alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OSWER/OSRTI

Washington, DC 20460

NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)

[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may change 

as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination.]

For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these 

substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet 

at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737.

***Final Site*** March 2011

DWYER PROPERTYGROUND Elkton, Maryland

WATER PLUME Cecil County

 Site Location:

The Dwyer Property Ground Water Plume (Dwyer) site is a ground water plume with unidentified sources. It is located in a

mixed industrial and residential area in northeastern Maryland. The property is just north of the Town of Elkton.

 Site History:

The Dwyer site is a portion of a former industrial facility, Triumph Explosives, Incorporated, which primarily manufactured 

incendiary bombs, shells, land mines, grenades, and flares for the Department of Defense from the 1930s through the end of 

World War II. From 1946 to 1948, Bowers Battery and Spark Plug Company manufactured carbon batteries at the site. 

From 1948 to 1958, Aerial Products, Incorporated, manufactured black powder fireworks at the site. From 1958 to 1972, 

Mr. Martin Dwyer produced incendiary flares at the site and used the land to graze cattle. The site is currently abandoned 

and heavily overgrown. 

 Site Contamination/Contaminants:

There are two known plumes that contain levels of trichloroethene (TCE) above EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Act Maximum 

Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for potable water. 

 Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment:

The ground water in the area of the Dwyer site is heavily used for drinking water. There are residential and municipal wells 

located nearby. Also, there is the potential for vapor intrusion in those residences that are located adjacent to the property 

and overlying the plumes.

 Response Activities (to date):

The Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) has completed a remedial investigation of the property under the 

State Superfund program. 

 Need for NPL Listing:

The State of Maryland referred the site to EPA. Other federal and state programs were considered but are not viable at this 

time. EPA received a letter of support for placing this site on the NPL from the state. The local government supports

listing.
II 

Calendar No. 330 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1445 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

520 Colorado Avenue in Arriba, Colorado, as the ‘‘William H. Emery 

Post Office’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 21, 2005 

Mr. SALAZAR (for himself and Mr. ALLARD) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 520 Colorado Avenue in Arriba, Colorado, 

as the ‘‘William H. Emery Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. WILLIAM H. EMERY POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 520 Colorado Avenue in Arriba, 
2 

•S 1445 RS 

1 Colorado, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘William 

2 H. Emery Post Office’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘William H. Emery 

7 Post Office’’. 

Calendar No. 330 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1445 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office’’. Arriba, Colorado, as the ‘‘William H. Emery al Service located at 520 Colorado Avenue in 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported without amendment
No. 42187.

#### Protests 990947-G, etc., of Blum Bros. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstracts 40880 and 39667 and *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 49389) it was held that an allowance should have been made for the weight of the-foreign substances on the outside of the cheese.
PUBLIC LAW 110–348—OCT. 7, 2008 122 STAT. 3945 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 6092: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008): 

July 8, considered and passed House. 

Sept. 26, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 110–348 

110th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 101 Tallapoosa 

Street in Bremen, Georgia, as the ‘‘Sergeant Paul Saylor Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SERGEANT PAUL SAYLOR POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 101 Tallapoosa Street in Bremen, Georgia, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Sergeant Paul Saylor Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Sergeant Paul Saylor Post Office Building’’. 

Approved October 7, 2008. 

Oct. 7, 2008 

[H.R. 6092] 


etreine on CSHP91QD1 with PUBLIC LAWS
#### SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a corporation, Petitioner, v. Myrtice Mae SWAIN, as personal representative of the Estate of Gerney Lee Swain, Deceased, and Myrtice Mae Swain, a widow, Respondent.

No. 52060.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 28, 1978.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 27, 1978.

Joseph P. Milton and Robert E. Warren of Toole, Taylor, Moseley, Milton & Joyner, Jacksonville, for petitioner.

Beckham, McAliley & Proenza, Jacksonville, and Robert Orseck of Podhurst, Or-seck & Parks, Miami, for respondent.

DuBose Ausley and William M. Smith of Ausley, McMullen, McGehee, Carothers & Proctor, Tallahassee, for Fla. Railroad Ass’n, amici curiae.

HATCHETT, Justice.

By Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company requests this court to review a decision of the First District Court of Appeal, reported at 347 So.2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), on the basis of a conflict with the decision in *Houston v. Caldwell,*347 So.2d 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). We have jurisdiction pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(3). We affirm.

Respondent brought a wrongful death action against petitioner in Duval County Cir*18cuit Court for the wrongful death of her husband resulting from injuries he sustained in a railroad crossing accident in Ware County, Georgia. Respondent is a resident of Ware County, Georgia. The trial court denied petitioner’s motion to dismiss, which urged the application of forum non conveniens, under authority in *Adams v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Co.,*224 So.2d 797 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969). The court in *Adams*and in the present case recognized that petitioner’s principal place of business is Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida. Under *Adams*and other similar Florida decisions, a case may be dismissed from the Florida courts in favor of a more convenient forum in another state only where none of the parties involved in the suit are residents of this state. If a suit is filed in Florida between non-resident parties seeking to litigate a cause of action accruing in a foreign jurisdiction, a trial court is accorded a sound discretion in determining whether it should retain jurisdiction of the action, or dismiss it without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to reinstitute the action in a more appropriate and convenient forum.

Our recent opinion in *Houston v. Caldwell,*359 So.2d 858 (Fla.1978), approved the applicable rule of law as set forth in Adams. Therefore, we affirm the decision of the First District Court.

It is so ordered.

ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD and OVERTON, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Annual Report of Peoples-Sidney Financial Corporation (the
      "Corporation") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2007, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date of this Certification (the
      "Report"), I, Douglas Stewart, the President and Chief Executive Officer of
      the
      Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.  The
      Report complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Corporation.








/s/
                Douglas StewartDouglas
                Stewart, President andChief
                Executive OfficerDate:  September
                28, 2007
No. 00-6857.

#### Guirguis *v.*CPC Alahambra Hospital.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 21


                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

Subsidiaries of the Registrant         Jurisdiction of Organization
------------------------------         ----------------------------

BCP Ingredients, Inc.                            Delaware

Balchem Minerals Corporation                     Delaware

Chelated Minerals Corporation                    Utah

BCP Saint Gabriel, Inc.                          Delaware





                                       62
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1226 

To provide jurisdiction over Federal contractors who engage in human 

trafficking offenses. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 13, 2005 

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

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide jurisdiction over Federal contractors who engage 

in human trafficking offenses. 

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 ‘‘Federal Contractor 

5 Extraterritorial Jurisdiction for Human Trafficking Of6 fenses Act of 2005’’. 

7 SEC. 2. FEDERAL CONTRACTOR EXTRATERRITORIAL JU8 RISDICTION. 

9 Chapter 77 of title 18, United States Code, is amend10 ed by adding at the end the following: 
2 

•S 1226 IS

1 ‘‘§ 1596. Federal contractor extraterritorial jurisdic2 tion 

3 ‘‘(a) Whoever, while a Federal contractor, engages in 

4 conduct outside the United States that would constitute 

5 a violation of this chapter punishable by imprisonment for 

6 more than 1 year if the conduct had been engaged in with7 in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the 

8 United States shall be punished as provided for that of9 fense. 

10 ‘‘(b) No prosecution may be commenced against a 

11 person under this section if a foreign government, in ac12 cordance with jurisdiction recognized by the United 

13 States, has prosecuted or is prosecuting such person for 

14 the conduct constituting such offense, except upon the ap15 proval of the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney 

16 General (or a person acting in either such capacity), which 

17 function of approval may not be delegated. 

18 ‘‘(c) An individual who is a victim of a violation of 

19 this chapter by a Federal contractor may bring a civil ac20 tion against the perpetrator under section 1595 if a civil 

21 action would have been authorized under section 1595 had 

22 the conduct been engaged in within the special maritime 

23 and territorial jurisdiction of the United States. 

24 ‘‘(d) As used in this section, the term ‘Federal con25 tractor’ means a person who— 
3 

•S 1226 IS

1 ‘‘(1) is employed as a contractor (including a 

2 subcontractor at any tier), or as an employee of a 

3 contractor (or subcontractor at any tier), of any ex4 ecutive agency, as that term is defined in section 

5 4(1) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy 

6 Act (41 U.S.C. 403(1)); 

7 ‘‘(2) is present or residing outside the United 

8 States in connection with such employment; and 

9 ‘‘(3) is not a national of or ordinarily resident 

10 in the country where the violation occurred.’’. 

Æ
```
**EXHIBIT 32.2

              CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
                PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I,  Heidi  O'Neil,   the  Director  of  Finance  and  Administration  of  Z-Axis
Corporation   (the  "Company"),   certify,   pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)  the Annual Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended March
     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
     78o(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: July 13, 2004

/s/Heidi O'Neil
Name: Heidi O'Neil
Title: Director of Finance and
Administration
```
No. 99-7965.

#### Shepardson *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 23(a)

Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement Nos. 33-6300, 33-19372, 33-38928,
33-38925, 33-86726, 333-14607, 333-29949, 333-85988, and 333-99233 of MFIC Corporation (the "Company") on
Form S-8 of our report dated March 11, 2004, except for Note 15, as to which the date is March 31, 2004, pertaining to the consolidated financial statements and
schedule of MFIC Corporation which appears in Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002.

|/s/BROWN & BROWN, LLP                |  | 
|------------------------------------ |  | 
|Boston, Massachusetts
April 29, 2004 |  | 

---



QuickLinks
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-063-CV

IN RE DOWAN T. MAYFIELD	RELATOR

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

	ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of the opinion that relief should be denied.  Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL A:  LIVINGSTON, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED:  March 6, 2007
#### In re Elinor W. ROBERTS v. Joe T. ROBERTS. Ex parte Joe T. ROBERTS.

77-204.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

April 7, 1978.

Robert J. Teel, Rockford, for petitioner.

Tom Radney, Alexander City, for respondent.

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

WRIT QUASHED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.

MADDOX, FAULKNER, JONES, SHORES, EMBRY and BEATTY, JJ., concur.

TORBERT, C. J., and ALMON, J., dissent.

ALMON, Justice

(dissenting).

I most respectfully dissent from quashing the writ. I think the Court should address the issue of whether the Court of Civil Appeals has misapplied the long standing ore tenus rule.

TORBERT, C. J., concurs.
Fly Lansin g Concierg e Trave l Center-410 0 Capita l Cit y Blv d- Lansing , M l 4890 6 Tuesday . Februar

y 07 , 201 2

r~ y Z S — i Docket Managemen t

Facilit y - ^ IJI;^TM

- U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportation , ' n 5=5^ i 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenu e SE. , _^_

_• . _. _. ^ ^^-^ ^ - - ^^r-'-^-oS^

- West Buildin g Groun dFloor , RoomWr2-140 7 •"•'""•"' ' " cj i ^5V~ Washington , DC 20590 . ^ ' Re : Su n Countr y Slo t

Exemptio n - Docke t

Numbe r FAA-2012-008 9

Ladie s an dGentlemen ; Sun Country Airline s ha s requeste da n exemptio n fro

mth e slo t

limi t fo r Ronal dReaga

n Washingto n National Airpor t (DCA ) set

fort h i n § 93.123(a) , l o permi t

th e FA A to creat e ai r carrie r slots.durin g certai n limite dhour s fo r Sun Country' s use . Th e propose dai r carrie r slot s woul dreplac e tw o slo t exemption s under

DO T Orde r

2010-12-1 6 awarde dto Sun Country . O

n January 6 . 2012 , th e Unite dState s Cour t o f Appeal s fo

r th e Distric t

o f Columbi aCircui t

vacate dth e DO T Order , an dSu n Countr y will los e it s existin g ser\'ic e betwee n DC

A an dLansing' s Capital Regio n International Airport . Specifically , Sun Countr y desire s on e dail y slo t

durin g eac h o f

th e 1000 an d1 iO

O hours . Th e propose d exemptio n woul dpemii t SunCbuntr y l o coniinue'oyeratin g it s existing~seK'ice s ^ d avoi da n inequitabl e resul t

o f th e Court' s order . A s amanage r

o f Fl y Lansin g Concierg e Trave l Cente r I fulfil l sea t request s fo

r m y client s o n dail y basis , a s wel l a s grou p spac e fo r loca l schools . Washington , D.C . allow s fo r additiona l connection s originatin g fro mLansin g fo

r international service . Th e Sun Country DCA servic e i s essentia l to th e economi c growt h o f th e Greate r

Lansin g Region . Th e dail y servic e i s th e onl y larg e aircraf t (737-800 ) servic e to Washingto n Reaga n Airport , i

n th e stat e o f

Michigan outsid e o f

Detroit . Prio r

t o Sun Country , th e regional community ha

drequeste dth e introductio n o f thi s servic e fro

mnumerou s othe r airlin e operator s withou t success . Accordingly , i t i s critica l tha

t th e FA A take th e necessar y step s t o ensur e th e continuatio n o f th e Su n Country slot s a t th e establishe d flight time s i n suppor t o f Greate r Lansing' s busines s an deconomi c growth .Fl

y Lansin g Concierg e Trave l Center-410 0 Capita l Cit y Blv d- Lansing , M

l 4890 6

You r immediat e approva l o f

thi s exemption , s o tha

t Su n Countr

y ca n begi n to ente r Might s schedule s fo

r sal e fo r th e balanc e o f

2012 , will b e greatl y appreciated . Sincerely , Llizabei h Andrews' , CI C ' ~ ~ " Fl y Lansin g Concierg e Trave l 410 0 Capital Cit

y Blvd . Lansing , M

l 4890 6 517-321-468 8 eandrcws@craa.co m
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 161 (Wednesday, August 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44268-44269]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21988]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP97-692-000]


El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

August 14, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 11, 1997, El Paso Natural Gas Company 
(El Paso), P.O. Box 1492, El Paso, Texas 79978, filed in Docket No. 
CP97-692-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 157.212 of 
Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and 
157.212) for authorization to construct and operate a delivery point, 
located in Hutchinson County, Texas, to permit the firm transportation 
and delivery of natural gas to Southern Union Gas Company (Southern 
Union), under El Paso's certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-435-000, 
pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set 
forth in the request that is on file with the Commission and open to 
public inspection.
    El Paso proposes to construct and operate the Buena Vista Meter 
Station, consisting of two 2-inch tap and valve assemblies, one 1-inch 
O.D. Daniels mini-turbine, all with appurtenances, to be located in 
Section 25, Arnold & Barrett, Block Y, Hutchinson County, Texas. El 
Paso states the proposed quantity of natural gas to be transported on a 
firm basis to the Buena Vista Meter Station is estimated to be 165,345 
Mcf annually, or an average of 453 Mcf per

[[Page 44269]]

day. El Paso asserts that it has sufficient capacity to accomplish the 
deliveries of the requested gas volumes without detriment or 
disadvantage to El Paso's other customers. El Paso declares the gas 
will be used by Southern Union to satisfy the residential and 
residential space heating requirements of its customers in the area.
    El Paso states that Southern Union will reimburse them for the 
costs related to the construction of the proposed delivery point, 
estimated to be $45,200, including respective overhead and contingency 
fees.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a 
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for 
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21988 Filed 8-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed December 23, 2015.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D14-2519

Lower Tribunal Nos. 14-1709 & 1277362203

________________

Hope Madu Onye,

Appellant,

vs.

Department of Revenue o/b/o Johnnel E. Missick,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Martin Shapiro,

Judge.

Hope Madu Onye, in proper person.

No appearance, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, SALTER and LOGUE, JJ.

LOGUE, J.

We reverse the award of retroactive child support because the record is

silent as to whether the former husband and the former wife resided together with
the children during the period of retroactivity. See Motie v. Motie, 132 So. 3d

1210, 1214-15 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014); see also § 61.30(17), Fla. Stat. (2014). We

affirm the trial court’s order on all other grounds. 

2