alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# 911 awareness procedures help DSCR employees

/ Published April 28, 2020
RICHMOND, Va., 
National 911 Awareness Month is observed every April on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia. The 911 system serves as a vital link between emergency responders and the public. The number gives the public a single, simple way to call for help in the event of a fire or other emergency. 911 was chosen as the national emergency phone number during the days of rotary telephones because the 9 and the 1 were easy to find on the dial.

Tips for calling 911 in an emergency:
      - Try to remain calm. You are the eyes and ears of the dispatcher, so the calmer you are, the better they can understand your needs.
      - If the area you are in is unsafe, leave and find a safe location to call from.
      - Know your location.          - Tell the dispatcher the building number, bay, floor, room or cube number you are calling from. Avoid using organization names like Information Operations, or National Guard.
        - If you are not in a building, give the lot number or nearest landmark. If using a building as a landmark, let the dispatcher know which side of the building you are located on. 
      - Know the number of the phone you are calling from and provide an alternate cell phone number if you are evacuating the area.
      - Be patient and let the dispatcher lead the conversation.          - Give short, clear and direct answers to help speed the response. Dispatchers must ask certain questions depending on the type of call; this allows the dispatcher to dispatch the appropriate units. 
      - Follow the directions provided by the dispatcher. You may be given direction on how to perform medical treatments, evacuate the area or send someone to meet the responders.
      - Do not hang up until the dispatcher tells you to; they may need more information or may need to give you pre-arrival instructions.          - If you call 911 by mistake, stay on the line and advise the dispatcher it was a mistake. If you are unable to respond, police officers will be dispatched to your location to check on you. 
      - All calls are prioritized and dispatched in order of severity.
      - From a Voice over Internet Protocol phone [office phone] always dial 911. The 911 phone lines are answered before the business lines.

If you are calling 911 from a cell phone or non-DSCR phone prefix (279), Chesterfield County Emergency Communications Center will answer your call. Tell them that you are calling from Defense Supply Center Richmond or DSCR at 8000 Jefferson Davis Hwy. When calling 911 from a VoIP phone, your call will be answered by the DLA Installation Management Richmond’s Emergency Communications Center.

We will soon be rolling out a new enhancement to our 911 system called Omni, which will allow the dispatchers to pinpoint the exact location of the VoIP phone from which you are calling.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ENDING JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             129
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      966
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        143
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,810
<PP&E>                                           2,489
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,309
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,103
<BONDS>                                          1,360
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            54
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,063
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,309
<SALES>                                          5,460
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,460
<CGS>                                            4,997
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      364
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  70
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    105
<INCOME-TAX>                                        39
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 67
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        67
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.23
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John Etheridge, True Name John Etheredge, Appellant.

[49 NYS3d 625]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Neil E. Ross, J.), entered May 11, 2015, which adjudicated defendant a level two sexually violent offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court providently exercised its discretion when it declined to grant a downward departure *(see People v Gillotti,*23 NY3d 841 [2014]). Defendant’s long period of law abiding conduct after being released from custody was outweighed by the seriousness of the underlying crime, in which defendant repeatedly raped a young child over a period of months. Even if defendant’s clean record for a period of years made him *447significantly less likely to reoffend, the magnitude of harm that would result if he did reoffend establishes a valid reason for denial of a downward departure *(see People v Cabrera,*91 AD3d 479 [2012], *lv denied*19 NY3d 801 [2012]).

The remaining mitigating factors cited by defendant were adequately taken into account by the risk assessment instrument, or were outweighed by the seriousness of the underlying sex offense.

Concur — Renwick, J.R, Mazzarelli, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Webber, JJ.
# DLA Troop Support celebrates two civilian retirees

/ Published Aug. 30, 2019
PHILADELPHIA, 
The Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support said farewell to two civilian employees during a retirement ceremony August 29.

Linda Gruber and Stanley Williams retired from the Construction and Equipment supply chain after 38 and 32 years of service respectively at DLA Troop Support.

DLA Troop Support Deputy Commander Richard Ellis presided over the ceremony and thanked them for their combined 70 years of dedication to the federal government and warfighters.

“You have met every challenge, and our warfighters have never suffered as a result,” Ellis said. “It is a privilege to have this opportunity to celebrate those civilians who have given so much of themselves in support of our warfighters serving around the world.”

During the ceremony, Ellis presented Gruber and Williams with certificates of retirement, DLA Troop Support mementos, and commander’s coins, on behalf of DLA Troop Support Commander Brig. Gen. Gavin Lawrence.

Gruber, who began her DLA Troop Support career in an entry level position as a contract administrator in 1981, retired as a supervisory integrated supplier team chief for the maintenance, repair and operations program. One of her career highlights was being a key member of the team that created and implemented the MRO prime vendor program, which generated $1 billion in sales in fiscal 2018.

“It’s been a wonderful career,” Gruber said.  “I’ve had great opportunities. I’ve been proud and honored to support the military and serve my government, and see places that I never thought I’d see in my life.”

Williams started as a contract specialist in the Defense Industrial Supply Center’s contract management program in 1987. After a number of promotions throughout his career, he retired as an acquisition specialist in the Construction and Equipment supply chain’s post award branch.

“It’s been a privilege,” Williams said. “I’ve been blessed over the years to work with many, many different people and marvelous people who were dedicated and responsible for supporting the warfighters.”

He acknowledged his young coworkers, who he said will be the next generation to keep the post awards branch going for years to come.
EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION  I, James H. Moore, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Mines Management, Inc. (the registrant); 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 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 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 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 10, 2006 /s/ James H. Moore  James H. Moore Chief Financial Officer    1
#### Henri Janian et al., Respondents, v John R. Barnes, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 416]

Rose, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (O’Shea, J.), entered October 4, 2002 in Tioga County, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for a protective order.

When this matter was last before us, we found that the only pertinent issue of fact concerning the effectiveness of plaintiffs’ quitclaim deed was whether or not defendant accepted the deed (284 AD2d 717, 718 [2001]). Subsequently, at his deposition, one of the plaintiffs was unable to recall signing the deed, but acknowledged that the signature appeared to be his. When defendant then sought further disclosure as to the deed’s execution, Supreme Court found no relevant issue of fact as to the deed’s execution and granted plaintiffs’ motion for a protective order. As defendant sought information neither relevant nor necessary to resolving the only issue remaining for trial, we find that Supreme Court did not abuse its considerable discretion in controlling disclosure *(see e.g. Mitchell v Stuart,*293 AD2d 905, 906 [2002]).

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                              
|View History:                                                               
|                                                                            
|Cameron, LA LNG Imports (Price) from Egypt (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                            
|                                                                            
|Cameron, LA LNG Imports (Price) from Egypt (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
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | --     | --     | --    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | --     | 9.08   | --     | --     | --     | --     |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION



I, James H. Moore, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Mines Management, Inc. (the registrant);

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 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 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 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:  May 8, 2006

/s/ James H. Moore



James H. Moore

Chief Financial Officer
# Effects of Pyrethroids on Human Sodium Channels Co - Expressed with β 1 and β 2 Subunits Project Completed By: ChanTest Corporation 14656 Neo Parkway Cleveland, OH 44128 Project Presented By: Steven B. Symington, PhD Department of Biology and Biomedical Science Salve Regina University, Newport, RI 02840 Project Funded By: The Council for the Advancement of Pyrethroid Human Risk Assessment ( CAPHRA)

# Assay in the Context of the A dverse O utcome P athway (AOP)

Expression of Human Na v isoforms in HEK cells

# Relationship of Na v 

# isoforms

Soderlund , **Pestic .**  **Biochem . Physiol.**  , 2010 Catterall et al., **Pharmacol . Rev**  ., 2005

### Human Rat 

# Na v 

# isoforms Expression Changes During Development

Nav 1.2

Nav 1.1 Nav 1.3

Cheah et al., **Channels**, 2013 Beckh et al., **J EMBO**. 1989

# Electrophysiology Method

HEK Cells Human Nav isoform + β 1 β 2 Subunits

Electroporate

Plate human Nav isoform expressing cells for Automated electrophysiology
Determine Control Responses
Determine Pyrethroid Responses IonWorks Barracuda Automated Electrophysiology 5 Min Incubation Overnight IncubationResting Conditions: Data collected after the first pulse (TP1) Use - dependent Conditions: Data collected on the 20 th test pulse (TP20 ) Late Current Ratio between the current measured during depolarization and the maximum inward (peak) current determined ( I late/ I peak) Tail Current Ratio between the current measured after repolarization and the maximum inward (peak) current determined ( I tail/ I peak) 

### Variables Measured

Test Pulse 20 Test Pulse 1

Resting Conditions Use - dependent Conditions

I late / I peakCurrent (nA)Current (nA)

I tail / I peakMaximal Response (efficacy) 

### Use - Dependent Tail Current is the M ost Robust Response to Assess Pyrethroid Effects on Human Na v 

### Isoforms

EC 50 (potency)

### Use - Dependent Tail Current is the M ost Robust Response to Assess Pyrethroid Effects on Human Na v 

### Isoforms

### Na v 

### 1.3 and Na v 

### 1.6 showed the Highest Maximum Response of the Pyrethroids that Affected Human VSSC isoforms

# Conclusions

• Cypermethrin , bifenthrin, and permethrin had no effects on Human Nav 

### tail currents

• Esfenvalerate and deltamethrin had weak effects on Na v 

### 1

. 3 and Na v 

### 1

. 2 tail currents

• The Na v 

### 1

. 3 and Na v 

### 1

. 6 isoforms were the most effected by the pyrethroids that acted on human VSSC isoforms ( Allethrin , Prallethrin, Pyrethrum, and Tefluthrin)

# END
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2114

To provide for the payment to States of plot allowances for certain veterans

eligible for burial in a national cemetery who are buried in cemeteries

of such States.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 12 (legislative day, MAY 2), 1994

Mr. BIDEN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To provide for the payment to States of plot allowances

for certain veterans eligible for burial in a national cemetery who are buried in cemeteries of such States.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. PAYMENT OF PLOT OR INTERMENT ALLOW4 ANCE.

5 Section 2303 of title 38, United States Code, is

6 amended by adding at the end the following new sub7 section:

8 ‘‘(c)(1) Subject to paragraph (3) of this subsection,

9 the Secretary shall pay to any State, or agency or political
2

•S 2114 IS

1 subdivision of such State, a plot or interment allowance

2 of $150 for the burial of any veteran who—

3 ‘‘(A) is eligible for burial in a national cemetery

4 under section 2402 of this title; and

5 ‘‘(B) is buried (without charge for the cost of

6 a plot or interment) in a cemetery, or a section of

7 a cemetery, that—

8 ‘‘(i) is used solely for the interment of per9 sons eligible for burial in a national cemetery;

10 and

11 ‘‘(ii) is owned by such State, or agency or

12 political subdivision.

13 ‘‘(2) The payment of a plot or interment allowance

14 under this subsection shall be in addition to any benefits

15 provided under section 2303 or 2307 of this title, or sub16 section (a) of this section.

17 ‘‘(3) The Secretary may not pay a plot or interment

18 allowance under this subsection for the burial of any vet19 eran for which the Secretary pays a plot or interment al20 lowance under subsection (b)(1) of this section.’’.

Æ