alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE> 1

               SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                     Washington, D.C.  20549


                          FORM 10-K/A



       ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                  SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
            For the fiscal year ended December 31, 1999


Purpose:  To supplement in part Part IV, Item 14(c) of Company's
          previously filed Form 10-K in order to file as an
          exhibit the Annual Servicing Report of Company's
          Independent Public Accountants.


                   Comission File Nos. 0-23942

         HOUSEHOLD AFFINITY CREDIT CARD MASTER TRUST I
     (Exact name of Registrant as specified in Department
      of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service Form SS-4)


HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION
(Servicer of the Trust)
(Exact name as specified in Servicer's charter)



            DELAWARE                      36-3670374
(State or other jurisdiction of   (I.R.S. Employer Identification
incorporation of Servicer)        Number of Registrant



 2700 SANDERS ROAD, PROSPECT HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS         60070
(Address of principal executive offices of           (Zip Code)
Servicer)


Servicer's telephone number, including area code  (847) 564-5000


<PAGE>
<PAGE> 2

                       SIGNATURES




     Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Servicer has duly caused this
report to be signed on behalf of the Household Affinity Credit Card
Master Trust I by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.




                          HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION,
                         as Servicer of and on behalf of the

                     HOUSEHOLD AFFINITY CREDIT CARD MASTER TRUST I
                                    (Registrant)




Date: May 5, 2000         By: /s/ John W. Blenke
                              John W. Blenke
                               Assistant Secretary












<PAGE>
<PAGE> 3

                           Exhibit Index


Exhibit No.    Exhibit

99          Copy of Independent Public Accountants Annual Servicing
            Reported dated March 28, 2000.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3320 

To provide that an individual may not serve as an employee in the executive 

branch for longer than 12 years, except for Presidential appointees, 

law enforcement officers, members of the military, and employees of 

the Department of Defense. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 15, 2023 

Mr. MARSHALL (for himself and Mr. SCHMITT) introduced the following bill; 

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

A BILL 

To provide that an individual may not serve as an employee 

in the executive branch for longer than 12 years, except 

for Presidential appointees, law enforcement officers, 

members of the military, and employees of the Department of Defense. 

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 ‘‘Tenure Evaluation and 

5 Rotation Mandate Act’’ or the ‘‘TERM Act’’. 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3320 IS

1 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON TERM OF SERVICE IN THE EXECU2 TIVE BRANCH. 

3 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

4 (1) AGENCY.—The term ‘‘agency’’ means an 

5 agency, establishment, office, or other appointing au6 thority in the executive branch of the Government of 

7 the United States. 

8 (2) POSITION.—The term ‘‘position’’— 

9 (A) means a position as an employee of an 

10 agency; and 

11 (B) does not include— 

12 (i) a position for which appointment is 

13 made by the President; 

14 (ii) a position as a law enforcement 

15 officer; 

16 (iii) a position as a member of an 

17 Armed Force; or 

18 (iv) a position in the civil service in 

19 the Department of Defense. 

20 (b) LIMITATION.—Notwithstanding any other provi21 sion of law or regulation, an individual may not serve for 

22 a total of more than 12 years in 1 or more positions. 

23 (c) APPLICATION TO CURRENT EMPLOYEES.— 

24 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), an 

25 individual serving in a position on the date of enact26 ment of this Act who has served for a total of not 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3320 IS

1 less than 9 years in 1 or more positions may not 

2 serve in a position on or after the date that is 3 

3 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

4 (2) RULE FOR SEPARATION FROM SERVICE.— 

5 An individual serving in a position on the date of en6 actment of this Act who has served for a total of not 

7 less than 9 years in 1 or more positions and who 

8 separates from service before the date that is 3 

9 years after the date of enactment of this Act may 

10 not serve in a position on or after the date on which 

11 the individual has served in a position for a total of 

12 not less than 12 years. 

Æ 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM STATIA
TERMINALS GROUP N.V.'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         13,400
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  18,352
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (804)
<INVENTORY>                                    1,964
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               34,184
<PP&E>                                         235,922
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (27,836)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 245,390
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          26,131
<BONDS>                                        101,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       114
<OTHER-SE>                                     116,942
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   245,390
<SALES>                                        74,664
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               122,992
<CGS>                                          66,336
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  99,327
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               10,850
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             11,113
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,386
<INCOME-TAX>                                   548
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (419)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (4,743)
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,162)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.21)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 16.1
                                                                    ------------




                      [McGladrey & Pullen, LLP letterhead]




                               September 21, 1999


Mr. James K. McHugh
Chief Financial Officer
N-Viro International Corporation
3450 West Central Avenue, Suite 328
Toledo, OH   43606

Dear Mr. McHugh:

This is to confirm that the client-auditor relationship between N-Viro
International Corporation (Commission File Number 0-21802), and McGladrey &
Pullen, LLP has ceased.

                                   Sincerely,




                                  /s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
                                  ---------------------------

                                  McGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP




cc:      Office of the Chief Accountant
         SECPS Letter File
         Securities and Exchange Commission
         Mail Stop 11-3
         450 Fifth Street, N.W.
         Washington, DC  20549
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 202 (Monday, October 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 54433]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27803]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, November 28, 1997.

PLACE: 1155 21st St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-27803 Filed 10-16-97; 1:13 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
#### Elijah BIVENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-15.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 25, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
How Healthy is

Your Road System?

Find out with systemic analysis

Systemic analysis is like a health screening for your road system. Just as 

your doctor identifies risk factors for illness, systemic analysis identifies 

locations that are at highest risk for severe crashes. Practitioners can then

prioritize projects based on risk and apply low-cost safety treatments to

reduce severe crashes across the whole at-risk system.

Symptoms

Severe roadway departure crashes 

 on curves.

Possible Risk Factors:

Avg. Daily Traffic > 1,000 vehicles

Curve Radius < 1,000 feet 

Intersection within Curve

Visual Trap within Curve

Severe Crash within Curve

Diagnosis

11% of all curves have 3 or more 

risk factors. 

Lab Results:

Curve A

Curve B

Curve C

Curve D

Curve E

Treatment

Prioritize highest risk sites and treat with low-cost 

countermeasures such as chevron signs or rumble strips.

Follow-Up

Track and evaluate safety improvements. Further 

remediation can be implemented as needed.

Systemic vs.

Systemwide

Systemic does not mean

treating all locations.

It allows agencies to 

treat the highest-risk sites

within limited budgets.

For more information visit

www.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/systemic/

FHWA-SA-21-118
#### Ellis SATCHELL, Appellant, v. Derrick V. VAN BRODE, Appellee.

No. 70-649.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 27, 1971.

Rehearing Denied June 9, 1971.

Edward C. Vining, Jr. and R. M. MacArthur, Miami, for appellant.

*246Arthur Rothfenberg, Michael S. Hacker, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., HENDRY, J., and MANN, ROBERT T., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff-appellee Van Brode (“Buyer”) sued defendant-appellant Satchell (“Seller”) for return of a $500.00 earnest money deposit on a written purchase-sale agreement for a residence owned by the Seller for $28,000.00. The Seller counterclaimed for damages for breach of the agreement. A final judgment in a non-jury trial awarded the Buyer his $500.00 earnest money deposit and denied recovery on the Seller’s counterclaim.

The contract, which was not drafted by an attorney, contained no provisions for what was to be the disposition of the deposit in the event of a breach.

The instant appeal presents the following threshold question: Where a contract for the purchase of real property fails to contain a liquidated damages provision, may the defaulting purchaser recover his $500.00 earnest money deposit? We express the view that the' case is governed by the following rule, which is stated in Beatty v. Flannery, Fla. 1950, 49 So.2d 81, 82:

> “It is well settled that, even in the absence of such a forfeiture provision, a vendee in default is hot entitled to recover from the vendor money paid in part performance of an executory contract.” (Citations omitted.)

Accord: Haas v. Crisp Realty Co., Fla. 1953, 65 So.2d 765, 768-769. We note that there are exceptions to the rule quoted, and they are adequately discussed in the cases cited; the exceptions do not apply here.

The appellant Seller contends that an adverse judgment on his counterclaim is erroneous. Here, the court sat without a jury and determined the facts, and his findings are clothed with a presumption of correctness. Reversible error not having been demonstrated, that portion of the final judgment is affirmed.

For the reasons stated, that portion of the final judgment awarding $500.00 to the plaintiff-appellee Van Brode, the buyer, is reversed.

Reversed in part and affirmed in part.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7459

LAKEITH BYRON BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusALTON BASKERVILLE; G. WASHINGTON; E. BARKSDALE; T. RAY; S. HILL; A. JOHNSON; E. GRAHAM; L. CEI; S. MCNAMARA; R. BARLOW; T. NEUMAYER; S. V. PREUTTE; R. HILDEBRAND, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-01-10) Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 20, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lakeith Byorn Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Lakeith Byron Brown appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Brown v. Baskerville , No. CA-01-10 (E.D. Va. June 28, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
p. 1 

# 01~~17-- 203-00/~ 

# C -

# PONT 3,> 0 ~'i I

DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts

Chambers Works Deepwater, NJ 08023

October 14, 2010 Document Control Office US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics EPAEast Room 6428 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Re: EPA- HQ- OPPT - 2003 - 0012 DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No
. NJ0005100 PFOA Data Submittal - Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples July / August 2010 Sample Data Dear Document Control Office: As per Part IV, Section G .5.a of the NJPDES permit, we are submitting a summary of PFOA analytical results for the weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662Ato NJDEP on a monthly basis

. Per your request, we are sending you a paper and electronic copy of the report for samples taken during July and August 2010
. We will continue to send you the reports each month . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (856) 540-3015
.

Joe Greenfield SHE Consultant - Environmental DuPont Chambers Works Enclosures



## CONTAINS NOCSICopies to:

Director, Chemical Control Division US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics EPA East Room4146 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 Ms
. Susan Rosenwinkel (cover letter only) Principal Environmental Engineer NJDEP Division ofWater Quality Bureau of Point Source Permitting - Region 2 401 E
. State Street P.O
. Box 029 Trenton, NJ 08625-0029
**Exhibit
      13.1**




**CERTIFICATION**


**Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**


**(Subsections
      (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
      Code)**




Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
      undersigned officers of Grupo Radio Centro, S.A.B. de C.V., a *sociedad
      anónima bursátil de capital variable* organized
      under the laws of Mexico (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s
      knowledge, that:




The
      Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the
      “Form 20-F”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained
      in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
                June 30, 2008
            /s/
                Carlos Aguirre G.Carlos
                Aguirre G.
              Director
                General, Chief Executive OfficerDate:
                June 30, 2008
            /s/
                Pedro Beltrán NasrPedro
                Beltrán Nasr
              Chief
                Financial Officer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 199 (Wednesday, October 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 53627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27268]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-5908-9]


Amendment to Notice of Proposed Administrative Settlement 
Pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; add names to the list of settling parties.

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

SUMMARY: The September 22, 1997, notice concerning the proposed 
settlement at the Marco of Iota Superfund Site in Iota, Louisiana (62 
FR 49514) included a list of settling parties. Three federal de 
micromis parties who settled pursuant to the ``Superfund Administrative 
Reforms'' (at no cost to the parties) were inadvertently excluded from 
the list.
    The excluded settlers are:

United States Department of Defense/Department of the Air Force
United States Department of Interior/Golden Spike National Historic 
Site
United States Department of Justice/Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal 
Prison Ind., Inc.

    Any comments regarding the additional parties must be submitted on 
or before October 22, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Bolden, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, 
Texas, 75202-2733 at (214) 665-6713.

    October 3, 1997.
Jerry Clifford,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-27268 Filed 10-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
#### Edna GEORGE, Appellant, v. Alfred GUSTINGER, Jr., Appellee.

No. 77-534.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 11, 1977.

Daniel E. Scott, Sarasota, for appellant.

Alfred Gustinger, Jr., pro se.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and HUBBART, JJ.

HENDRY, Chief Judge.

Appellant, defendant below, brings this interlocutory appeal from an order of the trial court which, *inter alia,*denied her “amended motion to abate” for improper venue.

Appellee, plaintiff below, filed a complaint for declaratory judgment in the Circuit Court of Dade County, in which he sought a determination of his rights in certain real property located in Manatee County which was given to him by appellant as payment for legal services furnished to one Fred John Roti. Appellant, by motion, sought to have venue transferred to the Circuit Court of Manatee County on the ground that the complaint filed by appellee was, in substance, a suit to quiet title to the realty. The trial court denied the motion and this appeal follows.

After carefully reviewing the allegations contained in the complaint in conjunction with the relief sought by appellee, it is our opinion that the trial judge erred in not transferring the case to the Circuit Court of Manatee County.

While appellee, relying upon the case of *Croker v. Powell,*115 Fla. 733, 156 So. 146 (1934), contends that the gravamen of the complaint is a *determination of his rights*to certain real property resulting from a breach of an employment contract which *575allegedly occurred in Dade County, the allegations of the complaint reveal that by virtue of a prior transfer made by appellant, appellee *already has*record title to the property.

In addition, the relief prayed for by ap-pellee is clearly of the kind sought in quiet title actions, to-wit:

> “WHEREFORE, the plaintiff petitions the Court for declaratory judgment as follows:

> “1. That the Plaintiff herein be declared to have clear title to said property in accordance with Exhibits A & B.”

It is our opinion therefore, that the order appealed from must be reversed and remanded with directions to transfer the cause to the Circuit Court of Manatee County, in accordance with the rule that actions to quiet title must be brought in the county where the land lies. *Hendry Corporation*v. *State Board of Trustees of Internal Improvement Trust Fund,*313 So.2d 453 (Fla.2d DCA 1975).

Reversed and remanded with directions.
EXHIBIT 12.1: CERTIFICATION OF THE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT & GENERAL MANAGER
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Samuel Rubinstein, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Taro Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe company and have:
a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this reportis being prepared;
b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and
c. Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: June 29, 2005 By:  /s/ Samuel Rubinstein    Samuel Rubinstein    Senior Vice President & General Manager