alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
To: 12022671293 From: 16147981620 Data: 10/01/15 Time: 1:47 PM Page: 18/20 

UNITED ST~TE~ OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

) 

SPirit Avionics, LTD., ) 

) __ EAJA~---

Applicant, ) 

) Docket No. FAA-2014-0ll9 

~ ) 

) C3se No. 2012-GL-07·0056 

l\Uch3el P. Hul.'rt3, ) 

Administrator ) Judge J.E. Sulliv3D 

Federal Aviation Administration, ) 

) 

Respondent. ) 

) 

MOTION TO WITH OLD CONFIDENTIAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION 

FROM,PUBLIC,RECORD 

Now Comes Applicant, by and through the undersigned counsel, and respectfully 

requests that the net worth exhibit be withheld from public record pursuant to 14 CFR § 14.11 (c). 

In support of this Motion, Applicant states as follows: 

1. Applicant is filing an "Application for an Award of Attorney Fees and Other Expenses 

Pursuant to The Equal Access To Justice Act" (the "Application") simultaneoUBly with 

this Motion. 

2. A requirvrnent'fvr filing "aid applicmion requires a net worth exliiNnihowmg the assets 

and liabilities of Applicant at the time the proceeding was initiated. 

3. Applicant has prepared said document in the form of a balance sheet, which is attached to 

the Application as EXHIBIT A. 
To: 12022671293 From: 16147981620 Date: 10/01/15 Time: 1:47 PM Page: 19/20 

4. Applicant is a privately held entity and as such, information relating to its finances is 

strictly confidential. As such, Applicant respectfully requests that the AU grant this 

Motion to exclude Applicant's net worth exhibit from the public record. 

Respectfully submitted, 

oro 

erry A. Eichenberger 

Eichenberger & Associates, Co. LP A 

6037 Frantz Road, Suite 107 

Dublin, Ohio 43017 

Phone: 614-798-1600 

Facsimile: 614-798-1620 

Counsel for Applicant 
To: 12022671293 From: 16147981620 Date: 10/01/15 Time: 1:47 PM Page: 20/20 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was served upon the following parties by 

facsimile this 30th day of September, 2015. 

FAA Beadng Docket 

800 Independence Ave, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk 

AGC-430, Wilber Wright Building 

Suite 2Wl000 

Fax: 202-267-1293 

Tbe Honorable J.E. Sullivan 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New J~sey Ave, S.E. (EI 1-310) 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Fax: 202-366-7536 

Kate B.arber 

La~renHoyson 

Federl!l Aviation Administration 

Office ofRegional Counsel, AGL-7B 

2300 E<!st Devon Avenue 

Des Plaines, lllinois 60018 

Fax: 847-294-7862 
To: 12022671293 From: 16147981620 Date: 10/01/15 Time: 1:47 PM Page: 01/20 

Date: Thu Oct 01 16:45 EDT2015 

TO 

Fax Number: 12022671293 

Name: FAA Hearing Clerk 

FROM 

Fax: Number. 16147981620 

Name: Patrick Moro 

Company: 

Subject: EAJA Claim - FAA-2014-0119 

Pages: 20 

Notes: 

Dear Qerl<, 

Please find the enclosed Application for an Award pursuant to the EAJA. 

If you h<ne any questions, please contact me at 614-798-1000
Document

GOLUB CAPITAL BDC 4, INC. 
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
REVOLVING LOAN AGREEMENT


This FIRST AMENDMENT (the “Amendment”) to the Revolving Loan Agreement, dated as of April 12, 2022 (the “Agreement”), by and between Golub Capital BDC 4, Inc. (the “Borrower”) and GC Advisors LLC (the “Lender”), is hereby made as of June 15, 2022. 
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Borrower and Lender desire to amend the Agreement to increase the commitment;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and the mutual agreements contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Borrower and Lender hereby agree as follows: 
1.    Amendment to the Commitment.  
The definition of “Commitment” in Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the amount “$70,000,000” and inserting the amount “$100,000,000” in lieu thereof.

2.    Full Force and Effect.  Other than as specifically set forth in this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
3.    Governing Law.  This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York.
4.    Counterparts.      This Amendment may be signed in two counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original but both of which when taken together shall constitute but one agreement. 


[Signature page follows]
    1    









IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Borrower and Lender have caused this Amendment to be duly executed by their duly authorized officers, all as of the date first set forth above.


BORROWER:
GOLUB CAPITAL BDC 4, INC.
By: /s/ David B. Golub    
      Name: David B. Golub
      Title: President and Chief Executive Officer










LENDER:
GC ADVISORS LLC
By: /s/ David B. Golub    
      Name: David B. Golub
      Title: President
EXHIBIT 32


                            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 Lincoln Park Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Donald S. Hom, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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, and in connection with this quarterly report on Form
10-QSB, that I have reviewed the Form 10-QSB and 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 result of operations of
         the Company.


                                       /s/ DONALD S. HOM
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Donald S. Hom
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer
                                       (Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                                       Financial Officer)


May 15, 2006
Exhibit 32.0

 

 

**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 Kearny Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John N. Hopkins, President and Chief 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:

 

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

| Date: November 10, 2008 |   | /s/ John N. Hopkins                   |
|-------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                    |   | John N. Hopkins                       |
|                    |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

                

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

----

 

Exhibit 32.0

 

 

**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 Kearny Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William C. Ledgerwood, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial 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:

 

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

| Date: November 10, 2008 |   | /s/ William C. Ledgerwood |
|-------------------------|--------|---------------------------|
|                    |   | William C. Ledgerwood     |
|                    |   | Senior Vice President and |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer   |
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carrol Edward SANDERS and Sally Lee Clasen, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 76-1574

Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 13, 1976.

Joe Ray Langston, Booneville, Miss., Ed W. Jenkins, Booneville, Miss. (Court-appointed), for defendants-appellants.

H. M. Ray, U. S. Atty., Alfred E. More-ton, III, Sam Knowlton, Asst. U. S. Attys., Oxford, Miss., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, and GEW-IN and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 Rule 18, 5 Cir.; see *Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al.,*5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

PER CURIAM:

Both of the appellants were convicted for Dyer Act violations under both counts of a two count indictment charging them in Count One with transporting a stolen motor vehicle in interstate commerce,1 and in Count Two with concealing the same stolen motor vehicle.2 Appellants were sentenced to *concurrent*three-year terms on each count. Their sole contentions on this appeal challenge only their convictions under Count Two.3 Appellants do not challenge their convictions under Count One.

It is well settled that the transportation offense codified in Section 2312 is a separate and distinct offense from the concealment transgression codified in Section 2313, even though the same vehicle is involved in both crimes. *Woody v. United States,*258 F.2d 535 (6th Cir. 1957), *aff’d,*359 U.S. 118, 79 S.Ct. 721, 3 L.Ed.2d 673 (1959) (by equally divided court); *United States v. Marvel,*493 F.2d 15, 16 (5th Cir.), *rehearing denied,*496 F.2d 1170 (1974); *United States v. Ploof,*464 F.2d 116, 119-20 (2d Cir.), *cert. denied,*409 U.S. 952, 93 S.Ct. 298, 34 L.Ed.2d 224 (1972) (several cases cited); *United States v. Thompson,*422 F.2d 1104, 1109-10 (6th Cir. 1970), *aff’d after remand,*442 F.2d 1333 (6th Cir. 1971); *see United**696*States v. Rice,*428 F.2d 923,925-26 (5th Cir. 1970). Accordingly, since appellants were sentenced concurrently under Count II (the concealment count), and do not challenge their convictions under Count I (the transportation count), pursuant to the concurrent sentence doctrine we need not and do not reach the merits of their attack on Count II. *Barnes v. United States,*412 U.S. 837, 848 & n. 16, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 37 L.Ed.2d 380 (1973); *Hirabayashi v. United States,*320 U.S. 81,105, 63 S.Ct. 1375, 87 L.Ed. 1774 (1943); *United States v. Works,*526 F.2d 940, 948 (5th Cir. 1976).

AFFIRMED.

1

. In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 & 2312.

2

. In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 & 2313.

3

. They assert that the trial court gave an erroneous jury instruction and that the evidence is insufficient to support their convictions.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2154

MAUREEN UCHE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MONTGOMERY HOSPICE, INC.; ROBERT WASHINGTON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. 

(8:13-cv-00878-ELH)

Submitted: March 31, 2015 Decided: April 7, 2015

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Maureen Uche, Appellant Pro Se. Marc Richard Engel, Michael 

John Neary, LERCH, EARLY & BREWER, CHARTERED, Bethesda, 

Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Maureen Uche appeals the district court’s order dismissing 

her case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 and several other 

orders. We have considered the claims raised in Uche’s informal 

brief and conclude that the district court committed no error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Uche v. Montgomery Hospice, Inc., No. 8:13-cv-00878-ELH 

(D. Md. Oct. 10, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**EXHIBIT 23**

**CONSENT OFPRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP**

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statementson Form S-8 (numbers 33-80666, 333-61556 and 333-136698) of Bemis Company,Inc. of our report dated February 28, 2007 relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting, and our report dated February 28, 2007 relating to thefinancial statement schedule, each of which appears in this Form 10-K.

PricewaterhouseCoopersLLP

Minneapolis,Minnesota

### February28, 2007

61

----
# C_2004094EN.01003606.xml

| 17.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/36

---

Removal from the register of Case C-137/03 (1)

1

(2004/C 94/102)

By order of 19 January 2004 the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case C-137/03: Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic.

---

(1)  OJ C 112 of 10.05.2003.

1

---
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 23, 2015.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, March 23, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15I0141. CHRIS STANTON v. THE IMPACT PARTNERSHIP, LLC et al..

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this

order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

14A51191
>i<>i<xo«***>K>i<x<>i<>t<** * -COMM . JOURNfiL - >x>i<*****>k>KX<*****x<*xo« DAT E 5EP-26-200 5 JK*** * TIM E 15=3 1 ** * P.0 1 MOD E = MEMOR Y TRANSMISSIO NSTflRT=SEP-2 6 15=1 4 FIL E N0. = 0B 5 ST NNO . CO M fiEBR NO . . STATIO NNflME/TEL.NO . PAGE S DURATIO N 00 1 BUS Y • s 91501982630 3 000/00 2 00:00'00 " END=SEP-2 6 15=3 1

)^<»<>K)K;K>f>K>K*>K^***>kX<>K>K*>K>K****)K)t<>*<)K)f**)i<*>k> k ' 

## SUPERFUN D BRANC H OFFIC EO FREGIONALCOUNSE L U.S . EP AREGIO N6 ^^ p 3^ . 1445RossAvenue , Ste . 120 0 ,5** ^ ^ Dallas , Texa s 75202-273 3 Telephon e No . (214 ) 665-2134 , 213 5 Telefa x No . (214 ) 665-646 0 

# ^• i o T 

# J^ / %Pi,ot« ^ FACSIMIL ETRANSMISSIO N FROM : TO : SUBJ : COMMENTS : PT^^yyt. ^ /^*^^-F LX^^P P 

### y^..t.t.X73^«f'-4/. ^ XzP//.*- '

SO F 9S' 2 6.yT 3

TOTA LNO . PAGES : 

# 7

^ SEN TBY : 

## Jr*'^*'*^" ' DATE/TIM E'^A^^^^XI^XXAT I



## 'X ^ 905035 2
391 A.2d 702

#### Commonwealth v. Vasger, Appellant.

Submitted March 30, 1977.

Joseph W. Mullin, Public Defender, for appellant; No appearance entered nor brief submitted for Commonwealth, appellee.

Judgments of sentence affirmed.

WATKINS, former P. J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 9, 2015

No. 04-15-00511-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF V.H., et al children,

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-PA-00098

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellant’s, C.B., Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is GRANTED. The 

appellant’s brief is due November 16, 2015.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

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

court on this 9th day of November, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
& I I C1a5 ~OJ fl~C~~VED ~N 

CO URi OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

• APR 09 2015 

_ -~Q.Cu-1 .S~, A~~~oo--e;~~~ · . 

- .J) ~-~-tbo±~-~-Qo.L\-~-~.--J)-~lL _-b_f--~&_ ___ · 

=that -SLJ:,.Wle._( ha~_)_g_ ~-d~ ~ q::_~_..QJ _ai~ct O_l)_::tc-~--­

~-8-u d~.!L,_b.4-_~Q~.J.~_:_'d: WQ,D_~_~d_,_a.O_J._ ~ ·v~-~-­

--±~ ~~~04-~--Jq~~~-do:fL_,_C)H)ct_~_-..J':l_~-~~-

. ~-D&W_2~-:\~,,~b~j;_..b_Q__cu:J._±h~-~-tbun-~-~-rw-~­

-~U>~~-· ~_JJQJ.J_fM~-~-~af-TJ~~L~-..fcL--i,~m----

. JY)~-~&e~-~d-~i:-L,w-~~~-~-D-n;{_-tb~~jJ~ .. __ ~ s;;Q_~~Qt_on_G\_~ :I~ - a.t JJJ M_d~~--3-~~-~_:_b{_OJ:S: 

~ ~-rll_cct_~--~-~ :th-~~~aQ ____ _ 

·~-~ab~;<>¥14:~ i;~OA-:_f,~~~~-~ ;-J;h~ ~jA .• _J'J)_~~-~~----CXQ~-0-C~. ~~_:-'-~b,-~-~-~--~---_'--=---'------

--. -~QG.r-\-_Q~v£.-d~-~k-'\~l-D-l:nc\~,-' t{-J)i)-~_:_:kiQ __ ~--

-P-~-lbai~-b:\.~~~-~-ih-~~O:.i ~~-Q~ _ _e_d-_~-· -- jm_~ '~-~ ~ ~ ln ~~~;-\--~!d~~--~~--~~-' cO~ I I ~ l . . I . ""'IS -~-~---~~--,-~.~---~-~-~~ - . . . I 

-~~S; --------;----------

- _ ~--· w_~J~_J._:_-kb_cct:_~--~d~~-· · YL1~-~&f-,! _ 

__ w_rQJJ~-ot~T~ ~__QjL_..JL,_f . - - _ - .
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 541 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that any United States-Saudi Arabia 

civilian nuclear cooperation agreement must prohibit the Kingdom of 

Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium or separating plutonium on its 

own territory, in keeping with the strongest possible nonproliferation 

‘‘gold standard’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 12, 2018 

Mr. MERKLEY (for himself, Mr. PAUL, and Mr. MARKEY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that any United StatesSaudi Arabia civilian nuclear cooperation agreement 

must prohibit the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium or separating plutonium on its own territory, in keeping with the strongest possible nonproliferation ‘‘gold standard’’. 

Whereas the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear 

Weapons, done at Washington, London, and Moscow July 

1, 1968 (NPT), which is nearing its fiftieth anniversary, 

obligates non-nuclear weapon states, in Article II, ‘‘not to 

receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of 

nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of 

control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 541 IS 

indirectly; not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not 

to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of 

nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices’’: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that any 

2 United States-Saudi Arabia civilian nuclear cooperation 

3 agreement under section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act 

4 of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2153), commonly known as a ‘‘123 

5 Agreement’’, concluded in the future, must prohibit the 

6 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium or sepa7 rating plutonium on its own territory, in keeping with the 

8 strongest possible nonproliferation ‘‘gold standard’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
# Table II Summary

# Table II Raw Data

# Table I Summary

# Table I Raw Data

# raw data-all fields
Opinion issued April 7, 2015.

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-00241-CV

———————————

MARTHA SORUM, Appellant

V.

KERRICK CASTLE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 268th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 12-DCV-202865

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Martha Sorum, has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the 

appeal. No other party has filed a notice of appeal, and no opinion has issued. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1), (c). 
2

Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Brown and Lloyd.
1 

### Parsons, Nick

From: Shrager, Brian Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 11:18 AM To: Parsons, Nick; Siefers, Andrea; Bouchard, Andrew Cc: Lassiter, Penny Subject: FW: Chemical Sector Emissions Data Evaluation Attachments: Emission Data Evaluation for Chemical Sector Subpar t OOO, PPP and JJJ.pdf; Chemical Sector- Subpart JJJ, OOO and PPP.xlsx



### Chemical Sector Response from NC

From: Colon, Teresa [ mailto:teresa.colon@ncdenr.gov ] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 11:05 AM To: Shrager, Brian Subject: Chemical Sector Emissions Data Evaluation



### Mr. Shrager Enclosed you will find official letter and excel sp readsheet with evaluated data. If you have any question please do not hesitate to contact me Thanks,
Teresa

Teresa Del P. Colón, Environmental Engineer Toxics Protection Branch Division of Air Quality, DENR 1641 Mail Services Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1641 Phone/fax : 919-707-8436 www.ncair.org teresa.colon@ncdenr.gov

*************************************************** ******************************** Email correspondence to and from this address is su bject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation