alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012280EN.01000501.xml

| 15.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 280/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

14 September 2012

2012/C 280/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3095 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 102,24 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4555 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,80745 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,5884 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2162 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,4285 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,433 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 281,75 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6961 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0602 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5030 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,3501 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,2366 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,2628 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,1520 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5719 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5973 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 461,73 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,8003 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,2696 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4160 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 447,27 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 3,9770 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 54,078 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,1130 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,280 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6431 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,7204 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 71,1140 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3095

JPY

Japanese yen

102,24

DKK

Danish krone

7,4555

GBP

Pound sterling

0,80745

SEK

Swedish krona

8,5884

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2162

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,4285

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,433

HUF

Hungarian forint

281,75

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6961

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0602

RON

Romanian leu

4,5030

TRY

Turkish lira

2,3501

AUD

Australian dollar

1,2366

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,2628

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,1520

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5719

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5973

KRW

South Korean won

1 461,73

ZAR

South African rand

10,8003

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,2696

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4160

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 447,27

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

3,9770

PHP

Philippine peso

54,078

RUB

Russian rouble

40,1130

THB

Thai baht

40,280

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6431

MXN

Mexican peso

16,7204

INR

Indian rupee

71,1140

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
E.O. 12866 Review-2060-AQ42 Email 011411.txt

 

 

 From: Dave Guinnup/RTP/USEPA/US 

 To: Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov, nancy beck <nbeck@omb.eop.gov> 

 Cc: Michael Stewart/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Sharon Nizich/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

 Date: 01/14/2011 08:38 AM 

 Subject: Part of E.O. 12866 Review: EPA Staff Response to followup to OMB 

questions 

pertaining to Primary Lead RTR: RIN 2060-AQ42 

 

 

 

Cortney, Nancy:

I misspoke yesterday regarding the use of the TRIM multi-pathway fate and 

exposure model -- it was not used in case studies to model multi-pathway lead 

transport in the development of the lead NAAQS.

Instead, those case studies relied on media-specific data and correlations 

with human biomarker data to determine human blood concentrations and IQ point 

losses. Further, as I now understand it, we do not have the data to use 

TRIM.Fate to model lead transport between air, soil, water, and biota, and it 

has not been used primarily because we do not have an RfD or a cancer unit 

risk estimate for the ingestion of lead. So the use of TRIM.Fate to model the 

fate of lead in the environment cannot be accomplished in a 2-3 month 

timeframe (as I said on the call yesterday) -- it would take significantly 

more time to develop the parameters and to test the application against 

environmental measurements to benchmark it.

I will be following up on the other items (source lead contributions at 

individual receptor locations, maximum impact locations for the main stack, 

etc.) later on today.

Dave Guinnup

Leader, Air Toxics Assessment Group

Health and Environmental Impacts Division Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards US EPA (C539-02) Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

(919)-541-5368 voice

(919)-541-0840 FAX

Page 1
#### MISSISSIPPI STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION v. George J. RYAN et ux.

No. 45935.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Nov. 2, 1970.

Stewart & Prichard, Picayune, for appellant.

Williams & Williams, Poplarville, for appellees.

JONES, Justice:

This is an eminent domain case from Pearl River County.

The juries in the eminent domain court and in the circuit court found damages in the same amount, to-wit: $4,900. The Commission appeals and we affirm.

The legal question here presented is settled by the opinion in Mississippi State Highway Commission v. Gipson et al., 240 So.2d 620, which opinion was rendered on the 2nd day of November, 1970.

As to the amount of the judgment, we have read and considered the evidence showing the amount of land taken, and the disadvantages to that part left arising from the construction of the proposed road, and *620while perhaps the judgment is somewhat more than some members of the Court would have allowed, we cannot say that it is so excessive as to evidence, bias or prejudice on the part of the juries, (one of which went upon the property and viewed it), nor is it so excessive in our opinion as to require a reversal for a new trial.

Affirmed.

ETHRIDGE, C. J., and PATTERSON, INZER and ROBERTSON, JJ., concur.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                  5
<MULTIPLIER>                                                 1000

<S>                                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                     JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                          JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                                        117
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               7,718
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  455
<INVENTORY>                                                10,542
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           18,585
<PP&E>                                                     53,337
<DEPRECIATION>                                             14,472
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             60,050
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      17,354
<BONDS>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                       76
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                               (12,964)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               60,050
<SALES>                                                   100,385
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          100,385
<CGS>                                                      86,097
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              93,438
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            (100)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          7,323
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             (276)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         (276)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           (1,532)
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                              (1,808)
<EPS-BASIC>                                               1.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              (1.20)




</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

I, Kenneth S. Barton, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge,
I-Web Media, Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended
June 30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of I-Web Media, Inc.


Date: 9/9/10                                By: /s/ Kenneth S. Barton
                                                --------------------------------
                                            Name:  Kenneth S. Barton
                                            Title: Chief Executive Officer
#### McArthur BELIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-257.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 21, 1972.

Walter N. Colbath, Jr., Public Defender, and Carl V. M. Coffin, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Andrew I. Friedrich, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is a belated appeal from a judgment and sentence for second-degree murder. The appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. We have reviewed the evidence and find that there is competent substantial evidence to support the verdict. Accordingly the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

REED, C. J, and WALDEN and MAG-ER, JJ., concur.
##### 



EXHIBIT 21.1
 SUBSIDIARIES
OF
DATASCOPE CORP.
  Where
    
    % ofIncorporated
    
    Voting StockDatascope Investment Corp.
    
    New Jersey
    
    100Datascope B.V.
    
    Netherlands
    
    100Datascope Medical Co. Ltd.
    
    United Kingdom
    
    100Datascope S.A.R.L.
    
    France
    
    100Datascope GmbH
    
    Germany
    
    100InterVascular S.A.S.
    
    France
    
    100Datascope SL
    
    Spain
    
    100Datascope Interventional GmbH
    
    Germany
    
    100Datascope International B.V.
    
    Netherlands
    
    100Datascope Service B.V.
    
    Netherlands
    
    100Artema Medical AB
    
    Sweden
    
    100Bioplex Corp.
    
    Delaware
    
    100Genisphere Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    83InterVascular, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    100InterVascular S.A.R.L.
    
    France
    
    100InterVascular GmbH
    
    Germany
    
    100Datascope Italia S.r.l.
    
    Italy
    
    100Datascope SPRL
    
    Belgium
    
    100Datascope Trademark Corp.
    
    Delaware
    
    100InterVascular C, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    100InterVascular V, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    100
D e a r S i r o r M a d a m

,

I a m w r i t i n g t o a d d m y s u p p o r t t o t h e S e c t i o n 3 3 3 E x e m p t i o n P e t i t i o n b e i n g f i l e d b y T h o m a s L a n d e c k e r

. I a m a

p r i v a t e p i l o t

, l i c e n s e n u m b e r 1 8 7 2 7 8 8

, a n d h a v e b e e n f l y i n g f o r o v e r 4 0 y e a r s

. M y e x p e r i e n c e r a n g e s f r o m h a n g

g l i d e r s

, p a r a g l i d e r s

, u l t r a l i g h t s

, a n d n o w 3 a x i s a i r c r a f t

. I f l y i n a n d o u t o f T h e S e a R a n c h a i r f i e l d o v e r 1 6 0 t i m e s

p e r y e a r

. I a m t h e c u r r e n t P r e s i d e n t o f T h e S e a R a n c h F l y i n g S o c i e t y

, a l o c a l f l y i n g c l u b w i t h o v e r 3 0 0 m e m b e r s

.

K n o w i n g C A 5 1 a n d t h e l a r g e r s u r r o u n d i n g a r e a

, I h a v e r e a d M r

. L a n d e c k e r ’ s p r o p o s a l a n d f i n d i t t o b e w e l l

t h o u g h t o u t a n d o n e t h a t w o u l d n o t a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t s a f e t y i n t h e a r e a

. A s U A b e c o m e m o r e n u m e r o u s a n d l o c a l

p r e s s u r e i n c r e a s e s t o u t i l i z e d r o n e t e c h n o l o g y c o m m e r c i a l l y

, i t b e c o m e s i n c r e a s i n g l y i m p o r t a n t t o h a v e a s a f e

,

l e g a l a l t e r n a t i v e t o u n l i c e n s e d o p e r a t o r s

. I b e l i e v e M r

. L a n d e c k e r w i l l b e a n e x c e l l e n t l i c e n s e d o p e r a t o r a n d I u r g e

t h e F A A t o a p p r o v e h i s r e q u e s t

.

I f y o u h a v e a n y q u e s t i o n s

, p l e a s e f e e l f r e e t o c a l l o r e m a i l

. M y e m a i l a d d r e s s i s j d e w i l d e e r @ e a r t h l i n k

. n e t

. M y l a n d

l i n e i s ( 7 0 7 ) 7 8 5

- 2 7 6 4

. A n d c e l l p h o n e i s ( 7 0 7 ) 3 6 7

- 2 5 4 4

.

S i n c e r e l y

,

J a m e s F

. D e W i l d e r

P r e s i d e n t

, t h e S e a R a n c h F l y i n g S o c i e t y

**T h**  **e S**  **e a**  **R a**  **n c**  **h A**  **s s**  **o c**  **i a**  **t i**  **o n**  **• P**  **O B**  **1 6** 

**• 9**  **7 5**  **A n**  **n a**  **p o**  **l i**  **s R**  **d**

**. •**  **T h**  **e S**  **e a**  **R a**  **n c**  **h**

**, C**  **A 9**  **5 4**  **9 7**
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December
31, 2004 of American General Finance Corporation as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of, Frederick W.
Geissinger, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Donald R.
Breivogel, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


                                 /s/  Frederick W. Geissinger
                                 -------------------------------------
                                      Frederick W. Geissinger
                                 President and Chief Executive Officer


                                 /s/  Donald R. Breivogel, Jr.
                                 -------------------------------------
                                      Donald R. Breivogel, Jr.
                                 Senior Vice President and
                                   Chief Financial Officer

Date:  April 7, 2005


                                       25
250 La. 542

#### Dan A. SPENCER v. John DIXON, Judge of the First Judicial District Court and Dozier Webster, Clerk of the First Judicial District Court.

No. 47921.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1965.

In re: Dan A. Spencer applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and review. See also 248 La. 604, 181 So.2d 41.

In view of the fact that the return of the district judge, together with certified copy of the minutes of the trial court, shows that in the case of Bert J. Leahy v. Ford, Walker & Hearn, Inc., No. 168,469 on the docket of the First Judicial District Court for the Parish of Caddo, a judgment was rendered within 30 days after the case was submitted, the application for writs is denied.

Rehearing refused. The court does not entertain an application for rehearing to a refusal to grant writs. See Rule XI, Section 5, Rules of the Supreme Court of Louisiana. In view of the charges or statements made in the application for a rehearing, this court reiterates that its refusal to grant the writs was based on the return of the district judge to the Court of Appeal together with a certified copy of the minutes in the case of Bert J. Leahy v. Ford, Walker & Hearn, Inc., No. 168,469 on the docket of the First Judicial District Court for the Parish of Caddo, which minutes constitute a part of the record in that case. These minutes disclose that judgment in that case was rendered on June 25, 1965, the day the case was submitted to the district judge for decision.

Applicant’s remedy, if any, is by a proceeding in the district court to correct the minutes of that court. If the minutes are established to be incorrect in that the judgment in the Leahy case was rendered beyond 30 days after the case was submitted for decision to the trial judge, applicant may again institute proceedings in the district court for the relief initially sought.
Hydraulic Institute, Inc.6 Campus Drive, First Floor North, Parsippany, NJ 07054-4406(973) 267-9700Special Statistical Report Bulletin for the**Compiled November 14, 2012**Hydraulic Institute, Inc.Pump Redesign Cost1 HP 50 HP 200 HP**Redesign, Prototype & Initial Test $ 52,239 $** **64,397 $ 65,918** **Pattern, Tooling $ 44,329 $** **51,280 $ 72, 862** **Testing $ 22,8 58 $ 35,394** **$ 47,293 Working Capital $** **37,101 $ 47,339 $ 54,9** **75 Marketing $ 32** **,225 $ 29,842 $ 27,155** TOTAL $ 188,752$ 228,252 $268,203**Participants Armstrong Griswold Pentair** **Blackmer Grundfos Price Pump Crane National Pump Sulzer** **Flowserve Patterson TACO Franklin Peerless Xylem** Design Process FactorsAverage Redesign Cost**HI Pump Redesign Cost Survey For information, please contact Stacey Harrison at** **(703)841-3269 or harrisons@nema.org 1 of 1**
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





In connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Plandel Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Rizalina Raneses, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





(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 Company.





/s/ Rizalina RanesesRizalina RanesesSecretary and TreasurerOctober 3, 2012
#### David JETMORE, Petitioner, *v.*STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 43607.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 11, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 275 So.2d 61.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., dissent.
#### CONTAINER CORPORATION OF AMERICA, a Delaware corporation, Appellant, v. Gene LONG, as Tax Assessor of Bradford County, Florida, et al., Appellees.

No. Q-270.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 1, 1973.

Rehearing Denied April 3, 1973.

Edward McCarthy, Jr., of Freeman, Richardson, Watson, Slade & McCarthy, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Theron A. Yawn, Starke, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This is a companion case to Container Corporation of America v. Gene Long, etc., et al., 274 So.2d 571, in which an opinion of reversal has this day been filed. The judgment appealed herein is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings for the reasons and upon the authorities cited in the opinion rendered in the companion case mentioned above.

Reversed.

RAWLS, Acting C. J., WIGGINTON, J., and POWELL, GILLIS E., Associate Judge, concur.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 27, 2020

No. 04-20-00351-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF T.E.C., ET AL CHILDREN,

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-PA-01552

Honorable Angelica Jimenez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant Erika G. filed a motion to extend the time to file her brief by ten hours.

Appellant filed her brief contemporaneously with this motion. The motion is GRANTED. 

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 27th day of October, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, 

Clerk of Court
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

IN THE MATTER OF SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC.

-- --------- ---- -- ---- -FAAIJQCK!l-T-NQ,-20-1-1--NM-.06005 FDMS NO. FAA-2012-0777 

# RECEIVED AUG 13 2015 

## HEARiNG DOCKET

RESPONDENT'S REQUEST FORAN EXTENSION OF TIME Pursuant to 14 C.P.R. § 13.233(c)(l), by agreement ofthe Parties, Respondent requests an extension oftime to perfect its Reply to Complainant's Appeal Briefand states the following in support: 1. On April22, 2015, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Richard C. Goodwin issued an Initial Decision inthe above-captioned matter. 2. On April29, 2015, Complainant filed atimely Notice ofAppeal. 3. Complainant filed its Appeal Briefon July 16,2015. 4. Respondent's counsel has conferred with Complainant's counsel and the parties have agreed to extend the time period for perfecting Respondent's Reply to Complainant's Appeal Briefby 30 days. WHEREFORE, Respondentrespectfully requests the Decisionmaker grant an extension oftime until September 21,2015 to file its Reply Brief.

Dated: August 12, 2015 3tspeetfully submitted,

# ~/\ 

# 9

# lwWLC-~· Todd C. Emerson 444 South River Road St. George, Utah 84790 Telephone: (435) 634-3530 Facsimile: (435) 634-3505CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served by Federal Express, the original and one copy ofthe foregoing RESPONDENT'S REQUEST FORAN EXTENSION OF TIME in the matter of SkyWest Airlines, Inc., FDMS NO. FAA2012-0777, addressed to: Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 600 Independence Avenue SW Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl00 Washington, D.C. 20591 In addition, I hereby certifythat I served a copy ofthe same by E-mail (Casey.Gardner@faa.gov) and U.S. Mail, addressed to: Casey E. Gardner EnforcementDivision, AGC-300 Office ofthe ChiefCounsel Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 Counsel for Complainant

Dated: August 12,2015
#### Ezoral WILLIAMS, a/k/a Zorro, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 67-113.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Aug. 7, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DEANDRE PAYTON JONES, JR.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 102 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 17th day of September, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
Memorandum

To: Four Corners Powe Plant Permit File, NN 14-01 and T-002-NN

From: Lisa Beckham

Date: 12/17/20 14

Re: Justification for Using 2012-2013 Data for Economizer Bypass Calculations, Table A-9 of the

Application

On December 17, 2014, I spoke with Mark Hajduk the environmental contact for the application

submitted by Arizona Public Service Company (APS) for the Four Corners Power Plant Selective Catalytic

Reduction (SCR) Project.

We discussed the data used for determining the projected hours of economizer bypass associated with

installing 5CR on Units 4 and 5.This data is presented in Table A-9 of the application. I asked Mark about

the basis for using 2012 through 2013 data for this portion of the application. The application otherwise

relies on 2011 through 2012 data for the emissions analysis — the chosen baseline period. Mr. Hajduk

explained that the temperature data needed to perform this analysis was unrepresentative for 2011

because of a faulty thermocouple that had been discovered that year. Therefore, APS relied on 2013

data in lieu of 2011 data. In addition, the 2013 data is more conservative because it represents a year of

lower than typical load.