alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Delivering fuel to the 92nd Air Refueling Wing

/ Published Feb. 15, 2018
FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE, Wash., 
Around the globe, Defense Logistics Agency Energy is delivering fuel to support global mobility to the warfighter.

A new DLA video recently released on the organization’s YouTube and Facebook sites shows the important contributions DLA Energy is making with the delivery of more than a million gallons of fuel per month to the 92nd Logistics Readiness Squadron at Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane, Washington. 

"My job is fuels management," said DLA Energy Fuel Superintendent Air Force Senior Master Sgt. Christopher Dobbertin. "DLA brings us the fuel that we deliver to the aircraft."

Dobbertin oversees the 92nd Air Refueling Wing fueling operations. He interacts daily with DLA personnel to ensure the KC-135 Stratotanker provides the core aerial refueling capability for the United States Air Force.

"We do inflight air refueling at Fairchild AFB," Dobbertin said. "Our customers are global, literally. The safety of our pilots and crew rely on the quality of fuel DLA Energy provides."
Livestock County Data (93105)

-  README.DOCcatl7579.zipcatl8084.zipcatl8589.zipcatl9094.zipcatl9598.ziphogs7479.ziphogs8084.ziphogs8589.ziphogs9094.ziphogs9597.zippoul7479.zippoul8084.zippoul8589.zippoul9094.zippoul9597.zipshep7579.zipshep8084.zipshep8589.zipshep9094.zipshep9598.zip
#### Arthur ODUM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-417.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Oct. 22, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.
# EUR-Lex - 41993D0022 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 41993D0022

**The Schengen acquis - Decision of the Executive Committee of 14 December 1993 concerning the confidential nature of certain documents (SCH/Com-ex (93) 22 rev.) **

*
Official Journal L 239 , 22/09/2000 P. 0129 - 0129 *

DECISION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

of 14 December 1993

concerning the confidential nature of certain documents

(SCH/Com-ex (93)22 rev.)

THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE,

Having regard to Article 132 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Irrespective of the different national legal rules, certain documents must be kept confidential for the following three reasons:

- making some documents public would be directly contrary to the objectives set,

- moreover, some documents may contain personal data or a description of administrative procedures that should not be disclosed,

- certain documents may also contain information relating to the production techniques or even the security of external relations.

2. The following documents shall remain confidential: Annexes 1, 5, 8, 9 and 10 to the Common Consular Instructions, the list of countries subject to the visa requirement, the Common Manual, the Sirene Manual, the three documents covered by the decision on narcotic drugs (tightening controls at external borders (SCH/Stup (92)45), controlled deliveries (SCH/Stup (92)46 rev. 4) and measures on combating the illicit export of drugs (SCH/Stup (92)72 rev. 3))(1).

3. The States may incorporate the content of the Common Manual, the Sirene Manual and Annex 1 to the Common Consular Instructions on Visas (the list of countries subject to the visa requirement) into their own national instructions and manuals.

Paris, 14 December 1993.

The Chairman

A. Lamassoure

(1) See SCH/Com-ex (98)17.
#### Charlie EWING v. The HARVEY CHAIR COMPANY and St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company.

No. 50313.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 10, 1978.

Mitchell, McNutt, Bush, Lagrone & Sams, Wade H. Lagrone, Tupelo, Sam M. Reedy, Fulton, for appellant.

Mitchell, Rogers, Eskridge, Voge & Clayton, Claude F. Clayton, Jr., Tupelo, for ap-pellees.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and WALKER and COFER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
**-  Northern Plains  
-  Manhattan, KS 
-   
-  Wind Erosion Research Unit 
Printable VersionE-mail this pageThis site onlyAll ARS Advanced Search UBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">	You are here: 						Research / 								**Research Project:**WIND ERODIBILITY OF BIOSOLID AMENDED SOILS
**Location: Wind Erosion Research Unit**
												Project Number: 5430-11120-008-04Project Type:																				Nonfunded Cooperative Agreement

Start Date: Dec 14, 2006End Date: Sep 30, 2009

**Objective:**Solid organic material recovered from the sewage treatment process, also known as sewage sludge or biosolids, are being applied to approximately 52,000 acres of agricultural land east of Denver, Colorado. This land has historically experienced wind erosion. Since biosolids are high in organic matter, they can potentially alter the soil structure and thus the wind erodibility of soils.  The effect that the biosolids have on the wind erodibility of the soils is unknown. The USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the land manager have an interest in determining the effect of biosolids on the wind erodibility of the soils to which they are applied and the potential amounts that can be eroded from amended surfaces.
**Approach:**The proposed research and expected results will contribute to the mission, strategies, and goals of the Wind Erosion Research Unit and the Particulate Emissions Component of the National Air Quality Programs (NP 203). The research seeks to elucidate the physical mechanisms by which particulates are generated, how they are transported and suspended in the air and their patterns of movement and deposition. The research goal is to support development of technology to reduce or prevent agricultural particulate emissions on biosoild amended land. Select field sites on the METROGRO Farm in Arapahoe and Elbert Counties, Colorado based on varying number of applications of biosolids to give a high, medium, and low level of biololids applications. Control sites will also be selected to which no biosolids have been added. Surface soil texture will be a similar as possible for all sites.
    Project TeamTatarko, John Wagner, Larry  
Project Annual Reports FY 2007 Publications  Publications 
Related National Programs Air Quality(203) Soil Resource Management(202)  							Last Modified: 11/08/2008 		ARS Home |USDA.gov |Site Map |Policies and Links FOIA |Accessibility Statement |Privacy Policy |Nondiscrimination Statement |Information Quality |USA.gov |White House

**
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23809]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-504-000]


Southern Natural Gas Company; Notice of GSR Cost Recovery Filing

September 3, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 29, 1997, Southern Natural Gas Company 
(Southern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets with the proposed 
effective date of October 1, 1997.

Tariff Sheets Applicable to Contesting Parties

Thirty-Second Revised Sheet No. 14
Fifty-Third Revised Sheet No. 15
Thirty-Second Revised Sheet No. 16
Fifty-Third Revised Sheet No. 17
Twenty-Ninth Revised Sheet No. 18
Thirty-Fifth Revised Sheet No. 29

Tariff Sheets Applicable to Supporting Parties

Seventeenth Revised Sheet No. 14a
Twenty-Third Revised Sheet No. 15a
Seventeenth Revised Sheet No. 16a
Twenty-Third Revised Sheet No. 17a

    Southern sets forth in the filing its revised demand surcharges and 
revised interruptible rates that will be charged in connection with its 
recovery of GSR costs associated with the payment of price differential 
costs under unrealigned gas supply contracts as well as sales function 
costs during the period May 1, 1997 through July 31, 1997. These GSR 
costs have arisen as adirect result of customers' elections during 
restructuring to terminate their sales entitlements under Order No. 
636.
    Southern states that copies of the filing were served upon 
Southern's customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure. All such motions or protests must be filed 
in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of Southern's filing are on file 
with the Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23809 Filed 9-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
EXHIBIT
32.1

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

In connection with the Annual
Report of Image Sensing System, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the Report), I, Kenneth R. Aubrey, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| |    |                                                                                                                                                       
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1. | The Report
 fully 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 Company.

| |                                       
| | --------------------------------------
| | /s/ Kenneth
 R. Aubrey                
| |                                       
| | Kenneth R.
 Aubrey                    
| | President
 and Chief Executive Officer
| | March 6, 2008                         

---
## IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

══════════ 

### No. 1 8

- 0 431

══════════


### T ARRANT 

### C OUNTY 

### , T EXAS 

### , P ETITIONER 

### ,

v. 

### R ODERICK 

### L YDELL 

### B ONNER 

### , R ESPONDENT

══════════════════ ════════════════════════ O N P ETITION FOR R EVIEW FROM THE C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE S ECOND D ISTRICT OF T EXAS

══════════════════ ════════════════════════
J USTICE B OYD , concurring. I agree with the Court that (1) Bonner’s claims arise from the County’s conduct “in
connection with” an inmate t reatment activity and (2) no evidence exists that the County acted intentionally, with willful or wanton negligence, or with conscious indifference or reckless disregard for the safety of others. See T EX

. C RIM

. P ROC

. C ODE § 42.20(a); T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE § 497.096. But I do not agree that (1) conscious indifference is “the same as” gross negligence or (2) a person cannot be consciously indifferent to a risk that is less than “extreme.” Ante at __; see Transp. Ins. Co. v. Moriel , 879 S.W.2d 10, 21 (Tex. 1 994) (explaining that for gross negligence to exist, “the defendant must be ‘consciously indifferent’ and his or her conduct must ‘create an extreme degree of risk’”) (emphasis added) (quoting Williams v. Steves Indus., Inc. , 699 S.W.2d 570, 573 (Tex. 1985 )). 1 And I would not address whether the Tort Claims Act waives the County’s

1 See also T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE § 41.001(11) (defining gross negligence as an act or omission that (1) objectively “involves an extreme degree of risk” and (2) the actor proceeds to perform “with conscious indifference” despite an “actual, subjective awareness of the risk”).2

immunity from a claim based on the County storing the chair in the multipurpose room because (as the Court explains) Bonner does not assert that claim. Ante at __. I respectfully concur in the Court’s judgment.

_____________________ Jeffrey S. Boyd Justice

Opinion delivered: May 24, 201 9
#### Vernetta Joyce HOEVENER, Appellant, v. George H. GORE, as Ancillary Administrator c. t. a. of the Estate of Ralph F. Hoevener, Deceased, and United Home Life Insurance Company, an Indiana corporation, Appellees.

No. 69-495.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Dec. 11, 1969.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; O. Edgar Williams, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Technological Change and Its Labor Impact in Five Energy Industries: Coal Mining, Oil and Gas Extraction, Petroleum Refining, Petroleum Pipeline Transportation, Electric and Gas Utilities

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Technological Change and Its Labor Impact in Five Energy Industries: Coal Mining, Oil and Gas Extraction, Petroleum Refining, Petroleum Pipeline Transportation, Electric and Gas Utilities : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 2005*,												Washington, D.C: 								U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 										April 1979,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4853,			accessed on September 5, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### In re James ROBINSON v. STATE of Alabama. Ex parte James Robinson.

77-577.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 21, 1978.

Gary R. Maxwell, Dothan, for petitioner.

No brief for the State, respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This case is before us on petition for writ of certiorari filed by petitioner seeking a reversal of the Court of Criminal Appeals’ affirmance of his conviction, 361 So.2d 379.

Although the Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion does not indicate the precise manner in which the issue of *probable cause*arose, there does not appear to be any factual dispute on this issue. We have gone to the record for a more complete understanding of this feature of that court’s opinion as we are permitted to do under our decisions. See *Wilbanks*v. *State,*289 Ala. 171, 266 So.2d 632 (1972); Crim.Law, *Ala. Dig.*&wkey;1179.

We have found that *probable cause*was made an issue in the court below by petitioner’s counsel himself, who objected to the introduction of the fruits of a search unless probable cause is laid. Counsel for petitioner made no motion to exclude the jury during the time probable cause was being laid, although this is undoubtedly the best practice. Thus, petitioner cannot be heard to complain now.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and BLOODWORTH, FAULKNER, ALMON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.
# Jornal Oficial C 83I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-1010 |
| --- | --- |
| Jornal Oficial
  da União Europeia | C 083I |
| | |
| Edição em língua portuguesa | Comunicações e Informações | 64.° ano12 de março de 2021 |

ISSN 1977-1010

Jornal Oficial

da União Europeia

C 083I

Edição em língua portuguesa

Comunicações e Informações

64.° ano12 de março de 2021

---

| Índice | Página |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Informações |
| | INFORMAÇÕES DOS ESTADOS-MEMBROS |
| 2021/C 83 I/01 | Informações comunicadas pelos Estados-Membros a respeito do encerramento da pesca | 1 |

Índice

Página

IV   Informações

INFORMAÇÕES DOS ESTADOS-MEMBROS

2021/C 83 I/01

Informações comunicadas pelos Estados-Membros a respeito do encerramento da pesca

1

---

| PT | |
| --- | --- |

PT

---

IV Informações

INFORMAÇÕES DOS ESTADOS-MEMBROS

| 12.3.2021 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | CI 83/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2021

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

CI 83/1

---

Informações comunicadas pelos Estados-Membros a respeito do encerramento da pesca

(2021/C 83 I/01)

Em conformidade com o artigo 35.o, n.o 3, do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1224/2009 do Conselho, de 20 de novembro de 2009, que institui um regime de controlo da União a fim de assegurar o cumprimento das regras da política comum das pescas (1), foi decidido encerrar a pesca como indicado no quadro seguinte:

| Data e hora do encerramento | 24.12.2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Duração | 24.12.2020 – 31.12.2020 |
| Estado-Membro | Portugal |
| Unidade populacional ou grupo de unidades populacionais | ALB/AN05N |
| Espécie | Atum-voador do Norte (Thunnus alalunga) |
| Zona | Oceano Atlântico, a norte de 5o N |
| Tipos de navio de pesca | --- |
| Número de referência | 40/TQ123 |

Data e hora do encerramento

24.12.2020

Duração

24.12.2020 – 31.12.2020

Estado-Membro

Portugal

Unidade populacional ou grupo de unidades populacionais

ALB/AN05N

Espécie

Atum-voador do Norte (Thunnus alalunga)

Zona

Oceano Atlântico, a norte de 5o N

Tipos de navio de pesca

---

Número de referência

40/TQ123

---

(1)  JO L 343 de 22.12.2009, p. 1.

---
SECOND
AMENDMENT TO


EXECUTIVE
SUPPLEMENTAL COMPENSATION AGREEMENT





This
Second Amendment to Executive Supplemental Compensation Agreement is entered
into as of January 23, 2009, by and between Valley Business Bank, a California
banking corporation (formerly known as Bank of Visalia) (the “Bank”) and Donald
A. Gilles (“Executive”).




RECITALS





A.           The
Bank and Executive are parties to that certain Executive Supplemental
Compensation Agreement dated as of March 1, 2002, as amended by that certain
Amendment dated as of December 31, 2008 (collectively, the “Original
Agreement”).  Capitalized terms used in this Second Amendment without
definition shall have the meanings given such terms in the Original
Agreement.





B.           Valley
Commerce Bancorp, the parent company of the Bank, anticipates that it will
participate in the United States Treasury Department’s TARP Capital Purchase
Program (the “CPP”).  For purposes of this Second Amendment, the “CPP
Covered Period” shall mean any period during which (i) Executive is a senior
executive officer and (ii) the Treasury Department holds an equity or debt
position acquired from Valley Commerce Bancorp in the CPP.





C.           The
CPP imposes certain limits on the amount of benefits that may be paid to
Executive under the Original Agreement.  The parties desire to amend
the Original Agreement to preserve certain of the benefits to Executive under
the Original Agreement.





NOW,
THEREFORE, the parties agree to the following:





1.           Amendment.  The
following amendment of Section 1.2 of the Original Agreement shall be effective
during the CPP Covered Period.  During the CPP Covered Period, Section
1.2 is amended in its entirety to read as follows:





1.2           Applicable
Percentage.  The term “Applicable Percentage” shall mean that
percentage listed on Schedule “A” attached hereto which is adjacent to the
number of calendar years which shall have elapsed from the date of this
Agreement and ending on the date the Executive terminates employment with the
Bank.  Notwithstanding the foregoing or the percentages set forth on
Schedule “A”, but subject to all other terms and conditions set forth herein,
the “Applicable Percentage” shall be:  one hundred percent (100%) upon
the occurrence of a Change in Control, or the Executive’s Disability, or the
Executive’s death.









2.           No Further
Modification.  Except as expressly provided in this Second
Amendment, the Original Agreement remains unmodified and in full force and
effect.  In the event of a conflict between the provisions of the
Original Agreement and this Second Amendment, the provisions of this Second
Amendment shall control.




The
parties have executed this Second Amendment as of the date set forth
above.




EXECUTIVE:
            
            BANK:Valley
      Business Bank, a California/s/
      Donald A. Gilles
            
            banking
      corporationDonald
      A. GillesBy:
            /s/
      Roy O. EstridgeName:
            Roy
      O. EstridgeTitle:
            EVP
      / Chief Financial Officer