alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 81/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 81 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5014 April 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 81

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5014 April 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 081/01 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2007/C 081/01

Euro exchange rates

1

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 081/02 | Notice of initiation of an expiry review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia | 2 |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2007/C 081/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4600 — TUI/First Choice) (1) | 7 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY

Commission

2007/C 081/02

Notice of initiation of an expiry review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia

2

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

2007/C 081/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4600 — TUI/First Choice) (1)

7

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2007/C 081/04 | Notice | s3 |

2007/C 081/04

Notice

Notice

s3

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 00444

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

00444\00444_ HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 00444\00444_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00444\00444_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00444\00444_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00444\00444_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00444\00444_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

00444\Certification Statement_00444.pdf Plant certification statement

x 00444\Supporting Documents\00444_Boiler Ash Block Diagram.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00444\Supporting Documents\00444_Cooling Water Block Diagram.xlsx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00444\Supporting Documents\00444_Property Boundaries of the Plant.JPG Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00444\Supporting Documents\00444_ICR CoverLetter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00444\00444_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

00444\00444_ Completeness Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40921

Summary Calendar

JOSE V ABANO

Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND

SECURITY

Defendant - Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:06-CV-23

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Abano brought this Title VII suit against the Department of

Homeland Security, alleging race and national origin discrimination. The

district court granted the Department summary judgment, concluding that

Abano’s suit was not timely. For the reasons set forth in the district court’s

opinion, we AFFIRM. 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 11, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
§ 303.700 State monitoring and enforcement. ( a ) The lead agency must— ( 1 ) Monitor the implementation of this part;
( 2 ) Make determinations annually about the performance of each EIS program using the categories identified in § 303.703(b);
( 3 ) Enforce this part consistent with § 303.704, using appropriate enforcement mechanisms, which must include, if applicable, the enforcement mechanisms identified in § 303.704(a)(1) (technical assistance) and § 303.704(a)(2) (imposing conditions on the lead agency's funding of an EIS program or, if the lead agency does not provide part C funds to the EIS program, an EIS provider), § 303.704(b)(2)(i) (corrective action or improvement plan) and § 303.704(b)(2)(iv) (withholding of funds, in whole or in part by the lead agency), and § 303.704(c)(2) (withholding of funds, in whole or in part by the lead agency); and
( 4 ) Report annually on the performance of the State and of each EIS program under this part as provided in § 303.702.
( b ) The primary focus of the State's monitoring activities must be on— ( 1 ) Improving early intervention results and functional outcomes for all infants and toddlers with disabilities; and
( 2 ) Ensuring that EIS programs meet the program requirements under part C of the Act, with a particular emphasis on those requirements that are most closely related to improving early intervention results for infants and toddlers with disabilities.
( c ) As a part of its responsibilities under paragraph (a) of this section, the State must use quantifiable indicators and such qualitative indicators as are needed to adequately measure performance in the priority areas identified in paragraph (d) of this section, and the indicators established by the Secretary for the State performance plans.
( d ) The lead agency must monitor each EIS program located in the State, using quantifiable indicators in each of the following priority areas, and using such qualitative indicators as are needed to adequately measure performance in those areas: ( 1 ) Early intervention services in natural environments.
( 2 ) State exercise of general supervision, including child find, effective monitoring, the use of resolution sessions (if the State adopts part B due process hearing procedures under § 303.430(d)(2)), mediation, and a system of transition services as defined in section 637(a)(9) of the Act.
( e ) In exercising its monitoring responsibilities under paragraph (d) of this section, the State must ensure that when it identifies noncompliance with the requirements of this part by EIS programs and providers, the noncompliance is corrected as soon as possible and in no case later than one year after the State's identification of the noncompliance.
(Approved by Office of Management and Budget under control number 1820-0578) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1416(a), 1442)
TRANS LEASING INTERNATIONAL, INC.
                         EARNINGS PER SHARE COMPUTATION
                  (Amounts in thousands, except per share data)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                  



                                                                 Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
                                                         1997             1996            1995
 
<S>                                                  <C>              <C>             <C>       
Net earnings                                         $    4,705       $     1,667     $    1,567

Shares:

Weighted average shares outstanding                       4,146             4,098          4,291
Primary                                                   4,146             4,098          4,291
Fully diluted                                             4,263             4,098          4,291

Earnings per share based on:

Weighted average shares outstanding                  $     1.13       $      0.41     $     0.37
Primary                                              $     1.13       $      0.41     $     0.37
Fully diluted                                        $     1.10       $      0.41     $     0.37

</TABLE>
CENTRAL VALLEY OPERATIONS OFFICE

DELTA SMELT AND SPLITTAIL

October-06

Note: Bold numbers are not verified by DFG.

Delta Smelt Splittail Pumping

Daily Total Daily Total

Daily Combined Daily Combined In CFS In Acre Feet

DATE Total Daily 14-Day Total Daily 14-Day

SWP CVP Total Average SWP CVP Total Average

1-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,434 4,277 10,710 12,761 8,483 21,244 

2-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,749 4,290 11,039 13,387 8,509 21,896 

3-Oct-06 0 0 0 3 0 3 11,795 4,295 16,090 23,396 8,519 31,915 

4-Oct-06 0 0 0 6 0 6 6,721 4,289 11,010 13,332 8,507 21,839 

5-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,427 4,301 10,728 12,748 8,531 21,279 

6-Oct-06 0 0 0 3 0 3 6,515 4,322 10,837 12,922 8,573 21,495 

7-Oct-06 0 0 0 18 0 18 6,872 4,293 11,165 13,630 8,515 22,145 

8-Oct-06 0 0 0 15 0 15 6,409 4,275 10,684 12,712 8,479 21,191 

9-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,422 4,312 10,734 12,739 8,552 21,291 

10-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,223 4,304 10,527 12,344 8,536 20,880 

11-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,675 4,294 11,969 15,223 8,518 23,741 

12-Oct-06 0 0 0 12 0 12 7,661 4,289 11,950 15,196 8,507 23,703 

13-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,427 4,300 11,728 14,732 8,530 23,262 

14-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1,714 4,305 6,019 3,400 8,538 11,938 

15-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 5 6,443 4,303 10,746 12,780 8,535 21,315 

16-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 5 7,612 4,262 11,874 15,099 8,453 23,552 

17-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6,631 4,263 10,894 13,152 8,456 21,608 

18-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6,637 4,255 10,892 13,164 8,440 21,604 

19-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6,721 4,257 10,979 13,332 8,444 21,776 

20-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6,549 4,267 10,816 12,990 8,464 21,454 

21-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4,933 4,369 9,301 9,784 8,665 18,449 

22-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5,599 4,354 9,953 11,106 8,636 19,742 

23-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5,425 4,348 9,773 10,761 8,624 19,385 

24-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5,110 4,345 9,454 10,135 8,618 18,753 

25-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5,109 4,373 9,482 10,134 8,673 18,807 

26-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 1 5,351 4,316 9,666 10,613 8,560 19,173 

27-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5,164 4,337 9,501 10,243 8,603 18,846 

28-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5,689 4,259 9,948 11,285 8,447 19,732 

29-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5,726 4,474 10,200 11,357 8,874 20,231 

30-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,024 4,366 9,390 9,965 8,660 18,625 

31-Oct-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,384 4,256 8,640 8,695 8,442 17,137 

Total 0 0 0 XXXX 72 0 72 XXXX 193,152 133,547 326,699 383,117 264,891 648,008 XX

Delta Smelt Incidental Take LevelsBelow Normal Water Year TypeDelta smelt risk assessment matrix (DSRM) Adult level of concern = 892Re-consultation level for October = 100

Banks Tracy Combined Banks S

D

Tracy Combined
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF LOTUS PACIFIC, INC. AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND ARE QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000789945
<NAME> LOTUS PACIFIC, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                      27,942,258
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               25,168,507
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 13,185,391
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            67,938,834
<PP&E>                                       4,127,628
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,317,636
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             152,560,503
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       39,707,203
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          4
<COMMON>                                        64,133
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               152,560,503
<SALES>                                     95,496,358
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           137,508,404
<CGS>                                       78,885,231
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               78,662,006
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            97,739,798
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             934,044
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (40,936,606)
<INCOME-TAX>                                10,663,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (50,855,065)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (50,855,065)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.80)



</TABLE>
APPLICATIONUNDER THESMALLCOMMUNITYAIRSERVICEDEVELOPMENTPROGRAMMAGICVALLEYREGIONALAIRPORT 

# S UMMARY 

# I NFORMATION

A. Applicant Information:

( Check all that apply)

X Not a

Consortium Interstate

Consortium Intrastate

Consortium

Community now receives EAS subsidy

Community (or Consortium member) previously

received a Small Community Grant

If previous recipient

, d ate of grant: N/A

Expiration date of grant: N/A

Federal funds requested: N/A

Carrier(s) service obtained: N/A

Destination(s) served: N/A

B. Public/Private Partnerships:

(List organization names)

Public Private

City Of Twin Falls, Idaho/

Magic Valley Regional

Airport 1. Twin Falls Area Chamber

of Commerce

2. Southern Idaho

Economic Development

Organization

3. Business Plus, Inc.

C

. Project Proposal:

(Check all that apply)

X Marketing Start

- Up Cost

Offset

Travel Bank X Secure Additional

Service

Surface

Transportation New Route

Launch New Carrier Subsidy

Study X Revenue

Guarantee

X Upgrade Aircraft First Service

Service Restoration Other ( explain

below ) Regional Service

D. Existing Landing Aids at Local Airport:

X Full ILS X Published Instrument Approach

X Localizer X Outer/Middle Marker

X Other (specify): RNAV, VOR, REILS, PAPI, MALSR E. Project Cost:

Line Description Sub

Total Total

Amount

1 Federal amount

requested $500,000

2 State cash financial

contribution $0

Local cash financial

contribution

3a. Airport cash funds $10,000

3b. Non

- airport cash

funds $55,000

3 Total local cash funds

(3a+3b) $65,000

4 TOTAL CASH FUNDING

(1+2+3) $565,000

In

- Kind contribution

5a. Airport In

- Kind

contribution ** $0

5b. Other In

- Kind

contribution** $ 19,925

5 TOTAL IN

- KIND

CONTRIBUTION

(5a+5b) $19,925

6 TOTAL PROJECT

COST (4+5) $584,925

F. In

- Kind Contributions** :

For funds in lines 5a (Airport In

- Kind contribution) and 5b

(Other In

- Kind contribution), please describe the source(s) of

fund(s) for each.

5b. Marketing plan development and

implementation; Program monitoring; Ongoing

communication with business community and

partners

G. Is this application subject to review by State

under Executive Order 12372 process?

c. Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.

H. Is the Applicant delinquent on any Federal

debt? (if “yes” , provide explanation)

No X X
RECORD OF COMMUNICATION

TELEPHONE CALL

DATE: July 3 1, 2012

SUBJECT: South Coast AQMD sumps

FROM: Nicole Law

– EPA Region IX, Rules Office

Stanley Tong

– EPA Region IX, Rules Office

TO: Victor Juan

– South Coast AQMD , AQ Inspector II (909) 396

- 7007

S UMMARY OF COMMUNICATION:

1. Some oil production facilities sample right after the first wash tank/knock out tank. At this point, the oil and water pumped out of the ground is just gravity separated, no chemical s or mechanical agitation

ha s occurred yet to enhance the oil/water separation.

2

. For a few facilities , gravity separation, without further processing is enough to get the water down to 5 mg/L. He believes this may be because the geologic conditions in the South Coast may be different

than thos e in other areas.

3

. Most facilities treat their waste water to meet the standards for disposal into the municipal sewer system or for disposal by reinjection and therefore do not have to meet the 5 mg/L limit.

4. It costs a facility around $125/hour fo r an outside tester to monitor for leaks (LDAR

– leak detection and repair) , if they have processing equipment that needs to be monitored for leaks.

On August 28, 2012, Victor provided the following clarification:

 Sampling at the inlet stream of a wastew ater separation process is an attempt to determine if the

wastewater can meet the 5 mg/L VOC limit exemption in Rule 1176 . These samples are not routinely taken.

 Sending wastewater to the sanitary sewer does not necessarily have a relation to the 5 mg / L limit. It means the facility has chosen that particular avenue as the cost effective solution for disposing of

their waste water. A facility does not have to meet the 5 mg/L VOC limit unless they chose to use the exemption and have open sumps, clarifier s, and similar units.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Marjorie P. Walsh, Appellant, against Russeks Fifth Avenue et al., Respondents. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

*761All concur.
Exhibit 99.1

The undersigned officer of Moldflow Corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies that the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 29, 2003 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as shall
not be deemed to be a part of the Report or "filed" for any purpose whatsoever.

|Date: May 9, 2003 | Name:  |  | /s/A. ROLAND THOMASA. Roland Thomas  
|----------------- | ------ |  | -------------------------------------
|                  | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

---
(No. 74-CC-55

#### John F. Flynn, Jr., M.D., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Mental Health, Respondent.

*Opinion filed October 15, 1973.*

John F. Flynn, Jr., M.D., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
EXHIBIT
23.1




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form
S-8 Nos. 333-143652, 333-61876, 333-153228 and 333-160100) pertaining to the
2000 Long-Term Incentive Plan, the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, and certain
warrants of RadNet Inc., of our reports dated March 15, 2010 with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of RadNet,
Inc. and subsidiaries, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting of RadNet, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2009.




/s/   Ernst & YoungLLPLos
      Angeles, CaliforniaMarch
      15, 2010
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

In Re: 

Oscar E Banks Case # 19-12504-BFK 

REPORT OF DEPOSIT OF UNCLAIMED FUNDS 

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3011 and 11 U.S.C. 347, the trustee 

herein submits a check, or checks, payable to the “Clerk, United States Bankruptcy Court” 

representing unclaimed funds to be deposited by the Clerk of the Court into the Treasury 

of the United States. Said funds are subject to withdrawal as provided by 28 U.S.C. 2042 

and shall not escheat under any state law. Unclaimed funds represent the dividend(s) due 

and payable to the entity identified as the original payee on the face of the enclosed 

check(s). 

PAYEE 

OSCAR E BANKS 

1987 Winston Court 

Woodbridge, VA 22191 

AMOUNT 

$579.90 

Dated: June 11, 2020 __/s/Thomas P. Gorman ___________ 

Thomas P. Gorman 

300 North Washington Street, Ste. 400 

Alexandria, VA 22314 

(703) 836-2226 

VSB#26421 

Case 19-12504-BFK Doc 39 Filed 06/11/20 Entered 06/11/20 13:32:46 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 1
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 585

 620

 606

 684

 481

 316

 295

 336

 364

 312

 302

 385

 440

 369

 443

 490

 668

 622

 722

 912

 853

 888

 1,142

 1,379

 1,499

 1,695

 1,943

 1,837

 1,499

 1,153

 972

 252

 249

 244

 240

 231

 219

 205

 207

 221

 198

 200

 206

 212

 222

 225

 213

 225

 218

 217

 211

 209

 214

 240

 277

 273

 297

 278

 286

 290

 284

 243

 321

 316

 306

 317

 269

 243

 227

 230

 253

 239

 241

 257

 275

 263

 286

 270

 298

 292

 335

 311

 307

 333

 434

 475

 595

 591

 697

 743

 565

 460

 408

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MARCH 2022 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: April 4, 2022

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 4,160

 4,170

 4,198

 4,229

 4,213

 4,152

 4,094

 4,020

 4,012

 3,972

 3,905

 3,841

 3,803

 3,757

 3,722

 3,676

 3,668

 3,643

 3,709

 3,777

 3,857

 3,960

 4,141

 4,377

 4,731

 5,065

 5,487

 5,967

 6,246

 6,436

 6,546

 297

 298

 300

 302

 301

 297

 292

 287

 287

 284

 279

 274

 272

 268

 266

 263

 262

 260

 265

 270

 276

 283

 296

 313

 338

 362

 392

 426

 446

 460

 468

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
(No. 6818

#### Mason-Barron Laboratories, Inc., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Mental Health, Respondent.

*161
      *Opinion filed December 13, 1972.*

Mason-Barron Laboratories, Inc., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.