alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2004168EN.01000802.xml

| 26.6.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 168/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/8

---

Action brought on 13 April 2004 by Télévision Française 1 SA against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-144/04)

(2004/C 168/15)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 13 April 2004 by Télévision Française 1 SA, established in Boulogne (France), represented by J.-P. Hordies, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Decision C (2003) 4497 final of the Commission of the European Communities of 10 December 2003 on State aid implemented by France for the benefit of ‘France 2’ and ‘France 3’ from 1988 to 1994, insofar as it declares that aid to be compatible with the common market under Article 86(2) of the Treaty; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Decision C (2003) 4497 final of the Commission of the European Communities of 10 December 2003 on State aid implemented by France for the benefit of ‘France 2’ and ‘France 3’ from 1988 to 1994, insofar as it declares that aid to be compatible with the common market under Article 86(2) of the Treaty;

| — | order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Following a complaint made by the applicant, the Commission decided to initiate a formal investigation procedure pursuant to Article 88(2) EC into investment subsidies and capital grants received by the television channels ‘France 2’ and ‘France 3’ from 1988 to 1994. By the contested decision, the Commission decided to treat those measures as State aid within the meaning of Article 87 EC but declared them compatible with the EC Treaty under Article 86(2).

By its first plea, the applicant alleges that the statement of reasons for the contested decision is erroneous and that the decision infringes Article 86(2) EC and the provisions on State aid. It disputes the Commission's finding that the activities of the two channels in question are a service in the general interest within the meaning of Article 86(2) and points out that, although its own activities are almost identical, they are not regarded as being in the general interest. It also calls into question the financial assessment of the aid made by the Commission in the contested decision.

By its second plea, the applicant submits that the Commission misapplied Directive 80/723 (1) when it decided that that directive did not apply to the broadcasting activities of public channels before 2000. On the same basis, the applicant alleges misapplication of the Protocol on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, which is annexed to the EC Treaty.

1

---

(1)  Commission Directive 80/723/EEC of 25 June 1980 on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings (OJ 1980 L 195, p. 35).

1

---
# C_2004278EN.01002701.xml

| 13.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/27

---

MEMBERS OF THE SELECTION BOARD

MEMBERS OF THE SELECTION BOARD

OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/B/7/03

OPEN COMPETITION

(2004/C 278/09)

ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANTS IN THE FIELDS OF PRODUCTION COORDINATION AND PROOF-READING

| Chairman: | Jean-Pascal Rihoux |
| --- | --- |
| Alternate Chairman: | Cécile Adam |
| Full members: | Marc Demeyer
  Nathalie Foigne
  Hans Wilhelm |

Chairman:

Jean-Pascal Rihoux

Alternate Chairman:

Cécile Adam

Full members:

Marc Demeyer

Nathalie Foigne

Hans Wilhelm

---
# Wetland Mitigation Banking Program - 2022 Project Summaries

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Wetland Mitigation Banking Program - 2022 Project Summaries 

Wetland Mitigation Banking Program - 2022 Project Summaries

**Magnolia Land Partners LLC**NRCS Funding Amount: $696,412; Partner Funds: $220,000State:  IndianaMAGNOLIA LAND PARTNERS seeks to establish 40 acres of restored forested wetlands in Southeastern Indiana. A statewide agreement will be developed to support the establishment of two bank sites. Magnolia Land Partners will work with Indiana NRCS staff to plan its sites in watersheds with significant wetland mitigation demand from producers.

**Farmers First Bank Sites**NRCS Funding Amount: $1,000,000; Partner Funds: $1,015,170State: Michigan FARMERS FIRST BANK SITES plans to develop four wetland bank sites which will service five areas throughout southern and mid-Michigan.  A total of 127 acres of wetlands will be restored, enhanced, or created. Credit costs will be discounted for historically underserved producers. 

**CORBLU Ecology Group LLC**NRCS Funding Amount: $499,531; Partner Funds: $146,610State: GeorgiaCORBLU ECOLOGY GROUP LLC will expand its existing mitigation banking effort to add an additional 50 acres of restored wetlands in the Coastal Plains Region of Southern Georgia. CORBLU Ecology Group is partnering with the Athens Land Trust to explore opportunities for engaging new and low-income producers.

**Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR)**NRCS Funding Amount: $812,000; Partner Funds: $262,457State: WisconsinWISCONSIN DNR seeks to enhance its existing agricultural wetland mitigation banking program by developing and additional 30 wetland credits on two sites in Dane and Milwaukee Counties in southern Wisconsin.  Dane County Land and Water Resources and Milwaukee County Parks are additional partners on the project.  

**South Dakota Farm Bureau**NRCS Funding Amount $998,000; Partner Funds: $342,505State: South DakotaSOUTH DAKOTA FARM BUREAU proposes the expansion of its existing South Dakota wetland mitigation banking effort to meet mitigation needs of Nebraska producers. The project will restore an additional five bank sites creating 200 mitigation credits. South Dakota Farm Bureau will partner with Minnehaha and Beadle County Soil and Water Conservation Districts to secure easements on the restored sites. 

**Iowa Ag Mitigation Inc.**NRCS Funding Amount $684,000; Partner Funds: $207,000State IowaIOWA AG MITIGATION INC. proposes to add 60 acres of restored wetlands to its existing mitigation banking efforts. Additionally, 150 acres of buffers will be established with this funding. Water quality will benefit through the permanent capping of drainage wells on the restoration sites. Wright County in north central Iowa is the target region for this project.
EXHIBIT 10(GG)

                   AMENDMENT TO REGISTRATION RIGHTS AGREEMENT

         This Amendment dated as of February 23, 1998 between Guardian
International, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), and Westar Security,
Inc., a Kansas corporation (the "Stockholder") to the Registration Rights
Agreement dated October 21, 1997 (the ARegistration Rights Agreement@) between
the Company and Westar Capital, Inc., a Kansas corporation (AWestar Capital@).

                                    RECITALS

         On November 24, 1997, Westar Capital assigned all of its rights and
obligations under the Registration Rights Agreement to the Stockholder. Pursuant
to the Stock Subscription Agreement between the Company and the Stockholder of
even date herewith, the Company is selling to the Stockholder 1,600,000 shares
(the "Preferred B Shares") of Series B 10 1/2% Convertible Cumulative Preferred
Stock (the "Preferred Stock"), par value $.001 per share, which is convertible
into Common Stock. The parties hereto desire to amend the Registration Rights
Agreement to include the Preferred B Shares in the definition of AShares@ and to
increase the number of mandatory rights to four.

                                    AGREEMENT

         1. DEFINITION OF SHARES. The last sentence in the Recitals of the
Registration Rights Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as
follows: AIn this Agreement, the Common Shares and the Common Stock issuable by
the Company upon conversion of the Preferred Shares and upon conversion of the
Preferred B Shares, together with any stock dividends, distributions, or splits
or any shares issued or issuable in connection with any reclassification,
recapitalization, merger or consolidation or reorganization (AAdjustments@),
shall be collectively referred to as the "Shares."

         2. MANDATORY RIGHTS. The first sentence of the fifth paragraph of
Section 1(b) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

         "The Stockholder shall be entitled to request four registrations
pursuant to this Section 1(b)."

                                       1

<PAGE>

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
executed as of the date first above written.

                                      GUARDIAN INTERNATIONAL, INC.

                                      By:/s/ Richard Ginsburg
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Richard Ginsburg
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer

                                      WESTAR SECURITY, INC.

                                      By:/s/ John W. Hesse
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                      Name:   John W. Hesse
                                      Its:  Secretary/Treasurer


ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:

HELLER FINANCIAL, INC.

By: /s/ Scott E. Gast
    ------------------------------------
    [Name] Scott E. Gast
    [Title]   Assistant Vice President

Date: 2/23/98

                                       2
# Diversion (Ft.) (362) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Diversion (Ft.) (362) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Diversion (Ft.) (362).

## 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)

Diversion (Ft.) (362) (7/2022) Standard Document(107.2 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Diversion (Ft.) (362) Overview(462.23 KB)

Diversion (Ft.) (362) CPPE(25.19 KB)

Diversion (Ft.) (362) Network Diagram(101.03 KB)

## Conservation at Work: Diversion

This video explores how Tyler and Trevor Houlden implemented this conservation practice on their 50-acre vegetable farm in of North Grafton, Massachusetts.

##   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
Conservation Stewardship Program - Grassland Conservation Initiative Fiscal Year 2024 United States Department of Agriculture

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Code Practice Component Units Unit Cost

E300GCI Grassland Conservation Initiative Grassland Conservation Initiative Activity AC $18.00

CSP-Grassland Conservation Itiative Page 1 of 1 Indiana - Fiscal Year 2024
Helping People Help the Land

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. 

Conservation Practice Standard Overview May 2016 

Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Soil

Treatment (Code 520) 

Pond sealing or liner for a pond or waste storage 

impoundment constructed using compacted soil with or 

without soil amendments.

Practice Information

The purpose of this practice is to reduce seepage losses 

from impoundments constructed for water conservation 

and environmental protection. 

This practice applies where— 

• In-place natural soils have excessive seepage rates, and

• An adequate quantity and type of soil suitable for constructing a compacted soil liner without

amendments is available, or

• An adequate quantity and type of soil suitable for treatment with a soil dispersant or bentonite

amendment is available for an amended soil liner. Alternatives to compacted clay liners

should be considered for poor foundation conditions such as karstic bedrock, joints, and other

discontinuities of the underlying bedrock.

Operation and maintenance required for this practice include operations necessary to prevent and/or 

repair damage to the compacted soil liner. This includes, but is not limited to, excluding animals and 

equipment from the treated area and repairing damage to the liner occurring from erosion during 

initial filling to its original thickness and condition. Damage that might be caused by roots from trees 

and large shrubs should be prevented by removing such vegetation at first appearance. 

Common Associated Practices

Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Soil Treatment (Code 520) is commonly applied with 

conservation practices, such as Irrigation Reservoir (Code 436), Pond (Code 378), Waste Storage 

Facility (Code 313), and Waste Treatment Lagoon (Code 359).

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.

Natural Resources Conservation Service
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           2,279
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,250
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      5,392
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          15,115
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            15,149
<LOANS>                                         53,135
<ALLOWANCE>                                        800
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  78,905
<DEPOSITS>                                      68,355
<SHORT-TERM>                                     1,403
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                275
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,035
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,325
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,512
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  78,905
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,708
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  707
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   534
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,949
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,095
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,261
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,688
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      710
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,094
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,932)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     (1,932)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,932)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.53)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.36
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                    90
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  800
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            800
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF OFFICER


OF AML COMMUNICATIONS, INC.


PURSUANT TO 18 USC § 1350





Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) the undersigned officer of AML Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge,
that:





(a)
The quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(b)
Information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: August 14, 2009





/s/ Heera Lee


By: Heera Lee,


Director of Finance


(Principal Financial Officer)
Company Plant Kiln

Avg 

(ppmd@7%O2)

Capitol Cement San Antonio, TX PH/PC 0.34

Alamo Cement San Antonio, TX PH or PC 0.46

Holcim Portland, CO PH/PC 1.10

Holcim Ada, OK Wet 1.42

Capitol Cement San Antonio, TX Wet 1.49

Holcim Ste Genevieve,MO PH/PC 1.55

Lehigh Tehachapi, CA PH/PC 2.56

National Cement Ragland, AL PH/PC 7.61

Holcim Catskill, NY Wet 9.11

Lafarge Harleyville, SC PH/PC 14.30

Lone Star Pryor, OK Dry, kiln3 15.07

Lehigh Leeds, AL PH 15.12

Lone Star Pryor, OK Dry, kiln 1&2 17.03

Ash Grove Louisville, NE PH or PC 24.70

Lafarge Alpena, MI Dry, K23 30.78

CalPortland Mojave, CA PH/PC, K1 55.37

Avg of top 2 0.40

Avg of all 12.38
### -77.6 -77.4 -77.2 -77.0 -76.8 -76.6 -76.4 -76.2 -76.0 -75.8

39.2 39.4 39.6 39.8 40.0



## ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 08/25 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 25 Aug 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 76.30 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■



## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ● 

## ★ ● ● ● ●
#### Haas and another, Appellants, vs. Racine Hotel Company, Respondent.

For the appellants : *Wilbershide & Baumblatt*of Racine.

For the respondent: *Gittings, Janecky & Buelow*of Racine.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24

- 1500

MICHAEL BREYAN , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
BANK OF AMERICA , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Columbia

. Bruce H. Hendricks , District Judge. ( 3:24

- cv - 00980

- BHH )

Submitted : September 1 2 , 2024 Decided: September 16, 2024

Before THACKER and RUSHING , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Michael Breyan, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-1500 Doc: 6 Filed: 09/16/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Michael Breyan appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss, upon 28 U.S.C. § 1915 review, Breyan’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983
action against Bank of America. Limiting our review to the issues raised in Breyan’s informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) , and to the magistrate judge’s rulings to which Breyan specifically objected, see Martin v. Duffy , 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017) , we find no reversible error. Acc ordingly, we
affirm the district court’s order. Breyan v. Bank of Am. , No. 3:24

- cv - 00980

- BHH (D. S.C. May 16, 2024 ). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 24-1500 Doc: 6 Filed: 09/16/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
# C_2004262EN.01000502.xml

| 23.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/5

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Grand Chamber)

of 7 September 2004

in Case C-347/02: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (1)

1

(Insurance - Third non-life insurance directive - Bonus-malus system)

(2004/C 262/09)

Language of the case: French

In Case C-347/02, action under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 30 September 2002, Commission of the European Communities (Agents: C. Tufvesson and J.-F. Pasquier) v French Republic (Agents: G. de Bergues, P. Boussaroque and C. Mercier) — the Court (Grand Chamber), composed of: V. Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), C. Gulmann and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Presidents of Chambers, R. Schintgen, F. Macken, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, R. Silva de Lapuerta and K. Lenaerts,, Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 September 2004 in which it:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 289 of 23.11.2002.

1

---
### Response

Robert l-Jackman Craig Fabian ATA Aircrafl O""nel"S & Pilots Association 

# tA.A- ~ 0 

# I0
- 

# 0477 Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed? I Organization Person Contacted 

### IOate National Business Aircraft Association Eli CoW 

# 11 V Regional Airline Association Dave Lotterer 

## I
**Exhibit
      23.1**




Consent
      of Grant Thornton LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting
      Firm





We
      have
      issued our report dated February 14, 2006, accompanying the consolidated
      financial statements included in the Annual Report of Zones, Inc. on Form 10-K
      for the year ended December 31, 2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation
      by
      reference of said report in the Registration Statements of Zones, Inc. on Form
      S-8 (File Nos. 333-87255, 333-110750, and 333-114945).








Grant
      Thornton LLP


Seattle,
      Washington


February
      21, 2006
#### Back, Respondent, vs. Schroeder and another, Appellants.

For the appellants: *D. J. Regan*of Milwaukee, attorney, and *Jacobsen ■& Malone*of Waukesha of counsel.

For the respondent: *F. F. Groelle*of Milwaukee.

*By the'Court,*

Judgment affirmed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7394** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. TRAVIS JENKINS, a/k/a TJ , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. James C. Fox , Senior District Judge. ( 5:13

- cr - 00168

- F

- 1 )

Submitted : December 1 7 , 2015 Decided: December 22, 2015

Before DIAZ and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON , Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Travis Jenkins, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Michael Duffy, Roberto Francisco Ramirez, Assistant United States Attorneys, Jennifer E. Wells, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appe llee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Travis Jenkins appeals the district court ’ s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2012) . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jenkins , No. 5:13

- cr 00168

- F

- 1 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 27, 2015)
. We deny Jenkins’ motion for appointment of coun s el. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED