alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# WASHOE COUNTYHEALTH DISTRICT AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DIVISION 

# o
PubHcHealth
July 30, 2012 Ms. Colleen Cripps, Ph.D. Administrator Division ofEnvironmental Protection 90IS. Stewart St., Suite 400I Carson City NV 89701-5249 Dear Ms. Cripps: Prevent. Promote. Protect.

Enclosed is a revision to the Washoe County portion ofNevada's PM2.5 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (I-SIP). This revision was adopted at a public hearing ofthe Washoe County District Board ofHealth (DBOH) on June 28, 2012. The submittal includes:
• Proofofpublication for the public hearing; • Request for parallel processing dated June 21, 2012; • DBOH Agenda for the June 28, 2012 public hearing; • Staffreport including DBOH Regulations Governing Air Quality Management Sections 030.023,030.218,030.230,030.235, and 030.970; • Approved minutes from the June 28, 2012 public hearing; and • Certificate ofAdoption. Two paper and two electronic copies ofthe submittal are enclosed. The electronic copies are exact duplicates ofthe paper copy submittal in searchable pdfformat. Please review these documents and determine ifthis submittal is complete. Ifso, then please forward one paper and one electronic copy to the U.S. EPA Region IX office. Ifyou have any questions or comments regarding this submittal, feel free to contact Mr. Daniel Inouye or me at (775) 784-7200
.



# ..**/Sir.:~~'** /.1(,/), .:::**/~fi /f.)Z/~**  Kevin Dick Director Enclosures
cc: Daniel Inouye, Washoe County Health District

- AQMD (w/o enclosures)

P.O. BOX 11130 Reno, NY 89520-0027· (775) 784-7200 • FAX (775) 784-7225 www.washoecounty.us/health WASHOE COUNTYISAN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYERHIRING EMPLOYMENT ELlGIBLEAPPLlCANTS Printed on Recyded Paper
of combustion, such as carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (C02), nitrogen oxides (N*), 

and sulfur oxides (S*). Wet scrubbers are typically used to control dryer emissions. The 

majority of expansion furnaces are ducted to fabric filters for emission control. However, wet 

scrubbers also are used to control the furnace emissions. Cyclones and fabric filters also are used 

to control emissions fiom screening, milling, and materials handling and transfer operations. 

Perlite Processing 7 

The major pollutant of concern emitted fiom perlite processing facilities is particulate matter 

(PM). The dryers, expansion furnaces, and handling operations can all be sources of PM 

emissions. Emissions of nitrogen oxides fiom perlite expansion and drying generally are 

negligible. When sulfur-containing fuels are used, sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions may result 

fiom combustion sources. However, the most common type of fuel used in perlite expansion 

furnaces and dryers is natural gas, which is not a significant source of SO2 emissions. To control 

PM emissions fiom both dryers and expansion fiunaces, the majority of perlite plants use 

baghouses, some use cyclones either alone or in conjunction with baghouses, and a few use 

scrubbers. Frequently PM emissions hm material handling processes and fiom the dryers are 

controlled by the same device. In most plants, fabric filters are preceded by cyclones for product 

recovery. Wet scrubbers are also used in a small number of perlite plants to control emissions 

fiom perlite milling and expansion sources. 

3.2 Emission Unit/Pollutant Matrix 

Emission units and pollutants associated with nonmetallic mineral mining and processing, as 

defined in this document, are presented in Table 3- 1. This matrix is based on available EPA 

literature on source category emissions and emission ktors. 

Table 3-1. Emission Unit/Pollutant Matrix 

Source Subcategory ( Emission Unit/ Process I Pollutant/Parameter 1 

NMMhoc TSD 6-14-02 Created on 6/18l2002 9:39:00 AM 9
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Office of the Secretary

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Kimberlee Proctor, Director, Office of Executive Resources, Room N-2453, U.S. Department of Labor, Frances Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, telephone: (202) 693-7800.

Dated: Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of February, 2012.

Hilda L. Solis,

Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 2012-8400 Filed 4-6-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-23-P
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 Quarterly Report of Solo Cup Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the thirteen weeks ended September 26, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert M. Korzenski, as Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, hereby 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:



| | (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/ Robert M. Korzenski              
|Robert M. Korzenski                  
|Chief Executive Officer and President
|(Principal Executive Officer)        
|November 9, 2010                     

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Orgral Technologies Corp. for the quarter ending February 28, 2006, I, Helen Heit, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Orgral Technologies Corp. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:
| 1. |   | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending February 28, 2006, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending February 28, 2006, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Orgral Technologies Corp. |
|----|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Dated: April 21, 2006 

Orgral Technologies Corp.

By: /s/ Helen Heit

Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 4.2


 


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM


 

We
have issued our report dated June 1, 2022, with respect to the financial statement of m+ funds Trust, Series 1-27 contained in Amendment
No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-264080) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned
report in the Registration Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm”.




 


 


/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


June 1, 2022
MANDATE

Court of Appeals 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-15-00314-CV

CEVA LOGISTICS U.S., INC. AND CEVA FREIGHT, LLC, Appellants

V.

ACME TRUCK LINE, INC., Appellee

Appeal from the 129th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 2010-39403).

TO THE 129TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before this Court, on the 29th day of September 2015, the case upon appeal to 

revise or to reverse your judgment was determined. This Court made its order in these 

words:

After inspecting the record of the court below, the 

Court holds that it lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. 

Accordingly, the Court dismisses the appeal.

The Court orders that the appellants, CEVA Logistics 

U.S., Inc. and CEVA Freight, LLC, jointly and severally, pay 

all appellate costs.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below 

for observance.

Judgment rendered September 29, 2015.
Per curiam opinion delivered by panel consisting of Justices 

Jennings, Higley, and Brown.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court 

in this behalf and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

December 11, 2015

Date CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK OF THE COURT
Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 on Form 10-K of TPG Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2021 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jon Winkelried, Chief Executive 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 to my knowledge:


(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.


This certificate is being furnished solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.





Date: March 29, 2022


/s/ Jon WinkelriedJon WinkelriedChief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned SEP: 

*Time and Date:*                         8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., February 21-22, 2012 (Closed).                     

*Place:*                         Crowne Plaza Atlanta Perimeter Hotel at Ravinia, 4355 Ashford Dunwoody Road, Atlanta, Georgia 30346 Telephone: (770) 395-7700.                     

*Status:*                         The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c) (4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.                     

*Matters To Be Discussed:*                         The meeting will include the initial review, discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response to “Grants for Injury Control Research Centers, Panel 1, FOA CE12-001.”                     

*Contact Person for More Information:*                         J. Felix Rogers, Ph.D., M.P.H., Scientific Review Officer, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway NE., Mailstop F63, Atlanta, Georgia 30341, Telephone (770) 488-4334.                     

                        The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                     

Dated: January 11, 2012. 

Elaine L. Baker, 

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2012-848 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
EXHIBIT
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the quarterly report of GlobalOptions Group, Inc., (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Harvey
      W. Schiller, Principal Executive Officer 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 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.





August
                12, 2008
            /s/
                Harvey W. SchillerName:
            Harvey
                W. SchillerTitle:
            Chairman
                of the Board and
              Chief
                Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)
IV

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 384

Recognizing the United States Air Force B–52 Stratofortress bomber on

the occasion of its 50th anniversary and honoring the pilots and crew

members who have served aboard that aircraft.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 18, 2002

Mr. VITTER (for himself and Mr. MCCRERY) submitted the following

concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the United States Air Force B–52 Stratofortress

bomber on the occasion of its 50th anniversary and honoring the pilots and crew members who have served

aboard that aircraft.

Whereas the B–52 Stratofortress bomber has been the prime

weapon in the United States strategic bomber fleet since

the first flight of that aircraft in 1952;

Whereas the B–52 bomber as currently configured can perform strategic attack, air interdiction, offensive counterair, and maritime operations missions;

Whereas the B–52 bomber is capable of dropping or launching the widest array of weapons of any aircraft in the

United States aircraft inventory, including gravity bombs,
2

•HCON 384 IH

cluster bombs, precision guided missiles, and joint direct

attack munitions;

Whereas the B–52 bomber was a key component of the

United States arsenal during the Cold War;

Whereas during the Cold War, there were always B–52

bombers aloft armed with nuclear weapons forming a

major component of America’s nuclear deterrence policies;

Whereas during Operation Desert Storm, B–52 bombers delivered 40 percent of all the weapons dropped by coalition

forces;

Whereas the B–52 bomber has recently contributed in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan;

Whereas current engineering analyses show that the life span

of the B–52 bombers currently in service can be extended

to beyond the year 2045; and

Whereas the year 2002 marks the 50th anniversary of the

entrance of the B–52 Stratofortress bomber: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress recognizes the United

3 States Air Force B–52 Stratofortress bomber on the occa4 sion of its 50th anniversary and honors the pilots and crew

5 members who have served aboard that aircraft.

Æ
#### STATE of Oklahoma, ex rel. S. M. FALLIS, Jr., District Attorney of Tulsa County, Oklahoma, Appellant, v. Michael Ray PATTON and Kenneth Wayne Patton, Appellees.

No. S-81-468.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Dec. 15, 1981.

David K. Robertson, Asst. Dist. Atty., Tulsa, for State of Okl.

Bob Stubblefield, Curtis Parks, Tulsa, for Michael Ray Patton & Kenneth Wayne Patton.

ORDER

This is an attempted appeal under Title 22 O.S.Supp.1980, § 1053 from an order of the District Court of Tulsa County, which sustained a motion to quash and motion to suppress and dismissed Cases No. CRF-81-516, CRF-81-517, CRF-81-518 *1267and CRF-81-515. This statute provides for appeals by the State in certain cases, however this statute does not allow the State to appeal a motion to quash for insufficient evidence sustained by the district court, but only for indictment set aside pursuant to 22 O.S.1971, § 493.

The authority of the district court to enter the order of dismissal was founded on 22 O.S.1971, § 815. Title 22 O.S.1971, § 817, provides that such a dismissal is not a bar to any other prosecution for the same offense. Since the court’s order in dismissing Cases No. CRF-81-516, CRF-81-517, CRF-81-518 and CRF-81-515 does not bar a refiling of information and is not a bar to subsequent prosecution in the same cases, the appeal is DISMISSED.

IT IS, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THIS COURT that the above styled and numbered cause should be, and hereby is, DISMISSED.

TOM BRETT, P. J.

HEZ J. BUSSEY, J.

TOM R. CORNISH, J.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00354-CV

IN RE ROBERT RICHARD TAYLOR II RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of 

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, MCCOY, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DELIVERED: August 30, 2012

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8(d).
15A NCAC 02D .0405 is amended as published in 23:18 NCR 1888 as follows:

15A NCAC 02D .0405 OZONE The ambient air quality standard for ozone measured by a reference method based on Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 50 and designated according to 40 CFR Part 53 is 0.08 0.075 parts per million (ppm), daily maximum 8-hour average. The standard is attained at an ambient air qua lity monitoring site when the average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0 .08 0.075 parts per million (ppm) as determined by Appendix I Appendix P of 40 CFR Part 50, or equiva lent methods established under 40

CFR Part 53.

History Note: Authority G.S. 143-215.3(a)(1); 143-215.107(a)(3); Eff. February 1, 1976; Amended Eff. January 1,2010; April 1, 1999; July 1, 1984; July 1, 1979; December 1,1976.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00019-CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS

V.

RAUL CORTEZ, Appellee

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 213th District Court

of Tarrant County (1470860D)

November 8, 2018

Opinion by Justice Pittman

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

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

was error in the trial court’s order. It is ordered that the trial court’s order setting 

aside the indictment is reversed, and this case is remanded to the trial court for further 

proceedings.

It is further ordered that Appellant The State of Texas shall pay all of the costs 

of this appeal, for which let execution issue.
SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By __/s/ Mark T. Pittman________________

 Justice Mark T. Pittman
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2016

- 3988 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2015

- NM

- 130

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into a nd then out of the changed cell

.

**Estimated Costs:**

Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per **Product** (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance) Work

- hours (include access, testing, and close

- up) Labor

c ost (@$8 5 /h our) Parts Cost Total Costs (labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Modification 8 .0 $ 680.00 $ 

### 892 $ 1,572.00 

### 90 $ 141,480.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00


### The known number of products in compliance: 

### 0 Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 141,480 

### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $ 

### 0

**On**

**- Condition Costs:** 

Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Work

- hours

(include access, testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$85/hou r) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( U se this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulator y action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation : **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:**
Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation: **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO Explanation:

**Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:**
This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :