alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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

DAY ELEV

 123.44

 123.32

 123.50

 123.50

 123.37

 123.83

 123.79

 122.95

 123.43

 122.95

 123.28

 124.13

 124.26

 123.76

 123.82

 123.89

 123.34

 123.50

 123.18

 124.01

 124.09

 124.24

 123.11

 123.12

 123.07

 123.41

 123.82

 123.90

 123.61

 123.48

 7,998

 7,941

 8,026

 8,026

 7,965

 8,181

 8,162

 7,769

 7,993

 7,769

 7,923

 8,326

 8,391

 8,148

 8,176

 8,209

 7,951

 8,026

 7,876

 8,266

 8,306

 8,381

 7,843

 7,847

 7,824

 7,984

 8,176

 8,214

 8,078

 8,017

STORAGE

+118

-57

+85

+0

-61

+216

-19

-393

+224

-224

+154

+403

+65

-243

+28

+33

-258

+75

-150

+390

+40

+75

-538

+4

-23

+160

+192

+38

-136

-61

CHANGE

1,833

1,810

1,892

1,841

1,790

1,886

2,110

2,120

2,424

2,201

2,552

2,748

2,817

2,635

2,736

2,788

2,652

2,801

2,689

2,956

2,785

2,805

2,749

3,018

3,056

3,151

3,169

3,423

3,506

3,538

INFLOW

 530

 10

 10

 10

 543

 1,697

 2,041

 2,234

 2,227

 2,230

 2,409

 2,482

 2,721

 2,703

 2,659

 901

 2,212

 2,698

 2,700

 2,695

 2,701

 2,703

 2,955

 2,951

 3,003

 3,005

 3,006

 3,339

 3,510

 3,504

POWER

 1,175

 1,752

 1,760

 1,752

 1,198

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1,806

 505

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 39

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

 45

HATCHERY

 4

 4

 4

 4

 5

 5

 4

 4

 4

 4

 4

 3

 3

 3

 3

 4

 5

 5

 5

 4

 4

 4

 5

 5

 5

 5

 6

 5

 5

 5

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2020 LAKE NATOMA DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: July 1, 2020

IN LAKE

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +137 78,481 66,389 9,948 1,344 130

ACRE-FEET +137 155,667 131,683 19,732 2,666 258

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 131,683

SPILL 19,732

FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL

HATCHERY

 1,194

 2,666

 7,880

FOLSOM

SOUTH 

 20

 28

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 35

 35

 35

 16

 15

 15

 13

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 602

 1,194

(1)

(1) INCHES OF EVAPORATION TAKEN FROM FOLSOM PAN.

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET) 

TOTAL 155,275
(No. 73-CC-299

#### City of Peoria, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Department of Mental Health, Respondent.

*Opinion filed June 7, 1973.*

City of Peoria, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Douglas G. Olson, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

JAMES WITT, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-3688 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed June 8, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Glenn T. Shelby, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Tosha Cohen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Susan M. Shanahan, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

SILBERMAN, Judge.

James Witt appeals his sentences for two counts of tampering with a witness in a third-degree felony investigation which were imposed after revocation of probation. The written sentences designate Witt as a habitual felony offender (HFO) and as a violent felony offender of special concern (VFOSC). Witt filed a motion to- 2 -

correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), and the trial court determined that Witt was entitled to a resentencing hearing based on his sentence as an HFO and at which time the court would strike costs of prosecution over $100. The trial court denied Witt's challenge to his status as a VFOSC. The State points out in its brief that the record reflects that Witt withdrew his rule 3.800(b) motion in the trial court and that the resentencing hearing was cancelled. Therefore, we affirm Witt's sentences imposed after revocation of probation.

Affirmed.

KELLY and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
V 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 397 

For the relief of Jeanette Vizguerra-Ramirez. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 14, 2015 

Mr. POLIS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Jeanette Vizguerra-Ramirez. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR JEA4 NETTE VIZGUERRA-RAMIREZ. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act, Jeanette Vizguerra-Ramirez shall be eligible for 

8 issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 

9 to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent resi10 dence upon filing an application for issuance of an immi11 grant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment 

12 of status to lawful permanent resident. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 397 IH

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Jeanette 

2 Vizguerra-Ramirez enters the United States before the fil3 ing deadline specified in subsection (c), she shall be con4 sidered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, 

5 if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status 

6 under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 

7 as of the date of the enactment of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.— 

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Jeanette Vizguerra-Ramirez, the Secretary of 

16 State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, dur17 ing the current or next following fiscal year, the total num18 ber of immigrant visas that are made available to natives 

19 of the country of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) 

20 of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, 

21 the total number of immigrant visas that are made avail22 able to natives of the country of the alien’s birth under 

23 section 202(e) of such Act. 

24 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

25 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 397 IH

1 parents, brothers, and sisters of Jeanette Vizguerra-Rami2 rez shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded 

3 any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and 

4 Nationality Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Sam Feuer, Appellant, v. Marguerite Walworth, Respondent.

*799Carswell, Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 5331

_____________________________
Z. T., m other o f E. L.F. , I I and Z. A

. T
., minor c hildren
, Appellant,

v.

F LORIDA D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN A ND F AMILIES , Appellee.

____ _________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. Michael G. Allen , Judge

. July 5, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
B.L. T HOMAS , C.J.
, and O STERHAUS and B ILBREY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 W. Douglas White, Northwest Florida Legal Services, Inc., Pensacola, and Jennifer Barbookles, Tampa
, for Appellant.

Sarah J. Rumph, Child ren's Legal Services, Tal lahassee
, for Appellee.

David P. Krupski , Guardian ad Litem Program, Sanford
, for Guardian ad Litem Program.
§ 30.714 If OWCP reduces a fee, may a provider bill the employee for the balance? A provider whose fee for service is partially paid by OWCP as a result of the application of its fee schedule or other tests for reasonableness in accordance with this part shall not request payment from the employee for the unpaid amount of the provider's bill. ( a ) Where a provider's fee for a particular service or procedure is lower to the general public than as provided by the schedule of maximum allowable charges, the provider shall bill at the lower rate. A fee for a particular service or procedure which is higher than the provider's fee to the general public for that same service or procedure will be considered a charge “substantially in excess of such provider's customary charges” for the purposes of § 30.715(d).
( b ) A provider whose fee for service is partially paid by OWCP as the result of the application of the schedule of maximum allowable charges and who collects or attempts to collect from the employee, either directly or through a collection agent, any amount in excess of the charge allowed by OWCP, and who does not cease such action or make appropriate refund to the employee within 60 days of the date of the decision of OWCP, shall be subject to the exclusion procedures provided by § 30.715(h).
[71 FR 78534, Dec. 29, 2006. Redesignated at 84 FR 3056, Feb. 8, 2019]
*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. 00-30869

Summary Calendar

 

STEFANIE RIVIERE; THOMAS STURDEVANT,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

BANNER CHEVROLET, INC.; ET AL.,

Defendant,

BANNER CHEVROLET, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Louisiana

(USDC No. 95-CV-3816-T)

_______________________________________________________

January 19, 2001

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*
2

Stefanie Riviere and Thomas Sturdevant appeal from the judgment of the district

court dismissing their claim under the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601-77. The

district court has made the determination directed by the panel of this court on the prior

appeal. The finding that the truck’s purchase was made for business purposes is not

clearly erroneous. The Act does not apply.

AFFIRMED.
---

|                                     | Principal Officers:       
|------------------------------------ | --------------------------
|Keith M. Braaten, P. Eng.           
|President & CEO                     
|Jodi L. Anhorn, P. Eng.             
|Executive Vice
      President & COO
|                                    
|Officers / Vice Presidents:         
|Terry L. Aarsby, P. Eng.            
|Caralyn P. Bennett, P. Eng.         
|Leonard L. Herchen, P. Eng.         
|Myron J. Hladyshevsky, P. Eng.      
|Todd J. Ikeda, P. Eng.              
|Bryan M. Joa, P. Eng.               
|Mark Jobin, P. Geol.                
|                                     | John E. Keith, P. Eng.    
|                                     | John H. Stilling, P. Eng. 
|                                     | Douglas R. Sutton, P. Eng.
|                                     | James H. Willmon, P. Eng. 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

Dejour Energy Inc.598-999 Canada PlaceVancouver, BC V6C
3E1

We hereby consent to the use and reference to our name and
reports evaluating a portion of Dejour Energy Inc.s petroleum and natural gas
reserves as of December 31, 2013, and the information derived from our reports,
as described or incorporated by reference in: (i) Dejour Energy Inc.s Annual
Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013, (ii) Dejour Energy
Inc.s Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-183587), and (iii)
Dejour Energy Inc.s Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Files No. 333-179540
and 333-156772), filed with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission.



| | Yours truly,                  
| | ------------------------------
| |                               
| | GLJ PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS LTD.
| |                               
| | Chad P. Lemke, P. Eng.        
| | Manager, Engineering          

Calgary, AlbertaApril 24, 2014CANADA



|4100, 400  3rd
      Avenue S.W., Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 4H2  (403) 266-9500  Fax (403)
      262-1855  GLJPC.com
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
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

 2,279

 971

 410

 331

 333

 297

 258

 225

 200

 191

 181

 174

 171

 177

 199

 174

 167

 182

 181

 188

 596

 1,437

 1,652

 3,712

 6,135

 7,661

 7,940

 7,740

 6,254

 4,852

 4,069

 361

 353

 287

 251

 220

 213

 199

 182

 173

 159

 161

 155

 155

 157

 160

 159

 161

 163

 169

 174

 176

 184

 239

 261

 311

 361

 516

 544

 591

 637

 528

 691

 513

 334

 294

 273

 264

 221

 203

 187

 178

 170

 164

 161

 164

 171

 168

 164

 170

 174

 179

 239

 357

 398

 675

 1,277

 2,412

 2,500

 2,493

 2,015

 1,670

 1,506

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JANUARY 2002 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 12, 2002

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
Exhibit 5.1
 (MINTZ LEVIN LOGO)
    
    One Financial Center
Boston, MA 02111
617-542-6000
617-542-2241 fax
www.mintz.com
 
      Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.  Boston | Washington | New York | Stamford | Los Angeles | Palo Alto | San Diego | London




---



##### 



Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
 
       Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo,
P.C.
| 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                  |   |      |                    |   |
|-----------------------|--------|-----------|-------------------------|--------|
| Date: August 15, 2011 |   | By:  | /s/ James L. Mandel     |   |
|                  |   |      | James L. Mandel         |   |
|                  |   |      | Chief Executive Officer |   |

----
This .zip file contains graphic files (in .png format) of each chart and graph in the Economic Research Service report "Agriculture in the Trans-Pacific Partnership" ERR-176, published in October 2014. The content and context of these files is as of the publication date of the report. After time, the material may not reflect the current ERS program of work, may be outdated, and/or superseded, so please visit the website to obtain the latest information: www.ers.usda.gov. Any reuse of these images should include attribution to "Economic Research Service/USDA."The following inventory lists each of the files in this folder.File name			Description       (Fig01.png)			Figure 1 - Agricultural tariff treatments under PTAs within the TPP region(Fig02.png)			Figure 2 - Australia’s tariff structure, 2025(Fig03.png)			Figure 3 - Canada's tariff structure, 2025(Fig04.png)			Figure 4 - Chile's tariff structure, 2025(Fig05.png)			Figure 5 - Japan's tariff structure, 2025(Fig06.png)			Figure 6 - Malaysia's tariff structure, 2025(Fig07.png)			Figure 7 - Mexico's tariff structure, 2025(Fig08.png)			Figure 8 - New Zealand's tariff structure, 2025(Fig09.png)			Figure 9 - Peru's tariff structure, 2025(Fig10.png)			Figure 10 - Singapore's tariff structure, 2025(Fig11.png)			Figure 11 - United States' tariff structure, 2025(Fig12.png)			Figure 12 - Vietnam's tariff structure, 2025(Fig-A1.png)			Appendix A figure 1 - Export confidence ranges(Fig-A2.png)			Appendix A figure 2 - Import confidence ranges
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS UNAUDITED SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE JUNE 30, 1998 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,567,206
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  397,747
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,307
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,054,847
<PP&E>                                       7,811,204
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,373,589
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,900,578
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,303,209
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     511,276
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,900,578
<SALES>                                      3,832,479
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,843,449
<CGS>                                        3,504,102
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,717,710
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             157,298
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                125,739
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   125,739
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     8.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     8.05
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 21.1**     Subsidiaries of 180 Connect Inc.       **Name Under Which Business is**  **Subsidiary Legal Name** **Conducted** **State or Country of Incorporation**1305699 Alberta ULC — Canada180 Connect Exchangeco Inc. — Canada180 Connect Inc. 180 Connect CanadaWirecomm Systems Inc. Wirecomm CanadaWirecomm America, Inc. — Delaware180 Connect, Inc. 180 Connect NevadaMountain Center, Inc. Ironwood CaliforniaPiedmont Telecommunications, Inc. — North Carolina180 Digital Interiors, Inc. 180 Home DelawareHD Complete, Inc. — DelawareIronwood Communications, Inc. Ironwood Nevada1083723 Alberta Ltd. — Canada
### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA THOMAS NELSON HA, Plaintiff,


### v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Defendant. ) ) ) ) 

### ) Civil Case No. 08-2136 (RJL) ) ) ) ) ) ) 

### FINAL JUDGMENT For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion entered this date, it is this

### ~ 

# I**~day** ofJanuary, 2010, hereby 

### ORDERED that the defendant's Motion To Dismiss 

### [#10] is 

### GRANTED, and it is further 

### ORDERED that the above-captioned case be 

### DISMISSED withoutprejudice. 

### SO ORDERED.

United States District Judge
§ 356.2 Penalties under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986. ( a ) For claims or statements made on or before October 23, 1996, the maximum penalty which may be assessed under part 355 of this chapter is $5,000.
( b ) For claims or statements made after October 23, 1996, but before August 1, 2016, the maximum penalty which may be assessed under part 355 of this chapter is $5,500.
( c ) For claims or statements made on or after August 1, 2016, but before January 1, 2017, the maximum penalty which may be assessed under part 355 of this chapter is $10,781.
( d ) For claims or statements made on or after January 1, 2017, the maximum penalty which may be assessed under part 355 of this chapter is the larger of: ( 1 ) The amount for the previous calendar year; or
( 2 ) An amount adjusted for inflation, calculated by multiplying the amount for the previous calendar year by the percentage by which the CPI-U for the month of October preceding the current calendar year exceeds the CPI-U for the month of October of the calendar year two years prior to the current calendar year, adding that amount to the amount for the previous calendar year, and rounding the total to the nearest dollar.
( e ) Notice of the maximum penalty which may be assessed under part 355 of this chapter for calendar years after 2016 will be published by the Board in the Federal Register on an annual basis on or before January 15 of each calendar year.
#### § 226.13 Cost-of-living increase in employee vested dual benefit.

If the employee's annuity begins June 1, 1975 or later, a cost-of-living increase is added to the total vested dual benefit amount. This increase is based on the cost-of-living increases in social security benefits during the period from January 1, 1975, to the earlier of the date the employee's annuity begins or January 1, 1982. The increases are effective on June 1 of each year through 1981. The percentage increase for annuities that begin June 1, 1981, or later is 81 percent.
# C_2012160EN.01001101.xml

| 6.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 160/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 160/11

---

Communication from the Commission relating to the available quantity for the September 2012 subperiod in the framework of certain quotas opened by the European Union for products in the rice sector

2012/C 160/03

Commission Regulation (EU) No 1274/2009 opened tariff quotas for the import of rice originating in the overseas countries and territories (OCT) (1). No import licence applications have been submitted during the first seven days of May 2012 for the quotas with order numbers 09.4189 and 09.4190.

1

In accordance with the second sentence of Article 7(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 (2), the quantities for which applications are not submitted are to be added to the following subperiod.

2

In accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 1(5) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 1274/2009 quantities available in the following subperiod are communicated by the Commission before the 25th day of the last month of a given subperiod.

As a result, the total available quantity for the September 2012 subperiod under the quotas with order numbers 09.4189 and 09.4190 as referred to in Regulation (EU) No 1274/2009 are set out in the Annex to this communication.

---

(1)  OJ L 344, 23.12.2009, p. 3.

1

(2)  OJ L 238, 1.9.2006, p. 13.

2

---

ANNEX

Quantities available for the following subperiod under Regulation (EU) No 1274/2009

| Origin | Order number | Import licence applications introduced for the May 2012 subperiod | Total available quantity for the September 2012 subperiod (in kg) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Netherlands Antilles and Aruba | 09.4189 | (1) | 25 000 000 |
| Least developed OCTs | 09.4190 | (1) | 10 000 000 |

Origin

Order number

Import licence applications introduced for the May 2012 subperiod

Total available quantity for the September 2012 subperiod (in kg)

Netherlands Antilles and Aruba

09.4189

(1)

25 000 000

Least developed OCTs

09.4190

(1)

10 000 000

---

(1)  No allocation coefficient for this subperiod: no licence applications were sent to the Commission.

---