alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EPA-420-B-11-006

February 2011

CDX Node Best Practices for EMTS 

Industry Nodes

Activity Limits 

Industry submitters should limit their Solicit and Submit calls to 75 per minute 

and no more than 1500 per hour. This applies to both the staging and production 

environments.

Subsequent GetStatus and Download requests should not be made until after at least 

10 minutes have past following a Solicit or Submit call. For transactions that return a 

status of Pending, additional GetStatus calls should be made at subsequent 30 minute 

intervals. The total number of GetStatus calls in an hour for a submitter should not 

exceed 1500. 

Submissions should be structured with both the short term and hourly limits in mind. 

Industry submitters exceeding thresholds enumerated above are subject to account 

deactivation without notice. Contact the Central Data Exchange (CDX) Node Support Help Desk for disabled accounts or other node related issues.

Network Authentication and Authorization Server (NAAS) 

Tokens

All transactions should leverage a single NAAS token. Submitters should obtain and 

use that token for their submission batches (e.g. obtain a token, use the same token 

for up to 75 Submit/Solicit calls in a minute). The NAAS token remains valid for 20 

minutes before expiring. 

Account Management

CDX will make every effort to communicate issues with limits and disabled accounts 

as quickly as possible. To facilitate communication, it is important to maintain up to 

date account information. Node administrators must work with the CDX Node Support Help Desk to update contact information in the NAAS metadata and maintain 
2

a valid user and domain name for their account, i.e. “@acme.com.” Node administrators must 

also approve their users and follow all other requirements from the CDX Node Administrator’s 

Guide, which will be made available at: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/emtshtml/emtsdocuments.htm.

Requirements for New Nodes

Approval for new nodes must first be obtained from Office of Transportation and Air Quality. 

Prior to receiving production submission access, submitters must simulate a production load of 

Solicit, Submit, and subsequent GetStatus calls in the CDX test environment. The transaction 

submission pattern must be reviewed and approved by EPA before production node access is 

granted. Detailed guidance will be included in CDX Industry Node On-Boarding Procedures. 

This guidance document will be made available on the EMTS website at: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/emtshtml/emtsdocuments.htm. 

Contact Information

CDX Node Support: nodehelpdesk@epacdx.net or 888-890-1995 (select option 2). The Node 

Support Help Desk manages issues relating to NAAS Authentication and Nodes. It is staffed between the 

hours of 8:00AM and 6:00PM (EST).

CDX Helpdesk: helpdesk@epacdx.net or 1-888-890-1995. The CDX Helpdesk supports CDX Login 

and general CDX support issues.

EMTS Support: support@epamts-support.com or 800-385-6164. EMTS Support manages questions 

and issues about the EMTS web application. It is staffed between the hours of 9:00AM and 5:00PM (EST).
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 191 (Thursday, October 2, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 51649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26081]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-4381-000]


Eastern Energy Marketing, Inc.; Notice of Filing

September 26, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 27, 1997, Eastern Energy Marketing, Inc. 
(EEM) tendered for filing a petition for waivers and blanket approvals 
under various regulations of the Commission and for an order accepting 
its FERC Electric Rate Schedule No. 1 to be effective no later than 
October 27, 1997.
    EEM intends to engage in electric power and energy transactions as 
a marketer and broker. In transactions where EEM sells electric energy 
it proposes to make such sales on rates, terms, and conditions to be 
mutually agreed to with the purchasing party. EEM it not in the 
business of generating, transmitting, or distributing electric power.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before October 8, 1997. 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-26081 Filed 10-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 190 (Wednesday, October 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 51410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25945]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-427-811]


Certain Stainless Steel Wire Rods From France: Extension of Time 
Limit for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of extension of time limit for preliminary results of 
antidumping duty administrative review.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') is extending 
the time limit for the preliminary results for the third review of 
certain stainless steel wire rods from France. This review covers the 
period January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1996.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Bolling or Steve Jacques at 202-
482-1386 or 482-3434; Office of AD/CVD Enforcement, Group III, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 
20230.

The Applicable Statute

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of 1930 
(``the Act'') are references to the provisions effective January 1, 
1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Act by the 
Uruguay Rounds Agreements Act.

Postponement of Preliminary Results

    The Department has determined that it is not practicable to issue 
its preliminary results within the original time limit. (See Decision 
Memorandum from Joseph A. Spetrini, Deputy Assistant Secretary, 
Enforcement Group III to Robert LaRussa, Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, September 17, 1997). The Department is extending the 
time limit for completion of the preliminary results until January 2, 
1998 in accordance with Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.
    The deadline for the final results of these reviews will continue 
to be 90 days after publication of the preliminary results.


    Dated: September 23, 1997.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement Group III.
[FR Doc. 97-25945 Filed 9-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
#### FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Petitioner, v. Neva S. TODD, Respondent.

No. 76-1868.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 4, 1978.

*663Kenneth H. Hart, Jr., Gen. Counsel, Florida Dept, of Commerce, Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Shepherd D. Johnston, Richard G. Rum-rell, Miami, and Gerald B. Curington of Smathers & Thompson, Jacksonville, for amicus curiae.

No appearance for respondent.

OTT, Judge.

We reverse the ruling of the Florida Industrial Relations Commission and reinstate the ruling of the claims examiner as affirmed by the appeals referee.

Respondent was employed by the state for 28 years. While employed she contributed to her retirement fund. The state — as a base period employer — also contributed to her pension. Upon voluntary retirement in 1974, respondent began receiving state retirement benefits as well as social security benefits.

After retirement, respondent obtained other employment, but was laid off. Her claim for unemployment compensation was denied by the claims examiner on the ground that the total of her state retirement and social security benefits exceeded the weekly unemployment benefit amount. The appeals referee affirmed, citing the Florida Unemployment Compensation Law — Section 443.06(8), Florida Statutes which provides in relevant part that:

> [a]n individual shall be disqualified for benefits for any week with respect to which ... he has received, or is eligible to receive, from a base period employing unit, income . . . . Provided, however, that for any week in which income . . . when combined with [Social Security] income is less than the weekly benefits which would otherwise be due under this chapter he shall be entitled to receive for such week, . . . benefits reduced by the income . . . combined with the United States Social Security Act retirement income, prorated to a weekly basis.

The Industrial Relations Commission reversed, holding that “the claimant is not disqualified from receipt of unemployment compensation benefits until she has exhausted her contribution to her retirement fund.”

The Florida Statute at issue does not qualify or distinguish the disqualification or reduction of benefits on the basis of whether the retirement funds are contributory or noncontributory. When the legislature passes laws it is deemed to have expressed its intent by the words found in the statute. *Van Pelt v. Hilliard,*75 Fla. 792, 78 So. 693 (1918). That is their prerogative. Courts and other tribunals may not “write in” legislative intent in the absence of the direct or indirect language in support of such intent.

The ruling of the Industrial Relations Commission was hinged upon whether respondent was “receiving back her investment in [the] fund.” Since the controlling statute is devoid of any reference to such a criterion, the Industrial Relations Commission’s order deviates from the statute and is contrary to the essential requirements of law.

Certiorari granted.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and GRIMES, J., concur.
Exhibit 32.2 - Chief Financial Officer Certification (Section 906)

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


In connection with the Annual Report of RPM Advantage, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2010
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
thereof (the "Report").

I, David R. Pressler, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

               (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of
                     section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
                     of 1934; and

               (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
                     in all material respects, the financial condition and
                     result of operations of the Company.

/s/ David R. Pressler
--------------------------
    David R. Pressler
    CEO President and Director


Date  April 25, 2011
      -----------------
#### LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT CO. v. John W. MECOM.

No. 61964.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 5, 1978.

In re: John W. Mecom, applying for cer-tiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Lafourche.

Denied.

SUMMERS and TATE, JJ., would grant.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of United Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Evelyn F. Smalls, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. '1350, as adopted pursuant to '906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

 

 

/*s*/ Evelyn F. Smalls 

 

Evelyn F. Smalls

Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                             FORM 10-K CERTIFICATION

I, Marc Fierman, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Source Interlink Companies, Inc.;

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 operation and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)), for the registrant and we have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.


April 15, 2004                          /s/ Marc Fierman
                                        ----------------------------------
                                        Marc Fierman
| **INTEGRITY MUTUAL FUNDS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES** | Exhibit 21.1 |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------------|

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT**

 

Integrity Mutual Funds, Inc.’s subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004, are listed below.

 
| Subsidiary                        | State of incorporation or organization |
|-----------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
| Integrity Fund Services, Inc.     | North Dakota                           |
| Integrity Money Management, Inc.  | North Dakota                           |
| Integrity Funds Distributor, Inc. | Kansas                                 |
| Capital Financial Services, Inc.  | Wisconsin                              |
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

              Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants


     THE COMPANY HAS BEEN UNABLE TO OBTAIN AN AUDIT OPINION ON THE FINANCIAL
     -------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENTS AND NOTES THERTO FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 26, 1998 AND DECEMBER
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
27, 1997 FROM ITS INDEPENDENT AUDITOR PRINCIPALLY AS A RESUULT OF THE
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONCERN OVER THE ABILITY OF THE COMPANY TO CONTINUE AS A
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOING CONCERN.  CONSEQUENTLY, THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES THERETO,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA, AND MAMANEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, HEREIN CONTAINED ARE PRESENTED AS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UNAUDITED.  THE READER OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, NOTES, SELECTED FINANCIAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA, AND MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS SHOULD CAREFULLY CONSIDER THE LACK OF AN INDEPENDENT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
AUDITORS ATTESTATION TO THE FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS OF THE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPANY FOR DECEMBER 27, 1997 AND DECEMBER 26, 1998 PRESENTED IN THIS FORM 10-K.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 99.2


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



I, James A. Prestiano, the President and sole officer of Daliprint, Inc.
(the "Company"), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


(a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2002, to which this certification accompanies (the "Periodic
Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and


(b) the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Dated: November 19, 2002


                                              /s/ James A. Prestiano
                                              ------------------------------
                                              James A. Prestiano, President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         548,319
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,954,462
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  3,632,913
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,698,129
<PP&E>                                         306,241
<DEPRECIATION>                                  63,437
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,034,842
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,506,275
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        42,900
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,418,870
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,034,842
<SALES>                                     35,372,386
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,372,386
<CGS>                                       29,087,860
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               34,921,991
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                57,297
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             184,167
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                208,931
<INCOME-TAX>                                    72,671
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            136,260
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   136,260
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03
        

</TABLE>