alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Pamela F. Faggert 

Vice President and Chief Environmental Officer 

Dominion Resources Services, Inc. 

5000 Dominion Boulevard, Glen Allen, VA 23060 

Phon" 804-273-3467 

By Electronic Delivery: mailto:drabin@mde.state.md.us 

February 16, 2011 

Ms. Deborah Rabin 

Regulations Coordinator 

Air and Radiation Management Administration 

Department of the Environment 

1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730 

Baltimore, MD 21230-1720 

Re: Comments of Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP and Dominion Transmission Inc. 

on the State of Maryland Department of the Environment Request for Comments 

on Proposed Regulatory revisions to Include Greenhouse Gases in Title V and 

NSR PSD Pennitting Programs 

Dear Ms. Rabin: 

Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP and Dominion Transmission Inc. ("Dominion") 

appreciate the opportunity to submit comments to the Maryland Department of the 

Environment ("MDE") regarding the request for comments on Proposed Regulatory 

Revisions to Include Greenhouse Gases in Title V and NSR PSD Pennitting Programs. 

As MDE is aware, Dominion owns and operates one of the nation's largest liquefied 

natural gas (LNG) import facilities in Lusby, Maryland and provides gas transportation 

services in Maryland as well as five other states - Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, 

New York, and Virginia. 

The proposed amendments consist of the addition of definitions of "greenhouse gases" 

and "carbon dioxide equivalent emissions" to the air quality regulations. They also 

designate levels of greenhouse gas emissions that would require a source owner to apply 

for a pennit under DEP's new source review prevention of significant deterioration 

(NSR PSD) and Title V operating pennit programs. We are pleased that these proposed 

Maryland amendments are consistent with the Federal Tailoring Rule requirements and 

that, beyond the requirement to obtain a pennit; the proposed amendments do not 

include any emissions standards or control requirements for greenhouse gases. 
Deborah Rabin 

By Electronic Delivery 

February 16,2011 

Page 2 

The Tailoring Rule requires that Maryland adopt the necessary requirements. If it fails 

to do so, EPA may impose the requirements directly on Maryland sources through a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). In a separate rulemaking, EPA has already 

proposed such a FIP. If implemented, we are concerned that such a FIP would result in 

dual permitting by EPA and MDE. This could significantly slow the issuance of permits 

and modifications as well as increase costs to Maryland businesses. Therefore, we 

support the expeditious promulgation of Maryland's proposed regulatory revisions to 

include greenhouse gases in Title V and NSR PSD Permitting Programs and to amend 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Air Quality to reflect these provisions. 

Dominion appreciates MDE's consideration of these important issues. If you have any 

questions, please call Paula Hamel at 804-273-3024 or e-mail at 

paula.a.hamel@dom.com. 

fryerelY, n ~J~~7j Pamela F. Faggert 

cc: 

Carolyn Moss, Dominion 

II 

I 

I
#### Philip Lee et al., Appellants, v Kent Hazzard Jaeger Wilson Fay & Conroy, Also Known as Kent Hazzard Jaeger Greer Wilson & Fay, et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[62 NYS3d 320]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth L. Thompson, Jr., J.), entered September 23, 2016, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was unable to demonstrate both that defendant attorneys’ attempts to seek enforcement of the settlement agreement in the underlying proceeding and failure to obtain payment of the remaining amount due, execution of a collateral security agreement, and delivery of the corporate shares allegedly owned equally by the parties in that proceeding were the result of a departure from defendants’ professional standard of care, and that the sale of the corporation’s sole asset prior to payment or delivery of the shares to plaintiff was the “but for” cause of any damages *(see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci,**420*Corker & Sauer,*8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]). Defendants’ failure to obtain the settling obligor’s execution of a collateral security agreement is distinguishable from those cases relied upon by plaintiff in which the defendant attorneys failed to properly file executed security agreements *(cf. S & D Petroleum Co. v Tamsett,*144 AD2d 849 [3d Dept 1988]; *Deb-Jo Constr. v Westphal,*210 AD2d 951 [4th Dept 1994]).

We have considered plaintiff’s other contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Kapnick, Kern and Singh, JJ.
# Environmental cleanup updates discussed at quarterly public meeting 

/ Published Oct. 22, 2019
RICHMOND, VA, 
Community members attended the Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management Richmond’s Environmental Cleanup Program quarterly Restoration Advisory Board meeting Oct. 21 at the Bensley Community Center in Chesterfield County, Virginia.

DLA established a RAB for Defense Supply Center Richmond in January 2002 to provide a forum for the community to be involved in DSCR’s Environmental Cleanup Program.

Defense Logistics Agency Aviation Commander Air Force Brig. Gen. David Sanford, along with David Gibson, site director, DLA Installation Management Richmond and Jimmy Parrish, chief, DLA Installation Management Richmond’s Environmental Management Division were among the close to a dozen attendees.

David Hufford, environmental engineer with the installation’s Environmental Office, opened the meeting by giving an update to several ongoing projects, including DSCR groundwater sampling; as well as updates on cleanup efforts at various locations on the installation. He also touched on the five-year review that’s ongoing, as well as an update on the pending Community Involvement Plan.

James Spencer from the engineering firm Architecture, Engineering, Consulting, Operations, and Maintenance (AECOM) gave an update on Operable Unit 8, including remedial actions completed to date and planned remedy optimization activities.

As an advisory board, the RAB makes suggestions, recommendations, and comments on issues concerning investigations and remediation activities. It is made up of local citizens, DLA representatives, business groups and personnel from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineering, the Environmental Protection Agency, Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality and Chesterfield County. The RAB is co-chaired by a DSCR representative and a community representative. 

The next RAB meeting is scheduled for January 13.
# New video series highlights employee views of DLA Culture Survey

/ Published Oct. 22, 2020
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
Tya Dammer believes in the power of the Defense Logistics Agency’s Culture/Climate Survey to make positive changes throughout the agency. As a DLA Human Resources employee, Dammer knew lack of career development opportunities was a popular concern among participants of the 2018 survey.

“Based on that information, we made one of our goals in our culture action plan to increase Executive Development Program nominations by 30%. I myself applied to EDP and was accepted,” she said in a new video series that highlights employees’ support for the 2020 survey.

The survey launched Oct. 9 and lasts five weeks. It’s normally conducted every 18-24 months to assess employees’ attitudes in areas ranging from morale to job satisfaction but was delayed this year due to the pandemic. Results will identify areas that need improvement and enable action planning for positive change.

All DLA employees – civilians, service members and local nationals – are receiving email invitations to take the confidential, web-based survey, which takes about 30 to 45 minutes to complete.

Honney Barner from DLA Information Operations said he believes employees should take the survey because the changes it drives impact today’s employees and tomorrow’s.

“There will be people coming to DLA years after we leave and this survey is going to impact their lifestyle and how they work,” he said. “Your voice is our future.”

Videos featuring culture survey views from Dammer, Barner and employees from DLA’s major subordinate commands are available at the Defense Visual Information Distribution Service.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jai Ortiz, Appellant.

[60 NYS3d 827]

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie G. Wittner, J.), rendered May 8, 2012, as amended May 15, 2012, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of two counts of burglary in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 7V2 years, unanimously reversed, on the law, the pleas vacated, and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

The preservation requirement for challenges to guilty pleas does not apply in this “rare case” where “defendant’s factual recitation negate [d] an essential element of the crime pleaded to” and the court “accept [ed] the plea without making further inquiry to ensure that defendant understood] the nature of the charge and that the plea [was] intelligently entered.” Depending on the particular facts, the burglary of a store in a mixed commercial and residential building may, or may not, constitute second-degree burglary *(see People v Joseph,*28 *449NY3d 1003 [2016]; *People v McCray,*23 NY3d 621, 627-629 [2014]). Viewing the plea allocution as a whole, we conclude that defendant’s responses consistently asserted that he only committed commercial burglaries, notwithstanding that other portions of the buildings were residential, and that these responses thus tended to negate the “dwelling” element of second-degree burglary. The court’s follow-up questions failed to establish that defendant understood he was admitting that the dwelling requirement was satisfied, and that he was giving up his right to litigate that factual issue.

The fact that defendant attempted to raise this issue in an unsuccessful motion under CPL article 440 and failed to obtain leave to appeal does not foreclose review on direct appeal, but only limits it to review of the plea allocution record itself (see *People v Evans,*16 NY3d 571, 574-575 [2011], *cert denied*565 US 912 [2011]). The issue is amply reviewable on the plea minutes themselves, and neither expansion of the record nor resort to anything extrinsic to the plea colloquy is necessary.

Concur — Acosta, P.J., Renwick, Webber, Oing and Moulton, JJ.
Exhibit 12.2

Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Samuel See, certify that:

1.
        I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Asia Pacific Wire & Cable Corporation Limited;


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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;


4.
        The registrants other certifying officers 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 registrant and have:


a)
        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 registrant, 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;


b)
        Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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


c)
        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


5.
        The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):


a)
        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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and






---





b)
        Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.




Date:
        November 5, 2007/s/ Samuel SeeSamuel SeeInterim Chief Financial Officer






---
Order entered March 11, 2019

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 00424

- CR

JOHNELLE RENEE HALL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 10

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. MA17

- 13792

- L



### O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s March 5, 2019 third motion for extension of time to file

his brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant’s tendered brief filed as of the date of

this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
|                                                                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                                       
|                                                                                                    
|Price of U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Antigua and Barbuda (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                    
|                                                                                                    
|Price of U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Antigua and Barbuda (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | 10.80  | 10.80  | 10.80  |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
# DLA Distribution’s F&MWR Chief retires after nearly 36 years of federal service

/ Published April 24, 2020
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Having served nearly 36 years in federal service, James A. Marshall retires from his position as chief, Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management Susquehanna Family and Morale, Welfare and Recreation April 30.

Marshall began his federal career as a lifeguard with DLA Installation Management Susquehanna Family and MWR in 1984. 

Over the span of his career he has served in a myriad of positions which include – recreational assistant and youth activities directorate the Fitness Center; business manager of  Recycling Operations and Business and Recreation Program; and financial manager of the Family and MWR administrative office. Marshall has served as the chief, Family and MWR for the past ten years.

Despite the closure of the military housing program, Marshall’s team has remained focused on providing programs to improve the quality of life for all service members, federal employees and their families in the community. MWR employees strive to deliver the highest quality programs and services that range from. MWR programs relieve stress, build strength and resilience, and help the DLA workforce stay physically, mentally and financially fit. 

“Working as a team has always been successful for me when all team members focus on their responsibilities,” said Marshall. “I always have believed in short- and long-term planning. Staying ahead of problems and making alternate plans for all situations.”

From the DLA Family & MWR lifeguard who worked his way to chief of the entire DLA Installation Management Susquehanna Family & MWR program, Marshall’s advice for those folks wanting to progress in their career paths is to “stay focused on your responsibilities and build good working relationships with your co-workers ... communication is important on all levels.”

Marshall’s career has allowed him to visit other installations within DLA to learn from their Family and MWR programs and find ways to improve the programs at Defense Distribution Center Susquehanna.

“The highlight of my career has been seeing the Family and  MWR facilities renovated here, or in the case of the fitness center, a new building constructed,” said Marshall, adding, “This has improved our ability to provide better service to the community.”

Marshall has a deep appreciation for the men and women serving the nation. “I want people to know about the men and women of Defense Logistics Agency that they are dedicated to the mission of supporting our warfighters all over the world. I am honored to have the opportunity to work on a team that provides Family and MWR programs for them.”

“This has been a very rewarding life experience for me,” said Marshall.
#### Com. v. Rugg

08/25/2016

117 WAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 120 A.3d 387
KNUTSON MORTGAGE CORPORATION
3001 METRO DR #400
BLOOMINGTON MN 55425



RE: Officer's Certificate

Dear Master Servicer:

The  undersigned  Officer  certifies  the  following  for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1996:

(A)  I have reviewed the activities and  performance of the Servicer  during the
     preceding  fiscal year under the terms of the  Servicing  Agreement,  Trust
     Agreement, Pooling and Servicing Agreement and/or Seller/Servicer Guide and
     to the best of these Officers' knowledge, the Servicer has fulfilled all of
     its  duties,   responsibilities   or  obligations  under  these  Agreements
     throughout  such  year,  or if there has been a default  or  failure of the
     servicer to perform any of such duties,  responsibilities or obligations, a
     description  of each  default or failure and the nature and status  thereof
     has been reported to Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.;

(B)  I have  confirmed  than the Servicer is currently an approved FNMA or FHLMC
     servicer in good standing;

(C)  I have confirmed that the Fidelity Bond, the Errors and Omissions Insurance
     Policy  and any other  bonds  required  under  the  terms of the  Servicing
     Agreement,   Trust  Agreement,   Pooling  and  Servicing  Agreement  and/or
     Seller/Servicer Guide are in full force and effect;


(D)  All premiums for each Hazard  Insurance Policy,  Flood Insurance Policy (if
     applicable) and Primary Mortgage  Insurance  Policy (if  applicable),  with
     respect  to each  Mortgaged  Property,  have  been  paid  and that all such
     insurance policies are in full force and effect;

(E)  All real estate  taxes,  governmental  assessments  and any other  expenses
     accrued and due, that if not paid could result in a lien or  encumbrance on
     any  Mortgaged  Property,  have been paid, or if any such costs or expenses
     have not been paid with respect to any Mortgaged  Property,  the reason for
     the non-payment has been reported to Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.;

(F)  All Custodial Accounts have been reconciled and are properly funded; and

(G)  All annual reports of  Foreclosure  and  Abandonment  of Mortgage  Property
     required  per  section  6050J  and  6050P  of the  Internal  Revenue  Code,
     respectively, have been prepared and filed.


Certified By:



/s/Mary L. Sullivan
Officer  Mary L. Sullivan

Vice President
Title

1-9-97
Date