alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Analysis Performed & Reported in 2008 LecoInter-Mountain (Relative Percent Difference) Air VolumeLeco TOF ICP-MSTOF ICP-MSLab Leco TOF/IML2008 Data/IML (m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3)(ug/m3) RPD RPD 1660 0.45 Not Run0.29 N/A 42% 1590 4.23 4.58 4.92 -7% -15% 1650 1.61 1.21 1.47 -20% 9% 1850 4.41 4.00 3.42 16% 25% 1840 6.02 5.01 5.14 -3% 16% 1870 4.85 4.49 5.29 -16% -9% 1940 4.52 3.93 4.04 -3% 11% 1970 1.15 0.96 0.43 76% 91% 1920 1.98 1.46 1.17 22% 52% 1940 2.27 2.02 2.13 -5% 6% 1990 1.15 0.89 1.08 -18% 7% 1900 1.78 1.43 1.73 -19% 3% 1890 3.09 2.67 3.03 -13% 2% 1810 1.24 0.90 1.03 -14% 18% 1820 2.35 2.42 2.47 -2% -5% 1960 1.12 0.83 1.14 -31% -2% 1970 1.68 1.23 1.49 -19% 12% 1980 1.95 1.40 1.70 -19% 14% 2000 3.46 3.51 3.68 -5% -6%

2.60 2.39 2.52 -5% -3% Data Comparison Analysis Performed & Reported in August, 2010

Average (ug/m3)
(logo) pwc

 

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To Management of AEGON USA Realty Advisors, LLC

 

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying *Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria Pursuant to Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934*, that AEGON USA Realty Advisors, LLC (“AEGON” or the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the commercial mortgage backed securities transactions listed in management’s assertion (the “Platform”), as of December 31, 2015 and for the year then ended, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(i), 1122(d)(3)(ii), 1122(d)(3)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(v), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii), 1122(d)(4)(xiv) and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which AEGON has determined are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that AEGON complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2015 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

March 14, 2016

 

 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 1100 Walnut Street, Suite 1300, Kansas City, MO 64106 

T: (816) 472 7921, F: (816)218 1890, www.pwc.com/us
6500

6000

6100

5700

5600

5800

5900

6200

5700

6400

5700

5700

5800

6100

5700

5700

6100

6250

6300

6300

5700

6600

6300

6550

5700

6400

5700

6500

6000

56

412

56

412

56

412

56

412

120

120

120

C O U N T Y R D -C 011

C O U N T Y H

W Y C -01 5

C O U N T Y H W Y C -01 5

56

412

56

412

56

412

56

412

120

120

120

C O U N T Y R D -C 011

C O U N T Y H

W Y C -01 5

C O U N T Y H W Y C -01 5

D O N

C A R L O S

H I L L S

Gard

Beenham

Gladstone

NW

Gladstone

Romero

Spring Pennington

Yates Aragon

Hill

Sofia Tripod

Mountain

19

03 6 6 6

000

E

23

04

20'

20

52'

08

13

40

6

18

40

N

10

06

02

6

1

50'

36°

21

26

40

40

40

40

14

6

25

21

13

40

40

22'

36°

103°

17'

000 FEET

03 6 6

08 11

23

6

950

47'

000

40

09

30"

103°

15

40

40

6 07

40

N

000m

17'

04 6

000m

19

24

25

40

30"

14

47'

30"

52'30"

18

40

40

6

22

05 10

6

40

6 11

40

40

000m

000 FEET

06

6 15'

710 36°22'

45'

36°

103°

30"

6

20'

30"

02

24

6

920

4016

40

09

FEET

680

FEET

000m

07

45'

103°

15'

30"

40

40

40

16

6

40

30"

17

26

20

6

22

1

12

50'

40

40

05 6

6 E

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

NEW MEXICO

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

ROMERO SPRING, NM

2010

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Interstate Route US Route State Route

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

ROMERO SPRING QUADRANGLE

NEW MEXICO

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

Zone 13S

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator,

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: New Mexico Coordinate System of 1983

(east zone)

Imagery..............................NAIP, January 2005 - June 2009

Roads..............................................©2006-2010 Tele Atlas

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2008

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2005

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2002

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

This map was produced to conform with version 0.5.10 of the

draft USGS Standards for 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.5.11

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0 1

MILES

MN

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

GN

UTM GRID AND 2010 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

0° 42 ́

12 MILS

8° 11 ́

145 MILS

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

13S

FA

CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988
www.gpo.gov

### §5603. United States export controls

The President shall—

(1) use the authorities of the Arms Export Control Act [22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.] to control the export of those defense articles and defense services, and

(2) use the authorities of the Export Administration Act of 1979 [50 App. U.S.C. 2401 et seq.] to control the export of those goods and technology,

that the President determines would assist the government of any foreign country in acquiring the capability to develop, produce, stockpile, deliver, or use chemical or biological weapons.

(Pub. L. 102–182, title III, §304(a), Dec. 4, 1991, 105 Stat. 1246.)

#### References in Text

The Arms Export Control Act, referred to in par. (1), is Pub. L. 90–629, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1320, as amended, which is classified principally to chapter 39 (§2751 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2751 of this title and Tables.

The Export Administration Act of 1979, referred to in par. (2), is Pub. L. 96–72, Sept. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 503, as amended, which is classified principally to section 2401 et seq. of the Appendix to Title 50, War and National Defense. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2401 of the Appendix to Title 50 and Tables.
----

Appointment of the First Advocate General

(2006/C 326/06)

Under the third subparagraph of Article 10(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court of Justice appointed Ms Kokott as First Advocate General for a period of one year ending on 6 October 2007.

----
Exhibit
32.2CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Milestone Scientific, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the six months ending June 30,
2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Rosaline Shau, Acting Chief Financial Officer of Milestone, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(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 result of operations of
Milestone. /s/ Rosaline Shau
      
      Rosaline Shau
      Acting Chief Financial Officer
      August 15, 2005  27
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-60049 Summary Calendar

MACK BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus JAMES V. ANDERSON, SUPERINTENDENT; MISSISSIPPI STATE PENITENTIARY, Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 2:93-CV-100-SA

- - - - - - - - - - December 26, 1997 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Mack Brown, Mississippi prisoner # 62926, appeals the district court’s judgment denying habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Brown argues that he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel in several respects, the State withheld exculpatory and impeachment evidence in violation of the Due Process Clause, and he was deprived of his fundamental right to testify at trial on his own behalf. We have reviewed theNo. 97-60049 -2- issues raised by Brown and conclude that he has not demonstrated that counsel’s performance was deficient at trial or on appeal and that he was prejudiced. See Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). Relevant to his claim that the State withheld statements of witnesses, Brown has not established that the statements contained exculpatory or impeachment evidence.
See Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 (1963); Giglio v. United
States , 405 U.S. 150, 154 (1972). Moreover, the record indicates that Brown at least acquiesced to a decision that he not testify.
See Jordan v. Hargett , 34 F.3d 310, 312 (5th Cir. 1994). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Because Brown filed his habeas petition before April 24, 1996, we have construed the district court’s grant of a certificate of appealability (COA) as a grant of a certificate of probable cause (CPC). See Lindh v. Murphy , 117 S. Ct. 2059 (1997). Accordingly, we have addressed all of the issues Brown sought to raise in the district court. See Sherman v. Scott , 62 F.3d 136, 138-39 (5th Cir. 1995), cert. denied , 116 S. Ct. 816 (1996). Therefore, the motion to file an out-of-time reply brief is DENIED as unnecessary.
EXHIBIT 31.2
 
 RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 I, Blaise B. Bettendorf, certify that:
 I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Summit Financial Corporation; Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 
 
 Date: November 5, 2003
/s/ Blaise B. BettendorfBlaise B. Bettendorf, Senior Vice President andChief Financial Office r
P.1 

OAR Box 1830 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

160) IV-C-127 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 11/13/2008 7:20:59 AM Sheet 160 of 232 
P.2 

^*" > 

P ^ vi UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

JZ -c- 127 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

OFFICE OF 

AIR ANO RADIATION 

SEP I 1988 

Mr. Marcel Halberstadt 

Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association 

300 New Center Building 

Detroit, MI 48202 

Dear Mr. Halberstadt: 

On June 30, 1988 EPA held a public workshop on the 

proposed test procedures for evaporative and refueling emission 

which had accompanying its refueling and volatility NPRMs. At 

that workshop we described several changes to the proposed 

procedures designed to simplify the refueling test and to 

insure that non-integrated refueling controls or 

evaporative-only controls would have equivalent in-use 

performance to integrated refueling control systems. 

Enclosed for your review is a copy of draft regulations 

embodying the changes described at the workshop, plus other 

lesser changes resulting from EPA's review of test procedure 

comments. These regulations will give you full details of the 

changes which we are anticipating for our upcoming reproposal 

action. If you have any questions, please contact Peter 

Hutchins of my staff at (313) 668-4340. To assist in our 

incorporation of your views on these draft regulations into our 

reproposal, we request that you supply us your comments by no 

later"than September 15, 1988. 

Sincerely yours^, 

i 

0\^uuiA^ ••' *s'~*-y >-\ ... 

Charles L. Gray', --Jr. 

Director 

Amission Control Technology Division 

Enclosure 

cc: Docket A-87-11 

6 309W 
P.3 

*

NV'»°<^ '&NT, 

ceNrn„

 ^ % 

S-by^CKFT 

•-'i\l -' 

'OrV
Exhibit 10.32


Description of
annual cash incentive awards to executives


The
Compensation Committee of the Board of Trustees (the “Compensation Committee”)
of Corporate Office Properties Trust (the “Company”) considers the award of
annual cash incentive awards designed to correlate executive compensation to
the overall performance of the Company and to the performance of each executive’s
specific business unit.


The
Compensation Committee establishes target performance levels for the Company in
general and for the business units specifically by using peer groups’ bonus
information, along with a summary of the objectives for the Company and its
business units. The Committee then establishes annual cash incentive award
targets based on different thresholds of performance in meeting the performance
levels.


The
Committee uses the median bonus level for executive positions in the REIT peer
groups as a guideline for determining a Company executive’s target bonus to be
awarded if the Company and the executive’s business unit meet target
performance levels. Each executive may generally earn up to an established
maximum percentage of his or her annual salary if higher-than-target
performance levels are achieved, and will generally receive less than the
target bonus if the target performance levels are not met, although bonuses
could not be paid at all if a defined minimum performance level is not met.


The
measures used in defining overall Company performance objectives for
determining bonuses are diluted funds from operations per share and diluted
adjusted funds from operations per share (both of which are measurements used
by equity REITs to evaluate financial performance).  The measures used in
defining business unit performance are tailored to apply to the nature of each
business unit’s operations.  The measures used in computing the bonus of
the Chief Executive Officer include only overall Company performance measures.
 The measures used in computing the bonuses of the other executives
include overall Company performance measures as well as measures applicable to
each executive’s business unit.


The
Compensation Committee has the discretion to award higher or lower annual cash
incentive awards to executives relative to amounts computed in accordance with
the methodology set forth above.
exv10w17wiii



 








Exhibit 10.17(iii)




FIRST SUPPLEMENT TO INTERCOMPANY LOAN AGREEMENT



This First Supplement to Intercompany Loan Agreement made as of June
21st, 2001 between TopSpin Medical (Israel) Ltd. an Israeli company having its address
at 1 Lev Pesach Street, North Industrial Zone Lod Israel (“LTD”) and TopSpin Medical Inc.
(“INC”) a company  incorporated in Delaware having its address at 1013 Center Road, Wilmington
Delaware, USA (the “Original Agreement”; All capitalized terms as used herein shall have the
meaning assigned to them in the Original Agreement, unless otherwise specifically stated in this
Opinion ) is entered into on April 6, 2006 between LTD and INC(the Supplement”) .




WHEREAS:



(A) Pursuant to the Original Agreement INC has provided from time to time Convertible Loans to LTD;



(B) On December 29, 2005 INC waived its right to recive any interest owed to INC by LTD as of
December 31, 2005 pursuant to the Original Agreement in connection with any Convertible Loans
extended to LTD by INC.



NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual undertakings herein, the parties, intending to be
legally bound, do hereby agree, declare and stipulate as follows:



1. The outstanding principal amount of Convertible Loan extended to LTD by INC as of December 31,
2005, totaling US$ 18,247,671.69 shall be converted into 121,651 ordinary shares of LTD (the
“Shares”) at a conversion price of $150 per share as of December 31, 2005. For the avoidance of
doubt, INC shall not be entitled to any interest with respect to the Convertible Loan from and
after December 31, 2005.



2. The provisions of the Original Agreement, to the extent not explicitly amended under this
Supplement, shall remain in force and affect.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Supplement to Intercompany Loan Agreement
as of the date first above written.




	 	 	 
	TopSpin Medical (Israel) Ltd.

	 	TopSpin Medical Inc.
	 	 	 
	By:
/s/ Erez Golan  /s/ Eyal Kolka

	 	By: /s/ Erez Golan  /s/ Eyal Kolka
	 

	 	 


	Name: Erez Golan & Eyal Kolka

	 	Name: Erez Golan & Eyal Kolka
	Title:  
CEO & CFO

	 	Title:   CEO & CFO
###### 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.

#### § 301.6075-1 Time for filing estate and gift tax returns.

For provisions relating to time for filing estate tax returns and gift tax returns, see § 20.6075-1 of this chapter (Estate Tax Regulations) and § 25.6075-1 of this chapter (Gift Tax Regulations), respectively.

extension of time for filing returns
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 64 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 64

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 May 10 (legislative day, May 1), 1995

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the 1995 Special Olympics Torch Relay to be run through the 
                            Capitol Grounds.
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF RUNNING OF SPECIAL OLYMPICS TORCH RELAY 
              THROUGH CAPITOL GROUNDS.

    On May 19, 1995, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House 
of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate may 
jointly designate, the 1995 Special Olympics Torch Relay may be run 
through the Capitol Grounds, as part of the journey of the Special 
Olympics torch to the District of Columbia Special Olympics summer 
games at Gallaudet University in the District of Columbia.

SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF CAPITOL POLICE BOARD.

    The Capitol Police Board shall take such action as may be necessary 
to carry out section 1.

SEC. 3. CONDITIONS RELATING TO PHYSICAL PREPARATIONS.

    The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe conditions for physical 
preparations for the event authorized by section 1.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 9, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
p.1 

CBIC Control Number 

356223 

RECEIVED 

OPPT CBIC 

20I3SEP25 PM 12:06 

DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts 

Chambers Works 

Deepwater, NJ 08023 

September 18, 2013 

Director, Chemical Control Division 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

EPA East 

Room 4146 

1201 Constitution Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

Re: EPA - HQ - OPPT - 2003 - 0012 

DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100 

PFOA Data Submittal - Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples 

August 2013 Sample Data 

Dear Chemical Control Division: 

Attached please find summaries of PFOA analytical results for the DuPont Chambers Works 

weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A in August 2013. In accordance with the 

current site NJPDES permit (NJ0005100, effective September 2011), these results are provided 

to NJDEP on a monthly basis via electronic discharge monitoring reports. The enclosures 

include two paper and two electronic copies of the analytical results from this monitoring period. 

Jacques Monteux 

Unit Manager-Site Manufacturing Systems 

DuPont Chambers Works 

CM/clc 

Enclosures 
p

. 2 

2 

CD 

CL 

Sh 

O CO 

>< CO CO o au CO 

2 

W fO D) CM CD CO 

O 

o CL 

o O 

CO 

c/> CD CC CO 76 o O CM ^ W s

 I 2< O i >. CM £ CO 

£ 

E CO 

o 

CD O) CO CL 

c 

't; 

o