alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
July 2021

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

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

Conservation Practice Overview

Fence (Code 382) 

A constructed barrier to animals or people. 

Practice Information 

This practice is applied to any area where livestock and/or

wildlife control is needed, or where access to people is to

be regulated. A wide variety of fences exist, however,

fencing material and construction quality is always

designed and installed to assure the fence will meet the

intended purpose. The standard fence is constructed of

either barbed or smooth wire suspended by posts with support structures. Other types include woven

wire for small animals, electric fence, and suspension fences which are designed with heavy, but

widely spaced posts and support structures. 

Things to consider when planning a fence: 

• Avoid irregular terrain as much as possible 

• Impact on wildlife movement 

• State and local laws 

• Livestock handling, watering, and feeding requirements 

Operation and maintenance for a fence include regular inspections after storms and other 

disturbance events. Maintain and repair a fence as needed, including tree and limb removal, 

water-gap replacement, repair or replacement of control features, and maintenance of fladry or

signage. 

 

Common Associated Practices 

NRCS Conservation Practice Standard (CPS) Fence (Code 382) is commonly applied with NRCS

CPSs such as Prescribed Grazing (Code 528) and Use Exclusion (Code 472). For further

information, contact your local NRCS field office.
# C_2005143EN.01003802.xml

| 11.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/38

---

Action brought on 16 March 2005 by Nicola Falcione against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-132/05)

(2005/C 143/73)

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 16 March 2005 by Nicola Falcione, residing in Brussels, represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Xavier Martin, Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of 24 March 2004 fixing the definitive recruitment grade at Grade A5/4; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 24 March 2004 fixing the definitive recruitment grade at Grade A5/4;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant was appointed an official at Grade A5/4 by decision of 24 March 2004. In his application he challenges his definitive recruitment classification. In support of his application, the applicant alleges infringement of Article 31 of the Staff Regulations and a manifest error of assessment. The applicant claims that the Commission ought also to have taken into account his relevant work and university level experience between 16 July 1974 and 28 February 1982. The Commission omitted to take that experience into account because the applicant did not obtain his university economics degree until 1 March 1982.

---
Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C05108120 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C05108120 
I ~ 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C05108120 HANDLE VIA 

5- l .. r" ~. trL.~j~'" 

~TIONAL RECONNAISSANCE 2.....~ WASHINGT ON, D.C. ~ 

BYEMAN 

CONTROL SYSTEM 

THE NRO STAFF 

HANDLE VIA. 

26 April 1968 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD 

SUBJECT: Irving Chute Co, Gardena, California Facility 

Discussed with I I KWBANJO, and LtCol 

Stevenson, SAFSP, th~e--s-t~a-t~u-s--o-f~m--a~t~t~ers at subject facility 

on this date. Bothl land Stevenson visited the 

facility on April 22nd. The results of their findings are 

as follows: 

1. The facility has stopped hiring non-citizens. 

2. A 24 hour guard service has been implemented 

perimeter to the entire facility. 

3. A guard and badging system has been implemented 

for the "Hartley Area". Physical security related to 

"Hartley Area" is being "beefed-up" by addition of steel 

wire above 7-8 feet partitioning walls which are not 

presently ceiling high. 

4. The "C" and IfG" chute work is being moved into 

the "Hartley Area", the target date is one week. 

5. The facility is hiring a professional industrial security officer. 

6. OSI (in coordination withl land Bumm) is 

continuing investigation into possible sabotage. At 

present, the investigation is limited to checking "personalities" and their possible association with chutes 

damaged in the past. 

7. BANJO and SAFSP are beginning to suggest to 

facility management, those individuals who should not 

work in the "Hartley Area". There 1s no evidence -=tf:i:at 

management will not cooperate completely. 

CONTROL No,--=I::.::N:.:...T=-E=R::.:N:.:.;A=L,,--_ 

BYEMAN COPY_-=;--_OF_-:--_COPI ES 

CONTROL SYSTEM PAGE_l __ OF_l __ P AGES 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C05108120 
HANDLE VIA 

BYEMAN 

CONTROL SYSTEM 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C05108120 

1nfetKt:::::::: 

8. QC procedures in general have been stepped up 

through the prime contractors. 

~~;AsecuritY NRO Staff 

HANDLE VIA 

BYEMAN 

CONTROL SYS TEM 

CONTROL No,---,I=.N=.:..::T:..;E=RN",,-,-A=L=--_ COpy ____ OF ____ COPIES 

PAGE_..,,2 __ O F--,2",-_ PAGES 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C05108120
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-450-CV

BETTY JEAN REAMES	APPELLANT

	V.

DOUGLAS MACK REAMES	APPELLEE

	------------

	FROM THE 393RD DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

	------------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

	------------

	Appellant Betty Jean Reames is attempting to appeal from the trial court’s December 3, 2007 order denying her “Motion to Enter Orders on Motion for New Trial.”  The trial court signed the final judgment in this case on January 30, 2007.  Appellant timely filed a motion for new trial on February 28, 2007, and it was overruled by operation of law seventy-five days after the judgment was signed.2  See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(c).  The trial court’s plenary power expired on May 15, 2007, thirty days after the motion was overruled.  See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(e).  Therefore, the trial court did not have the power to enter the December 3, 2007 order, and it was a nullity.  See State ex rel. Latty v. Owens, 907 S.W.2d 484, 486 (Tex. 1995) (stating that judicial action taken after a court’s jurisdiction over cause has expired is a nullity).   

	Because appellant’s motion for new trial was overruled by operation of law, she had ninety days from the day the judgment was signed, or until April 30, 2007, to file a notice of appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(1).  She did not file this notice of appeal, however, until December 5, 2007.  

	On January 18, 2008, the court notified appellant that it was concerned that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal and stated that unless appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed with the court a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  We have received no response.

	The times for filing a notice of appeal are jurisdictional in this court, and absent a timely filed notice of appeal or extension request, we must dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b), 26.3; Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (holding that once extension period has passed, a party can no longer invoke an appellate court’s jurisdiction).  Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

							PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	MCCOY, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and LIVINGSTON, J.

DELIVERED: March 6, 2008
.' NRO APPROVED FOR RELEAS.E 

DECLASSIFIED BY: C/IART l 

DECLASSIFIE;D ON: 1 OCTOBER 2012 

TOP SEelH 

.f&t-NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE 

WASHINGTON. D.C. 

; . 

\ rill 1 ..tCIJ' 

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR ~:- . 

February 2, 1970 .(!) 

MEMQRANDUM FOR THE NRP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 

SUBJECT: Adequacy of " the CORONA/HEXAGON Overlap 

The HEXAGON Review Committee, chaired· by Bob ~aka, 

has conducted two reviews of the HEXAGON Program since the 

report to the Execu.ti ve Committee' on June 20,' 1969._ Both 

times the Review Committee has concluded that no new order 

for CORONAs should be placed. Their r.eports of . 

November 4, 1969 and Ja.nuary 22, 1970 as well as Bob's 

memorandum to me are a tta.ched for your information. I 

believe we sho~td accept their recommenda.tion that there 

be n'o additional purchases of CORONA systems, and I will 

appreCiate your concurrence. . 

Attachments 

BYE-12566-70, Jan. 28, 1970 

BYE-13478-6'9, Nov. 4, 1969 

BYE-12546-70, Jan. 22, 1970 

·~f~~ Jtn L. McLucas . 

s 

CORONA HEXAGON ."., / MANDL,VIA 

BYEMAN 

COIITIIOI. SYIU. 

.- f8PSEeRET .. CLUDIO FItO. ",,",."11e l.t.ADINt 

DOe ... umv. 1100. fO DOIS NOT .P'LY 

COItTllO\ NO BYE-l2 56 7 -70 

COpy f OF CO".. . ..... 1 . OF" 1 ''' •• 1 

. C~C~ .. 0 ~ - (J ~ /
Exhibit 10.19(c)
 Third Amendment To The  Sterling Chemicals, Inc. Comprehensive Welfare  Benefit Plan
 Whereas Existing Plan
 Whereas Committee
 Whereas Amendment
 Now, Therefore
 Amendment of Article IV of the Existing Plan
 Article IV
 Eligibility and Participation




---



##### 



Amendment of Exhibits to the Existing Plan
 Effect of Amendments
 Binding Effect
 Severability
 Governing Law To The Extent Not Superseded By The Laws Of The United
States, This Amendment Shall Be Construed and Enforced in Accordance With, and the Rights
of the Parties Shall Be Governed By, the Internal Laws of the State of Texas, Without Reference to
Principles of Conflicts of Law.
 In Witness Whereof
 Sterling Chemicals, Inc.Employee Benefits Plans CommitteeBy:
    /s/ Kenneth M. HalePrinted Name:  Kenneth M. HaleChairman -2-




---



##### 



Exhibit A
 Insured Benefit Agreements and Pre-Paid Health Plans
 Description
    
    Policy or Group NumbersSterling Chemicals, Inc.
Medical Benefits Plan for
Hourly-Paid Employees
    
    Aetna 
Group Policy No. GP-479734 (POS) 
Contract Number 396438 (HMO) 
Insured HMO and POSSterling Chemicals, Inc. Medical
Benefits Plan for Salaried
Employees
    
    Aetna 
Group Policy No. GP479734 (POS) 
Contract Number 396438 (HMO) 
Insured HMO and POSSterling Chemicals, Inc. Medical
Benefits Plan for Pre-65 Retirees
    
    Aetna 
Group Policy No. GP-479734 (POS) 
Contract Number 396438 (HMO) 
Insured HMO and PPO for pre-65 retireesSterling Chemicals, Inc. Long Term
Disability Plan for Hourly
Employees
    
    Unum Policy # 128333 021Sterling Chemicals, Inc. Long Term
Disability Plan for Salaried
Employees
    
    Unum Policy No. 128333 011Sterling Chemicals, Inc. Group
Life Insurance Plan
    
    MetLife 

Group Policy No. 102890-GSterling Chemicals, Inc. Group
Life Insurance Plan for Fibers
Retirees
    
    MetLife 

Group Policy No. 102890-GSterling Chemicals, Inc. Group
Life Insurance Plan for Retirees
(this plan will terminate as of
December 31, 2010 and will no
longer be part of this WRAP Plan
as of such date))
    
    MetLife 

Group Policy No. 102890-G
 A-i




---



##### 



Exhibit B
 Self-Insured Benefit Agreements
  Plan
    
    DescriptionSterling Chemicals,
Inc. Health Care Expense
Reimbursement Plan
    
    Self-Funded Health FSASterling Chemicals, Inc.
Dental Assistance Plan
    
    Self-Funded Dental Benefit For All Active
Employees
Aetna Services Agreement-ASA-479734Sterling Chemicals, Inc.
Fourth Amended and
Restated Severance Pay
Plan (to be superseded by
the Sterling Chemicals,
Inc. Fifth Amended and
Restated Severance Pay
Plan effective as of March
1, 2010)
    
    Self-Funded For Salaried Employees OnlySterling Chemicals, Inc.
Short Term Disability Plan
for Hourly Employees
    
    Self-Funded Short Term Disability PlanSterling Chemicals, Inc.
Short Term Disability Plan
for Salaried Employees
    
    Self-Funded Short Term Disability Plan
 B-i
#### Superior Water, Light & Power Company, Appellant, vs. City of Superior and others, Respondents.

*March 4*

April *11, 1922.*

*Appeal: Demurrer: Leave to plead over: Judgment on failure to plead.*

Where, after a demurrer to a complaint, overruled in the circuit « court, was sustained on appeal, and upon remanding the record the circuit court granted leave to amend within twenty days, and upon failure of plaintiff to plead over entered final judgment dismissing the complaint, the judgment will be affirmed, the proceedings being regular and in accordance with proper practice.

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Douglas county: G. N. Risjord, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of Grace, *Fridley & Crawford*of Superior, attorneys, and *Harry L. Butler*of Madison, of counsel, and for the respondents on that of *T. L. McIntosh*and *R. M. Rieser,*both of Superior.

Jones, J.

On October 8, 1918/ the council of the city of *Superior*passed a resolution declaring the intention of the city to take over the property of the *Superior Water, Light & Power Company*in accordance with the public utility law. Thereupon the company brought suit to enjoin the city from so doing. From an order overruling a demurrer to the complaint the city appealed to this court. The court reversed the order overruling the demurrfer and remanded the case with directions to sustain the demurrer. 174 Wis. 257, 181 N. W. 113. Plaintiff filed a motion for a rehearing, which was ordered on one of the questions involved. A reargument was had, and thereafter, on May 31, 1921, the court rendered a decision sustaining its previous mandate. 174 Wis. 257, at p. 292 (183 N. W. 254). Upon the remanding of the record the circuit court entered *627an order sustaining the demurrer, with leave to amend the complaint within twenty days. The plaintiff not pleading over, final judgment was entered sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the complaint. The present appeal is from this judgment.

From an examination of the record it appears that the proceedings in the court below were regular and in accordance with the proper practice, and the judgment as entered should be affirmed.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
July 2022

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

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

Conservation Practice Overview

pond (Code 378) 

A pond is a water impoundment made by constructing an

embankment, by excavating a dugout, or by a combination

of both. 

Practice Information 

NRCS defines ponds constructed by the first method as

embankment ponds, and those constructed by the second

method as excavated ponds. 

The purpose of a of pond is to store water for livestock, fish and wildlife, recreation, fire control,

erosion control, flow detention, and other uses such as improving water quality . 

The Pond practice standard applies where failure of the embankment and resulting release of water

will not result in loss of life, damage to homes, commercial buildings, main highways, railroads, or

interruption of public utilities; the product of the storage (acre/feet) times the effective height of the

dam is less than 3,000 and the effective height of the dam is 35 feet or less. 

The site must be such that runoff from the design storm can pass through a natural or constructed

spillway at a safe velocity. The drainage area must be protected from erosion that would significantly

reduce the expected life of the structure and be large enough so that surface runoff and groundwater

flow will normally maintain an adequate supply of water in the pond. The water quality must be

suitable for the intended use of the water. The topography and soil must be suitable for the pond. 

The pond will require maintenance over the expected life of the practice. 

Common Associated Practices 

A Pond (378) is commonly applied with conservation practices such as Prescribed Grazing (528),

Fence (382), Access Control (472), and Critical Area Planting (342). 

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office,
United Air Lines

United Airlines, Inc.

Flight Operations

233 South Wacker Dr

Chicago, IL 60606

January 5, 2012

U. S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

400 7th Street, SW, Room PL-400

Washington, DC 20591-0001

Re: Exemption Number 8657B

Ladies and Gentlemen:

United Airlines, Incorporated, operating certificate CALA 014A, petitions the Administrator for an extension of 

Exemption No. 8657A. This request does not seek a change to the current exemption, which will expire on January 

31, 2012.

Exemption Number 8657B lowers the ceiling and visibility from 2000 feet and 3 statute miles to 1000 feet and 2 

statute miles for minimum weather forecast or other appropriate reports to not require the naming of a destination 

alternate using the current restrictions and limitations approved by the Administrator. This exemption has been used 

since originally issued with no known compromise to safety.

In accordance with the provision of 14 CFR 11, Subpart A - Rulemaking Procedures, Petitions for Rulemaking and 

for Exemption, Continental Airlines requests that a finding of good cause be made for waiving publication in the 

Federal Register. A summary of the original petition was published in the Federal Register and no precedents will 

be set by granting the requested relief. Continental Airlines therefore, requests that the publication and comment 

period be waived.

As required a summary of this petition is attached.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please call. The office phone number is (872)-825-6572.

Respectfully Submitted,

Capt. Maurice J. Montgomery JR

Manager – Flight Operations
Summary

United Airlines, Incorporated, operating certificate CALA 014A, petitions the Administrator for an extension of 

Exemption 8657B that permits relief from FAR §121.619, in order to conduct domestic operations utilizing a 

different methodology to determine the need for naming a destination alternate airport. This exemption lowers the 

ceiling and visibility from 2000 feet and 3 statute miles to 1000 feet and 2 statute miles for minimum weather 

forecast or other appropriate reports to not require the naming of a destination alternate using the current restrictions 

and limitations approved by the Administrator.
----

Euro exchange rates (1)

5 May 2005

(2005/C 111/05)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----
No. 85-6253.

#### Ford *v.*Georgia.

Sup. Ct. Ga. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*and certiorari granted. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of *Griffith*v. *Kentucky, ante,*p. 314.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 7466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02871]



[[Page 7466]]

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

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notice

February 6, 2015.

TIME AND DATE:  1:00 p.m., Thursday, February 19, 2015.

PLACE:  The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street 
entrance).

STATUS:  Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:  The Commission will consider and act upon 
the following in open session: Big Ridge, Inc. v. Secretary of Labor, 
Docket Nos. LAKE 2011-699-R, et al.; and Jim Walter Resources, Inc. v. 
Secretary of Labor, Docket Nos. SE 2011-477-R, et al. (Issues include 
whether the Administrative Law Judges erred in upholding certain orders 
issued pursuant to sections 103(j) and 103(k) of the Federal Mine 
Safety and Health Act of 1977.)
    Any person attending this meeting who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. 
Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and Sec.  2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO:  Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 
708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

Sarah L. Stewart,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2015-02871 Filed 2-6-15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
# C_2004156EN.01001001.xml

| 12.6.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 156/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.6.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/10

---

(2004/C 156/19)

Last publication of the Court of Justice in the
  Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

OJ C 146, 29.5.2004

OJ C 146, 29.5.2004

Past publications

OJ C 106, 30.4.2004

OJ C 94, 17.4.2004

OJ C 85, 3.4.2004

OJ C 71, 20.3.2004

OJ C 59, 6.3.2004

OJ C 47, 21.2.2004

These texts are available on:

| | EUR-Lex: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex |
| --- | --- |

EUR-Lex: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex

| | CELEX: http://europa.eu.int/celex |
| --- | --- |

CELEX: http://europa.eu.int/celex

http://europa.eu.int/celex

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          12,368
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,182,776
<ALLOWANCES>                                   123,272
<INVENTORY>                                  1,653,827
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,073,532
<PP&E>                                       2,588,226
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,057,882
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,427,579
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,351,779
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,598,000
<COMMON>                                    15,480,552
<OTHER-SE>                                (17,094,564)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,427,579
<SALES>                                      7,194,018
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,488,044
<CGS>                                        3,898,563
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,696,583
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               530,279
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               297,411
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             627,412
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,637,381)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,637,381)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (1,302,473)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,939,854)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.19)
        

</TABLE>