alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ENCORE COMPUTER CORPORATION                            Exhibit 11
Computation of Loss per Share
(in thousands except per share data)
Primary                                                 1996      1995      1994

Net Loss                                           ($70,732) ($81,354) ($54,556)

Series B, D, E, F and G Preferred
 Stock Dividends                                     (11,996) (19,062) (13,987)

Series B, D, E, F, G and H Accumulated
 Preferred Stock Dividends                           (13,417)        0         0

Net loss attributable to
 common shareholders                               ($96,145)($100,416) ($68,543)

Weighted average common
 shares outstanding                                   36,810    34,923    33,391

Loss per common share                                ($2.61)   ($2.88)   ($2.05)

Assuming Full Dilution
Net loss                                           ($70,732) ($81,354) ($54,556)

Wghtd avg common shares outstand                      36,810    34,923    33,391
Series A assumed converted                             7,364     7,364     7,364
Series B assumed converted                            22,544    21,242    20,014
Series D assumed converted                            34,496    32,503    30,624
Series E assumed converted                            35,260    33,223    28,481
Series F assumed converted                            16,499    12,437         0
Series G assumed converted                            17,704     6,388         0
Series H assumed converted                             7,760         0         0
Exercise of options reduced by the number
 of shares purchased
 with proceeds                                         3,158     3,349     4,866

Weighted avg shares outstand                         181,595   151,429   124,740

Loss per common share                                ($0.39)   ($0.54)   ($0.44)
Editorial Note on Part 817
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54999, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 817 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93418, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 817.81 Coal mine waste: General requirements. ( a ) *General.* All coal mine waste disposed of in an area other than the mine workings or excavations shall be placed in new or existing disposal areas within a permit area, which are approved by the regulatory authority for this purpose. Coal mine waste shall be hauled or conveyed and placed for final placement in a controlled manner to— ( 1 ) Minimize adverse effects of leachate and surface-water runoff on surface and ground water quality and quantity;
( 2 ) Ensure mass stability and prevent mass movement during and after construction;
( 3 ) Ensure that the final disposal facility is suitable for reclamation and revegetation compatible with the natural surroundings and the approved postmining land use;
( 4 ) Not create a public hazard; and
( 5 ) Prevent combustion.
( b ) Coal mine waste materials from activities located outside a permit area may be disposed of in the permit area only if approved by the regulatory authority. Approval shall be based upon a showing that such disposal will be in accordance with the standards of this section.
( c ) *Design certification.* ( 1 ) The disposal facility shall be designed using current, prudent engineering practices and shall meet any design criteria established by the regulatory authority. A qualified registered professional engineer, experienced in the design of similar earth and waste structures, shall certify the design of the disposal facility.
( 2 ) The disposal facility shall be designed to attain a minimum long-term static safety factor of 1.5. The foundation and abutments must be stable under all conditions of construction.
( d ) *Foundation.* Sufficient foundation investigations, as well as any necessary laboratory testing of foundation material, shall be performed in order to determine the design requirements for foundation stability. The analyses of the foundation conditions shall take into consideration the effect of underground mine workings, if any, upon the stability of the disposal facility.
( e ) *Emergency procedures.* If any examination or inspection discloses that a potential hazard exists, the regulatory authority shall be informed promptly of the finding and of the emergency procedures formulated for public protection and remedial action. If adequate procedures cannot be formulated or implemented, the regulatory authority shall be notified immediately. The regulatory authority shall then notify the appropriate agencies that other emergency procedures are required to protect the public.
( f ) *Underground disposal.* Coal mine waste may be disposed of in underground mine workings, but only in accordance with a plan approved by the regulatory authority and MSHA under § 784.25 of this chapter.
[48 FR 44030, Sept. 26, 1983, as amended at 56 FR 65636, Dec. 17, 1991; 81 FR 93418, Dec. 20, 2016; 82 FR 54999, Nov. 17, 2017]
PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1411-B

a USGS

a Difference between potentiometric heads, Canyonlands and Madison aquifers—PLATE 12
a U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Geldon, ALL. 2002, Hydrologic properties and ground-water flow systems of the Paleozoic rocks in the Upper
science fora changing world U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Colorado River Basin in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, excluding the San Juan Basin

EXPLANATION

S-} S *| Area where either the Canyonlands aquifer, Madison aquifer, or both
aquifers are missing because of erosion, nondeposition, or faulting

Difference, in feet, between potentiometric heads in the Canyonlands
aquifer and Four Corners aquifer system

3,500 to 4,500
2,500 to 3,500
1,500 to 2,500

500 to 1,500

-500 to 500

—1,500 to -500

—2,500 to -1,500

—3,500 to -2,500

—— Limit of data

BOUNDARY OF
UPPER COLORADO
RIVER BASIN

mington

AREA EXCLUDED FROM STUDY

~~ NL.
108°
1:2,000,000
25 50 75 100 MILES

| i
T T T T
25 50 75 100 KILOMETERS

o-oo

eee cae DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POTENTIOMETRIC HEADS IN THE CANYONLANDS AQUIFER AND MADISON AQUIFER
IN THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN AND VICINITY IN ARIZONA,
COLORADO, NEW MEXICO, UTAH, AND WYOMING
By
Arthur L. Geldon
2002
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-08-30T18:55:11-0400
      - 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
§ 48.31 Hazard training. ( a ) Operators shall provide to those miners, as defined in § 48.22(a) (2) (Definition of miner) of this subpart B, a training program before such miners commence their work duties. This training program shall include the following instruction, which is applicable to the duties of such miners: ( 1 ) Hazard recognition and avoidance;
( 2 ) Emergency and evacuation procedures;
( 3 ) Health and safety standards, safety rules and safe working procedures;
( 4 ) Self-rescue and respiratory devices; and,
( 5 ) Such other instruction as may be required by the District Manager based on circumstances and conditions at the mine.
( b ) Miners shall receive the instruction required by this section at least once every 12 months.
( c ) The training program required by this section shall be submitted with the training plan required by § 48.23(a) (Training plans: Submission and approval) of this subpart B and shall include a statement on the methods of instruction to be used.
( d ) In accordance with § 48.29 (Records of training) of this subpart B, the operator shall maintain and make available for inspection, certificates that miners have received the instruction required by this section.
[43 FR 47459, Oct. 13, 1978, as amended at 47 FR 23641, May 28, 1982]
§ 1292.5 Procedures. ( a ) Security regulations and orders will be promulgated by any of the following means: ( 1 ) Written directives of the activity Head.
( 2 ) Signs and similar media.
( 3 ) Orally, when required by a contingency/emergency.
( b ) Written directives and orders will contain so much of the following statement as is pertinent: This order (directive, bulletin, etc.) is issued pursuant to section 21, Internal Security Act of 1950, 50 U.S.C. 797, DoD Directive 5200.8, DLAR 5710.1, (directive issued by the Head of a DLA field activity subordinate to HQ DLA).
( c ) Signs used as the sole vehicle for issuing a security regulation or order must contain a recitation of the authority under which issued and the title of the authorized official who issued the regulation or order. DLAM 5710.1, chapter 3, contains instructions on the exact wording of such signs.
( d ) Oral orders will include a statement which clearly indicates the authority for issuance similar to the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section.
( e ) Written security orders and regulations will be posted in conspicuous and appropriate places to ensure widest dissemination. The posting of a general security regulation/order, or a listing of applicable directives, will suffice provided it cites the authority to issue such directive. The posting of voluminous, individual security regulations and orders will be avoided.
#### WRIGHT v. EMPIRE STEEL & IRON CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 17, 1905.)

Action by Erank P. Wright against the Empire Steel & Iron Company. No opinion. Motion granted, so far as to dismiss appeal, with $10 costs.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles S. Keever, Jr., Appellant.

In a *coram nobis*proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the County Court, Rockland County, dated November 16, 1961 and entered November 21, 1961, which denied, without a hearing, his application to vacate a judgment of said court, rendered November 5, 1945 on his plea of guilty, convicting him of burglary in the third degree and imposing sentence. Order affirmed. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 75

#### Editorial Note:

The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

#### § 75.701-2 Approved method of grounding metallic frames, casings and other enclosures receiving power from single-phase 110-220-volt circuit.

In instances where single-phase 110-220-volt circuits are used to feed electrical equipment, the only method of grounding that will be approved is the connection of all metallic frames, casings and other enclosures of such equipment to a separate grounding conductor which establishes a continuous connection to a grounded center tap of the transformer.
#### PRIVIDI v. O’BRIEN.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 10, 1905.)

Action by Joseph J. Prividi against William J. O’Brien. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document


Exhibit 4.28 




  


 
 

news release    
  


 
 

STRIKING WORKERS AT NORANDA'S COPPER SMELTER
  VOTE 73% TO REJECT COMPANY'S OFFER    
  


ROUYN-NORANDA, Quebec; November 21, 2002 — Noranda Inc. announced today that striking workers at its
Horne copper smelter in Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec, have voted 73% to reject the Company's final offer for settlement. The 510 employees are members of Le Syndicat des travailleurs de la Mine Noranda,
affiliated with the Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN). The employees have been on strike since June 18, 2002. The previous collective agreement expired
on February 28, 2002. 


Terms
of the final offer included salary and pension increases of 9.6% and 12.5% respectfully over the life of the agreement, improvements to the benefits program and special early-retirement
programs. 


"We
are disappointed with the outcome of the vote", stated Mario Chapados, General Manager, Horne Smelter. "We believe that the final offer was a fair one and provided both the employeees and the
Company with substanial gains." 


The
Horne smelter produced 188,000 tonnes of copper in 2001. The smelter is currently operating at more than 70% capacity by approximately 120 non-union staff and managers. 


Noranda Inc. is a leading international mining and metals company with more than 48 mining and metallurgical operations and projects under
development in nine countries. Noranda is one of the world's largest producers of zinc and nickel and is a significant producer of copper, primary and fabricated aluminum, lead, silver, gold,
sulphuric acid and cobalt. Noranda is also a major recycler of secondary copper, nickel and precious metals. It is listed on The Toronto Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange
(NRD).


— 30 — 


Contact:


Hélène
V. Gagnon

Director, Corporate and Public Affairs

Noranda Inc.

(514) 630-9342

gagnonhv@ntc.noranda.com 


www.noranda.com










QuickLinks


news release

STRIKING WORKERS AT NORANDA'S COPPER SMELTER VOTE 73% TO REJECT COMPANY'S OFFER
#### QUIGLEY v. NAUGHTON et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 24, 1905.)

Action by James E. Quigley against Bernard Naughton and another. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.
#### § 764.1 Scope.

This part establishes minimum procedures and standards to be included in each approved State program for designating non-Federal and non-Indian lands in a State as unsuitable for all or certain types of surface coal mining operations and for terminating designations.
Exhibit 31-9
**FORM 10-Q CERTIFICATION**
I, Anthony F. Earley, Jr., Chairman, President, Chief Executive and ChiefOperating Officer of The Detroit Edison Company, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ending June30, 2004 of The Detroit Edison Company;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internalcontrol over financial reporting (as defined in the Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
 a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  b. (Intentionally omitted)  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered bythis report based on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   /s/ ANTHONY F. EARLEY, JR. Date: August 4, 2004Anthony F. Earley, Jr.
#### § 944.1 Scope.

This part contains all rules applicable only within Utah that have been adopted under the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1977.

[46 FR 5913, Jan. 21, 1981]
#### SHOENBLUM, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 10, 1905.)

Action by Joseph Shoenblum against *1146the city of New York. T. Farley, for appellant. F. B. House, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide event, unless plaintiff stipulates to reduce judgment as entered, including costs, etc., to the sum of $2,294.82, in which event the judgment, as so modified, and order, affirmed, without costs.
EXHIBIT 10.23

                         UNIVERSAL DETECTION TECHNOLOGY
                         BOARD OF DIRECTORS COMPENSATION
                                      2005

     Each director who is independent under the rules and regulations of the
Securities and Exchange Commission, which we refer to as an independent director
receives compensation as set forth below.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S>                                            <C>
Annual Retainer                                $5,000 per annum

In Person Board, Shareholder or Committee      Reimbursement for reasonable travel and lodging
Meeting                                        expenses

Equity Compensation                            Directors, together with our executive officers
                                               and other employees, are eligible to receive
                                               grants of awards under our 2003 Stock Incentive
                                               Plan. These awards may be in the form of stock
                                               option0 and/or restricted stock grants. The
                                               number of shares underlying options or shares,
                                               as well as the exercise price, vesting and all
                                               other terms of the options and shares, are
                                               established by the Board of Directors.



</TABLE>
Exhibit 10(h)ii Final Agreement



Exhibit 10(h)ii

                                Final Agreement


This agreement is entered into this 5th of September 2002 by and among Huayang
International Holdings, Inc. (Buyer), a public held corporation organized in the
State of Nevada, and Mr. Zheng Hongwei (Seller), a citizen and resident of
China.

According to the 7/5/02 Acquisition Agreement between Huayang, Mr. Zheng and
Jaihe, Huayang will acquire all the Jaihe's stocks from Mr. Zheng. After signing
this Final Agreement, the acquisition will be completed. Huayang and Mr. Zheng
agreed as follows:

   A. Huayang will acquire Jaihe by giving Huayang's 1,900,000 shares of stocks
   B. Huayang will own 99% of Jaihe. The remaining 1% will belong to Haitong
   C. Huayang will acquire Jaihe's assets including land use right, Jaihe
      warehouse and approved GMP certificate. Although the value of the land
      use right, Jaihe's warehouse and GMP certificate haven't been recorded
      and included in the Jaihe's financial statements, they already belong to
      Jaihe. Mr. Zheng is responsible to complete all the legal procedures of
      transferring the name of the listed properties to Jaihe before 12/31/01
      or required timeline by Huayang.
   D. If Mr. Zheng can not complete the above legal procedures, Mr. Zheng
      agreed that Huayang can make necessary change of shares of stocks given
      to Mr. Zheng in exchange of Jaihe or withdraw from this acquisition
      agreement.
   E. After Mr. Zheng completes transferring and recording the value land use
      right, Jaihe warehouse and GMP certificate to Jaihe, it will adjust
      directly to Jaihe's assets and reserve fund. It should not create any
      liabilities between Huayang or Jaihe and Mr. Zheng.


Buyer: Huayang International Holdings, Inc.

Seller: Mr. Zheng Hongwei
Yes. 10 O'Clock sounds good.

Thanks, By ron

***** ************************************************************* By ron Bunker Center Director - Heavy- Duty Onroad Center Assessment and Standards Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality US Environmental Protection Agenc y 2000 Traverwood Drive Ann Ar bor, MI 48105 (734) 214 -4155 (734) 214 -4050 (fax) (734) 353 - 9623 (cell) e - ma il: bunker.byron@epa.gov ********************************************************** From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov> To: "james.tamm@dot.gov" <jame s.tamm@dot.gov>, Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 10/06/2010 03:23 PM Subject: RE: Follow- up call 

### How about 10 instead? From: james.tamm@dot.gov [mailto:james.tamm@dot.gov] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 4:24 PM To: Achanta, Chandana L.; Bunker .Byron@epamail.epa.gov Subject: Re: Follow - up call 

### Chandana, I have a conflict Thursday at 11 am. Could the meeting be scheduled at noon? Jim From : Achanta, Chandana L. [mailto:Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov] Sent : Tuesday, October 05, 2010 11:54 AM To : Bunker.Byron@epamail.epa.gov <Bunker.Byron@epamail.epa.gov>; Tamm, James (NHTSA) Subject : Follow - up call 

### Looks like tomorrow won’t work for a key folks here. Would 11AM Oct 7 th 

### work for both of you? Thanks. From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US To: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov> Cc: "james.tamm@dot.gov" <james.tamm@dot.gov> Date: 10/06/2010 03:46 PM Subject: RE: Follow- up call
§ 736.12 Notice, comment and hearing procedures. Prior to the promulgation or revision of a Federal program for a State, OSMRE shall: ( a ) *Federal Register notice.* Publish in the Federal Register a notice which: ( 1 ) Includes the basis, purpose and substance of the proposed Federal program or revision;
( 2 ) Offers any person an opportunity to submit written comments on the proposed Federal program or revision for a period to end no less than 30 days after the date of the notice;
( 3 ) Offers to hold a public hearing on the proposed Federal program or revision in the affected State during the comment period if requested by any person;
( 4 ) Gives the address of an appropriate place where any person, during normal business hours, may inspect and copy a copy of the administrative record for the proposed Federal program or revision;
( 5 ) For an indirect revision of a Federal program, states that the affected provision of the permanent program is cross-referenced by the Federal program, and thus that the proposed permanent program revision also would revise the Federal program;
( b ) *Newspaper notice.* For the initial promulgation of a Federal program for a State, publish in a newspaper of general circulation in the coal mining area of the affected State a notice concerning the proposed rulemaking which includes the information required by paragraph (a) of this section, except that for the substance of the proposed Federal program or revision OSMRE may substitute a brief description; and
( c ) *Federal agency comment.* As appropriate, solicit comments from the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the heads of other Federal agencies concerned with or having special expertise relevant to the proposed Federal program or revision.
[52 FR 39407, Oct. 21, 1987]