alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Yolo-Solano AQMD

Adopted January 13, 2010

(Final Draft December 29, 2009) Reg. II, Rule 2.12, Page1

RULE 2.12 SPECIFIC CONTAMINANTS

Adopted January 21, 1972

Revised January 13, 2010

INDEX

100 GENERAL

101 PURPOSE

102 APPLICABILITY

110 EXEMPTION - TRANSITION

200 DEFINITIONS

201 COMBUSTION CONTAMINANTS

300 STANDARDS

301 REQUIREMENT

400 MONITORING

401 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION

402 TEST METHODS
Yolo-Solano AQMD

Adopted January 13, 2010

(Final Draft December 29, 2009) Reg. II, Rule 2.12, Page2

100 GENERAL

101 PURPOSE: The purpose of this rule is to protect the ambient air quality by

establishing particulate matter combustion contaminants and sulfur compound

emission standards.

102 APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to any source operation which emits, or may

emit sulfur gaseous emissions and particulate matter combustion contaminants

110 EXEMPTIONS: The provisions of this rule shall not apply during the start of an

operation or change in energy source, during the time necessary to bring the

combustion process up to operating level.

200 DEFINITIONS

201 COMBUSTION CONTAMINANTS: Particulate matter discharged into

theatmosphere from the burning of any kind of material containing carbon in a free

or combined state.

300 STANDARD

301 REQUIREMENT: A person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any single

source of emission whatsoever, any one or more of the following contaminants, in

any state or combination thereof, in excess of the following concentrations at the

point of discharge:

a 2. Sulfur compounds calculated as sulfur dioxide (SO ) 0.2%, by

volume at standard conditions. 

b. Particulate Matter Combustion Contaminants: 0.31 grains per cubic

2

foot of gas calculated to 12 percent of carbon dioxide (CO ) at

standard conditions., except during the start of an operation or change

in energy source, during the time necessary to bring the combustion

process up to operating level. In measuring the combustion

contaminantsfrom incinerators used to dispose of combustible refuse

by 2 burning, the carbon dioxide (CO ) produced by combustion of any

liquid or gaseous fuels shall be excluded from the calculation to 12

percent of carbon dioxide (CO2). 

400 MONITORING

401 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION: In measuring the combustion contaminants

from incinerators used to dispose of combustible refuse by burning, the carbon

dioxide (CO2) produced by combustion of any liquid or gaseous fuels shall be
Yolo-Solano AQMD

Adopted January 13, 2010

(Final Draft December 29, 2009) Reg. II, Rule 2.12, Page3

excluded from the calculation to 12 percent of carbon dioxide (CO2).

402 TEST METHODS:

402.1 The exhaust stack gas velocity shall be determined in accordance with EPA

or CARB Test Method 2.

402.2 The exhaust stack gas moisture content shall be determined in accordance

with EPA or CARB Test Method 4.

402.3 Determination of particulate matter emissions shall be conducted in

accordance with EPA or CARB Test Method 5.

402.4 Sulfur compound emissions shall be determined in accordance with EPA or

CARB Test Method 8.
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 94

Note 10. Accounts Payable 

Accounts Payable as of September 30, 2019, and 2018 

(In billions of dollars) 2019 2018 

Department of Defense ............................................................................................... 39.7 29.2 

Department of Veterans Affairs .................................................................................... 12.2 13.5 

Department of Justice ................................................................................................. 4.2 5.1 

Department of Energy ................................................................................................. 4.2 3.7 

General Services Administration .................................................................................. 3.8 3.1 

Department of Education ............................................................................................. 3.8 3.8 

Department of State .................................................................................................... 3.7 3.6 

Department of the Treasury ......................................................................................... 3.6 3.8 

Department of Homeland Security ................................................................................ 2.4 2.5 

U.S. Agency for International Development ................................................................... 2.3 2.4 

Security Assistance Accounts ...................................................................................... 2.3 1.0 

Department of Agriculture ............................................................................................ 2.2 1.9 

Department of Commerce ........................................................................................... 2.2 2.0 

U.S. Postal Service ..................................................................................................... 1.8 1.8 

All other ...................................................................................................................... 9.6 9.3 

 Total accounts payable ............................................................................................. 98.0 86.7 

 Accounts payable includes amounts due for goods and property ordered and received, services rendered by other than 

federal employees, cancelled appropriations for which the U.S. government has contractual commitments for payment, and 

non-debt related interest payable.
(Reap. Dec. 10333)

Entry No. 10499, etc.

#### Wheeler & Miller *v.*United States

*388(Decided September 10, 1962)

*Barnes, Richardson & Oolbum*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph D. Guilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

LawRENCE, Judge:

The proper dutiable value of certain merchandise is the subject of the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in the schedule attached to and made a part hereof.

The parties hereto have entered into a stipulation of fact wherein it has been agreed as follows:

> 1. That on or about the date of exportation of the merchandise the subject of the appeals for reappraisement, enumerated on Schedule “A” hereto attached and made a part hereof, such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the ordinary course of trade in the principal markets of Germany.

> 2. That on or about the date of exportation of the merchandise involved herein, such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the ordinary course of trade in the principal markets of Germany for exportation to the United States.

> 3. That on or about the date of exportation of the merchandise involved herein, such or similar imported merchandise was not freely offered for sale for domestic consumption in the principal markets of the United States to all purchasers in the ordinary course of trade.

> 4. That the cost of production as defined in Section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930 is as follows:

> (a) With respect to those items appraised in Deutsche marks in red-ink figures less 33%% less the proportionate part of the items marked X, packed : the indicated red-ink figures in Deutsche marks less 33%% less 3% less 4% plus the proportionate part of export packing.

> (b) With respect to those items not showing red-ink values and appraised in United States dollars at the invoice unit values, plus 10%, packed: the indicated invoice unit values, in United States dollars, net, packed.

Upon, the agreed facts of record, the court finds and holds that cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1402(f)), is the proper basis of value for the merchandise covered by the appeals for a reappraisement, above referred to, and that such value is as follows:

> (a) With respect to those items appraised in Deutche marks in red-ink figures less 33%% less the proportionate part of the items marked X, packed: the indicated red-ink figures in Deutsche marks less 33%% less 3% less 4% plus the proportionate part of export packing.

> (b) With respect to those items not showing red-ink values and appraised in United States dollars at the invoice unit values, plus 10%, packed: the indicated Invoice unit values, in United States dollars, net, packed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Belk, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the quarter ended April 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Executive Vice President, Finance of the Corporation, certifies
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 results of operations of the
Corporation.

/s/ Brian T. Marley
---------------------------------
Brian T. Marley
Executive Vice President, Finance
(Chief Financial Officer)
June 9, 2005
**EXHIBIT 31.2**I, Brian T. Marley, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Belk, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or causedsuch internal control over financial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability offinancial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarizeand report financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.Date: September 7, 2006/s/ Brian T. Marley
# C_2017086EN.01002102.xml

| 20.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 86/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 86/21

---

Order of the President of the Court of 6 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen — Sweden) — Riksåklagaren v Zenon Robert Akarsar

(Case C-148/16) (1)

1

(2017/C 086/26)

Language of the case: Swedish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 175, 17.5.2016.

1

---
# C_2020175EN.01000901.xml

| 25.5.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/9

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 March 2020 — Elche Club de Fútbol v Commission

(Case T-901/16) (1)

(State aid - Aid granted by Spain in favour of certain professional football clubs - Guarantee - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Indirect beneficiary - Whether imputable to the State - Advantage - Private investor test)

(2020/C 175/09)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Elche Club de Fútbol, SAD (Elche, Spain) (represented by: M. Segura Catalán, M. Clayton and J. Morant Vidal, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/365 of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.36387 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) (ex 2013/CP) implemented by Spain for Valencia Club de Fútbol, SAD, Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD and Elche Club de Fútbol, SAD (OJ 2017 L 55, p. 12).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Decision (EU) 2017/365 of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.36387 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) (ex 2013/CP) implemented by Spain for Valencia Club de Fútbol, SAD, Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD and Elche Club de Fútbol, SAD, in so far as it concerns Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Decision (EU) 2017/365 of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.36387 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) (ex 2013/CP) implemented by Spain for Valencia Club de Fútbol, SAD, Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD and Elche Club de Fútbol, SAD, in so far as it concerns Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Elche Club de Fútbol, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Elche Club de Fútbol, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings;

| 3. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 53, 20.2.2017.

---
Before the Third Division,

February 7, 1947

No. 51555.

#### Protest 115043-K of Alfred Hart Distilleries (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Somerset*(33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the tojal contents of the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination because of breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gauger’s return as verified by the affidavit of the importer. The protest, having been abandoned as to entry 1631, was dismissed to such extent. In all other respects the protest was sustained as claimed.
No. 64013.

protests 218855-K/5160, etc. (Chicago).

#### Associated Importers, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co, Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# C_2019139EN.01004501.xml

| 15.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/45

---

Judgment of the General Court 28 February 2019 — Souruh v Council

(Case T-440/16) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Syria - Freezing of funds - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Duty to state reasons - Error of assessment - Right to respect for one’s good name and reputation - Right to property - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality)

(2019/C 139/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Souruh SA (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by S. Kyriakopoulou, G. Étienne and A. Vitro, subsequently by S. Kyriakopoulou and A. Vitro, and finally by S. Kyriakopoulou, A. Vitro and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application brought pursuant to Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/850 of 27 May 2016 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2016, L 141, p. 125) and its subsequent implementing acts, Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017 amending Decision 2013/255 CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017, L 139, p. 62) and Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/778 of 28 May 2018 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2018, L 131, p. 16), in so far as they concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Souruh SA to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Souruh SA to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Council of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 364, 3.10.2016.

---
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 10, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-10609

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PAAKS ADJEI, also known as Godfrey Okofo

Asuamah, also known as Harry Kelly, also

known as Harry Hasford, also known as Harry

Ato, also known as Harry Van,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:03-CR-38-ALL-A

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

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender, counsel appointed to represent

Paaks Adjei on direct appeal, has filed a motion to withdraw and

a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744

(1967). Adjei has not filed a response. Our independent review

of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue in

this direct appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to
No. 03-10609

-2-

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See

5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
EXHIBIT 32.1

STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF

2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350

The undersigned, Dwayne Powell, is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Pocahontas Bancorp, Inc. (the
Company).

This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company of the Companys Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2005, as amended (the Report).

By execution of this statement, I
certify that:



| | A) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | B) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods covered by the Report.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this statement
will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this statement be deemed
to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



|             |  |                  
|------------ |  | -----------------
|May 19, 2006 |  | /s/ Dwayne Powell
|Dated        |  | Dwayne Powell