alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 971.204 Environmental and use conflict analysis. ( a ) *Environmental information submission.* The application must be supported by sufficient marine environmental information for the Administrator to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on the proposed mining activities, and to determine the appropriate permit TCRs based on environmental characteristics of the requested minesite. The Administrator may require the submission of additional data, in the event he determines that the basis for a suitable EIS, or a determination of appropriate TCRs, is not available.
( b ) ( 1 ) In preparing the EIS, the Administrator will attempt to characterize the environment in such a way as to provide a basis for judging the potential for significant adverse effects or irreparable harm triggered by commercial mining (see subpart F). In compiling these data, the Administrator will utilize existing information including the relevant license EIS, additional exploration data acquired by the applicant, and other data in the public domain.
( 2 ) The EIS must present adequate physical, chemical, and biological information for the permit area. If the permit area lies within the area of NOAA's Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study (DOMES), the parameters listed in NOAA's Technical Guidance Document pertaining to the upper and lower water column should be included. Specifically, these parameters include: ( i ) Upper water column— Nutrients Endangered species Salinity, temperature, density Currents.
( ii ) Lower water column and seafloor— Currents Suspended particulate matter dispersion Sediment characteristics (mineralogy, particle size, shape and density, and water content) Topography Benthos.
( 3 ) For a permit area outside the DOMES area, the applicant is encouraged to consult with NOAA at the earliest opportunity in order to determine the specific parameters to be measured based on the location and specific environmental characteristics of the permit area. The Administrator, in consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and with the assistance of other appropriate Federal agencies, may determine that a programmatic EIS is required for any new area.
( c ) The application must include a monitoring plan for test mining and at-sea commercial recovery activities which meets the objectives and requirements of § 971.603.
( d ) *Use conflict analysis.* The application must include information known to the applicant on other uses of the proposed mining area to support the Administrator's determination regarding potential use conflicts between commercial mining activities and those activities of other nations or of other U.S. citizens.
( e ) *Onshore information.* Because of NEPA requirements, the Administrator must include in the EIS on the proposed permit the complete spectrum of activities resulting from the issuance of a permit. Therefore, onshore information including the location and operation of nodule processing facilities must be submitted with the application in accordance with the details in § 971.606.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Willard H. Phillips, Appellant.

Judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, convicting the appellant of the crimes of assault and attempted rape, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ.
```
State and Local Finances: Some Jurisdictions Confronted by Short- and
Long-Term Problems (Letter Report, 10/06/93, GAO/HRD-94-1).

As the nation begins to debate health care reform, welfare reform, and
other major policy initiatives in which state and local governments are
expected to play a key role, questions persist about the financial
condition of these governments.  GAO found that between 1985 and 1991,
state and local governments faced myriad spending and revenue pressures.
Most categories of programs were growing, but some programs grew more
rapidly, such as Medicaid at the state level and public safety at the
county level.  Although jurisdictions tried to curb program growth, trim
services, and raise revenues, spending continued to outpace revenues,
bringing year-end budget surpluses down.  Without such "budget
cushions," jurisdictions had less flexibility to fund services, and some
jurisdictions ended up with budget deficits.  These trends may improve
as the economy rebounds or as priorities change.  But many cities beset
with high poverty levels and low incomes face a more fundamental
long-term problem.  These jurisdictions have less capacity to finance
day-to-day police, fire, and other services because of their relatively
low tax bases.  Overall, the decline in state and local budget surpluses
could worsen the effects of the federal deficit on the economy,
potentially reducing long-term growth.  In GAO's view, the trends and
the differences in state and local financial conditions should be a part
of the discussions on major policy reforms now underway.  GAO summarized
this report in testimony before Congress; see: State and Local Finances:
Some Jurisdictions Confronted by Short- and Long-Term Problems, by
Gregory J. McDonald, Director for Operations in the Human Resources
Division, before the Subcommittee on Human Resources and
Intergovernmental Relations, House Committee on Government Operations.
GAO/T-HRD-94-1, Oct. 6, 1993 (16 pages).

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  HRD-94-1
     TITLE:  State and Local Finances: Some Jurisdictions Confronted by 
             Short- and Long-Term Problems
      DATE:  10/06/93
   SUBJECT:  Federal/state relations
             Local governments
             State governments
             Budget deficit
             Financial management
             Intergovernmental fiscal relations
             Entitlement programs
             Balanced budgets
             Future budget projections
IDENTIFIER:  AFDC
             Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program
             Medicaid Program
             Detroit (MI)
             California
             Colorado
             Miami (FL)
             Newark (NJ)
             San Antonio (TX)
             Toledo (OH)
             
************************************************************************

We regret that the full text of this item is presently unavailable.

See the GAO FAQ - Section 2.0 for printed copy ordering information.
The FAQ is automatically retrieved with all WAIS search results or 
can be obtained by sending e-mail to: [email protected]
```
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 22

- 00343

- CV

JOHNATHAN BALL

v. ISAAC SAGREDO
On Appeal from the 389th District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. C

- 3976

- 20

- H

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this caus e on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant.
We further order this decision certified below for observance. August 18, 2022
NRC APPROVES INCREASED POWER OUTPUT

FOR TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a request by Florida Power & Light 

(FP&L) to increase the power generating capacity of Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Units 3 

and 4 by 15 percent. The power uprate for the pressurized-water reactors, located approximately 

20 miles south of Miami, will increase each unit’s power generating capacity from 

approximately 700 to 823 megawatts electric.

The NRC staff’s careful evaluation determined that FP&L could safely increase the 

reactors’ power output primarily by carrying out significant upgrades to several plant systems 

and components, including the feedwater pumps and the high-pressure turbine. As part of its 

evaluation, NRC staff reviewed the company’s analysis showing the plant’s design can 

accommodate the increased power level.

The NRC’s safety evaluation of the plant’s proposed power uprate focused on several 

areas, including the nuclear steam supply systems, instrumentation and control systems, 

electrical systems, accident evaluations, radiological consequences, fire protection, operations 

and training, testing, and technical specification changes. 

FP&L intends to implement the uprate during the spring 2012 refueling outage for Unit 3 

and during the fall 2012 outage for Unit 4.

The NRC previously published a notice about the power uprate application in the Federal 

Register . The agency’s evaluation of the Turkey Point power uprate will be available through 

the NRC’s ADAMS electronic document database by searching for accession number 

ML11293A365, using the “Simple Search” tab.

###

NOTE: Anyone wishing to take photos or use a camera to record any portion of a NRC meeting should 

contact the Office of Public Affairs beforehand.

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No. 12-074 June 18, 2012
### SUBCHAPTER II—AERONAUTICS
### §3490. Purpose

It is the purpose of this subchapter (1) to encourage and assist veterans who have academic deficiencies to attain a high school education or its equivalent and to qualify for and pursue courses of higher education, (2) to assist eligible veterans to pursue postsecondary education through tutorial assistance where required, and (3) to encourage educational institutions to develop programs which provide special tutorial, remedial, preparatory, or other educational or supplementary assistance to such veterans.

(Added Pub. L. 91–219, title II, §204(a)(4), Mar. 26, 1970, 84 Stat. 79, §1690; renumbered §3490, Pub. L. 102–83, §5(a), Aug. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 406.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1991—Pub. L. 102–83 renumbered section 1690 of this title as this section.
### **CHAPTER 121—INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION REMEDIES**

Sec.
11601 to 11611. Transferred or Repealed.
Editorial Note on Part 400
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 400 appear at 78 FR 69289, Nov. 19, 2013.

§ 400.3 Authority of the Board. ( a ) *In general.* In accordance with the Act and procedures of this part, the Board has authority to: ( 1 ) Prescribe rules and regulations concerning zones;
( 2 ) Issue grants of authority for zones, and approve subzones and modifications to the original zone;
( 3 ) Authorize production activity in zones and subzones as described in this part;
( 4 ) Make determinations on matters requiring Board decisions under this part;
( 5 ) Decide appeals in regard to certain decisions of the Commerce Department's Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance or the Executive Secretary;
( 6 ) Inspect the premises, operations and accounts of zone grantees, operators and users (and persons undertaking zone-related functions on behalf of grantees, where applicable);
( 7 ) Require zone grantees and operators to report on zone operations;
( 8 ) Report annually to the Congress on zone operations;
( 9 ) Restrict or prohibit zone operations;
( 10 ) Terminate reviews of applications under certain circumstances pursuant to § 400.36(g);
( 11 ) Authorize under certain circumstances the entry of “zone-restricted merchandise” (19 CFR 146.44) into the customs territory pursuant to § 400.48;
( 12 ) Impose fines for violations of the Act and this part;
( 13 ) Instruct CBP to suspend activated status pursuant to § 400.62(h);
( 14 ) Revoke grants of authority for cause;
( 15 ) Determine, as appropriate, whether zone activity is or would be in the public interest or detrimental to the public interest, health or safety; and
( 16 ) Issue and discontinue waivers pursuant to § 400.43(f).
( b ) *Authority of the Chairman of the Board.* The Chairman of the Board (Secretary of the Department of Commerce) has the authority to: ( 1 ) Appoint the Executive Secretary of the Board;
( 2 ) Call meetings of the Board, with reasonable notice given to each member; and
( 3 ) Submit to the Congress the Board's annual report as prepared by the Executive Secretary.
( c ) *Alternates.* Each member of the Board shall designate an alternate with authority to act in an official capacity for that member.
( d ) *Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance (Alternate Chairman).* The Commerce Department's Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance has the authority to: ( 1 ) Terminate reviews of applications under certain circumstances pursuant to § 400.36(g);
( 2 ) Mitigate and assess fines pursuant to §§ 400.62(e) and (f) and instruct CBP to suspend activated status pursuant to § 400.62(h); and
( 3 ) Restrict the use of zone procedures under certain circumstances pursuant to § 400.49(c).
( e ) *Determinations of the Board.* Determinations of the Board shall be by the unanimous vote of the members (or alternate members) of the Board, which shall be recorded.
Third Department,

September, 2006

(September 7, 2006)

#### In the Matter of Joan M. Gaughan Atlas, a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Committee on Professional Standards, Petitioner.

[819 NYS2d 923]

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1990. She maintained an office for the practice of law in Pennsylvania where she was admitted to practice in 1981.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania suspended respondent from practice for three years in 2004 for knowingly and intentionally converting third-party funds, misrepresenting her receipt of funds, and engaging in false certifications in her attorney annual fee forms. By decision dated November 18, 2004, *1050this Court reciprocally suspended respondent for three years *(Matter of Atlas,*12 AD3d 929 [2004]). In November 2005, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania disbarred respondent on consent. She admitted conversion to her own use of up to $90,000 in third-party funds.

We grant petitioner’s unopposed motion for an order imposing reciprocal discipline pursuant to this Court’s rules *(see*22 NYCRR 806.19). We further determine that respondent should be disbarred.

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion for reciprocal discipline is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is disbarred, and her name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately; and it is further ordered that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; respondent is forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice with relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court’s rules regulating the conduct of disbarred attorneys *(see*22 NYCRR 806.9).
### Part III—General Provisions
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Basil McCullough, Appellant.

Present — Poster, P. J., Heffernan, Deyo, Santry and Bergan, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 247 (Thursday, December 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 66752]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28076]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-392]


Importer of Controlled Substances Registration

ACTION: Notice of registration.

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

SUMMARY: The registrant listed below has applied for and been granted 
registration by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as an 
importer of schedule I or schedule II controlled substances.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    The company listed below applied to be registered as an importer of 
various basic classes of controlled substances. Information on the 
previously published notice is listed in the table below. No comments 
or objections were submitted and no requests for hearing were submitted 
for this notice.
    Company: Fisher Clinical Services, Inc.
    FR Docket: 83 FR 53108.
    Published: October 19, 2018.
    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 
958(a) and determined that the registration of the listed registrant to 
import the applicable basic classes of schedule I or II controlled 
substances is consistent with the public interest and with United 
States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or 
protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's 
maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and 
testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the 
company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the 
company's background and history.
    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in 
accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the DEA has granted a registration as 
an importer for schedule I controlled substance to the above listed 
company.

    Dated: December 8, 2018.
John J. Martin,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-28076 Filed 12-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
#### Century Oxford Manufacturing Corp., Respondent, v. Eppens, Smith Co., Inc., Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Glennon, J. P., Dore, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ. [See *post,*p. 937.]
#### Republic Creosoting Co. v. Foster.

November 11, 1947.

Rehearing denied January 20, 1948.

Flem D. Sampson, Judge.

Earl Rose and Bethurum & Neikirk for appellant.

Leonard S. Stephens for appellee.

Opinion of the Court by

Van Sant, Commissioner

—Affirming.

The suit is for damages for trespass on land. The jury awarded appellee, plaintiff below, $500 and judgment was entered accordingly. As grounds for reversal, appellant argues that the verdict (1) is contrary to the law and evidence, and (2) is excessive.

The Court refused to certify the tendered bill of exceptions; thereupon a bystander’s bill, containing the bill of evidence, was filed; it was attested by the affidavit of one bystander only. Appellee has moved to strike the bill of exceptions from the record. This motion must be sustained, because the bill has not been attested by the affidavits of two bystanders in accordance with the provisions of Section 337 of the Civil Code of Practice. The only complaints in respect to the judgment are based upon the evidence, which, as we have said, has not been certified to this Court in due form, and therefore may not be considered. The sole question remaining for our determination is whether *275the pleadings support the judgment; and, although no complaint has been made in this respect, we have considered the question and have concluded that the pleadings are sufficient.

The judgment is affirmed.
### subpart 4—office of dietary supplements
### Part A—General Provisions

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 105–392, title I, §123(4), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3563, added part A heading and struck out former part A heading "Special Projects".

Pub. L. 99–92, §9(b)(1), (2), Aug. 16, 1985, 99 Stat. 400, substituted "Special Projects" for "Assistance for Expansion and Improvement of Nurse Training" as part A heading, and struck out headings for subparts I, II, III, and IV of part A which read as follows: "Subpart I—Construction Assistance", "Subpart II—Capitation Grants", "Subpart III—Financial Distress Grants", and "Subpart IV—Special Projects".
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.29


SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF OFFICER COMPENSATION


|                     |  |                                                   |  |        
|-------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------- |  | -------
|Name                 |  | Principal Position                                |  | 2006   
|                     |  |                                                   |  |        
|Phillip A. Harris    |  | President & Chief Executive Officer               |  | 240,000
|Barry Hollingsworth  |  | Vice President, Finance & Chief Financial Officer |  | 155,000
|Richard C.E. Durrant |  | Executive Vice President                          |  | 219,937
|Joe Norwood          |  | Executive Vice President                          |  | 238,000
**EXHIBIT10-7**

Dear[                         ],

I am pleased to inform youthat you have been designated a participant in The Clorox Company(the”Company”) Executive Incentive Compensation Plan(the “Plan”) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 20XX(the “Fiscal Year”), subject to the terms of the Plan.If you qualify for an award under the Plan, your bonus will becalculated as follows:

           1. The Management Development and Compensation Committee (the“Committee”) of the board of directors has establishedthe maximum bonus you may receive to be 360% of your bonus targetof $[          ]. That amount is based on the Company achieving 200% of itsfinancial target based on the matrix attached as Exhibit 1 to thisaward letter and a personal performance factor of 180%. TheCommittee has discretion to reduce your bonus based on personalperformance and a qualitative evaluation of the Company’sperformance, but not to increase it.

           2. Within 90 days of the close of the Fiscal Year the Committeewill certify the Company’s percentage performance against thematrix.

           3. The Committee will then determine your individual performancepercentage.

           4. The Committee will then use the following formula to determineyour award: Target bonus dollar amount times Company financialperformance percentage times individual performance percentageequals bonus, which may be reduced by the Committee’squalitative evaluation of Company performance.

The CloroxCompany

By____________________

    [name]

_______________________

[title]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED MICAH DAVIDSON ,

Petitioner ,
v. Case No. 5D 17

- 1604 STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Respondent

. ________________________________/ Opinion filed December 1, 2017 Petition for Belated Appeal A Case of Original Jurisdiction. Micah Davidson, Wewahitchka , pro se. Pamela Jo Bondi , Attorney General Tallahassee, and, Marjorie Vincent

- Tripp , Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent. PER CURIAM. The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed
with the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the September 16, 2016,

o rder on pro se m otion to w ithdraw p lea u pon r emand , filed in C ase N o s

. 2011

- CF

1958, 2011

- CF

- 1959, 2011

- CF

- 1960, and 2014

- CF

- 103021, in the Circuit Court in and for Volusia County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)( 6 )(D).

PETI TION GRANTED

. ORFINGER, BERGER, and WALLIS , JJ., concur.
### Part O—Combatting Domestic Trafficking in Persons