alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                              |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| formerly the National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC)...  more on NCEI |
|                                                                              | This Site        All of NOAA |

**NCEI is transitioning to a new website and paths to data resources will be changing. Please contact NCEI.Info@noaa.gov with any questions of issues. See the new website at www.ncei.noaa.gov.**

|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               | non-Javascript | non-Javascript |  |
| Retrieval software on this site requiresa browser with JavaScript enabled (e.g. Netscape 3.0 or IE 3.0 or higher).To upgrade (if necessary) your browsers use the following URL :Netscape  InternetExplorerPresented is a spatial distribution of Temperature, Salinity, Oxygen, Nitrate, AmmoniaNitrogen, Organic Nitrogen, Phosphate, Organic Phosphate, and Silicatedata from the Sea of Okhotsk during the 1990 - 1997 period for  the months of June - August. |
§ 81.12 Procedure to update NIOSH-IREP. ( a ) NIOSH may periodically revise NIOSH-IREP to add, modify, or replace cancer risk models, improve the modeling of uncertainty, and improve the functionality and user-interface of NIOSH-IREP.
( b ) Revisions to NIOSH-IREP may be recommended by the following sources: ( 1 ) NIOSH,
( 2 ) The Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health,
( 3 ) Independent reviews of NIOSH-IREP or elements thereof by scientific organizations (e.g., National Academy of Sciences),
( 4 ) DOL,
( 5 ) Public comment.
( c ) NIOSH will submit substantive changes to NIOSH-IREP (changes that would substantially affect estimates of probability of causation calculated using NIOSH-IREP, including the addition of new cancer risk models) to the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for review. NIOSH will obtain such review and address any recommendations of the review before completing and implementing the change.
( d ) NIOSH will inform the public of proposed changes provided to the Advisory Board for review. HHS will provide instructions for obtaining relevant materials and providing public comment in the notice announcing the Advisory Board meeting, published in the Federal Register.
( e ) NIOSH will publish periodically a notice in the Federal Register informing the public of proposed substantive changes to NIOSH-IREP currently under development, the status of the proposed changes, and the expected completion dates.
( f ) NIOSH will notify DOL and publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public of the completion and implementation of substantive changes to NIOSH-IREP. In the notice, NIOSH will explain the effect of the change on estimates of probability of causation and will summarize and address relevant comments received by NIOSH.
( g ) NIOSH may take into account other factors and employ other procedures than those specified in this section, if circumstances arise that require NIOSH to implement a change more immediately than the procedures in this section allow.
From: Szabo, Aaron [mailto:Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 5:55 PM

To: Brachtl, Megan

Cc: Ling, Michael

Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866 and 13563 Data Requirements for SO2 FR

Attached please find a summary of interagency comments under EO 12866 and 1363 on the EPA final 

rule entitled, Data Requirements Rule for the 2010 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

Thanks and please let me know if you have any questions.

Aaron L. Szabo

Policy Analyst

Office of Management and Budget

202-395-3621

Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov
#### § 90.2 Definitions.

*Administrator* means the Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry or designee.

*ATSDR* means the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

*CERCLA* means the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 *et seq.,* Pub. L. 96-520), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-499).

*EPA* means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

*Facility* is defined in 42 U.S.C. 9601(9).

*Hazardous substance* is defined in 42 U.S.C. 9601(14). In addition, the term includes any pollutant or contaminant which the Administrator determines is appropriate for the purposes of carrying out his or her responsibilities under CERCLA.

*Health assessment* means the evaluation of data and information on the release of hazardous substances into the environment in order to assess any current or future impact on public health, develop health advisories or other recommendations, and identify studies or actions needed to evaluate and mitigate or prevent human health effects.

*Health effects study* means research, investigation, or study performed by ATSDR or other parties pursuant to an agreement with ATSDR to evaluate the health effects of exposure to hazardous substances at specific sites. This term includes, but is not limited to, epidemiological studies, exposure and disease registries, and health surveillance programs. This term does not include health assessments.

*Owner or operator* is defined in 42 U.S.C. 9601(20).

*Peer review* means review for scientific quality by a panel consisting of no less than three nor more than seven members, who shall be disinterested scientific experts selected by the Administrator of ATSDR on the basis of their reputation for scientific objectivity and the lack of institutional ties with any person involved in the conduct of the study or research under review.

*Person* means an individual, firm, corporation, association, partnership, consortium, joint venture, commercial entity, United States Government, State, municipality, commission, political subdivision of a State, Indian tribe, or any interstate body.

*Pollutant or contaminant* is defined in 42 U.S.C. 9601(33).

*Public health advisory* is a statement by ATSDR containing a finding that a release poses a significant risk to human health and recommending measures to be taken to reduce exposure and eliminate or substantially mitigate the significant risk to human health.

*Release* is defined in 42 U.S.C. 9601(22).
#### § 18.431 Application.

Sections 18.431 through 18.439 apply to elementary, secondary, and adult education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs and to recipients that operate or receive Federal financial assistance for the operation of such programs or activities.

[45 FR 63268, Sept. 24, 1980, as amended at 68 FR 51370, Aug. 26, 2003]
Order filed, September 25, 2015.

 In The

Court of Appeals 

For The

First District of Texas 

____________

NO. 01-15-00763-CR

DONOVAN DWIGHT SIMMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 230th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case 1056045

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due August 8, 2015. See Tex. R. App. P. 

35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The 

record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed 

timely, we issue the following order.

We order Trish Matthews, the official (or substitute) court reporter, to file the 
record in this appeal, if any, within 30 days of the date of this order.

/s/ Michael Massengale

 Acting individually
Exhibit 31(b)
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Interphase Corporation (the Company);2.
    
    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;3.
    
    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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The Company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))
and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and
15d-15(f)) for the Company and have:
     5.
    
    The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the
audit committee of the Companys board of directors:
   Date: May 13, 2008Signature:
    
    /s/ Thomas N. Tipton Jr.Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register: August 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 164)]
[Notices]               
[Page 52385]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25au10-122]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7129]

 
Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Paintings From the Reign of Victoria: The Royal 
Holloway Collection, London''; Correction

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of State published a document in the Federal 
Register of August 26, 2008, concerning culturally significant objects 
imported for exhibition determinations. The document did not state that 
the exhibition, ``Paintings from the Reign of Victoria: The Royal 
Holloway Collection, London'' would leave the United States after the 
last exhibit listed and then return for further exhibits.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of exhibit objects, contact Carol B. Epstein, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/
632-6473). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth 
Floor, Washington, DC 20522-0505.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 26, 2008, in FR volume 73, page 
50395, at the end of the determinations, should be added the following: 
I further determine that the return to the United States of this 
exhibition of culturally significant objects for display at the 
Chrysler Museum of Art, Norfolk, VA, from on or about September 25, 
2010, until on or about January 3, 2011, and at an additional venue yet 
to be determined from on or about January 22, 2011, until on or about 
May 2, 2011, is in the public interest.

    Dated: August 17, 2010.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. C1-2010-21179 Filed 8-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-P
```
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Pam Atkinson and Thomas J. 	Atkinson, Respondents,<br><br>against<br><br>John O'Toole, Doing Business as Black Ice Paving, Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>The Law Office of Christopher J. Cassar, P.C., Christopher J. Cassar, Esq., for appellant.Darrin Berger, Esq., for respondents.</p><p>Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, Third District (C. Stephen Hackeling, J.), entered June 16, 2014. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiffs the principal sum of $6,715.</p><p>ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.</p><p>Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover for allegedly defective paving work that defendant John O'Toole, doing business as Black Ice Paving, had performed on plaintiffs' driveway. During a nonjury trial, defense counsel made an oral application to preclude plaintiffs' expert from testifying about the condition of the driveway on the ground that plaintiffs had prevented defendant's expert from examining the driveway. The court reserved decision, and the trial proceeded with the testimony of plaintiffs' expert. At the close of the trial, the District Court, in finding in favor of plaintiffs based on a breach of warranty, implicitly denied defendant's application to preclude the testimony of plaintiffs' expert. A judgment in favor of plaintiffs in the principal sum of $6,715 was entered on June 16, 2014.</p><p>Contrary to defendant's sole argument on appeal, we find that the District Court did not err in denying defendant's application to preclude the testimony of plaintiffs' expert, as defendant <font color="FF0000">[*2]</font>failed to establish that the drastic remedy of preclusion was appropriate. The record establishes that plaintiffs had acquiesced to an inspection of their driveway on February 18, 2014 and that, due to a snowfall on that date, defendant's expert was unable to inspect the driveway. The record is devoid of proof that any subsequent specific request had been made by defendant to inspect the driveway, which request plaintiffs had refused.</p><p>Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.</p><p>Iannacci, J.P., Tolbert and Brands, JJ., concur.</p><br>ENTER:<p class="auto-style1">Paul Kenny</p>Chief Clerk<br><br>Decision Date: March 31, 2017<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
#### Hudson P. Rose, Respondent, *v.*Walter E. Andrews, Appellant.

Appeal from a determination of the General Term of the City Court of the city of New York, affirming a judgment of the Trial Term rendered on the verdict of a jury in favor of the plaintiff.

Charles P. Hallock, for appellant.

Oliver W. Beals, for respondent.

Per *Ouriam.*

We have carefully examined the record and find no reversible error. The questions involved were purely matters of fact, as to which the jury found in plaintiff’s favor. The exceptions are without merit, and as to most of the objections sought to be raised on appeal,- the defendant took neither objection nor exception.

Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs.

Present: Tbuax, P. J., Scott and Dugbo, JJ.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
Editorial Note on Part 3
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 61 FR 7216, Feb. 27, 1996; 62 FR 35970, July 3, 1997; 62 FR 47532, Sept. 9, 1997; and 67 FR 46868, July 17, 2002.

§ 3.207 Void or annulled marriage. Proof that a marriage was void or has been annulled should consist of: ( a ) *Void.* A certified statement from the claimant setting forth the circumstances which rendered the marriage void, together with such other evidence as may be required for a determination.
( b ) *Annulled.* A copy or abstract of the decree of annulment. A decree regular on its face will be accepted unless there is reason to question the basic authority of the court to render annulment decrees or there is evidence indicating that the annulment may have been obtained through fraud by either party or by collusion.

Cross References:
Effective dates, void or annulled marriage. See § 3.400 (u) and (v). Evidence of dependents and age. See § 3.204. [28 FR 2904, Mar. 3, 1963, as amended at 40 FR 53581, Nov. 19, 1975; 52 FR 19349, May 22, 1987; 59 FR 46338, Sept. 8, 1994]
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14 OR 15D-14 OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Raul S. McQuivey, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of
Sutron Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this quarterly 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
quarterly report;

4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have: a) designed
such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared; b) evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing
date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures
based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrant
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions): a) all significant deficiencies in the design
or operation of internal controls which could adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for
the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal
controls; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal controls; and

6. The registrants other certifying officers and I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions
with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date:  May 17, 2004
By /s/ Raul S. McQuivey 		Raul S. McQuviey, Chairman of
						the Board of Directors
						and President
Page 1 of 12
                                                       Exhibit 11

                         ALPHARMA INC.
            Computation of Earnings per Common Share
                   Primary and Fully Diluted
       (Dollars in thousands, except for per share data)

                                                  Three Months Ended
                                                      March 31,
                                                  1997         1996
Computation for Statement of Income

  Primary earnings per share:

  Net income                                $     2,260   $     4,777

  Average  common shares outstanding         21,766,000    21,686,000

  Additions:
     Dilutive effect of outstanding
 warrants determined by treasury
 stock method                                                 532,000
     Dilutive effect of outstanding
      options determined by treasury
      stock method                               15,000       187,248

                                             21,781,000    22,405,248

Earnings per common share - Primary               $0.10         $0.21

  Fully diluted earnings per share:

      Net income                            $     2,260      $ 4,777

   Average  common shares outstanding         21,766,000  21,686,000
  Additions:
     Dilutive effect of outstanding
 warrants determined by treasury
 stock method                                                532,000
     Dilutive effect of outstanding
      options determined by treasury
      stock method                               17,000       187,248
                                             21,783,000    22,405,248

  Earnings per common share - Fully diluted       $0.10         $0.21
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2467 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 69 Montgomery Street in Jersey City, New 

Jersey, as the ‘‘Frank J. Guarini Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2467 EH

1 SECTION 1. FRANK J. GUARINI POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 69 Montgomery Street in Jersey 

4 City, New Jersey, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Frank J. Guarini Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Frank J. Guarini Post 

10 Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 10, 

2007. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2467 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postini Post Office Building’’. Jersey City, New Jersey, as the ‘‘Frank J. Guar- al Service located at 69 Montgomery Street in