alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## C-1 APPENDIX C

File Key for Substituted Data

## C-2 A dedicated page on the VIEWS database actsas the repository of all site-specific substitute data sets http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/views/web/documents/substitutedata.aspx. Data is also available on the ARS ftp site (f tp://ftp.air-resource.com/VISTAS/ Aerosol_dataset_VISTAS_2000-2004/).

Table C-1 presents a key to the substituted data files.

Table C-1 Key to Substituted Data Files

Column Header Description site IMPROVE site code year month day QUARTER 1 = Jan. – Mar., 2 = Apr.-Jun., 3 = Jul. – Sept., 4 = Oct. – Dec. date Group 10 = One of the 20% best visibility days; 90 = One of the 20% worst visibility days good_year 0 = incomplete year, 1 = complete RHR year, 2 = complete year with substitutions ss_rayleigh Site specific Rayleigh value (clean air extinction) fsrh f(RH) value for small sulfate, nitrate and organic mass flrh f(RH) value for large sulfate, nitrate and organic mass fssrh f(RH) value for sea salt mass Sea_Salt Sea salt mass (μg/m3) Soil Soil Mass (μg/m3) Amm_NO3 Ammonium nitrate mass (μg/m3) OMC Organic mass by carbon (μg/m3) LAC Light absorbing carbon (aka EC/Elemental Carbon) (μg/m3) CM Coarse mass (μg/m3) Amm_SO4 Ammonium sulfate mass (μg/m3) Large_OMC Large organic mass (μg/m3) Small_OMC Small organic mass (μg/m3) Large_Amm_SO4 Large ammonium sulfate mass (μg/m3) Small_Amm_SO4 Small ammonium sulfate mass (μg/m3) Large_Amm_NO3 Large ammonium nitrate mass (μg/m3) Small_Amm_NO3 Small ammonium nitrate mass (μg/m3) EAmm_SO4 Extinction due to ammonium sulfate (Mm-1) EAmm_NO3 Extinction due to ammonium nitrate (Mm-1) EOMC Extinction due to organic carbon mass (Mm-1) ELAC Extinction due to light absorbing carbon mass (Mm-1) ESoil Extinction due to soil mass (Mm-1) ECM Extinction due to coarse mass (Mm-1) ESea_Salt Extinction due to sea salt mass (Mm-1) RBext Reconstructed aerosol extinction (Mm-1) TBext Reconstructed total extinction (Mm-1) OC_SUB1 OC substituted using OC vs. organic H correlations EC_SUB1 EC substituted using ECvs. OC correlations (NH4)2SO4_SUB2 Ammonium sulfate substituted using site donor correlations (NH4)NO3_SUB2 Ammonium nitrate substituted using site donor correlations OM_SUB2 Organic mass substituted using site donor correlations EC_SUB2 Elemental carbon (aka LAC/light absorbing carbon) substituted using site donor correlations Soil_SUB2 Soil substituted using site donor correlations CM_SUB2 Coarse mass substituted using site donor correlations SeaSalt_SUB2 Sea salt substituted using site donor correlations
## Ernie Garcia

, Attorney at Law

Auto Accidents • Business Law • Debt • Eviction • Wills & Probate

Phone: (832) 305

- 7694 Fax: (832) 553

- 2984 Email: Ernie.Garcia@attorneyeg.com 616 FM 1960, Suite 105, Houston, Texas 77090 December 1 5 , 2015

Via E

- File o nly

1 ST Court of Appeals 301 Fannin, Room 245 Houston, TX 77002

RE: Case No. 01

- 15

- 00976

- CV ; Valdo Rodriguez vs. Nora Avila in the 1 ST District Court of Appeals of Texas

.

To the clerk of said court

,

I am the attorney of record for M r

. Rodriguez in the case styled above . I hereby submit this payment of $ 20 5 for the filing fee due in this case

.

Please feel free to contact my office if you should have any questions.

Regards

,

Ernie Garcia, Attorney at Law ACCEPTED
01-15-00976-CV
FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS
12/15/2015 5:35:00 PM
CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20832]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice No. 2577]


Shipping Coordinating Committee; Subcommittee for the Prevention 
of Marine Pollution; Notice of Meeting

    The Subcommittee for the Prevention of Marine Pollution (SPMP), a 
subcommittee of the Shipping Coordinating Committee, will conduct an 
open meeting on Tuesday, September 9, 1997, at 9:30 a.m. in Room 2415, 
U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC.
    The purpose of this meeting will be to review the agenda items to 
be considered at the fortieth session of the Marine Environment 
Protection Committee (MEPC 40) and the agenda items of the Conference 
on the Prevention of air pollution from ships (the Conference) of the 
International Maritime Organization (IMO). MEPO 40 and the Conference 
will be held in conjunction with each other from September 15-26, 1997. 
Proposed U.S. positions on the agenda items for MEPC 40 and the 
Conference will be discussed.
    The major items for discussion for MEPC 40 will begin at 9:30 a.m. 
and include the following:
    a. Bulk liquids and gases;
    b. Flag State implementation;
    c. Identification and protection of Special Areas and Particularly 
Sensitive Sea Areas;
    d. Adoption of amendments to the International Convention for the 
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol 
of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78), Annex I (regulation 10 to make 
the North West European waters a special area under Annex I and 
regulation 25A on intact stability of double hull tankers);
    e. Harmful aquatic organisms in ballast water;
    f. Harmful effects of the use of anti-fouling paints for ships;
    g. Implemenation of the Oil Pollution Preparedness Response and 
Cooperation (OPRC) Convention and resolutions; and
    h. Irradiated Nuclear Fuel Code related matters.
    The major items for discussion for the Conference will begin at 
11:00 a.m. and include the following;
    a. Consideration and adoption of the Protocol of 1997 to amend 
MARPOL 73/78 by adding a new Annex VI on controlling air pollution from 
ships; and
    b. Consideration of adopting resolutions banning the use of 
perflourocarbons on ships and other related matters.
    Members of the public may attend these meetings up to the seating 
capacity of the room. For further information or documentation 
pertaining to the SPMP meeting, contact Lieutenant Commander Ray Perry, 
U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters (G-MSO-4), 2100 Second Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20593-0001; Telephone (202) 267-2714.

    Dated: July 28, 1997.
Russell A. La Mantia,
Chairman, Shipping Coordinating Committee.
[FR Doc. 97-20832 Filed 8-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-M
**Exhibit
      23.1**







**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**




We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-8 (File Nos. 333-31347 and 333-103396) and on Form S-3 (File no. 333-110297)
      of Electronic Clearing House, Inc. of our report dated December 7, 2005 relating
      to the financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appears
      in
      this Form 10-K.




/s/
        PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP
 
 
 PricewaterhouseCoopers,
        LLP
 Los
        Angeles, California
 December
        14, 2006
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 154 (Monday, August 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42973-42974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21056]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP90-119-019]


Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation; Notice of Compliance 
Filing

August 5, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 1, 1997, Texas Eastern Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Eastern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1 and Original Volume No. 2, revised 
tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to the filing with a proposed 
effective date of September 1, 1997.
    Texas Eastern asserts that the purpose of this filing is to comply 
with the Stipulation and Agreement (S&A) approved by the Commission in 
Docket Nos. RP90-119 et al., in order to remove costs associated with 
the merger between Panhandle Eastern Corporation and Texas Eastern and 
as a result reduce Texas Eastern's system rates by approximately $4.7 
million annually. Texas Eastern states that Article I, Section 4 of the 
S&A provides that at the time of the termination of the collection 
period for the consolidation costs associated with the merger between 
Panhandle Eastern Corporation and Texas Eastern (Consolidation Costs), 
Texas Eastern will make an appropriate compliance filing to remove the 
Consolidation Costs from its rates. Texas Eastern also states that 
Article I, Section 4 of the S&A provides that the compliance filing 
removing the Consolidation Costs will not constitute a new Section 4 
filing, will not be subject to suspension and will be subject to review 
on the sole question of whether it accurately implements Article I, 
Section 4 of the S&A.
    Texas Eastern states that copies of this filing were served on firm 
customers of Texas Eastern, interested state commissions, current 
interruptible customers and all parties to the S&A.
    Any person desiring to protect this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sec. 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Sec. 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action 
to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public

[[Page 42974]]

inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21056 Filed 8-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### John STETSON, Appellant, v. Mary STETSON, Appellee.

Nos. 76-2359 and 77-127.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 14, 1978.

Donald J. Sasser of Johnston, Sasser & Randolph, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Edna L. Caruso of Montgomery, Lytal, Reiter, Denney & Searcy, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The husband in this divorce case raises several points on appeal. With one exception, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion: It erred in finding that a certain 1970 Lincoln automobile belongs to the wife. The automobile in question was titled in the joint names of the parties. The wife neither pled nor proved a special equity in the jointly owned automobile and an award of the husband’s interest in the automobile to the wife cannot be justified as alimony. The court specifically denied the wife’s prayer for alimony based upon the financial resources of both parties and the earning ability of the wife. We can find no legal basis for the court’s determination that the automobile belongs to the wife. It was jointly owned and upon dissolution of their marriage the parties became tenants-in-common.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and LETTS and MOORE, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATION**I, Charles L. McNew, certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Halifax Corporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b) (Intentionally omitted);c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andd) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sforth fiscal quarter in the case of any annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting     Date: June 21, 2006 /s/Charles L. McNew     Charles L. McNew    Chief Executive Officer
#### Gloria WHITE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-1796.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 22, 1977.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, and W. C. McLain, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Dávis G. Anderson, ,Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged in a single information with three counts of resisting an officer with violence, a third degree felony. She was convicted as charged on counts one and three, but was found guilty of the lesser included offense of resisting an officer without violence on count two. She was given concurrent sentences of six to eighteen months on each count.

Resisting an officer without violence is a first degree misdemeanor. Section 843.02, Florida Statutes (1975). The maximum prison sentence for a first degree misdemeanor is one year. Section 775.082(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1975). Therefore appellant’s sentence on count two exceeds the legal maximum.

Appellant’s convictions on all three counts and the sentences on counts one and three are affirmed. The sentence on count two is vacated, and the cause is remanded for imposition of a sentence of six months to one year on that count. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

BOARDMAN, C. J., and HOBSON and GRIMES, JJ., concur.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# DSCR Ergonomics Team strives to achieve OSHA star

By Leon W. MooreDLA Aviation Public Affairs

                RICHMOND, Virginia  –              Good Working Positions.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

DLA Aviation; People & Culture; process improvements
```

[106th Congress Public Law 445]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ445.106]

[[Page 114 STAT. 1931]]

Public Law 106-445
106th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To clarify the intention of the Congress with regard to the authority of 
   the United States Mint to produce numismatic coins, and for other 
            purposes. <<NOTE: Nov. 6, 2000 -  [H.R. 5273]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. <<NOTE: United States Mint Numismatic Coin 
            Clarification Act of 2000. 31 USC 5101 note.>> 

    This Act may be cited as the ``United States Mint Numismatic Coin 
Clarification Act of 2000''.

SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION OF MINT'S AUTHORITY.

    (a) Silver Proof Coins.--Section 5132(a)(2)(B)(i) of title 31, 
United States Code, is amended by striking ``paragraphs (1)'' and 
inserting ``paragraphs (2)''.
    (b) Platinum Coins.--Section 5112(k) of title 31, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``bullion'' and inserting ``platinum 
bullion coins''.

SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL REPORT REQUIREMENT.

    Section 5134(e)(2) of title 31, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
        ``reflect'' and inserting ``contain'';
            (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (C);
            (3) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (D) 
        and inserting ``; and''; and
            (4) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(E) a supplemental schedule detailing--
                          ``(i) the costs and expenses for the 
                      production, for the marketing, and for the 
                      distribution of each denomination of circulating 
                      coins produced by the Mint during the fiscal year 
                      and the per-unit cost of producing, of marketing, 
                      and of distributing each denomination of such 
                      coins; and
                          ``(ii) the gross revenue derived from the 
                      sales of each such denomination of coins.''.

    Approved November 6, 2000.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5273:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):
            Sept. 26, considered and passed House.
            Oct. 24, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

mniteb $>tates QCourt of §ppeaIs

for tbe jfeberaI QCircuit

CHRISTINE BALDRIDGE

(DOING BUSINESS AS INVENTORY DISCOUNT

PRINTERS),

Petitioner,

v.

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE,

Respondent.

2012-6001

On appeal from the Government Accountability Office, Contract Appeals Board no. 11-72994.

ON MOTION

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Christine Baldridge moves for reconsideration of the

court's August 22, 2012 order denying her motion to

correct and supplement the certified list and requests

leave to file an amended complaint. The Government

Printing Office opposes. Baldridge also files a corrected

motion for leave to file a corrected brief out of time.
BALDRIDGE V. GPO 2

A party "adversely affected by ... an order of the clerk

may move for relief within 14 days of the order or action."

Federal Circuit Rule 27(k). Because Baldridge's motion

for reconsideration was filed on October 10, 2012, well

after the time for seeking review of the court's August 22,

2012 order, we deny the motion.

Accordingly,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion for reconsideration is denied.

(2) The motions for leave to file a corrected brief out

of time are granted. The corrected brief is accepted for

filing.

FOR THE COURT

DEC 14 2012

Date

cc: Christine Baldridge

A. Bondurant Eley, Esq.

s26

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

u.s. eouRfb~PEALS FOR

THE FEDERt'J r.mculT

DEC 14 2011.

JAN HORBALY

CLERK
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 24

- 00009

- CR

A NDREW J AMES G ARIBAY

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 90th District Court

of Young County ( CR11982 )

August 22, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _ /s/ Mike Wallach

___________________ Justice Mike Wallach
| 1.   | The quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                   |   |                                                             |
|------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                   |   |                                                             |   |
| Date February 14, 2011 | By:    | /s/ Cristina Avramut                                        |   |
|                   |   | Name Cristina Avramut                                       |   |
|                   |   | Title Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) |   |
|                   |   |                                                             |   |
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 2010

- NM

- 108

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)