alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Jaguar Cars Limited EMISSION DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT No. J08158D1A 

Causal part name: SENSOR - MAF 

Causal part number: C2C7636 

Issued: 15 April 2011 

Page 1 of 2 

Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40. Part 85. Subpart T. 

§85.1903 - Emissions Defect Information Report 

(c)(1) The manufacturers corporate name. 

Jaguar Cars Limited. 

(c)(2) A description of the defect. 

Owners report M.I.L. illumination or uneven running. Technicians find lean, rich, and MAF sensor codes stored 

(P0171, P0174, P0172, P0101, P0102, P010b) and replace mass air flow sensors. 

Analysis reveals that 30% of MAF changes are followed by a related claim, suggesting that MAF replacement 

did not resolve the issue. An investigation is ongoing to determine root cause of MAF replacements. 

(c)(3) A description of each class or category of vehicles potentially affected by the defect including make, 

model, model year, and such other information as may be required to identify these vehicles. 

See table in section (c)(4)(i) below. 

(c)(4) For each class or category of vehicle or engine described in response to paragraph (c)(3) of this section, 

the following shall also be provided: 

(c)(4)(i) The number of vehicles or engines known or estimated to have the defect and an explanation of the 

means by which this number was determined. 

MODEL 

YEAR TEST GROUP MODEL SALES DEFECTS 

2005 5JCXV04.2DSB XJR; SUPER V8; S-TYPE R 2348 54 

2006 6JCXV04.2DSK XJR; SUPER V8; S-TYPE R 1112 33 

2007 7JCXV04.2DNK XK; XJ8; XJ8L; VDP LWB; S-TYPE 4.2 9182 50 

2007 7JCXV04.2DSK XKR; XJR; SUPER V8; S-TYPE R 2290 50 

The above data was taken from Jaguar's warranty tracking report dated 2010 Q4. 

Issues resolved first time by changing the MAF sensor are listed as defects. 

(c)(4)(ii) The address of the plant at which the potentially defective vehicles or engines were produced. 

Jaguar Castle Bromwich Plant, Birmingham, England. 

EPA EDIR# 4211 

Received: April 18, 2010
Jaguar Cars Limited EMISSION DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT No. J08158D1A 

Causal part name: SENSOR - MAF 

Causal part number: C2C7636 

Issued: 15 April 2011 

Page 2 of 2 

(c)(5) An evaluation of the emissions impact of the defect and a description of any driveability problems which a 

defective vehicle might exhibit. 

No adverse impact on emissions has been associated with the MAF sensor in this investigation. 

No adverse impact on driveability has been associated with the MAF sensor in this investigation. 

M.I.L. illumination associated with the MAF sensor has been noted in this investigation. 

(c)(6) Available emissions data which relate to the defect. 

Not applicable. 

(c)(7) An indication of any anticipated manufacturer follow-up. 

Investigation into root cause of defect will continue and will be reported upon completion. 

EPA EDIR# 4211 

Received: April 18, 2010
§ 526.820 Erythromycin. ( a ) *Specifications.* ( 1 ) Each single-dose, 6-milliliter (mL) syringe contains 300 milligrams (mg) erythromycin (as the base).
( 2 ) Each single-dose, 12-mL syringe contains 600 mg erythromycin (as the base).
( b ) *Sponsors.* See Nos. 054771 and 061133 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Related tolerances.* See § 556.230 of this chapter.
( d ) *Conditions of use for syringe described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section in lactating cows* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Infuse the contents of one 6-mL syringe (300 mg erythromycin base) into each infected quarter. Repeat infusion at 12-hour intervals for a maximum of 3 infusions.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of mastitis due to *Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus dysgalactiae,* and *Streptococcus uberis* in lactating cows.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Milk taken from animals during treatment and for 36 hours (3 milkings) after the latest treatment must not be used for food. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
( e ) *Conditions of use for syringe described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section in dry cows* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Infuse the contents of one 12-mL syringe (600 mg erythromycin base) into each infected quarter at the time of drying off.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of mastitis due to *Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus agalactiae,* *Streptococcus dysgalactiae,* and *Streptococcus uberis* in dry cows.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* For use in dry cows only. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[86 FR 13186, Mar. 8, 2021, as amended at 88 FR 14901, Mar. 10, 2023]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE GULFWEST
OIL  COMPANY'S  QUARTERLY  REPORT FILED ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH
31,  1998 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH  FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000813779
<NAME>                        0
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    0
       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                   MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                1
<CASH>                         8,302
<SECURITIES>                   0    
<RECEIVABLES>                  682,972
<ALLOWANCES>                   0      
<INVENTORY>                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>               844,680
<PP&E>                         22,037,949       
<DEPRECIATION>                 3,175,335          
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 19,726,038         
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          13,691,242          
<BONDS>                        0          
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          0 
<PREFERRED>                    54 
<COMMON>                       1,759  
<OTHER-SE>                     1,288,404     
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   19,726,038
<SALES>                        678,259
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               840,750       
<CGS>                          0       
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  1,226,516 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               0         
<LOSS-PROVISION>               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>             (311,493)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (697,231)       
<INCOME-TAX>                   0        
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (697,231) 
<DISCONTINUED>                 0         
<EXTRAORDINARY>                0 
<CHANGES>                      0
<NET-INCOME>                   (697,231)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                  (.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                  (.43)     
        


</TABLE>
#### § 26.44 Transmission of product evaluation reports.

Transmission of product evaluation reports will take place according to the importing party's specified procedures.
# L_2019199EN.01000501.xml

| 26.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 199/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 199/5

---

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) 2019/1263

of 18 July 2019

concerning the issuance of a commemorative coin with a common design to mark the 35th anniversary of the Erasmus programme

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 133 thereof,

Having regard to Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) No 651/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the issuance of euro coins (1),

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 9 of Council Regulation (EU) No 729/2014 (2), commemorative coins issued collectively by all Member States whose currency is the euro are to only commemorate subjects of the highest European relevance, and their design is to be without prejudice to the possible constitutional requirements of those Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 9 of Council Regulation (EU) No 729/2014 (2), commemorative coins issued collectively by all Member States whose currency is the euro are to only commemorate subjects of the highest European relevance, and their design is to be without prejudice to the possible constitutional requirements of those Member States.

| (2) | On 2 July 2019, on the basis of a proposal by the Euro Coin Subcommittee, the Economic and Financial Committee endorsed the principle of a common commemorative issuance for 2022 to mark the 35th anniversary of the Erasmus programme. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 2 July 2019, on the basis of a proposal by the Euro Coin Subcommittee, the Economic and Financial Committee endorsed the principle of a common commemorative issuance for 2022 to mark the 35th anniversary of the Erasmus programme.

| (3) | In accordance with Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) No 651/2012, the decision as to whether to issue commemorative coins with a common design collectively issued by all Member States whose currency is the euro is to be taken by the Council, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) No 651/2012, the decision as to whether to issue commemorative coins with a common design collectively issued by all Member States whose currency is the euro is to be taken by the Council,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The collective issuance in 2022 of a commemorative coin with a common design, by all Member States whose currency is the euro, in order to mark the 35th anniversary of the Erasmus programme is hereby approved.

Article 2

This Decision shall take effect on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 18 July 2019.

For the Council

The President

T. TUPPURAINEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 135.

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EU) No 729/2014 of 24 June 2014 on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 194, 2.7.2014, p. 1).

2

---
Factors Limiting Chum Salmon in the Columbia River Gorge

United States Fish and Wildlife ServiceColumbia River Fisheries Program Office

Objectives

• Evaluate the use of traditional and artificial spawning areas

• Evaluate the relationship betweenmainstem Columbia River and tributary spawning areas

• Examine smolt outmigration patterns

This research examines the natural chum salmon production within Hamilton Creek, Hardy Creek, and a portion of the mainstem Columbia River referred to as the “Ives Island 

Complex”.     

N

Hardy Creek

Hamilto

n Cre

ek

Ives Island

Pierce IslandColumbia River

0 500 1000 1500 Meters

"Ives Island Complex"

The annual historic Columbia River chum salmon run in the early 1900s was estimated to be 1,392,000.  In 1951 the run size on the Washington 

side of the Columbia River was estimated at 25,000.  Since 1959, the population has been relatively stable with the annual minimum run size 

ranging from 300 to 5,700. On May 24, 1999 the National Marine Fisheries Service listed Columbia River chum salmon populations 

as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7882

ROY LEE PERRY, II-Bey,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

ELLIOTT GAINES,

Plaintiff,

versus

JOHN JABE, Warden; P. A. TERRANGI; D. A. SWETTER,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 96-6446

ELLIOTT GAINES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

ROY LEE PERRY,

Plaintiff,

versus

JOHN JABE, Warden; P. A. TERRANGI; D. A. SWETTER,

Defendants - Appellees.
2
3

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-95-851-AM)

Submitted: June 20, 1996 Decided: June 27, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

No. 95-7882 dismissed and No. 96-6446 affirmed by unpublished per

curiam opinion.

Roy Lee Perry, Elliott Gaines, Appellants Pro Se. Lance Bradford

Leggitt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,

Virginia; David Ernest Boelzner, WRIGHT, ROBINSON, OSTHIMER &

TATUM, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
4

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal the district court's orders dismissing their

42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. The district court assessed a

filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th

Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the

action as to Roy Lee Perry without prejudice when he failed to

comply with the fee order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we deny

Perry leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss appeal No. 95-

7882. We deny Perry's motion to appoint counsel.

The district court dismissed the action as to Elliott Gaines

on the merits. Gaines moved for reconsideration, and the district

court denied the motions. Gaines filed a notice of appeal which was

only timely to the order denying reconsideration. Because we find

upon a review of the record that the district court did not abuse

its discretion in denying reconsideration, we affirm appeal No. 96-

6446 on the reasoning of the district court. Gaines v. Jabe, No.

CA-95-851-AM (E.D. Va. Jan. 25 & Feb. 8, 1996). We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

No. 95-7882 - DISMISSED

No. 96-6446 - AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                                           2,219
<SECURITIES>                                       500
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,153
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     84,382
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               142,349
<PP&E>                                         122,264
<DEPRECIATION>                                (23,629)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 292,813
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,262
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            36
<OTHER-SE>                                     427,067
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   292,813
<SALES>                                         68,741
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                70,993
<CGS>                                           42,618
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   42,618
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (14,947)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        30
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,917)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,917)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.46)
        

</TABLE>
§ 520.1615 Omeprazole. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each gram of paste contains 0.37 gram omeprazole.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 000010 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Special considerations.* When labeled for use as in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section, product labeling shall bear: “Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.”
( d ) *Conditions of use in horses* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* ( i ) For treatment of gastric ulcers, 1.8 milligrams per pound (mg/lb) of body weight (4 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)) once daily for 4 weeks. For prevention of recurrence of gastric ulcers, 0.9 mg/lb of body weight (2 mg/kg) once daily for at least an additional 4 weeks.
( ii ) For prevention of gastric ulcers using the premarked syringe, one dose per day for 8 or 28 days. Each dose delivers at least 1 mg/kg of body weight. Horses over 1,200 lb body weight should receive two doses per day.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* ( i ) For treatment and prevention of recurrence of gastric ulcers in horses and foals 4 weeks of age and older.
( ii ) For prevention of gastric ulcers in horses.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Do not use in horses intended for human consumption.
[69 FR 13220, Mar. 22, 2004, as amended at 71 FR 59374, Oct. 10, 2006; 84 FR 39183, Aug. 9, 2019]
§ 182.3173 Butylated hydroxytoluene. ( a ) *Product.* Butylated hydroxytoluene.
( b ) *Tolerance.* This substance is generally recognized as safe for use in food when the total content of antioxidants is not over 0.02 percent of fat or oil content, including essential (volatile) oil content of food, provided the substance is used in accordance with good manufacturing practice.
Kelly A Magurany 

<kamagurany@nalco.com>

10/12/2009 03:11 PM

To EHPV-Program-Submissions@EPA

cc

Christina_Franz@americanchemistry.com, Gloria 

Drayton-Miller/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Sergio Villalobos 

<svillalobos@nalco.com>

bcc

Subject NALCO: TEST PLAN/ ROBUST SUMMARY CAS# 

40372-66-5

Dear Administrator: 

Included in the attached is Nalco Company's Standard eHPV Submission for CAS# 40372-66-5, 

1,2,4-Butanetricarboxylic acid, 2-phosphono-, sodium salt

Title: Test Plan & Robust Summary For PBTC Sodium Salt, CAS# 40372-66-5

Best Regards, 

Kelly A Magurany, M.Sc. 

Senior Toxicologst 

Corporate Quality & Product Registration 

Nalco Company

1601 W Diehl Rd 

Naperville, IL 60563 

Ph. 630.305.1452 

Fax 630.305.2945 

E-mail. kamagurany@nalco.com

 - HPV Submission CAS# 40372-66-5.pdf
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                                   4
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       56,390
<ALLOWANCES>                                         2,910
<INVENTORY>                                         37,928
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    94,281
<PP&E>                                               6,462
<DEPRECIATION>                                       2,941
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     108,685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               78,171
<BONDS>                                              3,313
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               339
<OTHER-SE>                                          26,862
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       108,685
<SALES>                                            212,189
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   212,189
<CGS>                                              154,655
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      154,655
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    41,787
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2,134
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     13,613
<INCOME-TAX>                                         5,229
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  8,384
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         8,384
<EPS-BASIC>                                           2.78
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         2.47



</TABLE>
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2012-0600 Directorate ID: 2012-SW-017-AD

Helicopter Model: Agusta S.p.A. Model AW139 Helicopters

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 1 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: These actions are intended to prevent separation of the collective control rod from the

torque tube, loss of control of the collective pitch, and subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $

Labor per Helicopter

(8 x $85/work-hour for 

inspecting and reassembling 

the control rod)

$680

Other (Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter $680

Total US Fleet Cost $680

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Sharon Miles
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned, Gary L. Cavey, Chief Executive Officer of Ballantyne Strong, Inc. (the "Company"), has executed this
certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the
"Report").

The
undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to his knowledge
that:



IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 16th day of March, 2011.

/s/ GARY L. CAVEY Gary L. Cavey
Chief Executive Officer


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Ballantyne Strong, Inc. and will be retained by Ballantyne Strong, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks