alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<CIK>                         0001013564
<NAME>                        Farm Family Holdings, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1996
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           219,188
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          9,782
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            9,973
<EQUITIES>                                     7,908
<MORTGAGE>                                     1,745
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 244,704
<CASH>                                         4,110
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             10,743
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         10,682
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 321,836
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                141,220
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            55,945
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 17,674
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                1,304
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       53
<OTHER-SE>                                     6,710
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   321,836
<PREMIUMS>                                     130,780
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            15,952
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             (640)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 905
<BENEFITS>                                     94,977
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    39,465
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                10,838
<INCOME-TAX>                                   3,281
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            7,557
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                1,543
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   6,014
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.51
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 137,978
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            100,418
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              (5,441)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             50,122
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               39,795
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                141,220
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        5,441
        


</TABLE>
BB IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 - 056 4 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee , v. KASEY NICHOL HUGS ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including Septe mber 28 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve the State’s response brief

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 22 2023

08/22/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0564
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Seismic Analysis of Large-Scale Piping Systems for the JNES-NUPEC Ultimate Strength Piping Test Program (NUREG/CR-6983)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6983 (PDF - 45.8 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** August 2008**Date Published:** November 2008

**Prepared by:** G. DeGrassi, J. Nie, and C. Hofmayer

Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973-5000

S. Ali, NRC Project Manager 

**Prepared for:** Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC Job Code N6076

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization/Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation (JNES/NUPEC) conducted a multi-year test program for the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) of Japan to investigate the behavior of typical Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) piping systems under large seismic loads. The objectives of this program were to develop a better understanding of the elasto-plastic response and ultimate strength of nuclear piping systems, to ascertain the seismic safety margins in current piping design codes, and to assess new code allowable stress rules. The test program consisted of a series of static and dynamic material tests, piping component tests, simplified piping system tests, and large-scale piping tests. As part of collaborative efforts between the United States and Japan on seismic issues, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) participated in this program by performing both pre-test and post-test analysis for selected tests, and by evaluation of program results. A summary of the BNL analysis of the simplified piping system tests was documented in an earlier NUREG/CR report. This report describes the BNL post-test analyses of the large-scale piping system tests and discusses the insights gained from this program.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
# CA2004137EN.01000402.xml

| 15.5.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 137/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 137/4

---

Corrigendum to the vacancy notice for a Director (grade A2) in DG Regional Policy (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations)

COM/084/04

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 92 A of 16 April 2004
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 92 A of 16 April 2004

(2004/C 137 A/08)

Page 32: Closing Date

Closing Date

For:

‘Applications must be sent on or before 14 May 2004 (date of e-mail or date as postmark for registered mail).

14 May 2004

Applications sent by express courier service must be delivered to the address above before 17.00 on 14 May 2004.’

14 May 2004

Read:

‘Applications must be sent on or before 1 June 2004 (date of e-mail or date as postmark for registered mail).

1 June 2004

Applications sent by express courier service must be delivered to the address above before 17.00 on 1 June 2004.’

1 June 2004

---
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2138 

To provide that members of the Armed Forces performing services in the 

Sinai Peninsula of Egypt shall be entitled to tax benefits in the same 

manner as if such services were performed in a combat zone. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2017 

Mr. MCCAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide that members of the Armed Forces performing 

services in the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt shall be entitled 

to tax benefits in the same manner as if such services 

were performed in a combat zone. 

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 ‘‘Sinai Service Recogni5 tion Act’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2138 IH

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS PER2 FORMING SERVICES IN THE SINAI PENIN3 SULA OF EGYPT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of the following pro5 visions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, a qualified 

6 hazardous duty area shall be treated in the same manner 

7 as if it were a combat zone (as determined under section 

8 112 of such Code): 

9 (1) Section 2(a)(3) (relating to special rule 

10 where deceased spouse was in missing status). 

11 (2) Section 112 (relating to the exclusion of 

12 certain combat pay of members of the Armed 

13 Forces). 

14 (3) Section 692 (relating to income taxes of 

15 members of Armed Forces on death). 

16 (4) Section 2201 (relating to members of the 

17 Armed Forces dying in combat zone or by reason of 

18 combat-zone-incurred wounds, etc.). 

19 (5) Section 3401(a)(1) (defining wages relating 

20 to combat pay for members of the Armed Forces). 

21 (6) Section 4253(d) (relating to the taxation of 

22 phone service originating from a combat zone from 

23 members of the Armed Forces). 

24 (7) Section 6013(f)(1) (relating to joint return 

25 where individual is in missing status). 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2138 IH

1 (8) Section 7508 (relating to time for per2 forming certain acts postponed by reason of service 

3 in combat zone). 

4 (b) QUALIFIED HAZARDOUS DUTY AREA.—For pur5 poses of this section, the term ‘‘qualified hazardous duty 

6 area’’ means the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt, if as of the 

7 date of the enactment of this section any member of the 

8 Armed Forces of the United States is entitled to special 

9 pay under section 310 of title 37, United States Code (re10 lating to special pay; duty subject to hostile fire or immi11 nent danger), for services performed in such location. 

12 Such term includes such location only during the period 

13 such entitlement is in effect. 

14 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

15 (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para16 graph (2), the provisions of this section shall take 

17 effect on June 9, 2015. 

18 (2) WITHHOLDING.—Subsection (a)(5) shall 

19 apply to remuneration paid after the date of the en20 actment of this Act. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Washington Bancorp                                                    Exhibit 11
Computation of Earnings per Common Share
<TABLE>

                                          For the three months ended December 31,   For the six months ended December 31,
                                          ---------------------------------------  --------------------------------------

                                            2001      2000      2001      2000      2001      2000       2001     2000
                                            Basic     Basic    Diluted   Diluted    Basic     Basic    Diluted   Diluted
                                             EPS       EPS       EPS       EPS       EPS       EPS       EPS       EPS
                                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                       <C>        <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>
Computation of weighted average
  number of common shares
  outstanding:
    Common shares outstanding
      at the beginning of the period ...   651,133   651,133   651,133   651,133   651,133   651,133   651,133   651,133
    Employee Stock Ownership
      Plan (ESOP) at the beginning
      of the period ....................   (26,905)  (32,066)  (26,905)  (32,066)  (28,219)  (33,283)  (28,219)  (33,283)
    Weighted average common shares
      released by the ESOP during
      the period .......................       657       609       657       609     1,315     1,218     1,315     1,218
    Weighted average common shares
      outstanding - Stock Option Plan ..        --        --    13,350     7,219        --        --    12,596     7,302
    Weighted average common shares
      into treasury ....................  (140,415) (119,962) (140,415) (119,962) (136,388) (114,864) (136,388) (114,864)
                                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total average shares outstanding .......   484,470   499,714   497,820   506,933   487,841   504,204   500,436   511,506
                                          ==============================================================================

Net income .............................  $317,821  $241,510  $317,821  $241,510  $627,671  $503,406  $627,671  $503,406
                                          ==============================================================================

Net income per share ...................  $   0.66  $   0.48  $   0.64  $   0.48  $   1.29  $   1.00  $   1.25   $  0.98
                                          ==============================================================================
</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

ARAZAIS OLIVEROS, as personal )

representative of the Estate of Sergio R. )

Oliveros, deceased, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-3900

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed September 11, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee 

County; Margaret O. Steinbeck, Judge.

Christopher E. Cosden of Fort Myers,

for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, LUCAS, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
# Energy Efficient Building Envelope (No.) (672) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Energy Efficient Building Envelope (No.) (672) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Energy Efficient Building Envelope (No.) (672).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Energy Efficient Building Envelope (No.) (672) (7/2021) Standard Document(10.97 MB)

###   Supporting Documents

Energy Efficient Building Envelope (No.) (672) Overview(3.92 MB)

Energy Efficient Building Envelope (No.) (672) Network Diagram(97.24 KB)

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Elisa Merrill Wilson v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-11-01125-CR

Trial court case number: 10CCR149142

Trial court: County Court at Law No. 2 of Fort Bend County

The court requests that the court reporter in the above-referenced case supplement 

the record on appeal with the following original exhibits:

State’s Exhibit No. 5 – Telephone recording

State’s Exhibit No. 7 – Telephone recording

State’s exhibit No. 8 – Telephone recording

State’s exhibit No. 9 – Audio tape

Defendant’s exhibit No. 13 – Audio tape

The Clerk of this Court is directed to cooperate with the district clerk and/or court 

reporter to provide for the safekeeping, transportation, and return of such exhibit. See

TEX. R. APP P. 34.6(g)(2).

The exhibit is due in this Court no later than November 15, 2012.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Bland

 Acting individually 

Date: October 31, 2012
Exhibit 24

POWER OF ATTORNEY

Each director of Pacifica Bancorp Inc. (the "Company"), whose signature appears below, hereby appoints Jeffery C. Low, Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer, as his attorney to sign, in his name and behalf and in any and all capacities stated below, the Company's consolidated Form 10-KSB and Annual Report (the "Annual
Report"), and likewise to sign any and all amendments and other documents relating thereto, each such person hereby granting to such attorney power to act with or without the other and full power of
substitution and revocation, and hereby ratifying all that such attorney or his substitute may do by virtue hereof.

This
Power of Attorney has been signed by the following persons in the capacities indicated, on March 1, 2001.

|Signature                                     |  | Title   
|--------------------------------------------- |  | --------
|                                              |  |         
|/s/JEFFERY C. LOWJeffery C. Low               |  | Chairman
|/s/LAWRENCE J. FAGANLawrence J. Fagan         |  | Director
|/s/YI-HENG LEEYi-Heng Lee                     |  | Director
|/s/MARK P. LEVYMark P. Levy                   |  | Director
|/s/ROBERT E. PETERSONRobert E. Peterson       |  | Director
|/s/GEORGE J. POOLGeorge J. Pool               |  | Director
|/s/LYLE K. SNYDERLyle K. Snyder               |  | Director
|/s/KEITH D. TIBBLESKeith D. Tibbles           |  | Director
|/s/FANNIE KUEI-FANG TSAIFannie Kuei-Fang Tsai |  | Director
|/s/MARK W. WEBERMark W. Weber                 |  | Director
|/s/EDWIN R. YOUNGEdwin R. Young               |  | Director

---

QuickLinks
1 

### Kelly, Shaheerah

From: Kelly, Shaheerah Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 12:45 PM To: hswriter@frontiernet.net Cc: R9AirPermits; Kelly, Shaheerah Subject: RE: Confusion over old and new permit.



### Dear Ms. Strand,

Thank you for your comment. We will address this co mment in our responses to comments document which will be issued sometime after the public comment period ends. Shasta County AQMD’s permit is for the existing equipment onsite which is referenced in the EP A permit. These permits authorize the construction of new or modified equipment. Please contact Shasta County AQMD for more information on the permit issued by the air district.

Sincerely,

************************************ Shaheerah Kelly Permits Office, Air Division (AIR-3) U.S. Environmental Protec tion Agency, Region 9 San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: 415-947-4156 Fax: 415-947-3579 Email: kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov

From: hswriter@frontiernet.net [ mailto:hswriter@frontiernet.net ] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 4:47 PM To: Kelly, Shaheerah Cc: Celeste Subject: Confusion over old and new permit.



## Dear Shaheerah,

According to Sierra Pacific's PS D Permit SAC 12-01 signed by De borah Jordan on Feb 19th, 2013 (page 1)

"The PSD permit previously issued by the District to SPI is still in effect and applies to existing equipment at the SPI-Anderson site. "

Could you tell me the date Shasta County renewed this permit?

Thanks, Heidi Strand
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

         In connection with the quarterly  report of New Century Equity Holdings
Corp.  (the  "Company")  on Form 10-K for the year ended  December 31, 2005,  as
filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof, I, Steven
J. Pully, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the
best of my knowledge that:

     (1)  The Form 10-K report for the year ended December 31, 2005,  filed with
          the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on March 30,  2006,  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 Form 10-K report for the year ended
          December  31, 2005 fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the
          financial  condition and results of  operations of New Century  Equity
          Holdings Corp.

By:  /S/ Steven J. Pully                             Date:  March 30, 2006
   -----------------------------                          ------------------
Steven J. Pully
Chief Executive Officer
```
**EXHIBIT12.2****CERTIFICATION**I, OlliVaartimo, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Metso Corporation; 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 ofoperations and 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))for the company and have:      (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;      (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 over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The company’s other certifying officer 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):      (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: March 15, 2006         /s/OLLI VAARTIMO   Olli Vaartimo   Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
#### Schmitz, Assignee, Respondent, vs. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company and another, Appellants.

For the appellants: /. *F. Baker*and *Llewellyn Cole,*both of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Kadwit & Lepp*of Kenosha.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
---

Exhibit 13.1.

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

In connection with the Annual Report, as amended, of Meridian
Co., Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, In Beom Park, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 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 result of operations of the
Company.

By: /s/In Beom ParkName: In Beom Park Title: President, CEO, Director Date:
August 12, 2010

---
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy ActClosed Requests

# Closed Appeal & FOIA/PA Cases by Subject - FY 2013

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
**Exhibit 23**

 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTEREDPUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

 

We have issued ourreport dated February 21, 2005 accompanying the consolidated financialstatements included in the Annual Report of Channell Commercial Corporation onForm 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report inthe Registration Statement of Channell Commercial Corporation on Form S-8 (FileNo. 333-36097, effective September 19, 1997).

 

 
| /s/ Grant Thornton LLP |   |
|------------------------|--------|
| February 21, 2005      |

 

----