alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TEST DATA REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

P-11-0106

Post-Focus Draft Revision 1 2/16/2011

ENGINEER: El-Zoobi \ BCS

PV (kg/yr): 

Revision Notes/Assessment Overview: This revision includes the following changes to the FOCUS-ready draft 

that are made based on letter from submitter to V. Lee and M. El-Zoobi dated 2/10/11: 

SUBMITTER

USE: Emulsifier and anti-stripping agent for asphalt. 

OTHER USES:

MSDS: Yes LABEL: No

Gen Eqpt: Eye: face shield, chemical goggles // Skin: chemical resistant gloves and clothing // Eng Controls: local 

mechanical ventilation

Respirator: Where airborne exposure is likely or airborne exposure limits are exceeded (if| applicable, see above), 

use NIOSH approved respiratory protection equipment appropriate to the material and/or its components. Full 

facepiece equipment is recommended.

Health Effects: Causes Eye and Skin Burns. // May cause blindness. // Causes respiratory tract irritation. // May 

cause allegic skin reaction.

TLV/PEL: - none established

CRSS: (12/20/2010):

Chemical Name: 

S-H2O: Dispersible g/L @ 

VP: 1.0E-6 torr @ 

MW: 

Physical State and Misc CRSS Info:

 

 

 

Consumer Use

SAT (concerns): (12/21/2010):

Related Cases and Misc SAT Info:

Ecotox Analogs: 

Migration to groundwater: Negligible

PBT rating: P2 B1 T1 .

Health: 2-3, Dermal, Inhalation

Eco: 3, Water (All releases to water with a CC = 1 ppb)

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 4
OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1B

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS:

Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER. This PMN is imported only therefore mfg was not assessed. 

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

P2 REC:

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 4
P-11-0106

PROC: 

Number of Sites/Location: 1

 

Basis:

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources 

to the same medium.

High End: 

to: 

from: 

basis:

RELEASE TOTAL

kg/yr - 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes:

Basis:

Dermal:

Exposure to 

High End: 

Number of workers (all sites) with Dermal exposure:

Basis: 

Dermal:

Exposure to

High End: 

Number of workers (all sites) with Dermal exposure:

Basis: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 4
P-11-0106

USE: 

Number of Sites/Location: 

 

Basis:

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources 

to the same medium.

Output 2: 

to: 

from: 

basis:

RELEASE TOTAL

kg/yr - 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes: 

Basis:

Dermal:

Exposure to 

High End: 

Number of workers (all sites) with Dermal exposure:

Basis: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 4
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
     COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
     SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                          0000856573
<NAME>                                         North American Vaccine, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                               1,917
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        1,729
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                          4,457
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     8,913
<PP&E>                                              59,948
<DEPRECIATION>                                      38,872
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      37,037
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               18,735
<BONDS>                                            100,326
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                          6,538
<COMMON>                                            90,473
<OTHER-SE>                                       (180,237)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        37,037
<SALES>                                              3,589
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     7,626
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       36,233
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6,857
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (34,066)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (34,066)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (34,066)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (1.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (1.05)



</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. S. A. Harper, Defendant-Appellant.

Gen. No. 10,896.

Fourth District.

December 19, 1968.

Donald B. Mackay, Public Defender, of Bloomington, and Robert E. Williams, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Hugh A. Henry, Jr., State’s Attorney, of Bloomington, for appellee.

TRAPP, J.

Defendant was sentenced to the Illinois Youth Commission upon his plea of guilty to a charge of auto theft, c *95i/2,*§ 4-102, 111 Rev Stats, a misdemeanor.

The State’s Attorney has confessed error in the magistrate’s denial of defendant’s petition for probation in the following circumstances — the defendant is 15 years of age. He, with two boys, aged fourteen and fifteen, respectively, stole an automobile. Defendant was the driver of the automobile which was wrecked.

The probation officer was not called to testify at the hearing on probation, but his written report discloses no prior convictions. Defendant testified that he resided *56at the home of his parents, was in his final year of grammar school, and that his school grades were in the range D or F. Defendant also testified that he had violated the curfew law of the town in which he resided and had been expelled from school for three days for smoking on school property.

Following the hearing, the State’s Attorney recommended that probation be granted. The magistrate granted probation to each of the two boys charged with defendant.

By reason of the error confessed, it is not necessary to examine the several issues raised upon the appeal. The conviction upon the plea of guilty is affirmed, but the cause is remanded with directions to vacate the sentence imposed, and to enter an order granting probation.

Conviction affirmed, cause remanded with directions.

SMITH and CRAVEN, JJ., concur.
Incentive Compensation Plan


    ..

    EXHIBIT
      10.20A

    


    


    AMENDMENT
      TO THE FIRST OAK BROOK BANCSHARES, INC.

    INCENTIVE
      COMPENSATION PLAN

    


    


    Section
      6.2 shall be amended by replacing the third sentence by the
      following:

    


           “In
      addition, in
      the event of any such change or distribution, in order to prevent dilution
      or
      enlargement of Participants’ rights under the Plan, the Committee shall adjust,
      in an equitable manner, the number and kind of shares that may be issued under
      the Plan, in accordance with the limitations set forth in Sections 6.1 and
      7.1, the number and kind of shares subject to outstanding Awards, the exercise
      price applicable to outstanding Stock Options, and the Fair Market Value of
      a
      Share of the Common Stock and other value determinations applicable to
      outstanding Awards.”

    


    Section
      10.3 shall be amended to include the following at the end
      thereof.

    


            “No
      Award may be
      amended, modified, extended or renewed after December 31, 2004 in a manner
      that
      would subject the Award to Section 409A, unless such Award is intended to be
      subject to Section 409A and such amendment, modification, extension or renewal
      is made in accordance with Section 409A.”

     

    New
      Section 11.10 shall be added as follows:

    
      	
               

            	
              “Section
                11.10. Stock
                Unit Awards.
                No Award of any Stock Units shall be made after December 31, 2004
                that are
                not settled promptly after the expiration of lapse restrictions unless
                such Award is granted upon terms and conditions that comply with
                Section
                409A.”

            


    

    


    Section
      12.15 shall be amended to include the following at the end
      thereof:

    


            “Notwithstanding
      anything herein to the contrary, effective January 1, 2005, the determination
      of
      Fair Market Value shall comply with Section 409A.”

    


    New
      Section 12.22a shall be added to read as follows:

    


            “Section
      409A”
      means
      Code Section 409A and any regulations and guidance of general applicability
      issued thereunder.”

    


    


    The
      foregoing amendments were adopted on February 22, 2007 but effective as of
      January 1, 2005 unless Section 409A (as defined above) requires an earlier
      or
      later effective date, in which case such earlier or later date shall be the
      effective date.
Editorial Note on Part 892
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 892 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 892.6500 Personnel protective shield. ( a ) *Identification.* A personnel protective shield is a device intended for medical purposes to protect the patient, the operator, or other persons from unnecessary exposure to radiation during radiologic procedures by providing an attenuating barrier to radiation. This generic type of device may include articles of clothing, furniture, and movable or stationary structures.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 892.9.
[53 FR 1567, Jan. 20, 1988, as amended at 61 FR 1125, Jan. 16, 1996; 65 FR 2323, Jan. 14, 2000]
A. G., A CHILD

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 1974

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 1, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Henry E. Davis , Judge

. Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Archie F. Gardner, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee , for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and David Llanes, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED

.

B.L. THOMAS

, ROWE

, and WINSOR

, J J

. , CONCUR.
Exhibit 32.1



SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, the undersigned officer of Sky Financial Group, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge,
that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Marty E. Adams                             
|Marty E. Adams                                 
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|                                               
|August 1, 2005                                 



The signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [USITC SE-09-022]

# Agency Holding the Meeting:

 United States International Trade Commission.

# Time and Date:

 August 13, 2009 at 3:30 p.m.

# Place:

 Room 101, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.

# Status:

 Open to the public.

# Matters To Be Considered:

                        1.                         *Agenda for future meetings:*                         None.                    

2. Minutes.

3. Ratification List.

4. Inv. No. 731-TA-1163 (Preliminary) (Woven Electric Blankets from China)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determination to the Secretary of Commerce on or before August 14, 2009; Commissioners' opinions are currently scheduled to be transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce on or before August 21, 2009.)

                        5.                         *Outstanding action jackets:*                         None.                    

                        In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not                               ( print page 39105)                            disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. Earlier announcement of this meeting was not possible.                    

Issued: July 31, 2009.

By order of the Commission.

William R. Bishop,

Hearings and Meetings Coordinator.

[FR Doc. E9-18742 Filed 8-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
In the costs section of the executive summary, I th ought you were adding a sentence saying the costs o f this rule

are less than the 2009 rule but you haven’t estimat ed that (e.g. the 2009 rule is an upper bound estim ate of the

costs)?

Second, were the Title V costs calculated in 2009? If so, where are they in this table?

Table 1. Summary of the Costs and Emissions Reducti ons of 40 CFR Part
63, Subpart VVVVVV

From: Penny Lassiter [ mailto:Lassiter.Penny@epamail.epa.gov ]

Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 6:21 PM

To: Higgins, Cortney

**RE: Latest CMAS Preamble Higgins, Cortney** 

**to: Penny Lassiter** 

**10/16/2012 10:58 AM**

**Cc:**

**Nick Parsons**

**Hide Details From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.g**  **ov>**

**To: Penny Lassiter/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA**

**Cc: Nick Parsons/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA**

**Requirement Capital Costs ($)**  **Annualized Costs ($/yr)**  **Emissions**

**Reductions (tpy)**
**Batch process vents $390,000**  **$370,000 <43**  **Continuous process vents $170,000**  **$85,000 <29**  **Metal HAP process vents $690,000**  **$1,700,000 41**  **Storage tanks $85,000**  **$15,000 5**  **Heat exchange systems $640,000**  **$280,000 79**  **Transfer operations $75,000**  **$10,000 1**  **Wastewater systems $210,000**  **$79,000 51**  **Management practices $540,000**  **$685,000 N/A** 

**Total $2,800,000**  **$3,200,000 248**  **Page 1**  **of 2** 

**10/16/2012 file://C:\Documents and Settings\nparsons\Local Set**  **tings\Temp\notes87944B\~web1109.**

**...**Cc: Nick Parsons

Subject: Fw: Latest CMAS Preamble

Cortney,

Please find attached below a clean version and a re dline version (the file that doesn't say "clean" in the title) showing the additional language on pg. 37 to add th e citation to part 70 and to list the types of othe r rules that could have to be included in a title V permit. This is a redline from the previous clean version we se nt to you at 4:00 pm on 10/12.

Penny Lassiter Group Leader Refining and Chemicals Group (D205-01) Sector Policies and Programs Division Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. EPA Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 (919) 541-5396

----- Forwarded by Penny Lassiter/RTP/USEPA/US on 1 0/15/2012 06:16 PM -----

From: Nick Parsons/RTP/USEPA/US

To: Penny Lassiter/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 10/15/2012 05:07 PM Subject: Latest CMAS Preamble

(See attached file: EO12866_CMAS Recon 2060-AQ89Fin al_20121015 Clean.doc)(See attached file: EO12866_CMAS Recon 2060 -AQ89Final_20121015.doc)

- - Nick Parsons Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/RCG Research Triangle Park, NC

919.541.5372 parsons.nick@epa.gov

"No man is more important than the team."

- Bo Schembechler **Page 2**  **of 2** 

**10/16/2012 file://C:\Documents and Settings\nparsons\Local Set**  **tings\Temp\notes87944B\~web1109.**

**...**
Amendment To Duke Energy Corp Retirement Benefit Equalization Plan



 Exhibit 10.19.1 
  
 AMENDMENT TO 
 DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION RETIREMENT BENEFIT
EQUALIZATION PLAN 
 (effective January 1, 1999) 
  

The Duke Energy Corporation Retirement Benefit Equalization Plan (effective January 1, 1999) (the “Plan”) is amended, effective as of
December 21, 2006, as follows: 

	 	1.	The Plan is hereby amended by adding the following new Section 13 at the end thereof: 

 “13. Termination of Plan. Effective as of December 31, 2006, the Plan is hereby frozen such that no further benefits or entitlements shall accrue thereunder.” 
 This amendment has been approved and signed by an authorized officer of Duke Energy Corporation as of the date specified above. 
  

			
	DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION
		
	 By:
	 	 /S/    CHRISTOPHER C.
ROLFE        

		 	Christopher C. Rolfe
		 	Group Executive and
		 	Chief Administrative Officer
Editorial Note on Part 301
Editorial Note: In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations. References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

§ 301.6414-1 Income tax withheld. ( a ) For rules relating to the refund or credit of income tax withheld under chapter 3 of the Code on nonresident aliens and foreign corporations and tax-free covenant bonds, see § 1.6414-1 of this chapter (Income Tax Regulations).
( b ) For rules relating to the refund or credit of income tax withheld under chapter 24 of the Code from wages, see § 31.6414-1 of this chapter (Employment Tax Regulations).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          19,694
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,036
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,021
<PP&E>                                           1,897
<DEPRECIATION>                                     226
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,287
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                         828
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,119
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,816
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 565
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,778)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,778)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,778)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
39589.

#### POPPELL v. SMUTNEY.

Decided September 5, 1962.

*Swift, Pease, Davidson ■& Chayman, W. G. Scranton, Tom S. Slade,*for plaintiff in error.

*L. B. Kent, Albert W. Stubbs, Hatcher, Smith, Stubbs •& Rothschild,*contra.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

1. “ 'In passing on the general grounds of a motion for new trial, this court passes not on the weight but on the sufficiency of the evidence. It is our duty to determine whether the verdict as rendered can be sustained under any reasonable view taken of the proofs submitted to the jury.’ *Ingram v. State,*204 Ga. 164, 184 (48 SE2d 891).” *Farlow v. Brown,*208 Ga. 646, 648 (68 SE2d 903). See also *Bibb Cigar*&c. *Co. v. McSwain,*95 Ga. App. 659, 661 (98 SE2d 128).

2. “One not himself violating the law is not charged with the duty of anticipating that it will be violated by another.” *Southern Bell Tel. &c. Co. v. Bailey,*81 Ga. App. 20, 25 (57 SE2d 837).

3. The evidence presented by the defendant was not self-contradictory or equivocal so as to require it to be construed most strongly against him.

4. The evidence adduced on the trial supported the verdict for the defendant and the trial court did not err in overruling the plaintiff’s motion for new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Frankum and Jordan, JJ., concur.*
#### § 1.410(b)-1 [Reserved]