Issue 3 definition
Issue 3. What are the surface effects from underground mining of the LBA tract using room and pillar mining methods, possibly including pillar removal (retreat) mining?
Issue 3. The rule changes would eliminate public participation in the review and assessment of exercises before a licensing board. Commission Response: While it is true that the rule changes will have the likely effect of limiting litigation of the success of exercises in licensing hearings, it is the Commission’8 view that such assessments are not necessary to make the kind of predictive finding on emergency planning called for by the regulations prior to license issuance.
Issue 3. Did the Claimant speedily rush out of an office whilst wearing stiletto high-heeled shoes and did she fail to take heed of the alleged wet floor signs and yellow mop bucket?
Examples of Issue 3 in a sentence
Bellcore GR-1299-CORE, AINGR: Switch Service Control Point (“SCP”) Adjunct Interface, Issue 3, July 1996, and revision 1, November 1996.
Bellcore GR-1298-CORE, AINGR: Switching System, Issue 3, July 1996, and Revision 1, November 1996.
In all cases the requirements of DEFCON 658 (Edn 9/21) and DEFSTAN 05-138 (Issue 3) shall be maintained.
The MSCN concerning the switch from Technical Specification Issue 3 Revision 1 to Technical Specification Issue 4 will be incorporated [CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT].
The dates of publication are: Issue 1 - Sep 2022 Issue 2 - Nov 2022 Issue 3 - Feb 2023 Issue 4 - Apr 2023 2022-23 school year—once in the first semester and twice in the second semester.
More Definitions of Issue 3
Issue 3. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ was concerned with a provision in the NPDES permit requiring an emergency discharge in Chewacla Creek, which could adversely effect the baseline population of the covered species immediately downstream of the Lake ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ dam. We responded that this was a valid concern; however, the SHA does not authorize take of the baseline population of the covered species and should this emergency outfall be used, the Applicants would be exposing themselves to potential liability under the Act. The Service would pursue an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the event and would move forward with an appropriate response to protect the covered species. Such actions might include, but are not limited to, seeking civil and/or criminal penalties as provided in the Act and/or revoking the SHA.
Issue 3. Termination of a commercial agency agreement
Issue 3. What is the true meaning of Clause 3 of the byelaws and whether the Defendants breached it? “No doubt the general rule is that the language of an Act is to be read according to its ordinary grammatical construction unless so reading it would entail some absurdity, repugnancy, or injustice…. But I utterly repudiate the notion that it is competent to a judge to modify the language of an Act of Parliament in order to bring it in accordance with his views as to what is right or reasonable.” Issue 4: Whether the Defendants have acted contumely by continuing to breach Clause 3 of the byelaws despite Injunction?
Issue 3. Does the Commission have the statutory authority to approve FPL’s requested Solar Base Rate Adjustment mechanism for 2024 and 2025 as part of the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement?
Issue 3. The workgroup recommended that phosphorus efficiencies be set 5% lower than sediment efficiencies as a general rule to account for dissolved phosphorus losses not associated with soil losses, unless the scientific research indicates differently. o UMD supports the recommendation that TP efficiencies be set lower than TSS efficiencies; however they suggest that the TP efficiencies be lowered by 10% rather than by 5%. They favor 10% because it implies that there is a significant difference and because it does not indicate a greater level of precision than we have. However, they will defer to the workgroup regarding what percentage is used. o Some members voiced concern that subtracting 10% from TP will affect some BMPs more than others. For example, if the original efficiency is 40% and it is lowered to 30% than it is only reduced by 25%, whereas if the original efficiency is 20% and it is lowered to 10% than it will be reduced by 50%.
Issue 3. Does the Defendant owe the sum of $2,278,912.86 to the Claimant in unpaid invoices for the period of June, 2007 to December, 2009? [16] The Court does not find that there were any inconsistencies between the Claimant’s pleaded case and his evidence on this issue. The Claimant pleaded that on the 12th January, 2010, he delivered to the Defendant a Statement of Accounts covering all transactions between the 9th June, 2007 and the 15th December, 2009, which totalled $2,278,912.86 and that the Defendant, in breach of contract, has failed to pay the balance due17. The Claimant’s case was maintained in its witness statements. Further, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ stated that she was the person who prepared the statement of accounts on behalf of the 17 Paras 8 & 9 of the Amended Statement of Case. Claimant and sent it to the Defendant18. Under cross-examination, neither witness contradicted themselves or the pleadings and maintained that the Claimant issued a statement of accounts in the said amount which remains outstanding. However, other evidence was revealed under cross-examination that the Defendant submitted undermined the inherent probability of the Claimant’s case as follows:
Issue 3. (The Second Step in ▇▇▇▇▇): Adverse Impacts