alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
...^^JVLD

PRE-PINAL INSPECTION REPORT - • ' ^ VJ

JACKSONVILLE MUNICIPAL LANDFILL SUPERTUND ai-TB- . ^

Loanoke County, Arkansas •

?M VD ^ ' H 2: 30

and

 '^JICC-.;-(-,!-:: - ;-,- , ,., •.,-., - ROGERS ROAD MUNICIPAL LANOriLL 8UPERFUND fftTE - ^.-..l, .

Pulaski County, Arkansas

prepared by Kathleen Aisling

On September 20, 1995, representatives of the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) , the Arkansas Department of Pollution

Control and Ecology (ADPC&E), and the City of Jacksonville

inspected the Jacksonville and Rogers Road Municipal Landfills in

order to assess whether or not construction (as defined by EPA)

was complete at the sites.

As detailed in the January 20, 1995, Technical Assistance

Reports for the two landfills, the EPA portion of the work at the

site was completed in December 1994. Under the June 20, 1994,

Consent Decrees (CDs) for the sites, EPA performed the work that

involved handling the hazardous substances and the City performed

the non-hazardous work. The city performed its portion of the

work, which included regrading and revegetating, from August 1994

through September 1995. The purpose of the inspection was to

ensure that these activities were complete and that no further

EPA action was necessary.

The sites had a very heavy rain the day before the

inspection which made the conditions ideal for determination of

positive drainage. No areas of standing water were observed at

the site. Newly mulched and seeded areas were also visible. The

site fencing was in excellent condition and a new entrance to the

Jacksonville Landfill had been constructed and secured. The

housekeeping at the sites was very good and all areas that

provided access were freshly mowed. Construction completion at

the sites is deemed successful.

Punch List of Site Closeout Activities

• Empty drums of clean purge water that were collected during

ground water sampling.

• Inspect site after heavy rain for standing water and fill in

any low spots.

• Inspect revegetated area to make sure that the revegetation

is successful.

• Continue to monitor site drainage ditches for clogging

material.

002120
The Remedial Action (RA) was satisfactory implemented and

completed consistent with the Record of Decisions for the sites

and the RA work plans. Long-term operation and maintenance

activities will include ground water sampling for at least four

more years (one year of the 5-year sampling was conducted in

October 1994) and fence maintenance.

Inspection Participants:

Kathleen Aisling, Remedial Project Manager EPA

Ken dark, On-scene Coordinator EPA

Duane Reel, Jacksonville City Engineer City

Devon Hobby, Supervisory Project Manager ADPC&E

2

002121
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1754

ALEXANDER S. STEWART,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (4:14-cv-00071-MSD-TEM)

Submitted: October 16, 2014 Decided: October 20, 2014

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alexander S. Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Alexander S. Stewart appeals the district court’s 

order dismissing without prejudice his civil complaint as 

frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 5 1915(e)(2)(i) (2012).* We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Stewart v. Dep’t of the Navy, No. 4:14-cv-00071-MSD-TEM 

(E.D. Va. filed July 7, 2014 & entered July 8, 2014). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 * We conclude that the order is final and appealable as no 

amendment to the complaint could cure the defects identified by 

the district court. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers

Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066–67 (4th Cir. 1993).
EXHIBIT 10.16a


                               FIRST AMENDMENT TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         This FIRST AMENDMENT,  made as of the 1st day of February, 1998, to the
Employment  Agreement,  made as of the 1st day of March, 1997, (the "Agreement")
between  THE  UNITED  ILLUMINATING  COMPANY,  a  Connecticut   corporation  (the
"Company") and ALBERT N. HENRICKSEN, an individual (the "Executive"),

                                WITNESSETH THAT:

     (1) The Company and the  Executive  hereby agree to amend the  Agreement as
set forth in sections (2) and (3) below:

     (2) By deleting the final sentence of Section (4)(b) in its entirety.

     (3) By inserting,  following  the second  sentence of Section  (4)(f),  the
following  sentence:  "For purposes of this  Agreement,  Total  Compensation  is
defined as the sum of the Executive's Base Salary and any amount paid or payable
to  the  Executive   pursuant  to  the  Company's  annual  Executive   Incentive
Compensation Program."

     (4) All the terms and  conditions of the  Agreement,  as amended hereby are
and shall remain in full force and effect.

     (5) This First  Amendment to the  Agreement  may be executed in one or more
counterparts,  each of  which  shall  be  deemed  an  original  but all of which
together will constitute one and the same instrument.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  the parties hereto have executed this instrument as of
the day and year first above written.

THE UNITED ILLUMINATING COMPANY

                                                   ATTEST:

By       /s/ Richard J. Grossi
  -----------------------------------
         Its Chairman of the
         Board of Directors and
         Chief Executive Officer
                                                         /s/ Kurt Mohlman
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                            Treasurer and
        /s/ Albert N. Henricksen                            Secretary
  -----------------------------------
         Albert N. Henricksen
Exhibit 10.9


 


US
ASIAN CONSULTING GROUP, LLC


32
Camlet Court


Roseland,
New Jersey 07068


 


Dated
as of March 30, 2022


 


Nexalin
Technologies, Inc.


1776
Yorktown, Suite 550


Houston,
Texas 77056


Attn.:
Mark White, CEO


 


Re:
Deferral of Consulting Fee


 


Ladies
and Gentlemen:


 


We
refer to the Consulting Agreement, as amended, dated as of May 9, 2018 (“Consulting Agreement”) between US Asian Consulting
Group, LLC (“US Asian”) and Nexalin Technology, Inc.


 


This
letter confirms our agreement that US Asian has agreed to defer payments of $250,000 otherwise due to it in connection with fees owed
to it under Consulting Agreement. We further confirm that the payments have been deferred until December 15, 2022.


 


	 	Sincerely,
	 	 	 
	 	US ASIAN CONSULTING GROUP, LLC
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/
    Leonard
    Osser 
	 	 	Leonard
    Osser, Managing Member/Principal
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Condensed
Statement of Consolidated Financial Position and the Condensed Statement of
Consolidated Income and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                              47
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      380
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        250
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,814
<PP&E>                                          19,170
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,835
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  16,962
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,442
<BONDS>                                          1,191
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           597
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,113
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    16,962
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,794
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,450
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  92
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    297
<INCOME-TAX>                                       107
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                190
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       190
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Van Kirk, Appellant, *v.*Jackson.

May 6, 1925:

*Appeals*— Divided *court*— Affirmation *of court below.*

When the judges of tbe Superior Court who beard tbe appeal are equally divided in their opinion, the judgment of tbe court below will be affirmed.

Submitted May 4, 1925.

Appeal, No. 200, April T., 1925, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., Jan. T., 1924, No. 2386, in the ease of Lawrence E. Van Kirk v. Porter R. Jackson.

Before Porter, Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.

Affirmed.

Assumpsit for the return of money paid for the sale of real estate. Before Ford, J.

On case stated the court entered judgment in favor of the defendant. Plaintiff appealed.

*Error assigned*was the decree of the court.

*Miles H. Jones,*for appellant.

*Warren H. Van Kirk,*for appellee.

Per Curiam,

The six judges who heard the argument of this appeal are equally divided in their opinion, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.
From: Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US

To: "Andrew O'Hare" <aohare@cement.org> Cc: Steven Silverman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 10/25/2010 10:37 AM Subject: Cement Correction Notice Dear Andy: I made corrections to the notice language based on comments. Please check this over again.

Still working on the schedule. Keith W . Barnett USEPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MMG Mail Code D243
- 02 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 919
- 541
- 5605 barnett.keith@epa.gov
# Official Journal C 345/27 A

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 345 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6427 August 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 345

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6427 August 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 345/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2021/C 345/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

    CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
          RELATING TO A PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

      I, Robert J. Chaney, Chief Executive Officer, and I, John C. Barney, Chief
Financial Officer, of UGI Utilities, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation (the
"Company"), hereby certify that to our knowledge:

      (1)   The Company's periodic report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
            March 31, 2004 (the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
            1934, as amended; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

                                      * * *

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER                        CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

/s/ Robert J. Chaney                           /s/ John C. Barney
----------------------------------             ---------------------------------
Robert J. Chaney                               John C. Barney

Date: May 17, 2004                             Date: May 17, 2004
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2010

- 0904 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2010

-NE

- 33

- AD If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into an d then out of the changed cell

. **Estimated Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per **Product** (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance) Work

- h ours (include access, testing, and close

- up) Labor

co st ( @ $8 5 /h our) Part s Cost Total Costs ( labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U

. S

. Fleet 

### Inspect NGV 40.0 $3,400.0 0 $0 $3,400.00 

### 20 $68,000.00 

### Replace NGV, S1 & S2 turbine discs 60.0 $5,100.0 0 $19,889 $ 24,989.00 

### 1 $24,989.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### The known number of products in compliance: Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $92,989 

### Costs covered under warranty ( if kno wn ) $
**On**
**- Condition Costs:**  Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Work

- h ours

(include access, testing, and close

up) Labor cost

( @ $8 5 /hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be o bvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### : 

### Cost for checking engine rundown is based on one inspection cycle per engine. The number of engines in

### the U.S. fleet with a repaired second stage nozzle guide vane (NGV) instal led is estimated as 20. It

is estimated that 1 engine of the 20 will have a non

- conforming NGV installed, which will result in replacement of the NGV and stage 1 and 2 turbine discs.
**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regul atory action”? YES * NO
* Explanation: **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES * NO
* Explanation: **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for eit her a Yes or No answer. YES NO Explanation: **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES * NO


### * Explanation 

### :
# C_2017014EN.01001301.xml

| 16.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 14/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/13

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 November 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — Stadt Wiener Neustadt v Niederösterreichische Landesregierung

(Case C-348/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment - Directive 85/337/EEC - Directive 2011/92/EU - Scope - Concept of ‘specific act of national legislation’ - No environmental impact assessment - Definitive authorisation - Legislative regularisation a posteriori of the lack of environmental impact assessment - Principle of cooperation - Article 4 TEU))

(2017/C 014/16)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Stadt Wiener Neustadt

Defendant: Niederösterreichische Landesregierung

Intervening party: .A.S.A. Abfall Service AG

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(5) of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, must be interpreted as meaning that it covers a project subject to a legislative provision such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which a project which has been the subject of a decision taken in breach of the obligation to assess its effects on the environment, in respect of which the time limit for an action for annulment has expired, must be regarded as lawfully authorised. EU law precludes such a legislative provision insofar as it provides that a prior environmental impact assessment must be deemed to have been carried out for such a project.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 363, 3.11.2015.

---
No. 54847.

#### Gane & Ingram, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 159577-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE : May 12 , 20 15 T O : Dockets EPA - HQ - OAR - 2013 - 0602, EPA - HQ - OAR - 2013 - 0603, and EPA - H Q OAR - 2013 - 0495 FROM: Lora Strine SUBJECT : Summary o f Conference Call w ith Chris Van Atten and Amlan Saha and E PA

Staff **SUMMARY** Discussion of 111 ( d) Clean Power Plan **ATTENDEES** Lora Strine, EPA Elineth Torres, EPA EPA Regional contacts from the implementation team Chris Van Atten <vanatten@mjbradley .com> Amlan Saha <asaha@mjbradley .com>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Case No. 2:13-CR-00252 

Plaintiff, 

JUDGE ALGENON L. MARBLEY 

v. 

WILLIAM SCOTT ELLIOTT, 

Defendant. 

ORDER 

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant William Scott Elliott's Emergency 

Motion to Delay Self-Surrender to the Franklin County Jail for 48 Hours (Doc. 22). Defendant, 

the president and chief executive officer of Mariette Industrial Enterprises, Inc., was sentenced 

on AprilS, 2014 to a term of two (2) days' incarceration (Doc. 19). Defendant alleges that he 

was informed on Friday, May 2, 2014, that he would be required to report to the Franklin County 

Jail on Tuesday, May 6, to serve his sentence. (Doc. 22 at 1). Defendant asserts that he has been 

negotiating a major contract with a potential customer and has been scheduled for over a month 

to meet with the customer on May 7, 2014. (!d.). Accordingly, Defendant asks the Court to 

issue an Order delaying the date on which he must report to jail for 48 hours, until May 8, 2014. 

(!d. at 2). The United States does not oppose this Motion. 

For good cause shown, Defendant's Motion is hereby GRANTED. Defendant shall 

report to the Franklin County Jail on May 8, 2014. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: t/ M'i ZDt'f 

Case: 2:13-cr-00252-ALM Doc #: 23 Filed: 05/05/14 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Skip Links

USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

Scientific Investigations Map 2964

Pubs Warehouse

## The International Geomagnetic Reference Field, 2005

#### By Kenneth S. Rukstales and Jeffrey J. Love

| *SIM 2964 Plate 1* PDF (2 MB)                Right-Click to 'Download' or 'Save As'*SIM 2964 Plate 1* PDF (2 MB)              Right-Click to 'Download' or 'Save As'
This is one of five world charts showing the declination, inclination, horizontal intensity, vertical component, and total intensity of the Earth’s magnetic field at mean sea level at the beginning of 2005. The charts are based on the International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) main model for 2005 and secular change model for 2005-2010. The IGRF is referenced to the World Geodetic System 1984 ellipsoid.

Additional information about the USGS geomagnetism program is available at: http://geomag.usgs.gov/

 

 

**For sale by**          U.S. Geological Survey Information Services,          Box 25286, Federal Center,          Denver, CO 80225;          1-888-ASK-USGSUSGS: Maps on Demand   | Version 1.0

Posted April 2007
-  **Plate 1** PDF (2 MB) 
-  **Plate 2** PDF (2 MB) 
-  **Plate 3** PDF (2 MB) 
-  **Plate 4** PDF (2 MB) 
-  **Plate 5** PDF (2 MB) 
-  **Downloads** Directory  Refer to the Readme TXT file for more information about this dataset. 
This text-only version of the plates is accessible as defined in Section 508. |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

**Suggested citation:**

Rukstales, K.S., Love, J.J., 2007, The International Geomagnetic Reference Field, 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 2964, 5 pls., scale 1:30,000,000.

----

Download the latest version of Acrobat Reader, free of charge
access.adobe.com

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey	URL: *http://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/sim/2007/2964/index.html*	Questions or Assistance: Contact USGS	Last modified: Thursday, 01-Dec-2016 17:08:18 EST