Georgia and Florida Sample Clauses

Georgia and Florida. Atlanta Gas Light Company (“AGLC”) is required to investigate possible environmental contamination at manufactured gas plants (“MGP”) and, if necessary, clean up any contamination. AGLC has been associated with ten MGP sites in Georgia and three in Florida. One new former MGP site has been recently identified adjacent to an existing MGP remediation site. Based on investigations to date, cleanup has either already occurred or is likely at most of these sites. As of June 30, 2010, the remediation program in Georgia was approximately 100% complete, except for a few remaining areas of recently discovered impact, although ground water remediation continues. Investigation is concluded for one phase of the Orlando, Florida site; however, the Environmental Protection Agency has not approved the clean up plans. For elements of the Georgia and Florida sites where we still cannot provide engineering cost estimates, considerable variability remains in future cost estimates. As reported in Holdings Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2009, the projected costs of the remaining remediation at these sites are estimated to be $64-113 million. New Jersey. In New Jersey, Pivotal Utility Holdings, Inc. (f/k/a NUI Utilities, Inc.) (“PUHI”) owns five properties where former MGPs were operated. A sixth MGP site, formerly operated by Elizabethtown Gas, a division of PUHI, operating in New Jersey (“ETG”), is now owned by a church. PUHI is currently conducting remediation activities with oversight from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Various investigation and cleanup investigations have been conducted and are progressing slowly, but cleanups are likely at most sites. Because we still cannot provide engineering cost estimates, considerable variability remains in future cost estimates. As reported in Holdings Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2009, the projected costs of the remaining remediation at these sites are estimated to be $69-134 million.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Georgia and Florida. Atlanta Gas Light Company (“AGLC”) is required to investigate possible environmental contamination at manufactured gas plants (“MGP”) and, if necessary, clean up any contamination. AGLC has been associated with teneleven MGP sites in Georgia and three in Florida. One new former MGP site has been recently identified adjacent to an existing MGP remediation site. Based on investigations to date, cleanup has either already occurred or is likely at most of these sites. As of June 30, 2010,December 31, 2011, the remediation program in Georgia was approximately 100% complete, except for a few remaining areas of recently discovered impact, although ground water remediation continues. Investigation is concluded for one phase of the Orlando, Florida site; however, the Environmental Protection Agency has not approved the clean upcleanup plans. For elements of the Georgia and Florida sites where we still cannot provide engineering cost estimates, considerable variability remains in future cost estimates. As reported in Holdings AnnualGuarantor’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-KQ for 2009,the quarter ending March 31, 2012, the projected costs of the remaining remediation at these sites are estimated to be $6442-11398 million.
Georgia and Florida. Atlanta Gas Light Company (“AGLC”) is required to investigate possible environmental contamination at manufactured gas plants (“MGP”) and, if necessary, clean up any contamination. AGLC has been associated with ten MGP sites in Georgia and three in Florida. One new former MGP site has been recently identified adjacent to an existing MGP remediation site. Based on investigations to date, cleanup has either already occurred or is likely at most of these sites. As of June 30, 2010, the remediation program in Georgia was approximately 100% complete, except for a few remaining areas of recently discovered impact, although ground water remediation continues. Investigation is concluded for one phase of the Orlando, Florida site; however, the Environmental Protection Agency has not approved the clean up plans. For elements of the Georgia and Florida sites where we still cannot provide engineering cost estimates, considerable variability remains in future cost estimates. As reported in Holdings Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2009, the projected costs of the remaining remediation at these sites are estimated to be $64-113 million.

Related to Georgia and Florida

  • Massachusetts If I reside in Massachusetts, I acknowledge that the Company provided me with at least ten (10) business days to review and sign this Agreement, during which time I had the right to consult with counsel of my choice at my own expense. I further understand and agree that voluntarily signing this agreement before the expiration of ten (10) business days shall serve as a waiver of the ten (10) day review period.

  • Arizona The following Arizona provisions are not intended to, and do not, limit the express choice of New York law set forth in Section 9.3 of this Agreement and as set forth in the other Loan Documents, and are set forth herein, if and to the extent that, notwithstanding the choice of law provisions contained in this Agreement and the other Loan Documents, Arizona law is held to govern any Mortgage encumbering a Property located in Arizona or any other Loan Document:

  • Massachusetts Law to Apply -------------------------- This Contract shall be construed and the provisions thereof interpreted under and in accordance with laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

  • Illinois The following counties in the State of Illinois: Cook, Lake, McHenry, Kane, DuPage, Will as well as any other counties in the State of Illinois in which the Employee regularly (a) makes contact with customers of the Company or any of its subsidiaries, (b) conducts the business of the Company or any of its subsidiaries or (c) supervises the activities of other employees of the Company or any of its subsidiaries as of the Date of Termination.

  • Massachusetts Law This Agreement and all rights and obligations hereunder, including matters of construction, validity, and performance, shall be governed by the laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

  • Georgia Law This Agreement and each Note shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the law of the State of Georgia.

  • Texas Matagorda County Filed on April 27, 2006, under Instrument No. 063043, Official Records XxXxxxxx County Filed on April 27, 2006, Volume 168 Page 336 Xxxxxxx County Filed on April 27, 2006, under Instrument No. 263022, Volume 650 Page 320, Official Records

  • Oklahoma The only provisions of Paragraph 5(b) that will apply during Employee’s ongoing (not temporary or business travel) assignment in Oklahoma shall be Subparagraph (i), and to the extent necessary to prevent the direct solicitation of the sale of goods and/or services from the customers of the Company, Subparagraphs (ii) and (iii), and to the extent necessary to protect the Company’s trade secrets, Subparagraphs (v) and (vi).

  • Massachusetts Business Trust With respect to any Fund which is a party to this Agreement and which is organized as a Massachusetts business trust, the term “Fund” means and refers to the trustees from time to time serving under the applicable trust agreement of such trust, as the same may be amended from time to time (the ‘Declaration of Trust”). It is expressly agreed that the obligations of any such Fund hereunder shall not be binding upon any of the trustees, shareholders, nominees, officers, agents or employees of the Fund personally, but bind only the trust property of the Fund as set forth in the applicable Declaration of Trust. In the case of each Fund which is a Massachusetts business trust (in each case, a “Trust”), the execution and delivery of this Agreement on behalf of the Trust has been authorized by the trustees, and signed by an authorized officer, of the Trust, in each case acting in such capacity and not individually, and neither such authorization by the trustees nor such execution and delivery by such officer shall be deemed to have been made by any of them individually, but shall bind only the trust property of the Trust as provided in its Declaration of Trust.

  • California If the Participant is employed in the State of California immediately prior to the Termination Date, then Sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Award Agreement shall be restated to read as follows:

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.