensource Energy Income Fund LP (the “Partnership”) on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott W. Smith, ChiefExecutive Officer of the general partner of the Partnership, certify pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, to my  knowledge that:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 
|   | /s/ Scott W. Smith                                                                                                                                 |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Scott W. Smith                                                                                                                                     |
|   | Chief Executive Officer of  Ensource Energy  Company LLC, on behalf of Ensource Energy  Partners, LP, on behalf of Ensource Energy Income  Fund LP |
|   |                                                                                                                                               |
|   | Date: March 31, 2006                                                                                                                               |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM SOUTHSIDE BANCSHARES CORP'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
</LEGEND>
<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>                                          21,765
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             455
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 5,300
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    150,723
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          66,838
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            66,951
<LOANS>                                        360,084
<ALLOWANCE>                                      6,103
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 631,988
<DEPOSITS>                                     515,710
<SHORT-TERM>                                    46,027
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,608
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,186
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,985
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,472
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 631,988
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 22,028
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                9,099
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   951
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                32,078
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              13,386
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,854
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           17,224
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       45
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 13,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,228
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       6,228
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,563
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .53
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.09
<LOANS-NON>                                      4,430
<LOANS-PAST>                                       994
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 6,192
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      373
<RECOVERIES>                                       239
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                6,103
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,103
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 31, 2017. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, October 31, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A18I0048. DARYL MOODY et al. v. HILL, KERTSCHER & WHARTON, LLP et al..
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 17A1127
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 ELEV

 130.05

 130.09

 130.12

 130.37

 130.47

 130.42

 130.21

 130.09

 130.17

 130.10

 130.08

 129.99

 130.59

 129.51

 130.82

 129.73

 129.27

 129.24

 129.48

 129.37

 129.50

 129.47

 129.20

 129.00

 128.82

 129.24

 129.56

 129.62

 129.66

 129.83

 129.82

 586

 590

 593

 620

 630

 625

 602

 590

 598

 591

 589

 580

 643

 532

 669

 554

 509

 507

 529

 519

 531

 528

 503

 485

 469

 507

 537

 543

 547

 563

 562

STORAGE

-4

+4

+3

+27

+10

-5

-23

-12

+8

-7

-2

-9

+63

-111

+137

-115

-45

-2

+22

-10

+12

-3

-25

-18

-16

+38

+30

+6

+4

+16

-1

CHANGE

69

68

69

69

60

52

50

59

67

54

99

117

230

671

247

1,859

106

114

196

376

457

160

77

70

81

114

110

212

185

96

207

INFLOW

 28

 28

 27

 25

 25

 25

 25

 25

 25

 25

 25

 25

 128

 677

 128

 1,882

 79

 72

 138

 331

 401

 101

 25

 25

 25

 25

 25

 139

 113

 25

 148

PUTAH

 43

 38

 40

 30

 30

 30

 37

 40

 38

 33

 75

 97

 70

 50

 50

 35

 50

 43

 47

 50

 50

 61

 65

 54

 64

 70

 70

 70

 70

 63

 60

PUTAH

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

C.F.S.

 .03

 .03

 .02

 .03

 .03

 .03

 .03

 .02

 .02

 .02

 .05

 .02

 .01

 .00

 .03

 .00

 .06

 .07

 .02

 .03

 .02

 .06

 .14

 .06

 .03

 .02

 .03

 .00

 .04

 .04

 .00

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .29

 .02

 .00

 .41

 4.02

 1.64

 4.00

 .24

 .00

 .00

 1.71

 .78

 .08

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .17

 .38

 .16

 .45

 .01

 .75

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-SOLANO PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

DECEMBER 2002 RUN DATE: 01/15/2003

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -28 6,401 1,623 4,795 0 .99 15.11

ACRE-FEET -28 12,696 3,219 9,511 0

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

PUTAH CREEK 9,511

PUTAH SOUTH CANAL 3,219

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 15.11

JULY 1, 2002 18.87

 590

LAKE SOLANO DAILY OPERATIONS

SOUTH CREEK
No. 11,627.

#### Hartman *v.*The People.

Decided December 13, 1926.

Plaintiff in error was convicted of keeping a gambling room.

*Affirmed.*

*On Application for Supersedeas.*

1. Appeal and *Error*— Sufficiency *of Evidence.*The contention that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction of keeping a gambling room, overruled.

2. Criminal *Law*— Statutes. Section 6867, C. L., does not provide an exclusive mode of procedure against gambling.

3. *County Courts*— Jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of county courts in cases of misdemeanor, under section 5781, C. L., is all inclusive.

*Error to the County Court of Logan County, Hon. H. Lawrence Hinkley, Judge.*

Mr. T. E. Munson, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. William L. Boatright, Attorney General, Mr. Louis W. Burford, Assistant, for the people.

*Department Two.*

Mr. Justice Whitford

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff in error was convicted upon information, in the county court of Logan county, of keeping a room and building to be used for gambling, and was sentenced to *343pay a fine of thirty dollars. From this judgment she prosecutes a writ of error to this court and prays for a supersedeas.

We have carefully read all of the testimony in the record, and after doing so are entirely satisfied that the contention of the plaintiff: in error that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict cannot be sustained.

The contention that section 6867, C. L. 1921, provides an exclusive mode of procedure in the district court against gambling is without merit. When section 6867 was enacted, the district court possessed exclusive jurisdiction of all criminal offenses, except those cognizable by justices of the peace. Section 23 of article VI of the Constitution provides that the county court shall have original jurisdiction “in all matters of probate ** * **and such other civil and criminal jurisdiction as may be conferred by law.” In 1889 the General Assembly enacted section 5781, C. L. 1921, as follows: “Original jurisdiction is hereby conferred upon the county courts in each of the several counties of this state, in cases of misdemeanor, and such courts shall hereafter be empowered to try such cases upon information by the district attorney of the district in which such counties are situated.”

The jurisdiction of the county court in cases of misdemeanor under this section of the statute is all inclusive.

We find no prejudicial error in the record, and the supersedeas is therefore denied and the judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Burke, acting as chief justice, and Mr. Justice Denison concur.
§ 670.300 What entities are eligible to receive funds to operate centers and provide training and operational support services? ( a ) Entities eligible to receive funds under this subpart to operate centers include: ( 1 ) Federal, State, and local agencies;
( 2 ) Private for-profit and non-profit corporations;
( 3 ) Indian tribes and organizations; and
( 4 ) Area vocational education or residential vocational schools. (WIA sec. 147(a)(1)(A) and (d)).
( b ) Entities eligible to receive funds to provide outreach and admissions, placement and other operational support services include: ( 1 ) One-Stop Centers and partners;
( 2 ) Community action agencies;
( 3 ) Business organizations;
( 4 ) Labor organizations;
( 5 ) Private for-profit and non-profit corporations; and
( 6 ) Other agencies, and individuals that have experience and contact with youth. (WIA sec. 145(a)(3)).
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 ELEV

 130.48

 130.46

 130.19

 129.98

 129.98

 129.97

 130.01

 130.06

 130.12

 130.17

 130.18

 130.14

 130.18

 130.40

 130.50

 130.23

 129.96

 129.76

 129.76

 129.62

 129.68

 130.14

 129.40

 130.09

 130.16

 130.45

 130.44

 130.55

 130.59

 130.52

 130.50

 631

 629

 600

 579

 579

 578

 582

 587

 593

 598

 599

 595

 599

 623

 633

 604

 577

 556

 556

 543

 549

 595

 522

 590

 597

 628

 627

 639

 643

 635

 633

STORAGE

+12

-2

-29

-21

+0

-1

+4

+5

+6

+5

+1

-4

+4

+24

+10

-29

-27

-21

+0

-13

+6

+46

-73

+68

+7

+31

-1

+12

+4

-8

-2

CHANGE

104

105

104

119

134

132

131

131

131

131

133

131

131

122

108

106

120

145

171

205

285

347

406

497

429

427

419

431

421

426

442

INFLOW

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 48

 49

 50

 50

 50

 121

 115

 86

 78

 78

 79

 80

 80

 80

PUTAH

 50

 57

 71

 82

 85

 85

 81

 80

 80

 80

 84

 85

 81

 62

 55

 73

 86

 108

 121

 161

 231

 274

 322

 347

 338

 332

 341

 345

 338

 349

 362

PUTAH

 0

 1

 0

 0

 1

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1

 1

 1

 0

 0

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

C.F.S.

 .09

 .14

 .11

 .11

 .15

 .14

 .11

 .10

 .13

 .12

 .12

 .10

 .11

 .08

 .13

 .12

 .07

 .13

 .21

 .16

 .15

 .12

 .14

 .23

 .15

 .24

 .20

 .21

 .16

 .23

 .27

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .12

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-SOLANO PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MARCH 2015 RUN DATE: 04/01/2015

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +14 7,124 5,246 1,860 13 4.53 .12

ACRE-FEET +14 14,130 10,405 3,689 26

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

PUTAH CREEK 3,689

PUTAH SOUTH CANAL 10,405

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .12

JULY 1, 2014 17.38

 619

LAKE SOLANO DAILY OPERATIONS

SOUTH CREEK
Non-Destructive Tests Performed

Evaluation and Testing Method Equipment Procedures

Low Frequency Electromagnetic Technique (LFET) Falcon 2000 Mark II

Tank wall and component scanning for wall thickness and back side 

corrosion with UT prove up as needed for actual wall conditions or 

weld quality.

Balanced Field Electromagnetic Technique (BFET) Hawkeye 2000 Weld Inspection for surface and slightly subsurface indications; 

Evaluates accessible tank welds for surface and toe cracks.

Ultrasonic longitudinal and shearwave inspection (UT) Krautkramer Ultrasonic Shearwave / Thickness 

Meter

Component integrity and wall thickness; Used as prove up to other 

techniques; Shearwave applied to the first 6 inches of intersection 

weld between the plates of course 1, just above the cover plates.

Magnetic Particle Inspection (MT)

Prod Technique; Dry powder, color contrast 

method

Yoke technique, dry powder method

Used for for surface and slight subsurface indications for prove up as 

needed; MT used on welds of the lower dome/floor interface in place 

of shearwave technique because the intersection welds were 

concealed by cover plates.

Liquid Penetrant Testing

Dye Penetrant: Magnaflux Spotcheck SKL-SP1 

or Sherwin Dubl-Chek DP-40/DP-51

Cleaner: Magnaflux Spotcheck SKC-S or 

Sherwin Dubl-Chek DR-60

Developer: Magnaflux Spotcheck SKD-S2 or 

Sherwin Dubl-Chek D-100

Visibly dye solvent removable method; Detects weld discontinuities 

open to the surface such as cracks, seams, laps, cold shuts, 

laminations, surface porosity, and lack of fusion.

Hydrostatic Pressure Testing

Hydro tree (proprietary); test boundary ANSI 

flange blinds (18"); proprietary test boundary 

flange blinds (32"); Diaphragm pump; 

MadgeTech dataloggers; MadgeTech 

thermocouple Temperature Recorder; 

MadgeTech Four Channel Thermocouple 

Recorder; GPI 10 GPM flow meter; GPI 5-50 

GPM flow meter; Crystal Engineering 5000 psi 

Pressure Gauge; 

Point in-time, pressure decay combination strength / stress / leak test. 

test pressure: 162 psig

Procedures in conformance (in part) with UFC3-460-03F, California 

State Fire Marshal Pressure Testing Requirements for Hazardous 

Liquid Pipelines, ASME B31.3 Process Piping, ASME B31.4: Pipeline 

Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids, 

Section 3.4 of API RP 1110 Pressure Testing of Liquid Petroleum 

Pipelines.

Vacuum Box Testing Proprietary vacuum box tester Vacuum: 7 psig in Hg