alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FW:Revised Agenda for Navajo Nation Revised Agenda for Navajo Nation Revised Agenda for Navajo Nation /EPA Consultation on Four Corners EPA Consultation on Four Corners EPA Consultation on Four Corners 

-Wed.June13th

Stephen B. Stephen B.Etsitty Etsitty Etsitty to: Colleen McKaughan, Teddy Ryerson, 

Anita Lee 06/11/2012 01:01 PM

Cc: Michelle Morris, Eugenia Quintana

History: This message has been forwarded.

Hello. I want to let you know that the NN President, and the rest of the NN BART Team are expecting to 

hear USEPA Region 9's explanation of how the NN comments to the ANPRM, the Proposed Rule, the 

Supplement Rule will be considered in the forthcoming Final Rule.

The Draft Agenda list an "EPA Overview of Navajo Input on Four Corners," and this does not clearly 

indicate that USEPA will provide the expected explanations.

Michele Morris - will convey any other Agenda changes.

SBE

From: Michele L. Morris

Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 6:40 PM

To: Stephen B. Etsitty; Eugenia Quintana; Greg Kelly; Sherrick Roanhorse; Sam Woods; alaughing; 

Alberta Laughing

Subject: Fw: Revised Agenda for Navajo Nation/EPA Consultation on Four Corners - Wed. June 13th

Hi, Michele,

Here is the revised agenda based on our conversation this afternoon. I also left you a voicemail. Please 

let us know if this agenda covers all the issues that the President would like to discuss next Wednesday . 

We appreciate the opportunity to meet with you and look forward to our discussion next week .

Consultation between Navajo Nation and EPA on Four Corners Power Plant

June 13, 2012

9 - 11 AM
San Francisco, CA

Draft Agenda

 Welcome, introductions, and opening remarks by Navajo Nation and EPA

 EPA Overview of Navajo Input on Four Corners

 Update on Four Corners BART Rulemaking

 Economic Impacts to Navajo Nation of the BART Alternative 

 Updates on Permitting Actions related to Four Corners Power Plant 

 Update on EIS/NEPA process for Four Corners and Navajo Mine

 Closing Remarks 

Colleen W. McKaughan

Associate Director, Air Division

USEPA, Region 9

(520) 498-0118
#### Lyons, Appellant, *v.*Gill, State Fire Marshal, Appellee.

(No. 28178

Decided June 12, 1940.)

*151
      *Mr. Edgar Ervin,*for appellant.

*Mr. Thomas J. Herbert,*attorney general, and *Mr. Howard Bernstein,*for appellee.

It is ordered and adjudged that said appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, Williams, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          16,391
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   47,931
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,715
<INVENTORY>                                     25,230
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                92,197
<PP&E>                                         120,977
<DEPRECIATION>                                  40,101
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 231,064
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,922
<BONDS>                                         91,105
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           125
<OTHER-SE>                                      69,612
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   231,064
<SALES>                                        146,496
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               172,815
<CGS>                                          148,443
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  160,348
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   120
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,067
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,219
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,848
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,848
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.50


</TABLE>
Exhibit 4.9
 
 Summary of Construction Contract with Shanghai Gong Ze Steel Structure Co, Ltd.
 
 On September 29, 2009, Shanghai Jinpan Electric Co. Ltd. (the “Company”) entered into an agreement (“Agreement”) with Shanghai Gong Ze Steel Structure Co. Ltd. (the “Contractor”) for the construction of the steel frames for two factory buildings in the Company’s Shanghai facility.
 
 According to the Agreement, the Contractor agreed to commence construction on both factory buildings on September 29, 2010 and to complete work prior to December 25, 2009.
 
 The total price of the Agreement is RMB 5.0 Million, inclusive of labor and materials, payable in several installments depending on the progress of the construction. Forty percent (40%), or RMB 2 million, is due upon the signing of the Agreement.  Thirty percent (30%), or RMB 1.5 million, is due upon the completion of the frame structure and the installation of ceiling and side panel and the delivery of wall materials to the worksite.  Fifteen percent (15%) is due upon the completion of the two single piece steel structures.  Ten percent (10%) is due upon the delivery of the building documentation and successful completion of inspection and acceptance. The remaining five percent (5%) is held by the Company as security and payable one (1) year after the completion of the two factory buildings.
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.                  

###### Export-Import Bank of the United States

# SUMMARY:

The Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee was established by Pub. L. 105-121, November 26, 1997, to advise the Board of Directors on the development and implementation of policies and programs designed to support the expansion of the Bank's financial commitments in Sub-Saharan Africa under the loan, guarantee and insurance programs of the Bank. Further, the committee shall make recommendations on how the Bank can facilitate greater support by U.S. commercial banks for trade with Sub-Saharan Africa.

# Time and Place:

Wednesday, November 15, 2000, at 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Export-Import Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20571.

# Agenda:

This meeting will include a review of Export-Import Bank activities in sub-Sahara Africa.

# Public Participation:

The meeting will be open to public participation, and the last 10 minutes will be set aside for oral questions or comments. Members of the public may also file written statement(s) before or after the meeting. If any person wishes auxiliary aids (such as a sign language interpreter) or other special accommodations, please contact, prior to November 10, 2000, Teri Stumpf, Room 1215, Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20571, Voice: (202) 565-3502 or TDD (202) 565-3377.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, contact Teri Stumpf, Room 1215, 811 Vermont Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20571, (202) 565-3502.

John M. Niehuss,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00-27761 Filed 10-27-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6690-01-M
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed September 1, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-408

Lower Tribunal No. 19-32602

________________

MC Tours Roatan, S.A.,

Appellant,

vs.

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.,

Appellee.

An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade 

County, Peter R. Lopez, Judge.

Marlow Adler Abrams Newman & Lewis, and Bruce R. Marx, for 

appellant.

Hunton Andrews Kurth, LLP, Gustavo J. Membiela, and Crystal B. 

Carswell, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LOGUE, and BOKOR, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Affirmed. See Jetbroadband WV, LLC v. MasTec N. Am., Inc., 13 So. 

3d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).
July 09, 2013 

## <!rnngrens nf tije Nnite!t §fates 1Wluzl1ingtmt, 

## :mar 20515

The Honorable Anthony Foxx Secretary United States Depatiment ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590-0001
Dear Secretm·y Foxx: .· .. :_

..,

We are writing today in support ofCape Air's Essential Air Service (EAS) proposal (DOT-OST20120211681) to continue to provide services fl·om Rutland-Southern VermontRegional Airpmi to Boston, Massachusetts and to add an additional daily service to and from White Plains, New York.

I Cape Airhas a history ofproviding exceptional, affordable service to Rutland-SouthernVermont Regional Airport. The company's daily services to and from Bostonhave increased enplanernents in Rutland by more than two and a halftimes since it opened commercial services at that airpoti in 2007. The service has allowed for easier access, greater interstate commerce, andincreased tourism between these two destinations. These services are animpmiant economic development tool in the Rutland region and throughout southern Vermont. Equally impmtantto the health ofthe Rutland-area economy is easy access to NewYork City. SouthernVermont's globally-recognized firms- from Orvis to General Electric- need better alternatives to reaching NewYork City. And our tourism industry depends heavily onvisitors from the NewYork City area. We believe Cape Air'sproposal to expand service to White Plains, New Yorkwouldprovide Vermonters with a much-needed transportation alternative and provide for significant economic growth in the region.
EAS was designed to support isolated communities serviced by certified air caniers with a guaranteed level ofscheduled air service. Cape Air, in partnership with Rutland-Southern Vermont Regional Airport, continues to succeed in this goal, with exponential economic benefit to the region. Thankyou for your consideration ofthis important proposal. Please feel free to contact us ifyou have any questions. Sincerely,

# ~~,!_?~4~ PATRICK LEAHY United States Senator BERNARD SANDERS United States Senator

PRINTED DN RECYCLED PAPER PETER WELCH United States Representative
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          13,520
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   94,312
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (12,612)
<INVENTORY>                                      5,727
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               123,125
<PP&E>                                          90,376
<DEPRECIATION>                                (41,012)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 433,469
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           62,575
<BONDS>                                        139,271
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           154
<OTHER-SE>                                     214,349
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   433,469
<SALES>                                         11,158
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               222,165
<CGS>                                            7,842
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  182,618
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (431)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   869
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,310
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 25,045
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,018
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,027
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,027
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.96


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1


Tel-Instrument Electronics Corp








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 Quarterly Report of Tel-Instrument Electronics Corp (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, each hereby certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of their 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 Company.











By:  /s/  Harold K. Fletcher


Harold K. Fletcher


CEO





By:  /s/  Joseph P. Macaluso


Joseph P. Macaluso


Principal Accountin


August 23, 2010







A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Tel-Instrument Electronics Corp and will be retained by Tel-Instrument Electronics Corp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 13.2**

 

**CertificationPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted**

**Pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F ofTricom, S.A. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the “PeriodicReport”), I, Erwin Mendez, Vice President, Finance & Administration of theCompany, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the informationcontained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|                    | /s/ ERWIN MENDEZ                              |   |
|-------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
| Dated: October 29, 2007 | Erwin Mendez                                  |
|                    | Vice President, Finance  & Administration |

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.2
                Auditors' report for Certificate Series 1997 C-1
<PAGE>

                         INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT

To the Partners of CRIIMI MAE Services Limited Partnership:

We have examined management 'e assertion about CRIIMI MAE Services
Limited Partnership's compliance with the minimum servicing standards
identified in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform
Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers  (USAP) and that CRIIMI
MAE Services Limited Partnership had in effect a fidelity bond and
errors and omissions policy in the amount of $20 million as of and for
the year ended December 31, 1997 included in the accompanying
Management's Assertion. Management is responsible for CRIIMI MEB
Services Limited Partnership's compliance with those minimum servicing
standards and for maintaining a fidelity bond and errors and omissions
policy. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's
assertion 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 CRIIMI MAE Services
Limited Partnership'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 CRIIMI MAE Services Limited Partnership's compliance
with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that CRIIMI MAE Services Limited
Partnership complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards
and that CRIIMI MAE Services Limited Partnership had in effect a
fidelity bond and errors and omissions policy in the amount of $20
million as of and for the year ended December 31, 1997 is fairly stated,
in all material respects.

Washington, D.C                           /S/Arther Andersen LLP.
February 27, 1998
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 23

- 00090

- CR

E RIC A NTONIO J OHNSON

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ O n Appeal from Criminal District Court

No. 2

of Tarrant County ( 1597343D )

March 28, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the tr ial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Dana Womack

Justice Dana Womack
|   | ·   The Company would pay 20% of the contract price when the General Contractor completes the four floors of the building.                                                  |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | ·   The Company would pay 20% of the contract price within one (1) week of General Contractor completing construction of the roof of the building.                          |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | ·   The Company would pay 20% of the contract price within one (1) week of the General Contractor completing the floors, walls, doors, and windows, and passing inspection; |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | ·   The Company would pay 35% of the contract price when the General Contractor completes the building, passes inspection, and submit the requisite documents.              |
Schedule of executive officer and director compensation agreement




 Exhibit 10.18 
 Summary of Executive Officer and Director Compensation Arrangements 
 Executive Officer
Compensation  
 The following table presents the 2006 base salary and 2006 bonus plan approved by the Board of Directors pursuant to the
annual incentive compensation plan for the President and Chief Executive Officer and four of the five other most highly compensated executive officers for 2005. The other most highly compensated executive officer terminated his employment with
Hercules in September 2005. Under the 2006 bonus plan, bonuses are paid to Hercules’ executive officers based on performance measures established jointly by the Nominating, Governance and Compensation Committee and management. For 2006, the
annual incentive bonuses are based on targets for Hercules’ earnings, return on the use of capital, and company safety statistics. The Committee has established three performance measurement levels: threshold level, target level and maximum or
stretch level. The amount of incentive compensation increases with each increasing level of Hercules’ performance. 
  

										
	 	  	 	  	2006 Bonus
	 Officer
	  	 2006
 Base Salary
	  	Target	  	Maximum
	 Randall D. Stilley
	  	$	300,000.00	  	$	200,000.00	  	$	400,000.00
	 Steven A. Manz
	  	$	180,000.00	  	$	120,000.00	  	$	240,000.00
	 Don P. Rodney
	  	$	150,000.00	  	$	45,000.00	  	$	90,000.00
	 Randy Reed
	  	$	170,000.00	  	$	85,000.00	  	$	170,000.00
	 Thomas E. Hord
	  	$	225,000.00	  	$	90,000.00	  	$	180,000.00

 Director Fees 
 Directors who are also full-time officers or employees of Hercules do not receive additional compensation for serving as directors. All other directors receive an annual retainer of $30,000. Each non-employee director
also receives a fee of $1,500 for each board meeting and each committee meeting attended. In addition, the chairman of the audit committee receives an annual fee of $15,000 and the chairman of the nominating, governance and compensation committee
receives an annual fee of $8,000. Hercules also reimburses the reasonable expenses incurred by the directors in attending meetings and Company business. Each non-employee director also receives an annual grant of restricted stock under
Hercules’ 2004 long-term incentive plan having a fair market value (as defined in the plan) of $40,000, which vests on the business day after the following year’s annual meeting of stockholders. Any fees payable to directors who are
affiliated with LR Hercules Holdings, LP (“Lime Rock”) or Greenhill Capital Partners, L.P. (“Greenhill”) will be paid to Lime Rock and Greenhill, as applicable.
#### MOFFETT v. STATE.

No. 24943.

Court of Criminal Appeals *of*Texas.

Oct. 11, 1950.

None on appeal, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant' was convicted of the possession for the purpose of sale of intoxicating liquor in dry area, and his punishment was assessed at a fine of $500 and six months in jail.

Appellant perfected an appeal to this court, but now files his personal affidavit advising that he desires to accept the sentence and does not further desire to prosecute the appeal, and at his request the appeal is dismissed.