alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Dregon

111eodore R. Kulongoski, Governor'

October 6, 2010
Dennis McLerran, Regional Administrator

. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10

1200 Sixth Avenue RA-140 Seattle, W A 98101 

### Department of Environmental Quality Headquarters 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 (503) 229-5696 FAX (503) 229-6124 TTY (503) 229-6993 

# IfDJ

# ~ ((;

# ~ D

# W

# ~**~**

# ~ OCT I 

## 22010 

# IY

OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE RE: Revision to the Oregon State Implementation Plan: Transportation Conformity Rules
Dear Mr. McLerran:
The Oregon Department ofEnvironmental Quality requests approval ofrevisions to the Oregon State Implementation Plan from the Office ofAir, Waste, and Toxics, State and Tribal Air Programs Unit ofthe U.S. EPA, Region 10. DEQ is transmitting copies ofthese amendments for EPA's review and approval. Oregon's Environmental Quality Commission adopted changes to our transportation conformity rules as a modificationto our SIP under OAR 340-200-0040 onFebruary 18, 2010. We are submitting these revisions pursuant to 40 CFR 51.104. I certify the public was notitled ofthe proposedrule changes through notices published in The Oregonian-anewspaper ofgeneral circulation----{)n October 20,2009, and inthe Secretary of State's Oregon Bulletin onNovember 1,2009. The notices included a statement that adoption of the rules would revise the SIP. I further certifY that a public hearing was held November 23, 2009 in Portland, Oregon. Thank you for EPA's coordination with our agency during the rule development process and for your consideration ofthese changes as a revision to Oregon's SIP. Ifyou have questions about the development ofthese changes, please contact Dave Nordberg at (503) 229-5519. Ifyou have questions concerning this SIP submission, please contact Margaret Oliphant at (503) 229-5687.

Sincerely,

# ihJ J ni' ammond, De' Director

cc w/attachments: DOlma Deneen, EPA, Region 10 (3 complete sets plus 2 additional copies ofrevised rules, Attachment 3) cc 

### wlo attachments: Margaret Oliphant, DEQ AQ SIP Coordinator Andrew Ginsburg, DEQ AQ Administrator Paul Koprowski, EPA Oregon Operations office
----

| CAWLEY, GILLESPIE & ASSOCIATES, INC. |
|------------------------------------------|
| PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS                    |
|                                     |   |   |   |   |
| 9601 AMBERGLEN BLVD., SUITE 117          |   | 306 WEST SEVENTH STREET, SUITE 302 |   | 1000 LOUISIANA STREET, SUITE 625 |
| AUSTIN, TEXAS 78729-1106                 |   | FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102-4987 |   | HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-5008 |
| 512-249-7000                             |   | 817-336-2461 |   | 713-651-9944 |
| FAX 512-233-2618                         |   | FAX 817-877-3728 |   | FAX 713-651-9980 |
|                                     |   | www.cgaus.com |   |   |
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

34 36 38 40 

### ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 06/19 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 19 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.06 N 76.88 WMeters AGL
KENNETH THOMPSON,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Respondent. __________________________/ 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 1 5

- 5443

Opinion filed March 11, 2016.

Petition for Belated Appeal

-- Original Jurisdiction.

W. Charles Fletcher

, Jacksonville, for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Bureau Chief, and Jillian H. Reding, Assistant Attorney General, T allahassee , for Respondent

.

PER CURIAM

. The petition seeking a belated appeal of the judg ment and sentence rendered

on October 29, 2015, in Duval County Circuit Court case number 2012

- CF

- 11144,

is granted. Upon issuance of mandate, a copy of this opinion shall be furnished to

the clerk of the lower tribunal for treatment as a notice of appeal

.
THOMAS, BILBREY, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v EARL J. BOETTCHER, Jr., Staff Sergeant, U. S. Air Force, Appellant

7 USCMA 691, 23 CMR 155

No. 9474

Decided April 5, 1957

*Lieutenant Colonel Stanley S. Butt*and *Captain John H. Leonard*were on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel Francis P. Murray*and *Captain Lawrence J. Gross*were on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

A general court-martial convicted the accused of a number of offenses, in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and sentenced him to a dishonorable discharge, total forfeitures, and confinement at hard labor for two years. Intermediate appellate authorities affirmed. The allegations of the specification of Charge II in this case are virtually the same as those which, in United States v Lightfoot, 7 USCMA 686, 23 CMR 150, we held were legally insufficient to state an offense *692under the Uniform Code. Accordingly, the findings of guilty of the Charge are set aside, and the Charge is ordered dismissed. The record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for resubmission to the board of review for the determination of an appropriate sentence on the basis of the remaining findings of guilty.
No. 48085.

#### Protest 936217-G of New York Merchandise Co. (New York).

Opinion by

TiLsojN, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) Brass base shells at 35 percent under paragraph 353, as parts of articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, such as signs, following *New York Merchandise Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(8 Cust. Ct. 209, C. D. 607); (2) paperweights at 40 percent under paragraph 339, as household utensils, on the authority of *F. W. Woolworth Co.*v. *United States*(26 C. C. P. A. 221, C. A. D. 20); (3) banks similar to those the subject of Abstract 42749 at 40 percent under paragraph 339 as hollow ware; and (4) banks similar to those the subject of Abstract 38680 at 40 percent under paragraph 339 as household utensils. Protest sustained in part.
#### F. W. Woolworth Co. *v.*United States

No. 6101.

Invoice dated Sonneberg, Germany, October 30, 1939.

Certified November 1, 1939.

Entered at Baltimore, Md., November 28, 1939.

Entry No. 1774/3.

(Decided February 12, 1945)

*Sharretts & Hülis (Edward P. Sharretts*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I. Auster,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Kincheloe, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, that the facts and circumstances relating to the item of 10 per centum commission in the case listed in the annexed 'schedule, identified on the invoice with “xx” in green ink and the initials CHR of Examiner Charles HI Ritz, are in all material respects the same as the facts and circumstances relating to the item of 10 pei centum commission specified in the invoices *336relating to glass tree ornaments, novelties, and figures covered by reappraise-ments 113038-A, 113040-A, and 113468-A of the F. W. Woolworth Co. and passed upon by the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals in *United States*v. *S. S. Kresge Co., B. Shackman & Co., Rice & Co. Corp., Strauss-Eckardt Co., Inc., F. W. Woolworth Co.,*26 C. C. P. A. 349, 352, wherein the court held that “A purchasing commission, charged for the handling of merchandise, is not a proper part of dutiable value.”

> It is further stipulated and agreed that on the date of exportation of the merchandise involved in the case listed in the annexed schedule, identified on the invoices with “xx” in green ink and the initials CHR of Examiner Charles H. Ritz, articles such and, similar thereto were freely offered for sale and sold to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country of exportation in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States at the *per se*unit invoice prices, plus 3 *%*per centum social assessments for insurance, vacation, and holiday costs, plus packing, as invoiced, and that there was no higher .foreign value.

> As to all other items, the appeal is abandoned.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that the record in *United States*v. *S. S. Kresge Co. et al.,*26 C. C. P. A. 349, 352, be incorporated herein and that the said appeal to reappraisement is submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise represented on the invoice by the items marked “xx” in green ink and the initials CHR of Examiner Charles H. Ritz, and that such values are the *per se*unit invoice prices, plus per centum social assessments for insurance, vacation, and holiday costs, plus packing, as invoiced.

The appeal having been abandoned insofar as it relates to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeal is hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Eastern Long Island Sound Eelgrass 2006 Inventory

Fishers Island, New York

Eelgrass Cover
|) High

i) Medium
7 Low

Field Sites

Eelgrass Found
e Eelgrass Not Found

/\/ Sub-basin Boundary

This map is a product of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National
Wetlands Inventory Program, Region 5, and was produced for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Office of Ecosystem
Protection.

Eelgrass digital data were derived from photo interpretation of 1:20,000-
scale true color photography dated 6/16/06 with intensive field verification.
2004 TrueColor, Digital Ortho Imagery were obtained from The State of

New York Ortho Imagery Program and used as a geo-referencing baseline for
photography. Interpreted information was generated "on screen", using
USFWS 2002 eelgrass delineations as a base layer.

This map was produced with the intent that it be used or displayed at
a scale of 1:20,000. There are no warranties made as to the fitness of
this map for any unlisted purpose or reproduction at any other than
the original scale.

Study Area Locus Map Watershed Sub-basin Locus Map

Fishers Island, NY

1:20,000
Date: 

### %b;-33-6S To: District 

# 1 , Mr.

# ® k#;s We would like to request placement on theagenda for the upcoming Community meeting on 

### /3 1

# / 0q 

# . The air quality programwill make a presentation on the following

Please call Janet Travis at(520) 562-2234 ext. 286 to confirm placement on 

### the agenda. 

### Thank-you 

# I ITRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 05/23/2005 16:19 WME : DEPT DEQ FAX : 5205622245 TEL : 5205622234
DATE, TIM FAX NO./NAME DURATION PffiE(S) RESULT MODE - - OK STANDARD ECM

SacaTon, 

### AZ. 

### 85247

Date: 

## 5 ->36S



### The presentation

### will be given 

### by 

## AT M fi

## riella ,
Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
 .
 1.
    
    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of United Components, Inc. for the quarter ended March
31, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of United Components, Inc.
 Date: May 15, 2008By:
Name:
    
    /s/ BRUCE M. ZORICH

Bruce M. ZorichTitle:
    
    Chief Executive OfficerDate: May 15, 2008By:
Name:
    
    /s/ DANIEL J. JOHNSTON

Daniel J. JohnstonTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer
H. Con. Res. 340 Agreed to May 2, 2008 

One Hundred Tenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eight 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 493 (to prohibit 

discrimination on the basis of genetic information with respect 

to health insurance and employment) the Clerk of the House of 

Representatives shall make the following technical corrections: 

(1) In section 104(d)— 

(A) in paragraph (2), strike ‘‘June 30, 2008’’ and insert 

‘‘October 31, 2008’’; 

(B) in paragraph (3), strike ‘‘October 1, 2008’’ and 

insert ‘‘July 1, 2009’’; and 

(C) in paragraph (4)— 

(i) in subparagraph (A)(ii), strike ‘‘October 1, 2008’’ 

and insert ‘‘July 1, 2009’’; and 

(ii) in subparagraph (B)(ii)— 

(I) strike ‘‘in 2008’’ and insert ‘‘in 2009’’; and 

(II) strike ‘‘July 1, 2008’’ and insert ‘‘July 1, 

2009’’. 

(2) In section 202(b)(6), strike ‘‘law enforcement’’ and all 

that follows through ‘‘and requests’’ and insert ‘‘law enforcement 

purposes as a forensic laboratory or for purposes of human 

remains identification, and requests’’. 

(3) In section 205(b)(6), strike ‘‘law enforcement’’ and all 

that follows through ‘‘and requests’’ and insert ‘‘law enforcement 
H. Con. Res. 340—2 

purposes as a forensic laboratory or for purposes of human 

remains identification, and requests’’. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
EXHIBIT 10.23.1

Service Addendum No. 1 to Service Agreement

Per Article 3 of the Service Agreement (the "Agreement") between The Dow Chemical Company ("TDCC") and Union Carbide Corporation ("UCC"), with an Effective
Date of 6 February 2001, this Service Addendum specifies services which TDCC (or its designated Affiliate) is to perform pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

Services:

|THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY |                          | UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION
|------------------------ | ------------------------ | -------------------------
|By:                      |                          |                          
|Name:                    | Arnold A. Allemang       |                          
|Title:                   | Executive Vice-President |                          
|Date:                    | February 6, 2001         |                          

33

---

QuickLinks
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Hearth & Home journal article which states "Manufacturers that we interviewed this year all posted strong growth numbers of 15 to 20 percent, and perhaps a bit beyond. They did that while key indicators such as new home starts and sales, remodeling activity and consumer confidence were still far from what they were back in 2008." March 2014 edition.

This document can be viewed at the USEPA Docket Center Public Reading Room.  Address: 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004. Telephone: 202-566-1744; Fax: 202-566-9744; Email: docket-customerservice@epa.gov
# C_2016191EN.01004702.xml

| 30.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 191/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 191/47

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 11 April 2016 — FN, FP and FQ v CEPOL

(Case F-41/15 DISS II) (1)

1

((Civil service - CEPOL staff - Temporary staff - Contract staff - Place of employment corresponding to the seat of CEPOL - Relocation of CEPOL to Budapest (Hungary) - Corresponding change in the place of employment of members of staff - Contractual consequences - Need for consent from members of staff - Correction coefficient applicable to the new place of employment - Legitimate expectations - Principle of sound administration))

(2016/C 191/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: FN, FP and FQ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Police College (represented by: F. Bánfi and R. Woldhuis, Agents, B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decisions of the European Police College (CEPOL) which resulted in either the applicants resigning from their positions at the agency or the applicants relocating from London to Budapest and thereby suffering financial loss, and an application for damages in respect of the material and non-material harm allegedly incurred.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders FN, FP and FQ to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Police College. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders FN, FP and FQ to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Police College.

---

(1)  OJ C 178, 01/06/2015, p. 28.

1

---
# C_2019044EN.01008101.xml

| 4.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/81 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/81

---

Order of the General Court of 8 November 2018 — Infratel Italia and Others v Commission

(Case T-636/15) (1)

(2019/C 44/108)

Language of the case: Italian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 16, 18.1.2016.

---
combustionsurvey

- Comments to EPA's Reconsideration of Boiler MACT and CISWI Rules

Please find attached Alyeska Pipeline Service Company’s (Alye ska’s) comments to EPA’s reconsideration of the Boiler MACT and CISWI rules. Please let me know (emai l, 907-787-8568) if you have any questions or problems downloading the attached file. Thank-you...Don M.A. From: "Mark Anthony, Don T." <Don.MarkAnthony@alyeska

- pipeline.com> To: "'shrager.brian@epa.gov'" <shrager.brian@epa.gov>, "'eddinger.jim@epa.gov'"

<eddinger.jim@epa.gov>, "'jones.toni@epa.gov'" <jones.toni@epa.gov>, "'faison.george@epa.gov'" <faison.george@epa.gov>, "'combustionsurvey'" <combustionsurvey@erg.com> Date: 7/14/2011 7:24 PM Subject: Comments to EPA's Reconsideration of Boiler MACT and CISWI Rules Attachments: Alyeska's Reconsideration Notice Comments.pdf Page 1 of 1

8/2/2011 file://C:\Documents and Settings\GGibson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpw ise\4E1F4280DO

...
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNIFAB
INTERNATIONAL, INC.'S DECEMBER 31, 1999 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,731
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,980
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,505
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                26,369
<PP&E>                                          40,447
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,910
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  76,102
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,588
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            68
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,823
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    76,102
<SALES>                                         55,817
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                55,817
<CGS>                                           48,942
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   48,942
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 908
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (111)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        97
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (208)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (208)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)


</TABLE>
# C_2017402EN.01000201.xml

| 27.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 5 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos teismas — Lithuania) — ‘LitSpecMet’ UAB v ‘Vilniaus lokomotyvų remonto depas’ UAB

(Case C-567/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts - Directive 2004/18/EC - Article 1(9) - Concept of contracting authority - Company wholly owned by a contracting authority - Transactions internal to the group))

(2017/C 402/02)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Referring court

Vilniaus apygardos teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant:‘LitSpecMet’ UAB

Applicant:

Defendant:‘Vilniaus lokomotyvų remonto depas’ UAB

Defendant:

Intervening party:‘Plienmetas’ UAB

Intervening party:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The second subparagraph of Article 1(9) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts, as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 1251/2011 of 30 November 2011, must be interpreted as meaning that a company which, on the one hand, is wholly owned by a contracting authority whose activity consists of meeting needs in the general interest and which, on the other, carries out both transactions for that contracting authority and transactions on the competitive market must be classified as a ‘body governed by public law’ within the meaning of that provision, provided that the activities of that company are necessary for the contracting authority to exercise its own activity and, in order to meet needs in the general interest, that company is able to be guided by non-economic considerations, which it is for the referring court to ascertain. The fact that the value of the internal transactions may in future represent less than 90 % or an insignificant part of the overall turnover of the company is irrelevant in that regard.

---

(1)  OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.

1

---