alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 3052-003]

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR Part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for license for the Black River Falls Hydroelectric Project, located on the Black River in Jackson County, Wisconsin, and has prepared a Scoping Document 1 (SD1) for the project. The project does not occupy federal lands.

Copies of the SD1 are available for review at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 208-1371. The SD1 may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call (202) 208-2222 for assistance).

Any comments (an original and eight copies) should be filed by November 16, 2000 and should be addressed to David P. Boergers, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. For further information, contact Susan O'Brien at (202) 219-2840. Beginning November 1, 2000, comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-27093 Filed 10-20-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
From:	Schaffner, Karen S. <ksschaffner@rti.org>
Sent:	Monday, June 08, 2009 2:23 PM
To:	'warren.dean@siemens.com'
Subject:	NOx Chapters:  Siemens TDL NH3 slip

Good Afternoon, Mr. Dean:  Thank you very much for the information on Siemens TDL ammonia 
monitoring system you shared today.  I have included a summary of our discussion below and 
hopefully I understood you clearly.  Please feel free to correct me or expand on.  Thank you, 
Karen Schaffner

The Siemens TDL for ammonia monitoring is in place at approximately 90 to 100 full-scale coal-
fired units in the U.S.  Facilities measure NH3 slip concentration after the SCR (and SNCR) and 
before the air heater.  Some facilities measure at up to 3 points in the duct between the SCR and 
AH (for example, at 10 foot distances) to account for or eliminate any stratification.  The Siemens 
TDL unit has a capital cost of approximately $40,000 for one point of measurement; 
measurement at three points could be up to $70,000 for capital cost.



Karen Schaffner
Air Quality Engineering Group
RTI International
3040 Cornwallis Rd (800 Park, C311)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
phone:  (919) 316 3740
fax:  (919) 541 7155
**Exhibit 12.3****CERTIFICATIONS**          I, Akihiro Nojiri, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of NIS Group Co., Ltd. (the “Company”); 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 includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have: (e) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the Company, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  (f) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or causedsuch internal control over financial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability offinancial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  (g) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered bythis report based on such evaluation; and  (h) Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annualreport that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the Company’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the Company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (c) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (d) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date:September 28, 2007      **NIS GROUP CO., LTD.**
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 09345

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name Description

x 09345\09345_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

09345\09345_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

09345\09345_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 09345\09345_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09345\09345_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09345\09345_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09345\09345_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09345\09345_Part E.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09345\09345_Part F.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09345\09345_Part G.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09345\09345_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

09345\Certification Statement Plant ID 09345.pdf Plant certification statement

x 09345\Supplemental Documents\09345_BBSES Monitoring Wells_1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 09345\Supplemental Documents\09345_BBSES Monitoring Wells_2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 09345\Supplemental Documents\09345_BBSES Monitoring Wells_3.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

09345\Supplemental Documents\09345_Big Brown Plant Area Map.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

09345\Supplemental Documents\09345_Big Brown Property Map-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 09345\Supplemental Documents\09345_WB-1 BBSES_Water Balance.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

09345\09345_Cover Letter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
Internet Capital Group







Exhibit 10.1






Internet Capital Group



2006 Bonus Plan






 



The Board of Directors of Internet Capital Group, Inc. (together with its wholly-owned subsidiaries, the "Company") hereby establishes this 2006 Bonus Plan (this "Plan").  The purpose of the Plan is to advance the interests of the Company's stockholders by providing certain employees with bonus payments upon achievement of Company-specific 2006 goals and individual goals, as well as to help the Company attract and retain key employees.  The Company's executive officers and other regular, full-time employees are eligible to participate in the Plan.  






The Compensation Committee of the Company's Board of Directors (the "Committee") shall administer and interpret the Plan.   All decisions and determinations of the Committee with respect to the Plan shall be final and binding on all parties.  






The Company's 2006 goals include quantitative and qualitative goals.  The relative weighting of each element of the Company-specific goals is described below.  






Eighty percent of the bonus potential related to Company goals is tied to accomplishment of quantitative goals.  Realization of a specified increase in the aggregate value of the Company's Core partner companies accounts for 50% of the potential bonus award.  Achievement of a specified increase in the aggregate value of the Company's other assets accounts for a total of 10% of the potential bonus award.  Twenty percent of the potential bonus award relates to the effective deployment of capital.  






Twenty percent of the bonus is tied to execution against the following qualitative goals: (1) improvement in communicating the value of the Company's underlying assets, (2) building the ICG brand, (3) performance and effectiveness of partner company executives, (4) reaction to unforeseen market/business conditions and (5) overall execution of strategic initiatives.  






Following the end of the Company's fiscal year, the Committee will evaluate the Company's 2006 performance and determine the extent to which the Company's 2006 goals and individual goals were achieved.  Based upon this assessment, the Committee will award bonuses in accordance with the terms of this Plan.
(LOGO) KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP


233 South 13th Street, Suite 1600
Lincoln, NE 68508-2041

Two Central Park Plaza
Suite 1501
Omaha, NE 68102

                         INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT

The Board of Directors
Farmers State Bank & Trust Co. of Superior:

We have examined management's  assertion about Farmers State Bank & Trust Co. of
Superior's (the Bank) compliance with the minimum servicing  standards set forth
in the Mortgage  Bankers  Association of America's  UNIFORM  SINGLE  ATTESTATION
PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS (USAP), except for minimum servicing standards V.4
and VI. 1, which the MBA has interpreted as being  inapplicable to the servicing
of commercial and multi-family  loans, as of and for the year ended December 31,
1997,  included  in  the  accompanying   management  assertion.   Management  is
responsible for the Bank's  compliance with those minimum  servicing  standards.
Our responsibility, is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the
Bank's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test  basis,  evidence  about the  Bank's  compliance  with the
minimum  servicing   standards  and  performing  such  other  procedures  as  we
considered  necessary,  in the  circumstances.  We believe that our  examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a
legal  determination  on  the  Bank's  compliance  with  the  minimum  servicing
standards.

In  our  opinion,  management's  assertion  that  the  Bank  complied  with  the
aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended December
31, 1997 is fairly stated, it all material respects.

March 12, 1998                                  /s/ KPMB Peat Marwick LLP
#### YOUNG v. GOERIG et al.

No. 12721.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Galveston.

March 11, 1954.

E. W. Bruce, Baytown, and Gene Bruce, Houston, for appellant.

A. H. Krichamer and Murray B. Jones, Houston, for appellee.

HAMBLEN, Chief Justice.

Appellant has filed herein his motion asking this Court to direct its clerk to file his transcript tendered for filing on February 19, 1954.

The motion reflects that Glen D. Young as plaintiff in the' trial court filed therein a motion for summary judgment under the provisions of Rule 166-A, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Such motion was denied by the trial court, and from such order this appeal is sought. The question presented therefore is whether an order denying a motion for summary judgment is a final appealable judgment of the trial court. We have concluded that it is not.

The question has been passed upon only inferentially by an appellate court in this State. In Mellette v. Hudstan Oil Corp., Tex.Civ.App., 243 S.W.2d 438 at page 440, the El Paso Court of Civil Appeals expresses the same view that we have reached. However, since the point was not, in that case, essential to the determination of the question then before the court, it is insisted that that opinion is not authority for the proposition.

The source of Rule 166-A, as promulgated by the Supreme Court of Texas, is Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 56, 28 U.S.C.A. That rule, which is substantially identical to our own, has been frequently interpreted by the Federal courts, the procedure of which it governs. The combined effect of the Federal decisions, in so far as the question here presented is concerned, is that the refusal of summary judgment is not a “final judgment” as the case still stands for regular trial, so that no appeal lies from such refusal. Jones v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 108 F.2d 123; Atlantic Co. v. Citizens Ice & Cold Storage Co., 5 Cir., 178 F.2d 453.

We consider the conclusions reached in the cited cases and the reasoning supporting the same to be correct, and accordingly refuse appellant’s motion now presented, and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Order filed August 11, 2020

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 20

- 00138

- CV

____________ GARY MILBURN , Appellant

V.

10445 GREENS CROSSING LP D/B/A SUTTER RANCH APARTMENTS , Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at La w No

. 1

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1148611



### O R D E R
Appellant’ s brief was due July 29, 2020

. No brief or motion for extension of
time has been filed.
Unless appellant files a brief with this court on or before August 28. 2020
, the cour t will d ismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Spain, Hassan, and Poissant.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.  SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002*





In connection with the Annual Report of Martin Midstream Partners L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Partnership”), on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Ruben S. Martin, Chief Executive Officer of Martin Midstream GP LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my knowledge:





(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 Partnership.





/s/ Ruben S. MartinRuben S. Martin,Chief Executive Officer of Martin Midstream GP LLC,General Partner of Martin Midstream Partners L.P.March 29, 2018





*A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 199 (Friday, October 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26370]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to section 1301.33(a) of Title 21 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on August 11, 2000, B.I. 
Chemical, Inc., 2820 N. Normandy Drive, Petersburg, Virginia 23805, 
made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration 
(DEA) for registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of 
controlled substances listed below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphetamine (1100).........................  II
Methadone (9250)...........................  II
Methadone-intermediate (9254)..............  II
Levo-alphacetylmethadol (LAAM) (9648)......  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The firm plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substances 
for formulation into finished pharmaceuticals.
    Any other such applicant and any person who is presently registered 
with DEA to manufacture such substance may file comments or objections 
to the issuance of the proposed registration.
    Any such comments or objections may be addressed, in quintuplicate, 
to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, 
Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice, 
Washington, DC 20537, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative 
(CCR), and must be filed no later than December 12, 2000.

    Dated: September 28, 2000.
John H. King,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-26370 Filed 10-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
May 12, 2005


Mr. Stephen P. Rolf
Marlton Technologies, Inc.
2828 Charter Road
Philadelphia, PA 19154

Re:  Employment Agreement dated November 24, 1999

Dear Steve:

      Confirming the actions of the Compensation Committee of the Board of
Directors of Marlton Technologies, Inc. ("Company"):

      Effective August 1, 2004, your annual base salary was increased to
$140,000.

      For 2004, you were awarded a discretionary bonus of $12,000.

      The provisions of your Employment Agreement relating to the above subject
matter are superseded by this amendment; otherwise the Employment Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms and shall
constitute the legal, valid and binding agreement of the Company.


                                       ---------------------------------
                                       Richard Vague
                                       Chairman of Compensation Committee

Agreed this _____ day of May, 2005.


----------------------------------
         Stephen P. Rolf
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3126 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3126

 To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to prohibit a 
  government subsidy for the purchase of a health plan by a Member of 
                               Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 2013

 Mr. Fincher introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to prohibit a 
  government subsidy for the purchase of a health plan by a Member of 
                               Congress.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Healthcare Fairness Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. NO HEALTH CARE SUBSIDIES FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

    Section 1312(d)(3)(D) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care 
Act (42 U.S.C. 18032(d)(3)(D)) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iii); and
            (2) by inserting after clause (i) the following new clause:
                            ``(ii) No premium assistance for members of 
                        congress.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
                        of law or any regulation or guidance 
                        promulgated by the Director of the Office of 
                        Personnel Management, no Federal funds shall be 
                        expended to pay any portion of the premium for 
                        a health plan purchased by a Member of Congress 
                        pursuant to clause (i).''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit
      10.11

    


    


    DESCRIPTION
      OF PERFORMANCE SHARE PROGRAM

    


    


    The
      performance share program provides annual awards for the achievement of
      pre-established long-term strategic initiatives and annual financial performance
      of the Company. With respect to the Chairman, President and Chief Executive
      Officer of Ingersoll-Rand Company Limited, the
      number
      of performance share program awards granted are based upon a combination of
      financial objectives and strategic objectives, including the Company’s
      performance as well as his individual performance. For all other participants
      in
      the performance share program, the
      number
      of performance share program awards granted are based solely on enterprise
      financial objectives rather than a combination of those financial objectives
      and
      strategic objectives. The amount of any performance share program awards is
      discretionary and is subject to general guidelines.