alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Surface water supply of the United States, 1961-65: Part 1. North Atlantic slope basins: Volume 1. Basins from Maine to Connecticut

By: Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1901

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
[No. 20633-5-III.

Division Three.

November 7, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Frank James Icard, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Spokane County, No. 01-1-02146-1, Robert D. Austin, J., entered October 31, 2001. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Kato, A.C.J., concurred in by Sweeney and Kurtz, JJ.
#### CISKI et v WENTWORTH et

Ohio Supreme Court

No 22172.

Decided June 11, 1930

Marshall, CJ., Kinkade, Robinson, Jones, Matthias and Allen, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      13,400,728
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               21,857,886
<ALLOWANCES>                                   270,000
<INVENTORY>                                 20,352,845
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            58,325,433
<PP&E>                                      17,679,180
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,090,757
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              67,913,856
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,284,330
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,057,033
<OTHER-SE>                                  50,645,393
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                67,913,856
<SALES>                                    136,651,751
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           137,234,391
<CGS>                                       79,645,326
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              121,949,258
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             15,285,133
<INCOME-TAX>                                 6,190,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          9,094,633
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 9,094,633
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.87


</TABLE>
§ 30.10 Selection of apprentices. ( a ) A sponsor's procedures for selection of apprentices must be included in the written plan for Standards of Apprenticeship submitted to and approved by the Registration Agency, as required under § 29.5 of this title.
( b ) Sponsors may utilize any method or combination of methods for selection of apprentices, provided that the selection method(s) used meets the following requirements: ( 1 ) The use of the selection procedure(s) must comply with the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP) (41 CFR part 60-3), including the requirements to evaluate the impact of the selection procedure on race, sex, and ethnic groups (Hispanic or Latino/non-Hispanic or Latino) and to demonstrate job-relatedness and business necessity for those procedures that result in adverse impact in accordance with the requirements of UGESP.
( 2 ) The selection procedure(s) must be uniformly and consistently applied to all applicants and apprentices within each selection procedure utilized.
( 3 ) The selection procedure(s) must comply with title I of the ADA and EEOC's implementing regulations at part 1630. This procedure(s) must not screen out or tend to screen out an individual with a disability or a class of individuals with disabilities, on the basis of disability, unless the standard, test or other selection criteria, as used by the program sponsor, is shown to be job-related for the position in question and is consistent with business necessity.
( 4 ) The selection procedure(s) must be facially neutral in terms of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age (40 or older), genetic information, and disability.
#### Carpenter *vs.*Herrington.

*Potatoes*planted *tor family use*are exempt from execution before they are dug, the same as when taken out of the ground and laid up in store.

*282Error from the Rensselaer common pleas. Herrington, sued Carpenter in a justice’s court, in an action of *trespass,*for selling, as a constable, by virtue of an execution against him, a quantity of *potatoes*before they were dug from the ground which had been planted by Herrington on shares, on the land of a third person. Herrington is a poor man, having a family. The justice rendered judgment in his favor for §>10.62 damages, which judgment, on *certiorari,*was affirmed by the Rensselaer common pleas. Carpenter sued out a writ of error.

*C. M. Davis,*for the plaintiff in error.

*J. S. Olin,*for the defendant in error.

*By the Court.*

Nelson, Oh. J.

The trial before the justice appears to have been conducted loosely on both sides, and it is therefore somewhat difficult to arrive at any tangible point, to induce the court to interfere. The question whether potatoes in the field are exempt from execution, under the statute, 2 *R. S.*367, § 22, *sub.*4, is perhaps in the case, or in other words, whether they may be regarded *“*as necessary vegetables actually provided for family use.”

The proof shews the potatoes were planted and raised expressly for such purpose, and that they do not exceed the quantity necessary for the family. It is supposed they must be dug and laid up in store before they can be considered as provided’ “ for family use.” This is too narrow a construction. The clause is remedial, and should be liberally expounded to effect the humane object in view. The argument assumes that the legislature contemplated the procurement of the articles in some way other than by cultiva- [ *371 J tion ; *as if the mode of acquiring them was regarded in fixing the exemption. The supposition is preposterous. As the “ necessary vegetables” are absolutely exempt, they will be protected in any stage of the process of obtaining them for the family use, whether by planting them, or in any other way.

Judgment affirmed.
110TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 12

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas the Medal of Honor, the highest award for valor in

action against an enemy force that can be bestowed to a

member of the Armed Forces, is awarded by the President, in the name of Congress, to individuals who have

distinguished themselves conspicuously by gallantry and

intrepidity at the risk of their lives above and beyond the

call of duty;

Whereas the United States will forever be in debt to the recipients of the Medal of Honor for their bravery and sacrifice in times of war or armed conflict;

Whereas the first Medal of Honor awards were presented to

6 men on March 25, 1863, by the Secretary of War;

Whereas only 3,443 individuals out of the millions of men

and women who have served the United States in war,

military operations, or other armed conflicts have been

awarded the Medal of Honor;

Whereas there are 111 living recipients of the Medal of

Honor, as of January 1, 2007;

Whereas it is appropriate to commemorate and honor the recipients of the Medal of Honor and what they represent;

Whereas the people of the United States should always be

aware of the significance and meaning of the Medal of

Honor;
 †

2

SCON 12 ES

Whereas the designation of a National Medal of Honor Day

would focus the efforts of national, State, and local organizations striving to foster public appreciation and recognition of Medal of Honor recipients; and

Whereas March 25, 2007, would be an appropriate date to

observe National Medal of Honor Day: Now, therefore, be

it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That Congress—

3 (1) recognizes the heroism and sacrifice of

4 Medal of Honor recipients;

5 (2) recognizes the educational opportunity that

6 a National Medal of Honor Day would present to

7 the people of the United States; and

8 (3) supports the goals and ideals of a National

9 Medal of Honor Day to celebrate and honor the con10 tributions of Medal of Honor recipients.

Passed the Senate February 15, 2007.

Attest:

Secretary.
110TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 12

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Supporting the goals and ideals of a National

of that medal in 1863.of Honor on the anniversary of the first awardcelebrate and honor the recipients of the Medaland importance of the Medal of Honor and toMedal of Honor Day to mark the significance
Order filed September 3, 2015

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 15

- 00609

- CV

____________ IN THE INTEREST OF X .E.A., A Child

On Appeal from the 310th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2012

- 40160



### O R D E R
The notice of appeal in this case was filed July 6, 2015

. To date, the filing fee of $19 5.00 has not been paid. No evidence that appellant has established indigence has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P

. 20.1. Therefore, the court issues the following order.
Appellant is ordered to pay the filing fee in the amount of $1 9 5.00 to the

c lerk of this court on or before September 18, 2015

. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. If appellant fails to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal will b e dismissed.

PER CURIAM
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 913 

To clarify that the revocation of an alien’s visa or other documentation 

is not subject to judicial review. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 19, 2007 

Mr. GRASSLEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To clarify that the revocation of an alien’s visa or other 

documentation is not subject to judicial review. 

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

3 SECTION 1. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF VISA REVOCATION. 

4 Section 221(i) of the Immigration and Nationality 

5 Act (8 U.S.C. 1201(i)) is amended by striking ‘‘There 

6 shall be no means of judicial review’’ and all that follows 

7 and inserting the following: ‘‘Notwithstanding any other 

8 provision of law, including section 2241 of title 28, United 

9 States Code, any other habeas corpus provision, and sec10 tions 1361 and 1651 of such title, a revocation under this 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•S 913 IS

1 subsection may not be reviewed by any court, and no court 

2 shall have jurisdiction to hear any claim arising from, or 

3 any challenge to, such a revocation.’’. 

4 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

5 The amendment made by section 1 shall— 

6 (1) take effect on the date of the enactment of 

7 this Act; and 

8 (2) apply to all visas issued before, on, or after 

9 such date. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2



Section 906 Certification of Chief Financial Officer



I, David M. Gernak, Chief Financial Officer of Patriot Motorcycle Corporation (the Company), certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | (1) | the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|Dated: October 27, 2005
|                       
|/s/ David M. Gernak    
|David M. Gernak        
|Chief Financial Officer
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).
**Title:****California public lands
 
 
2003 | 2006| 2008 | 2009
2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2015 | 2017 | 2019
 
 
SuDoc Number:I 53.11:C 12/14/
Item Number:0629-B (online)
CGP System Number:000936829
 
 
 
** 
**Permanent Public Access
** 
Title 44 of  the United States Code (44 U.S.C. Section 1911) stipulates that public access  to official Government information products disseminated through the Federal Depository  Library Program (FDLP) must be maintained permanently in regional depository  libraries and by depository libraries not served by a regional library. Since  online products are not physically distributed to depository libraries for  retention, GPO has assumed responsibility for the provision of permanent  access to Government information products residing on FDsys servers.
GPO's  permanent public access commitment is also met by bringing agency-disseminated  Internet resources under the purview of GPO and incorporating them into a  digital archive. GPO captures copies of agency electronic information  products, and creates PURLs so that users will be automatically redirected to  the archived products if the information is no longer accessible on the  agency Web site. Please refer to the report Managing the FDLP Electronic  Collection: A Policy and Planning Document for more information.
 
September 5, 2017********
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       3,510,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,015,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    81,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,905,000
<PP&E>                                         718,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 149,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,766,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,752,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,075,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   (495,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,766,000
<SALES>                                      1,625,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,625,000
<CGS>                                        1,039,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,039,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,462,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                27,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,842,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,842,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,842,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Dolan Chemical Laboratory 4001 Bixby Road Groveport, OH 43125 T: 614-836-4221, Audinet 210-4221 F: 614-836-4168, Audinet 210-4168 http://aepenv/labs 

### Water Analysis Form REP-702 Rev. 0, 4/2012



### Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 10/30/2012

Sample Number:124621-001 Date Collected:10/24/2012 08:00 Date Received:10/24/2012 

### CPS Effluent

Units Parameter Result RL Analysis ByAnalysis Date/Time Method MDL ug/L Selenium, Se 432 0.5 DPC EPA 200.8 0.1 10/30/2012 10:21 mg/L Bromide, Br 23.9 5 CRJ EPA 300.1 1 10/26/2012 mg/L Chloride, Cl 2990 20 CRJ EPA 300.1 5 10/26/2012 mg/L Fluoride, F 54.4 1 CRJ EPA 300.1 0.2 10/26/2012 mg/L Sulfate, SO4 5530 100 CRJ EPA 300.1 30 10/26/2012

THIS TEST REPORT RELATES ONLY TO THE ITEMS TESTED AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE LABORATORY. ALL TEST RESULTS MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACCREDITING AUTHORITY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

Brian Snyder, Chemist II Email bssnyder@aep.com Tel. 614-836-4224 Fax 614-836-4168 Audinet 210-4224

Mountaineer Plant, 124621 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 23.2





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements (No. 333-06435, No. 333-132768, Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to 333-132768, No. 333-167908, and No. 333-167909) on Forms S-8 and (No. 333-167907) on Form S-3 of Lee Enterprises, Incorporated and subsidiaries of our report dated November 4, 2010, relating to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of Madison Newspapers, Inc. and Subsidiary, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 26, 2010.








/s/ McGladrey & Pullen LLP





Madison, Wisconsin


December 10, 2010
----

               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT            

(Fifth Chamber)

of 17 June 2004            

in Case C-99/03: Commission of the European Communities v Ireland (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 2000/52/EC - Transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings - Failure to implement within the prescribed period)

(2004/C 201/10)

Language of the case: English

In Case C-99/03: Commission of the European Communities (Agent: J. Flett) v Ireland (Agent: D. O'Hagan) — application for a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2000/52/EC of 26 July 2000 amending Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings (OJ 2000 L 193, p. 75) or, in any event, by failing to notify the Commission of those measures, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, S. von Bahr (Rapporteur) and R. Silva de Lapuerta, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 June 2004, in which it:

----

(1)OJ C 101, 26.4.2003.

----
A-AA+Skip to content

                  - Home
                  - Compendium Statistics
                  - Event
                  - Archives
                  - Glossary
                  - Help
                  - Contact
                  - Research on Disability

Annual Disability Statistics Compendium

              - Home /
              - Compendium Statistics /
              - International Disability Statistics /
              - 14.2 International Disability Statistics—Disability Benefit Recipients as Percent of the Working-Age Population in Selected OECD Countries

## Table 14.2: International Disability Statistics—Disability Benefit Recipients as Percent of theWorking-Age Populationin Selected OECD Countries

| United States   | 5.9  | 2006 |
|-----------------|------|------|
| Australia       | 5.4  | 2007 |
| Austria         | 4.6  | 2007 |
| Belgium         | 6.0  | 2007 |
| Canada          | 4.3  | 2007 |
| Czech Republic  | 7.0  | 2007 |
| Denmark         | 7.2  | 2006 |
| Finland         | 8.5  | 2007 |
| France          | 4.9  | 2004 |
| Germany         | 4.4  | 2007 |
| Greece          | 4.6  | 2007 |
| Hungary         | 12.1 | 2007 |
| Ireland         | 6.3  | 2007 |
| Italy           | 3.2  | 2006 |
| Japan           | 2.0  | 2006 |
| Korea           | 1.5  | 2007 |
| Luxembourg      | 4.9  | 2005 |
| Mexico          | 0.7  | 2007 |
| Netherlands     | 8.3  | 2007 |
| New Zealand     | 3.8  | 2007 |
| Norway          | 10.3 | 2007 |
| Poland          | 7.2  | 2007 |
| Portugal        | 4.7  | 2007 |
| Slovak Republic | 6.3  | 2006 |
| Spain           | 3.8  | 2007 |
| Sweden          | 10.8 | 2007 |
| Switzerland     | 5.4  | 2007 |
| United Kingdom  | 7.0  | 2007 |
§ 4022.28 Effect of tax disqualification. ( a ) *General rule.* Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, benefits accrued under a plan after the date on which the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate issues a notice that any trust which is part of the plan no longer meets the requirements of section 401(a) of the Code or that the plan no longer meets the requirements of section 404(a) of the Code or after the date of adoption of a plan amendment that causes the issuance of such a notice shall not be guaranteed under this part.
( b ) *Exceptions.* The restriction on the guarantee of benefits set forth in paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply if: ( 1 ) The Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate issues a notice stating that the original notice referred to in paragraph (a) of this section was erroneous;
( 2 ) The Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate finds that, subsequent to the issuance of the notice referred to in paragraph (a) of this section, appropriate action has been taken with respect to the trust or plan to cause it to meet the requirements of sections 401(a) or 404(a)(2) of the Code, respectively, and issues a subsequent notice stating that the trust or plan meets such requirements; or
( 3 ) The plan amendment is revoked retroactively to its original effective date.