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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from AmeriTruck
Distribution Corp.'s Consolidated Financial Statements for the nine months ended
September 30, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,842
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   26,823
<ALLOWANCES>                                       528
<INVENTORY>                                      1,235
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,875
<PP&E>                                         140,553
<DEPRECIATION>                                  29,997
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 196,642
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,516
<BONDS>                                        168,658
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            35
<OTHER-SE>                                      (2,613)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   196,642
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               161,145
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  149,560
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,166
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (516)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       470
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (986)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (230)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,216)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
National Reconnaissance Office Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Release #01-21

Contact: (703) 808-5050 April 26, 2021

NRO celebrates 60th anniversary with successful launch of NROL-82

CHANTILLY, Va. — Today the Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines and U.S. Space 

Force Chief of Space Operations General Jay Raymond joined the National Reconnaissance 

Office Director Dr. Christopher Scolese for the successful NROL-82 mission launch aboard a 

United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy. The Delta IV Heavy launched at 1:47 p.m. PDT / 4:47

p.m. EDT from Space Launch Complex-6 at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, carrying a 

classified national security payload designed, built, and operated by the NRO to support its 

overhead reconnaissance mission. NROL-82 is the agency’s first launch this year, following six 

launches and 12 payloads delivered to orbit in 2020.

“On behalf of ODNI and the entire Intelligence Community, congratulations to the National 

Reconnaissance Office and the agency’s mission partners on the successful NROL-82 launch,” 

said DNI Haines. “Today’s liftoff demonstrates the often unseen work from men and women in the 

IC who are dedicated to advancing our nation’s security—including to heights ‘above and beyond’ 

Earth. I am so honored to serve alongside extraordinary professionals and enjoyed watching their 

innovation, collaboration, and impact take to the skies.” 

Since 1961, the NRO has pushed the envelope of U.S. space-based intelligence collection with 

courage and ingenuity. Today, NRO’s innovative legacy continues to thrive as it develops, 

acquires, launches, and operates the world’s most capable spy satellites. NROL-82 will 

strengthen NRO’s ability to provide a wide-range of timely intelligence information to national 

decision-makers, warfighters, and intelligence analysts to protect the Nation’s vital interests and 

support humanitarian efforts worldwide. 

“We are delighted DNI Haines and General Raymond were able to join us for today’s successful 

launch,” said Dr. Scolese. “Space is an increasingly contested domain as our adversaries 

become more threatening and capable. To meet this challenge, we are expanding our 

commercial partnerships, adapting processes to innovate faster, and incorporating resilience from 

our assets on the ground to our systems on orbit. This launch is another important milestone as 

we rise to meet the challenges of today and the future.” 

NROL-82 is the NRO’s 31st launch in partnership with ULA. Additional mission partners 

supporting today’s launch include the 30th Space Wing and the U.S. Space Force Space and 

Missile Systems Center. NRO’s collaborative partnerships with government, academic, 

commercial, and international organizations are vital to mission success. 

The NRO’s next scheduled launch is NROL-111 later this year from NASA’s Wallops Flight 

Facility, Virginia, in collaboration with Northrop Grumman and Virginia Space/Mid-Atlantic 

Regional Spaceport. 

###
**Conservation Practice Effects**

**Commonly Associated Practices:**Access Control, Combustion System Improvement, Integrated Pest Management.

**Note:**This worksheet contains general talking points for the conservation planner to discuss with the land user.  It is the first step towards an economic or financial analysis.  The second step would include identifying a specific site for analysis at the farm or field level, editing the template for local conditions, adding units and quantities of farm inputs and outputs.  The third step in the economic analysis is to place a dollar value on as many variables as possible, put all units in the same time frame, using amortization ($/Acres/Year) or net present value ($/Acre), so benefits and costs can be compared.  The fourth and final step would be to combine several conservation practices into a conservation system, which is how most conservation practices are applied at the field level. Data for the worksheet comes from the land user, conservation planner, technical specialist and local agricultural supply vendors and contractors.  See Economics Technical Note: TN 200-ECN-1, Basic Economic Analysis Using T-Charts (August 2013) for more information.
#### Trush, Respondent, vs. Trush, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Fiedler, Garrigan & Grimm*of Beloit.

For the respondent: *Arnold & Johnston*of Beloit.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICE EFFECTS - NETWORK DIAGRAM September 2020

 Saturated Buffer (Code 604) Start

I.2 (-) Nutrients 

delivered to 

receiving waters

I.1 (+) 

Release of 

ammonia 

gas

Initial setting: The discharge of an underground 

drainage system goes directly into receiving 

waters. A distribution line is connected to the 

outlet pipe and distributes drainage water along 

the buffer. The saturated buffer removes some of 

the nitrogen from the drainage water through 

denitrification and plant uptake..

D.3 (+) Disturbed 

areas (construction), 

soil erosion

Critical Area Planting (342)

C.4 (+/-) Public/private health 

and safety, public/private 

property protection

D.2 (+) Cost of 

installation and 

maintenance

C.2 (+) Aquatic 

habitat

I.3 (-) Cost media 

replacement and 

disposal

I.4 (-) Cost of 

future regulatory 

compliance

I.8 (+/-) Net return

C.3 (+/-) Income and 

income stability 

(individuals and 

communities)

1. Water control structure leading to a distribution line 

running parallel to the water course on the uphill side of 

the buffer.

D.1 (-) Nutrient levels 

in discharge

I.6 (+) Greenhouse 

gases

Note: 

Effects are qualified with a plus 

(+) or minus (-). These symbols 

indicate only an increase (+) or a 

decrease (-) in the effect upon 

the resource, not whether the 

effect is beneficial or adverse.

I.7 (+) Water quality

Pathway

LEGEND

#. Created by practice

D. Direct effect

I. Indirect effect

C. Cumulative effect

Mitigating practice

Associated practice

I.5 (+) Growth of desirable 

vegetation

I.9 (+) Soil Stabilized

C.1 (-) Air Quality
# C_2005082EN.01000901.xml

| 2.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/9

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam by judgment of that court of 28 December 2004 in Kawasaki Motors Europe NV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane district Rotterdam

(Case C-15/05)

(2005/C 82/18)

Language of the case: Dutch

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by judgment of the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam (Amsterdam Regional Court of Appeal) (Netherlands) of 28 December 2004, received at the Court Registry on 19 January 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Kawasaki Motors Europe NV and Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane district Rotterdam on the following questions:

| 1. | Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 2518/98 (1)of 23 November 1998 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 1998 L 315) valid in so far as the new, four-wheel all terrain vehicles described at point 5 of the Annex thereto are classified as a vehicle designed for the transport of persons within the meaning of subheading 8703 21 of the CCT? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 2518/98 (1)of 23 November 1998 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 1998 L 315) valid in so far as the new, four-wheel all terrain vehicles described at point 5 of the Annex thereto are classified as a vehicle designed for the transport of persons within the meaning of subheading 8703 21 of the CCT?

1

| 2. | If the regulation is invalid, can the CCT be interpreted as meaning that the goods at issue can be classified under one of the subheadings of heading 8701 90 of the CCT? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the regulation is invalid, can the CCT be interpreted as meaning that the goods at issue can be classified under one of the subheadings of heading 8701 90 of the CCT?

---

(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2518/98 of 23 November 1998 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 1998 L 315, p. 3).

1

---
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

DWAYNE JARREL JOHNSON, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-5474 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed February 13, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Charlotte County; Donald H. Mason, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Gary R. Gossett, Jr., Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Peter Koclanes, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, VILLANTI, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos.
333-58629 and 333-70405 on Form S-3 and Registration Statements Nos. 333-12243
and 333-12633 on Form S-8 of The North Face, Inc. of our report dated April 12,
2000 (which expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory
paragraph referring to the substantial doubt of the ability of the Company to
continue as a going concern), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
The North Face, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1999.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


San Francisco, California
April 13, 2000

                                      58
Exhibit 32.1

             CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with the Annual Report of ATSI Communications, Inc. on Form 10-K
for  the  period ending July 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur L. Smith, President and Chief Executive
Officer  of  the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C, ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that,

1)   the  Report complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
     Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

2)   the  information  in  the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
     the  financial  condition  and  result  of  operations  of  the  Company.

By /s/ Arthur L. Smith
Arthur L. Smith
President and
Chief Executive Officer
November 9, 2004


<PAGE>
# C_2004273EN.01002002.xml

| 6.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 273/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 273/20

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of that court of 7 July 2004 in the case i-21-germany GmbH against the Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-392/04)

(2004/C 273/35)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Bundesverwaltungsgericht of 7 July 2004, which was received at the Court Registry on 16 September 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of i-21-germany GmbH against the Federal Republic of Germany on the following questions:

| 1. | Is Article 11(1) of Directive 97/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 April 1997 on a common framework for general authorisations and individual licences in the field of telecommunications services (the licensing directive) to be interpreted as precluding the imposition of a licence fee calculated to anticipate the amount of a national regulatory authority's general administrative costs over a period of 30 years, to be charged in advance?
  If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 11(1) of Directive 97/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 April 1997 on a common framework for general authorisations and individual licences in the field of telecommunications services (the licensing directive) to be interpreted as precluding the imposition of a licence fee calculated to anticipate the amount of a national regulatory authority's general administrative costs over a period of 30 years, to be charged in advance?

If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative:

| 2. | Are Article 10 EC and Article 11 of the licensing directive to be interpreted as meaning that a fee assessment that determines fees within the meaning of Question 1 and which has not been contested although such a possibility is afforded under national law must be set aside where that is permissible under national law but not mandatory? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Are Article 10 EC and Article 11 of the licensing directive to be interpreted as meaning that a fee assessment that determines fees within the meaning of Question 1 and which has not been contested although such a possibility is afforded under national law must be set aside where that is permissible under national law but not mandatory?

---
*June 20, 1932.*

#### Gisin (Albert), Respondent, vs. Gillis, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Powell & Sprowls*of Superior.

For the respondent: *Curran & Sher*of Superior.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
<PAGE>

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-31911) pertaining to the 1995 Stock Option Plan of SRI/Surgical
Express, Inc. (formerly Sterile Recoveries, Inc.) of our report dated February
7, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
SRI/Surgical Express, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2002.

                             /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Tampa, Florida
March 28, 2003
ARDARIUS HARRIS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-4001

_____________________________/

Opinion filed May 11, 2017. 

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Mark W. Moseley, Judge.

Ardarius Harris, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., WINOKUR and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
# Stormwater Runoff Control (Ac.) (570) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Stormwater Runoff Control (Ac.) (570) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Stormwater Runoff Control (Ac.) (570).

## 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)

Stormwater Runoff Control (Ac.) (570) (9/2020) Standard Document(73.47 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

 Stormwater Runoff Control (Ac.) (570) Overview(499.78 KB)

 Stormwater Runoff Control (Ac.) (570) CPPE(25.23 KB)

 Stormwater Runoff Control (Ac.) (570) Network Effects Diagram(91.1 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
EXHIBIT 31.a

I, John P. Manning, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BCTC IV Assignor Corp. (the "Assignor");
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Assignor as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Assignor and have:



1. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relating to the Assignor, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
2. evaluated the effectiveness of the Assignor's disclosure controls and procedures  and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
3. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



1. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Assignor's auditors and the audit committee of the Assignor's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



1. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Assignor's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
2. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Assignor's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date:  May 15, 2006 | /s/ John P. Manning 
|------------------- | --------------------
|                    | John P. Manning     
|                    | Director, President 
|                    | (Principal Executive
|                    | Officer), BCTC IV   
|                    | Assignor Corp.
# C_2004182EN.01000101.xml

| 15.7.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

14 July 2004

(2004/C 182/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2381 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 134,80 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4355 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,6662 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,212 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5248 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 88,09 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,518 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5819 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 31,501 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 249,93 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6624 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4263 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,47 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 41 016 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,85 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 40,003 |
| TRL | Turkish lira | 1 774 400 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7069 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,6348 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,6597 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8902 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,107 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 427,47 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,5628 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2381

JPY

Japanese yen

134,80

DKK

Danish krone

7,4355

GBP

Pound sterling

0,6662

SEK

Swedish krona

9,212

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5248

ISK

Iceland króna

88,09

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,518

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5819

CZK

Czech koruna

31,501

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

249,93

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6624

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4263

PLN

Polish zloty

4,47

ROL

Romanian leu

41 016

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,85

SKK

Slovak koruna

40,003

TRL

Turkish lira

1 774 400

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7069

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,6348

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,6597

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8902

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,107

KRW

South Korean won

1 427,47

ZAR

South African rand

7,5628

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---