alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
KDKC Photography & Design

PO Box 300174, Escondido, CA 92030

Petition for Exemption, requesting relief from the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Public Law 112

- 95 FEB. 14, 2012, Section 333.

KDKC photography and design (KDKC) currently, under individual ownership, seeks

relief from airworthiness certification requirements from the above mentioned regulations.

KDKC has been in existence since 6/1/2014 with the purpose of providing photography

for realtors and private homeowners. We wish to offer aerial photography using UAS.

KDKC is represented by the owner Daniel B. Kirksey

, a current licensed private pilot,

certificate #292 5720.

Personal Information of Applicant: Daniel B. Kirksey

PO Box 300174 Escondido, CA 92030 (760)505

- 1377 dan@kdkcphotos.com

KDKC seeks exemption under the guidelines of Section 333 specifically as it relates to the Real Estate Industry in San Diego County under the small UAS rule. We believe that we have put together a program as responsible operators of an UAS that will be a

model for others in the market.

Under the terms of this exemption, it is our intention to safely fly an UAS specifically a DJI Inspire 1, with a built in camera and gimbal, 2 operators, 1 flying the craft keeping

the aircraft in cons tant line of sight, while the second operator controls the camera, independent of flight controls. The aircraft maintains a FPV connectivity with 5.8 GHz 600mW antenna linked to a monitor allowing the pilot and camera operator to see what
the camera sees, ensuring a recording of safe and responsible flight.

As air safety is paramount being a private pilot and understanding airspace rules and boundaries, KDKC has developed a highly structured pre

- flight checklist and safety flight manual for the pilot and observer. As recent as the new proposed FAA regulation released as of February of 2015, KDKC intends to operate well within the most stringent proposal required to operate an unmanned aircraft in the National Airspace System (NAS). We are prepared to atte nd any required course of study, participate in flight evaluation and pay any required fee(s) that may be instituted. We have many hundreds of combined hours of safe flying in the recreational mode.

Sincerely,

Daniel B. Kirksey

Certificate #292 5720

KDKC Photography & Desi g n
Avian Flu

General Precautions

Avian flu is a viral disease and it can be very contagious 

and even deadly in poultry (e.g., chickens, turkeys, ducks). 

Of great concern are the highly pathogenic avian influenza 

(HPAI) viruses (e.g., H5N1, H7N9) that have killed millions 

of birds and infected humans in other countries. If avian 

flu viruses are detected in the U.S. or if you have travel 

assignments in countries that have avian flu outbreaks, take 

appropriate precautions. 

Avian Flu Symptoms in Humans

Range from fever, cough, sore throat and muscle aches to 

nausea, abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, eye infections, 

difficulty breathing, pneumonia and severe respiratory disease. 

Symptoms may depend on which virus caused the infection 

but are often similar to those of human seasonal influenza.

How Humans Are Infected

• Contact with sick poultry or surfaces soiled with discharge 

from their mouths or beaks, or with feces.

• Inhaling contaminated particles from poultry.

Treatment

Some prescription antiviral drugs may be effective. 

General Precautions

• Wash hands thoroughly (for at least 15 seconds) and 

frequently, preferably with soap and water (or an alcoholbased hand rub with at least 60 percent alcohol, if soap and 

water are not available).

• Avoid contact with possibly infected poultry.

Precautions When Exposed

• Use appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE):

– Disposable gloves or gloves that can be disinfected;

– Protective clothing (long-sleeved coveralls with a 

waterproof apron);

– Disposable shoe covers or footwear that can be disinfected;

– Safety goggles; and

– Wear at least the minimum level of respiratory protection, 

an N95 or higher respirator.

• Employees should remove all PPE at work to avoid taking 

contaminated items home. Wash hands after removal of 

gloves and other PPE.

Additional Guidance

• Get the seasonal flu vaccine.

• If you develop flu-like symptoms, stay at home except 

to get medical attention.

QUICK

CARDTM

For more information:

www.osha.gov (800) 321-OSHA (6742)

OSHA 3306-08R 2017
LAW OFFICE OF JOHN MIETUS,LLC 

6701 DEMOCRACY BOULEVARD, SUITE 300 

BETHESDA, MD 20817-7500 

September 24, 2013 

BY ELECTRONIC MAIL 

Ms. Esta Rosenberg 

Mr. Robert Finamore 

Office of International Aviation 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington DC 20590 

jOHN R.. M!EIUS,JR. 

(202) 747-5212 

(240) 396-5362 fax 

john@mietuslaw.com 

Re: Docket OST-2013-0179, Joint Application of Aeromexico and Delta 

(Cancun-Chicago) 

Dear Ms. Rosenberg and Mr. Finamore: 

The Joint Applicants have completed their poll of the U.S. carriers served on 

September 20, 2013 with the above-captioned application. There were no 

objections. 

The Joint Applicants would appreciate expedited Department action on their 

application. 

Respectfully submitted, 

John R. Mietf 

Counsel for Aeromexico
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

Thomas Spielbauer, Esq.

SBN 78281

THE SPIELBAUER LAW OFFICE

111 North Market Street, Suite 300

San Jose, CA 95113

MAIL: Post Office Box 698

Santa Clara, CA 95052

(408)451-8499

Fax: (610)423-1395

thomas@spielbauer.com

Attorneys for Ruthie Hillery, Defendant

and the Spielbauer Law Firm, Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CONSUMER SOLUTIONS REO, LLC,

a Delaware Limited Liability Company,

Plaintiff.

v.s.

RUTHIE B. HILLERY, an Individual;

THE SPIELBAUER LAW FIRM, an

Unknown Business Entity; and DOES 1

through 50, inclusive,

Defendants.

No. 08-CV-04357-EMC

ORDER OF DISMISSAL AS TO

RUTHIE HILLERY, SPIELBAUER

LAW FIRM, AND CONSUMER

SOLUTIONS REO, LLC

RUTHIE HILLERY,

Counter-Claimant.

v.s.

CONSUMER SOLUTIONS REO, LLC,

a Delaware Limited Liability Company,

SAXON MORTGAGE SERVICES,

INC.; and MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.,

Counter-Claim Defendants.

1

Case 3:08-cv-04357-EMC Document 137 Filed 08/10/10 Page 1 of 2
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

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, and upon Stipulation of Counsel for Ruthie

Hillery, for the Spielbauer Law Firm, and for Consumer Solutions REO, LLC, the

above matter, i.e., all complaints and counter-claims, is dismissed with prejudice

as to all remaining parties, those being Ruthie Hillery, the Spielbauer Law Firm

and Consumer Solutions REO, LLC.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

***END OF ORDER***

2

Case 3:08-cv-04357-EMC Document 137 Filed 08/10/10 Page 2 of 2
### §6309. Authorization of appropriations

#### (a) Authorizations for Secretary

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary not more than the following amounts to carry out his responsibilities under this part—

(1) $1,700,000 for fiscal year 1976;

(2) $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1977;

(3) $3,300,000 for fiscal year 1978; and

(4) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1979.

Amounts authorized for such purposes under paragraph (3) shall be in addition to amounts otherwise authorized and appropriated for such purposes.

#### (b) Authorizations for Commission

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission not more than the following amounts to carry out its responsibilities under this part—

(1) $650,000 for fiscal year 1976;

(2) $700,000 for fiscal year 1977;

(3) $700,000 for fiscal year 1978; and

(3) 1 $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1979.

#### (c) Other authorizations

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to be allocated not more than the following amounts—

(1) $1,100,000 for fiscal year 1976;

(2) $2,500,000 for fiscal year 1977; and

(3) $1,800,000 for fiscal year 1978.

Such amounts shall, and any amounts authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), may be allocated by the Secretary to the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

(Pub. L. 94–163, title III, §339, Dec. 22, 1975, 89 Stat. 932; Pub. L. 95–70, §3, July 21, 1977, 91 Stat. 276; Pub. L. 95–619, title IV, §426, title VI, §691(b)(2), Nov. 9, 1978, 92 Stat. 3267, 3288; Pub. L. 100–12, §11(b)(8), Mar. 17, 1987, 101 Stat. 126; Pub. L. 100–418, title V, §5115(c), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1433.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1988—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100–418 substituted "National Institute of Standards and Technology" for "National Bureau of Standards" in closing provisions.

1987—Pub. L. 100–12 inserted headings for subsecs. (a) to (c).

1978—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 95–619, §§426(a), 691(b)(2), substituted "Secretary" for "Administrator", meaning Administrator of the Federal Energy Administration, in text preceding par. (1), "$3,300,000" for "$1,500,000" in par. (3), added par. (4), and provided that amounts authorized under par. (3) would be in addition to amounts otherwise authorized and appropriated.

Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 95–619, §426(b), added second par. (3) relating to fiscal year 1979.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 95–619, §691(b)(2), substituted "Secretary" for "Administrator".

1977—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 95–70, §3(a), substituted "$2,500,000" for "$700,000".

Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 95–70, §3(b), substituted "$1,800,000" for "$700,000".

1 So in original. Probably should be designated "(4)".
ORDER DELAYING INITIAL DISCOSURES AND CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE AND RELATED DEADLINES 

Case No.: CV 09 1510 MMC

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

Patricia A. Murphy (CSB #139368)

LAW OFFICE OF PATRICIA MURPHY

625 Market Street, 4th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: (415) 686-1363

Facsimile: (415) 520-5302

pmurphy@pmurphylaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

LES CONCIERGES, INC., 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LES CONCIERGES, INC., a California 

corporation,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MARK ROBESON, an individual; LES 

CONCIERGES SERVICES PVT. LTD. an 

Indian corporation; CLUB CONCIERGE 

SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation; 

and CLUB CONCIERGE LOYALTY 

SERVICES, INC., a business organization of 

unknown form and unknown citizenship, 

Defendants.

Case No.: CV 09 1510 MMC

[PROPOSED] 

ORDER DELAYING INITIAL 

DISCLOSURES AND CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

RELATED DEADLINES 

Case 3:09-cv-01510-MMC Document 88 Filed 01/25/10 Page 1 of 2
1

ORDER DELAYING INITIAL DISCOSURES AND CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE AND RELATED DEADLINES 

Case No.: CV 09 1510 MMC

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

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-12, the Court has reviewed and considered the parties’ 

Stipulated Request for an Order Delaying Initial Disclosures and Continuing the Case 

Management Conference and Related Deadlines. Good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED

that:

1. The January 29, 2010, initial case management conference in this action is reset to 

February 12, 2010;

2. The deadline for the parties to file a Rule 26(f) Report, complete initial

disclosures or state objection in Rule 26(f) Report and file Case Management Statement per 

attached Standing Order re Contents of Joint Case Management Statement shall be February 5,

2010.

3. All other dates previously ordered by the Court remain unchanged.

SO ORDERED:

Dated: January ___, 2010

_________________________________

Hon. Maxine M. Chesney

United States District Court Judge

25

Case 3:09-cv-01510-MMC Document 88 Filed 01/25/10 Page 2 of 2
Editorial Note on Part 200
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 200.1525 Settlement agreements. ( a ) HUD staff, as authorized, may negotiate a settlement agreement with a MAP lender before or after the issuance of a warning letter or referral to the MAP Lender Review Board. Once a matter has been referred to the MAP Lender Review Board, only the Board may approve a settlement agreement.
( b ) Settlement agreements may provide for: ( 1 ) Cessation of any violation;
( 2 ) Correction or mitigation of the effects of any violation;
( 3 ) Removal of lender staff from positions involving origination, underwriting, and/or construction loan administration;
( 4 ) Actions to collect sums of money wrongfully or incorrectly paid by the MAP lender to a third party;
( 5 ) Implementation or revision of a quality control plan or other corrective measure acceptable to HUD; and
( 6 ) Modification of the duration or provisions of any administrative sanction deemed to be appropriate by HUD.
( c ) A MAP lender's compliance with a settlement agreement is evidenced by the lender certifying its compliance with the conditions of the agreement, and HUD's determination that the lender is in compliance with the conditions of the agreement.
( d ) Failure by a MAP lender to comply with a settlement agreement may result in a probation, or suspension, or termination of MAP privileges, or referral to the Mortgagee Review Board.
#### In the Matter of Mark H., Appellant.

In a proceeding pursuant to article 7 of the Family Court Act, the *appeal*is from so much *of an*order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated July 27, 1977, as placed appellant with the Division for Youth in a Title III facility. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. Upon the argument of this appeal, it was agreed that appellant has been home with his parents since October, 1977. Titone, J. P., Gulotta, Shapiro and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
#### Arthur L. Dorsey, appellant, v. Joe Mihalic, appellee.

Gen. No. 27,579.

Suit in tort for striking, assaulting and injuring plaintiff." Defendant found not guilty. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John J. Rooney, Judge, presiding. Heard in the third division of this court for the first district at the March term, 1922.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed May 9, 1923.

Hill, Melaniphy & Pedderson, for appellant; John C. Melaniphy, of counsel. Poulton and Green, for appellee; Thomas A. Green, of counsel.

Mr. Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**INTERLINE BRANDS,INC.**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Annual Report of Interline Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ending December 29, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas J.Tossavainen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(2)         The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| /s/ THOMAS  J. TOSSAVAINEN |   |
|----------------------------|--------|
| Thomas J. Tossavainen      |
| Chief Financial Officer    |
| March 13, 2007        |

 

----
### §7708. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation

#### (a) Establishment

The Director of the National Science Foundation shall establish the George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation that will upgrade, link, and integrate a system of geographically distributed experimental facilities for earthquake engineering testing of full-sized structures and their components and partial-scale physical models. The system shall be integrated through networking software so that integrated models and databases can be used to create model-based simulation, and the components of the system shall be interconnected with a computer network and allow for remote access, information sharing, and collaborative research.

#### (b) Authorization of appropriations

In addition to amounts appropriated under section 7706(c) of this title, there are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation for the George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation—

(1) $28,200,000 for fiscal year 2001;

(2) $24,400,000 for fiscal year 2002;

(3) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2003;

(4) $17,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;

(5) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, all of which shall be available for operations and maintenance;

(6) $20,400,000 for fiscal year 2006, all of which shall be available for operations and maintenance;

(7) $20,870,000 for fiscal year 2007, all of which shall be available for operations and maintenance;

(8) $21,390,000 for fiscal year 2008, all of which shall be available for operations and maintenance; and

(9) $21,930,000 for fiscal year 2009, all of which shall be available for operations and maintenance.

(Pub. L. 95–124, §14, as added Pub. L. 106–503, title II, §205, Nov. 13, 2000, 114 Stat. 2306; amended Pub. L. 108–360, title I, §104(c), Oct. 25, 2004, 118 Stat. 1675.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2004—Subsec. (b)(5) to (9). Pub. L. 108–360 added pars. (5) to (9).
### §7661. Definitions

As used in this subchapter—

#### (1) Affected source

The term "affected source" shall have the meaning given such term in subchapter IV–A.

#### (2) Major source

The term "major source" means any stationary source (or any group of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common control) that is either of the following:

(A) A major source as defined in section 7412 of this title.

(B) A major stationary source as defined in section 7602 of this title or part D of subchapter I.

#### (3) Schedule of compliance

The term "schedule of compliance" means a schedule of remedial measures, including an enforceable sequence of actions or operations, leading to compliance with an applicable implementation plan, emission standard, emission limitation, or emission prohibition.

#### (4) Permitting authority

The term "permitting authority" means the Administrator or the air pollution control agency authorized by the Administrator to carry out a permit program under this subchapter.

(July 14, 1955, ch. 360, title V, §501, as added Pub. L. 101–549, title V, §501, Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2635.)
#### Turman *v.*Winecoff *et al.*

September 25, 1912.

Equitable intervention. Before Judge Pendleton. Fulton superior court. May *26,*1911.

*Moore & Pomeroy,*for plaintiff.

*King & Spalding and Underwood, Evins & Spence, A. A. & E. L. Meyer, J. D. Kilpatrick,*and *T. P. Qorrigan,*for defendants.

Fish, C. J.

1. In order that a power to sell may survive the death of the grantor, it must be coupled with an interest; and that interest must be not in the proceeds alone of the thing to be sold, but in the thing itself. Civil Code, § 3575, par. 1; *Lathrop*v. *Brown,*65 *Ga.*315; *Wilkins*v. *McGehee,*86 *Ga.*764 (13 S. E. 84). Such power will not survive merely because the donee may have paid a valuable consideration for it. *Coney*v. *Sanders,*28 *Ga.*511.

2. Applying the rule above announced to the contract upon which the petition for intervention in the present case was based, and to the allegations of such petition, the general demurrer to the petition was properly sustained. *Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justies eoneur.*
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

PERMIACARE, RAMORA 

THOMAS IN HER CAPACITY AS 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF 

PERMIACARE, AND TODD

LUZADDER IN HIS OFFICIAL AS 

DIRECTOR OF MENTAL 

HEALTH SERVICES OF 

PERMIACARE,

Appellant,

v.

L. R. H.,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00144-CV

Appeal from the

83rd District Court

of Pecos County, Texas

(TC #P-7934-83-CV)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in that 

part of the judgment related to the ultra vires claims (notice and opportunity to appeal, right to 

participate in treatment plan, Medicaid billing, and acts outside of agents’ scope of activity). We 

therefore reverse that part of the order on the plea to the jurisdiction.

We further order that the judgment of the court below is affirmed on the federal ADA and 

Rehabilitation Act claims. We therefore affirm the trial court’s order on these claims and remand 

the cause for further proceedings in accordance with our opinion.

We further order that Appellee recover from Appellant and its sureties, if any, for 

performance of the judgment and all costs, both in this Court and the court below, for which let 
2

execution issue. See TEX.R.APP.P. 43.5. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2020.

JEFF ALLEY, Chief Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT CATHCART,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant. /

No. C 08-03784 WHA

ORDER CONTINUING CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

The Court hereby GRANTS a continuance of the case management conference to

SEPTEMBER 23, 2010, AT 11:00 A.M. Please file a case management statement at least seven days

prior. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-03784-WHA Document 27 Filed 07/06/10 Page 1 of 1
EPA Comments on Pio Pico Draft Biological Opinion 

Roger Kohn to: Eric_Porter 08/23/2012 02:37 PM

Cc:

ACrisp, djenkins, Doreen_Stadtlander, ESolorio, Julie Walters, 

Karen_Goebel, RFRODRIGUEZ, Gerardo Rios, Steve Hill

Mr. Porter,

I am attaching EPA Region 9's comments on the Service's draft Biological Opinion for the Pio Pico Energy 

Center. 

We understand that the applicant also recently provided comments that may overlap to some extent with 

ours, and that it may be useful to have the CFWO circulate revised language for us to quickly review 

before finalizing the document. 

EPA comments on PPEC draft biological opinion.pdf

Roger Kohn

USEPA Region 9 - Air Division (AIR-3)

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

415-972-3973 

kohn.roger@epa

Hello Roger, I have attached the draft biological... 08/08/2012 10:36:26 AM

From: <Eric_Porter@fws.gov>

To: Roger Kohn/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, 

Cc: Julie Walters/R9/USEPA/US@EPA, <ACrisp@energy.state.ca.us>, 

<djenkins@apexpowergroup.com>, <ESolorio@energy.ca.gov>, <RFRODRIGUEZ@dfg.ca.gov>, 

<Karen_Goebel@fws.gov>, <Doreen_Stadtlander@fws.gov>

Date: 08/08/2012 10:36 AM

Subject: Pio Pico Draft Biological Opinion

Hello Roger,

I have attached the draft biological opinion for the Pio Pico project. I have copied the PPEC, 

CEC, and CDFG as well. We look forward to your comments. Please let me know if you have 

any questions.

(See attached file: 10B0661-12F0275_SDG_ Draft BO-Pio Pico Energy Center 8 Aug

2012.pdf)(See attached file: 10B0661-12F0275_ figure_1_nitrogen_plume email.pdf)(See 

attached file: 10B0661-12F0275_ figure_2_quino email.pdf)(See attached file: 

10B0661-12F0275_ figure_3_cagn email.pdf)(See attached file: 10B0661-12F0275_

figure_4_deco email.pdf)

Best Regards,
Eric

Eric Porter

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office

6010 Hidden Valley Road

Carlsbad, CA 92011

(760) 431-9440 ext. 285[attachment "10B0661-12F0275_SDG_ Draft BO-Pio Pico Energy 

Center 8 Aug 2012.pdf" deleted by Roger Kohn/R9/USEPA/US] [attachment 

"10B0661-12F0275_ figure_1_nitrogen_plume email.pdf" deleted by Roger 

Kohn/R9/USEPA/US] [attachment "10B0661-12F0275_ figure_2_quino email.pdf" deleted by 

Roger Kohn/R9/USEPA/US] [attachment "10B0661-12F0275_ figure_3_cagn email.pdf" deleted 

by Roger Kohn/R9/USEPA/US] [attachment "10B0661-12F0275_ figure_4_deco email.pdf" 

deleted by Roger Kohn/R9/USEPA/US]