alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### McKenzie *v.*Gibson.

*Action for L-’enalty provided by Section 1587 of the Code.*

1. *Penalty provided by section 1587 of the Code; how recovered.*— Under the statute providing that the owner of lands, not. inclosed by a lawful fence, is liable to the owner of trespassing cattle, if he kills or injures them, for live times the amount of the injury thereby sustained, the statutory penalty can not be recovered in an action of trespass, but only ■in an action founded on the statute, in the nature of an action of debt.

2. *Same; trespass can not be joined with count on the statute.*— In an action for the recovery of such penalty, commenced before 'a justice of the peace, a complaint having been filed in the justice’s court, declaring on the statute, on appeal to the circuit court, a count in trespass *ri et nr mis*can not be joined or substituted.

Appeal from Macon Circuit Court.

Tried before Hon. James E. Cobb.

This action was commenced before a justice of the peace, ■and was brought by McKenzie and others against Gribson, to recover, as shown by the complaint filed before the justice of the peace, the penalty provided by section 1587 of the Code of 1876, for killing a hog, the plaintiff’s property. The cause having been taken by appeal to the circuit court, the plaintiffs there filed a complaint, containing two counts, the first declaring in trespass, and the second on the statute. On motion •of the defendant, the first count was stricken out, and the *205plaintiff's excepted. There was a judgment on verdict for the defendant, from which the plaintiffs appealed.

The ruling above noted is here assigned as error.

W. O. Brewer and B. H. Abercrombie, for appellant.

J. A. Bilbro, *contra.*

STONE, J.

— We find no error in the récord. The complaint filed before the justice claims a penalty under section 1587 of tbe Code of 18'76. The statute provides no special remedy for the penalty therein denounced. The penal part of the demand can not be recovered in an action of trespass. Tbe suit must be on the statute, and is in its nature an action of debt. A count in trespass *vi et armis*can not be joined with such complaint, nor can it, on appeal, be substituted for it. It changes tbe form of the action, which is not allowable. *Jean v.*Sandiford, 39 Ala. 317; *Crimm v. Crawford,*29 Ala. 623; *Beavers v.*Hardie, 59 Ala. 570; 1 Brick. Dig. 526, §§ 19, 20.

Affirmed.
#### § 1721.107 Agreement.

After approval of the Borrower's request for a deferment of principal and interest, an extension agreement, containing the terms of the extension, together with associated materials, will be prepared and forwarded to the Borrower by RUS. The extension agreement will then be executed and returned to RUS by the Borrower.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1934 

To expand the boundary of Saguaro National Park, to study additional 

land for future adjustments to the boundary of the Park, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2013 

Mr. GRIJALVA (for himself, Mr. BARBER, and Mrs. KIRKPATRICK) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To expand the boundary of Saguaro National Park, to study 

additional land for future adjustments to the boundary 

of the Park, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Saguaro National Park 

5 Boundary Expansion and Study Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. BOUNDARY OF SAGUARO NATIONAL PARK. 

7 Section 4 of the ‘‘Saguaro National Park Establish8 ment Act of 1994’’ (Public Law 103–364, 108 Stat. 

9 3467), is amended— 


SMARTINEZ on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1934 IH

1 (1) in subsection (a)— 

2 (A) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ before ‘‘The bound3 aries of the park’’; and 

4 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(2) The boundary of the park is further modi6 fied to include approximately 2525 acres, as gen7 erally depicted on the map titled ‘Saguaro National 

8 Park Proposed Boundary Adjustment’, numbered 

9 151/80,045c, and dated February 26, 2013. The 

10 map shall be on file and available for inspection in 

11 the appropriate offices of the National Park Serv12 ice.’’; 

13 (2) by striking subsection (b)(2) and inserting 

14 the following new paragraphs: 

15 ‘‘(2) The Secretary may, with the consent of 

16 the State and in accordance with Federal and State 

17 law, acquire from the State land or interests in land 

18 within the boundary of the park. 

19 ‘‘(3) If the Secretary is unable to acquire the 

20 State land under paragraph (2), the Secretary may 

21 enter into an agreement that would allow the Na22 tional Park Service to manage State land within the 

23 boundary of the park.’’; and 

24 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub25 section: 


SMARTINEZ on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1934 IH

1 ‘‘(d) BOUNDARY STUDY.— 

2 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall con3 duct a study to identify lands that would be a part 

4 of any future boundary adjustments for the park. 

5 ‘‘(2) CRITERIA.—The study shall examine the 

6 natural, cultural, recreational, and scenic values and 

7 characters of lands identified under paragraph (1). 

8 ‘‘(3) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the 

9 date funds are made available for the study under 

10 this subsection, the Secretary shall submit to the 

11 Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 

12 Representatives and the Committee on Energy and 

13 Natural Resources of the Senate a report on the 

14 findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the 

15 study.’’. 

Æ 


SMARTINEZ on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsGEOSIM: A numerical model for geophysical fluid flow simulationA numerical model which simulates geophysical fluid flow in a wide range of problems is described in detail, and comparisons of some of the model's results are made with previous experimental and numerical studies. The model is based upon the Boussinesq Navier-Stokes equations in spherical coordinates, which can be reduced to a cylindrical system when latitudinal walls are used near the pole and the ratio of latitudinal length to the radius of the sphere is small. The equations are approximated by finite differences in the meridional plane and spectral decomposition in the azimuthal direction. The user can specify a variety of boundary and initial conditions, and there are five different spectral truncation options. The results of five validation cases are presented: (1) the transition between axisymmetric flow and baroclinic wave flow in the side heated annulus; (2) the steady baroclinic wave of the side heated annulus; (3) the wave amplitude vacillation of the side heated annulus; (4) transition to baroclinic wave flow in a bottom heated annulus; and (5) the Spacelab Geophysical Fluid Flow Cell (spherical) experiment.Document ID19910012137Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsButler, Karen A.*(New Technology, Inc., Huntsville AL., United States)*Miller, Timothy L.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL., United States)*Lu, Huei-Iin*(Universities Space Research Association Huntsville, AL., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateFebruary 1, 1991Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And Heat TransferReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:103528NASA-TM-103528Accession Number91N21450Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910012137.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
## EPA FACT SHEET: Clean Power Plan 

# OVERVIEW OF THE CLEAN POWER PLAN CUTTING CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

On June 2, 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, proposed a commonsense plan to cut carbon pollution from power plants. The science shows that climate change is already posing risks to our health and our economy. Th e Clean Power Plan will maintain an affordable, reliable energy system, while cutting pollution and protecting our he alth and environment now and for future generations.
Our climate is changing, and we’re feeling the dangerous and costly effects right now.

 A verage temperatures have risen in most states since 1901, with seven of the top 10 warmest years on record occurring since 1998.

 Climate and weather disasters in 2012 cost the American economy more than $100 billion

. Although there are limits at power plants for other pollutants like arsenic and mercury, there are curren tly no national limits on carbon.

 Children, the elderly, and the poor are most vulnerable to a range of climate

- related health effects, including those related to heat stress, air pollution, extreme weather events, and others.
Nationwide, th e Clean Power Plan will help cut carbon pollution from the power sector by 30 percent from 2005 levels

.  Power plants are the largest source of carbon pollution in the U.S., accounting for roughly one

- third of all domestic greenhouse gas emissions

.  The proposal will also cut pollution that leads to soot and smog by over 25 percent in 2030. Americans will see billions of dollars in public health and climate benefits, now and for future generations.

 The Clean Power Plan will lead to climate and health benefits worth an estimated $ 55 billion to $93 billion in 2030, including avoiding 2,700 to 6,600 premature deaths and 140,000 to 150,000 asthma attacks in children

. States and businesses have already charted the path toward cleaner, more efficient power

.  States, cities and businesses are already taking action

.  The Clean Power Plan puts states in the driver’s seat to a cleaner, more efficient power fleet of the future by giving them the flexibility to choose how to meet their goals

. With EPA’s flexible proposal, we can cut wasted energy, improve efficiency, and reduce pollution

– while still having all the power we need to grow our economy and maintain our competitive edge

.  The agency’s proposal is flexible

— reflecting the different ne eds of different states.

 The proposal will put Americans to work making the U.S. electricity system less polluti ng and our homes and businesses more efficient , shrinking electricity bills by roughly 8 percent in 2030

.  It will keep the Unite d States

— and more importantly our businesses

— at the forefront of a global movement to produce and consume energy in a better, more sustainable way.

Join the conversation

 In the coming months, we’ll be listen ing to feedback and seeking new ideas about the best ways to reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants: http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan
#### § 1734.26 Criteria for scoring grant applications.

The criteria by which applications will be scored will be published in the RUS DLT Program application guide and/or the RUS DLT Program Web site and in the funding opportunity posted on *www.Grants.gov* Web site on an annual basis. The criteria will be used to determine and evaluate: Rurality; economic need; service need and benefit; and special considerations as determined by the Administrator
Editorial Note on Subchapter B of Chapter XIV
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations to regulations affecting previous program years not included in this volume, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*

§ 1415.13 Transfer of land. ( a ) Any transfer of the property prior to an applicant's acceptance into the program will void the offer of enrollment, unless at the option of the State Conservationist or State Executive Director, as appropriate, an offer is extended to the new landowner and the new landowner agrees to the same easement or rental contract terms and conditions.
( b ) After acreage is accepted in the program, for easements with multiple payments, any remaining easement payments will be made to the original participant unless NRCS receives an assignment of proceeds.
( c ) Future annual rental payments will be made to the successor participant.
( d ) The new landowner is responsible for complying with the terms of the recorded easement, and the contract successor is responsible for complying with the terms of the rental contract and for assuring completion of all activities and practices required by any associated restoration agreement. Eligible cost-share payments will be made to the new participant upon presentation that the successor assumed the costs of establishing the practices.
( e ) With respect to any and all payments owed to participants, the United States bears no responsibility for any full payments or partial distributions of funds between the original participant and the participant's successor. In the event of a dispute or claim on the distribution of cost-share payments, USDA may withhold payments, without the accrual of interest, pending an agreement or adjudication on the rights to the funds.
( f ) The rights granted to the United States in an easement will apply to any of its agents or assigns. All obligations of the participant under the GRP conservation easement deed also bind the participant's heirs, successors, agents, assigns, lessees, and any other person claiming under them.
( g ) Rental contracts may be transferred to another landowner, operator, or tenant that acquires an interest in the land enrolled in GRP. The successor must be determined by FSA to be eligible to participate in GRP and must assume full responsibility under the contract. FSA may require a participant to refund all or a portion of any financial assistance awarded under GRP, plus interest, if the participant sells or loses control of the land under a GRP rental contract, and the new landowner, operator, or tenant is not eligible to participate in the program or declines to assume responsibility under the contract.
§ 1784.27 Grant closing and disbursement of Funds. ( a ) The Water and Waste Grant Agreement for rural and native villages in Alaska, or other approved form(s) will be executed by all applicants. To view all forms and agreements, refer to the USDA RUS Water and Environmental Programs Web site.
( b ) Grant funds will be distributed from the Treasury at the time they are actually needed by the applicant using multiple advances. Instructions regarding disbursement of funds can be found in the Letter of Conditions.
( c ) If there is a significant reduction in project costs, the applicant's funding needs will be reassessed. Decreases in RUS funds will be based on revised project costs and current number of users. Other factors, including RUS regulations used at the time of grant approval, will continue to be used as published at the time of grant approval. Obligated grant funds not needed to complete the proposed project will be deobligated. In such cases applicable forms, the letter of conditions, and other items will be revised.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsBOREAS RSS-17 1994 ERS-1 Level-3 Freeze/Thaw Backscatter Change ImagesThe Boreal Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study (BOREAS) Remote Sensing Science (RSS)-17 team acquired and analyzed imaging radar data from the European Space Agency's (ESA's) European Remote Sensing Satellite (ERS)-1 over a complete annual cycle at the BOREAS sites in Canada in 1994 to detect shifts in radar backscatter related to varying environmental conditions. Two independent transitions corresponding to soil thaw and possible canopy thaw were revealed by the data. The results demonstrated that radar provides an ability to observe thaw transitions at the beginning of the growing season, which in turn helps constrain the length of the growing season. The data set presented here includes change maps derived from radar backscatter images that were mosaicked together to cover the southern BOREAS sites. The image values used for calculating the changes are given relative to the reference mosaic image. The data are stored in binary image format files. The imaging radar data are available from the Earth Observing System Data and Information System (EOSDIS) Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC). The data files are available on a CD-ROM (see document number 20010000884).Document ID20000116641Acquisition SourceGoddard Space Flight CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsRignot, Eric*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA United States)*Nickeson, Jaime*(Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services Greenbelt, MD United States)*Hall, Forrest G.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD United States)*Way, JoBea*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA United States)*McDonald, Kyle C.*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA United States)*Smith, David E.Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateAugust 1, 2000Subject CategoryEarth Resources And Remote SensingReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2000-209891/VOL73NAS 1.15:209891/VOL73Rept-2000-03136-0/VOL73Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 923-462-33-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20000116641.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Description of Changes to Arrangements



 EXHIBIT 10dd(i) 
  
 Description of Changes to Arrangements 
  
 As previously disclosed, Messrs. Seidenberg, Babbio and Barr waived their rights to receive certain deferred previously
earned bonus payments in exchange for Verizon’s entering into split-dollar insurance arrangements for their benefit. The deferred bonus payments waived by Messrs. Seidenberg, Babbio and Barr pursuant to these arrangements were $3.8 million,
$2.0 million and $500,000, respectively. These amounts were included in the summary compensation table in Verizon’s proxy statements. Under these arrangements, the insurance premiums paid by Verizon would ultimately be returned to Verizon. The
present value after-tax costs of these arrangements to Verizon were designed to be equivalent to the after-tax costs to Verizon of these waived deferred compensation obligations. Thus, the arrangements were cost neutral to Verizon at the time they
were entered into. 
  
 As a result of provisions in the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Verizon suspended premium payments to these split-dollar insurance policies as of July 2002. To date, the Securities and Exchange Commission has not provided any guidance as to whether the provisions in the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 apply to these types of arrangements. Accordingly, Verizon determined that it will not make any additional premium payments to these split-dollar policies. The amounts previously waived by Messrs. Seidenberg, Babbio and Barr (plus an
amount that would have accrued in a market-based investment account since the date the amounts were waived) will be returned to their respective individual deferral accounts under the Verizon Income Deferral Plan. The amounts to be restored to
Messrs. Seidenberg, Babbio and Barr’s deferral accounts are approximately $5.1 million, $2.4 million and $605,000, respectively. The policies will remain the property of Messrs. Seidenberg, Babbio and Barr at a reduced benefit level until such
time as they are cancelled or terminated. Verizon expects to eventually recover all of the insurance premiums previously paid towards the policies.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Report: Diabetes 2014 Report Card      

# Report: Diabetes 2014 Report Card

The CDC publishes the *Diabetes Report Card* every two years and includes the most recent information and data available about diabetes, gestational diabetes, pre-diabetes, preventive care practices, risk factors, quality of care, diabetes outcomes, and, to the extent possible, national and state trends. According to the *Diabetes 2014 Report Card* (PDF, 18 pages), more than 5,000 new cases of Type 2 diabetes are diagnosed among youth under the age of 20 each year. 

http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/library/diabetesreportcard2014.pdf?utm_source=youth.gov&utm_medium=federal-links&utm_campaign=reports-and-resources