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

Fallon, Gail

From: Colleen Delaney <cdelaney@utah.gov>

Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 1:08 PM

To: Brewer, Pat; Don_Shepherd@nps.gov

Cc: Dave Mcneill; Fallon, Gail; mberger@utah.gov

Subject: Draft Revisions to Utah's Regional Haze SIP

Attachments: ITEM_VIII_SIP_XX.D.6_RegHaze.pdf; ITEM_IX_R307-110-17and110-28.pdf; 

ITEM_XIb_ProgressRrt_RegHz.pdf

The Utah Division of Air Quality (DAQ) has prepared a draft revision to the Utah Regional Haze SIP to address 

the EPA’s December 14, 2012 disapproval of the BART determinations for NOx and PM for four EGUs in 

Southern Utah. Utah’s Air Quality Board is scheduled to propose these revisions for public comment at the 

October 1, 2014 Board meeting. DAQ has also prepared a 5-Year Progress Report for Utah’s RH SIP as 

required by 40 CFR 51.309(d)(10). The 5-Year Progress Report does not require formal rulemaking, but will 

follow the public comment process required for a SIP revision. 

Utah’s RH SIP was developed under the provisions of section 309 and therefore a formal FLM consultation 

period is not required. However, we want to accomplish the same review informally. We will be sending a 

letter to NPS in the near future requesting your review. In the meantime, here are the drafts electronically. 

The comment period for the proposed SIP revisions and the 5-year Progress Report will be open from 

November 1, 2014, through December 1, 2014. A hearing on the proposed revisions to the RH SIP and the 5-

Year Progress report has been scheduled for Tuesday, December 1, 2014, from 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM at 195 N 

1950 W, Salt Lake City, Utah, in the Four Corners Conference Room (4th Floor). The Air Quality Board is 

expected to consider the RH SIP for final adoption at their regularly scheduled meeting on January 7, 2015. 

Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need a copy of any of the supporting information. We 

are still compiling the technical support document for this SIP revision and plan to post all of the documents 

online prior to the start of the public comment period. 

Colleen Delaney 

Utah Division of Air Quality 

(801) 536-4248 

cdelaney@utah.gov
Exhibit 12

Fiscal Year Ended

January 30,
2010

January 31,
2009

February 2,
2008

February 3,
2007

January 28,
2006(in thousands, except ratios)Interest

$
21,704

$
27,048

$
51,293

$
49,342

$
49,040Interest factor in rental expense


25,088


25,717


23,085


19,984


22,534Capitalized interest











799


867(a) Fixed charges, as defined

$
46,792

$
52,765

$
74,378

$
70,125

$
72,441Earnings (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and cumulative effect of change in accounting principle

$
37,616

$
(34,977
)
$
(63,032
)
$
(13,470
)
$
(57,622
)Fixed charges


46,792


52,765


74,378


70,125


72,441Capitalized interest











(799
)

(867
)(b) Earnings, as defined

$
84,408

$
17,788

$
11,346

$
55,856

$
13,952(c) Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (b÷a)


1.8














The
ratio of earnings to fixed charges is completed by dividing earnings by fixed charges. "Earnings" consist of earnings before income taxes plus fixed charges (exclusive of capitalized
interest costs) plus one-third of rental expense (which amount is considered representative of the interest factor in rental expense). Earnings, as defined, were not sufficient to cover
fixed charges by approximately $34,977, $63,032, $14,269 and $58,489 for fiscal 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

---
#### BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU OF DALLAS, Inc., et al. v. SHUTTLES et al.

No. 11764.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.

Oct. 26, 1935.

W. H. Flippen and J. Manuel Hoppen-stein, both of. Dallas, for appellants.

Martin B. Winfrey and Irving L. Goldberg, both of Dallas, for appellees.

BOND, Justice.

The appellants, competitive merchants, sought to enjoin the appellees from executing an extensively advertised lottery scheme very similar to the illegal scheme denounced by this court in the case of Featherstone v. Independent Service Station Ass’n, 10 S.W.(2d) 124, in which is held that no one should be permitted to employ criminal means in trade rivalry to enhance his sales to the calculative pecuniary injury of a law-abiding competitor, and that a court of equity, as an, incident to the giving of proper relief, may enjoin the exercise of such unlawful scheme for the purpose of preventing injury to the property, or civil rights of another. We think the cited case is decisive of the rights of the parties here affected.

However, the'record reveals in this case that the appellants predicate their claim for injunction relief, primarily, on an alleged lottery then going on, and which was to be finally and definitely consummated on July 10, 1933, and incidentally allege that the appellees “are threatening, to and will continue said operation from month to month by the distribution of other and like prizes, ‘ in the manner above set out, after Monday, July 10th, 1933.”

Manifestly, the unlawful lottery, perforce the action of the trial court in refusing the injunction, has long since been consummated, and whatever damage, if any, the alleged' criminal acts may have caused to appellants, is not a subject now for the determination of a court of equity. The allegations that the appellees are “threatening and will continue the opera*300tion” of the lottery scheme in the future, and that the appellants, in the ordinary course of trade, will suffer loss of patronage, which they reasonably expect to reap, are mere speculative conclusions, apprehensively predicated on the consummated criminal action of July 10, 1933. We think the mere allegation of a continuation by the appellees of the illegal method employed by them, and the possibility of diverting customers and patrons thereby, unsupported by anything in the record, is an expression of fear which does not in itself present an avowed controversy requisite to appellate jurisdiction.

The controversy existing at the time the appeal was taken, by reason of matters transpiring prior and subsequent thereto, ceases to exist, thus the questions involved on the appeal have become moot; therefore, the appeal should be dismissed, .and it is so ordered.

Appeal dismissed.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

The Board of Directors 

Rewards Network Inc.:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference into previously filedregistration statements on Form S-3 (Registration Nos. 333-53147, 333-49366 and 333-111390) and on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-101237, 333-72501, 333-06747 and 333-115903) of Rewards Network Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) of our reportsdated March 6, 2006, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cashflows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, and the related financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2005, annual report on Form 10-K of the Company. 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

 

March 15, 2006 

Miami, Florida 

Certified Public Accountants
# C_2023203EN.01000301.xml

| 9.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/3

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

SA.106972

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 203/02)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 16.5.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.106972 |
| Member State | Bulgaria |
| Region | Yugozapaden |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | Rescue aid to Bulgarian Posts Plc |
| Legal basis | Decree of the Council of Ministers — Draft |
| Type of measure | Ad Hoc Case
  Bulgarian Posts Plc |
| Objective | Rescuing undertakings in difficulty |
| Form of aid | Soft loan |
| Budget | Overall budget: 50 000 000 BGN
  Annual budget: 50 000 000 BGN |
| Intensity | |
| Duration | From 15.5.2023 |
| Economic sectors | Postal and courier activities, Postal activities under universal service obligation, Other postal and courier activities |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Ministry of Transport and Communications |
| Republic of Bulgaria, Sofia, 9, Dyakon Ignatiy Str. |

Date of adoption of the decision

16.5.2023

Aid number

SA.106972

Member State

Bulgaria

Region

Yugozapaden

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

Rescue aid to Bulgarian Posts Plc

Legal basis

Decree of the Council of Ministers — Draft

Type of measure

Ad Hoc Case

Bulgarian Posts Plc

Objective

Rescuing undertakings in difficulty

Form of aid

Soft loan

Budget

Overall budget: 50 000 000 BGN

Annual budget: 50 000 000 BGN

Intensity

Duration

From 15.5.2023

Economic sectors

Postal and courier activities, Postal activities under universal service obligation, Other postal and courier activities

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministry of Transport and Communications

Republic of Bulgaria, Sofia, 9, Dyakon Ignatiy Str.

Other information

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
#### TEXAS & NEW ORLEANS R. CO. v. NEILL et al.

No. 22369.

Supreme Court of Texas.

Jan. 6, 1937.

Baker, Botts, Andrews & Wharton, of Houston, and Templeton, Brooks, Napier & Brown and Harper MacFarlane, all of San Antonio, for plaintiff in error.

Carter & Lewis, H. C. Carter, Champe G. Carter, and Randolph L. Carter, all of San An.tonio, and James Young, Jr., of Corpus Christi, for defendants in error.

PER CURIAM.

On the question of whether the railroad company was entitled to have submit*349ted to the jury a specific special issue as to the existence of a custom of not having a switchman riding kicked or shunted cars, we observe that upon its request the following issue was submitted to the jury:

> “Did Alvah Neill know that in passing the lead track there would be probable danger from a car kicked without a switch-man riding it ?” To which the jury answered “No.”

As an intelligent employee of many years’ experience in this particular switchyard, Neill necessarily knew the custom which obtained in regard to a switchman riding or not riding on shunted or kicked cars. In its brief filed in the Court of Civil Appeals, the railroad company pointed out that Neill was necessarily acquainted with the custom of the yard in this particular. Under these conditions, the answer of the jury to the issue above copied clearly involves a finding against the existence of the claimed custom of shunting cars without a switch-man riding thereon.

Further, the requested issue which was given related alone to the defense of assumed risk. Since the railroad company requested the court to give that issue as a submission of that defense, it is in no position to complain that another requested issue submitting the same defense in' different language was not given. It was not entitled to two issues submitting the same question and cannot complain that the court selected one of its two requested issues thereon.

The question of the excessiveness of the judgment is one of fact as to which the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals is final. We are lacking in jurisdiction to consider it.

The application for writ of error is refused.
# C_2023301EN.01000401.xml

| 25.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/4

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

SA.107960

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 301/03)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 10.7.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.107960 |
| Member State | Austria |
| Region | |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | Energiekostenzuschuss für Unternehmen |
| Legal basis | Guidelines of the Federal Minister of Labour and Economy: Energiekostenzuschuss für Unternehmen I. based on Federal Law: Bundesgesetz über einen Energiekostenzuschuss für energieintensive Unternehmen (Unternehmens-Energiekostenzuschussgesetz) — UEZB, BGBL. I. Nr. 177/2022 idgF |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy |
| Form of aid | |
| Budget | Overall budget: 1 350 000 000 EUR |
| Intensity | |
| Duration | Until 31.12.2023 |
| Economic sectors | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | BMAW Abteilung IV/3 |
| Stubenring 1, 1010 Wien |

Date of adoption of the decision

10.7.2023

Aid number

SA.107960

Member State

Austria

Region

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

Energiekostenzuschuss für Unternehmen

Legal basis

Guidelines of the Federal Minister of Labour and Economy: Energiekostenzuschuss für Unternehmen I. based on Federal Law: Bundesgesetz über einen Energiekostenzuschuss für energieintensive Unternehmen (Unternehmens-Energiekostenzuschussgesetz) — UEZB, BGBL. I. Nr. 177/2022 idgF

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy

Form of aid

Budget

Overall budget: 1 350 000 000 EUR

Intensity

Duration

Until 31.12.2023

Economic sectors

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

Name and address of the granting authority

BMAW Abteilung IV/3

Stubenring 1, 1010 Wien

Other information

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
# C_2022487EN.01000401.xml

| 22.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 487/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 487/4

---

Notice for the attention of certain persons and major credit institutions subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP and Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine

(2022/C 487/03)

The following information is brought to the attention of Mr. Khazalbek Atabekau (No 10), Mr. Andrei Galenka (No 17), Mr. Anatol Vasilieu (No 20), Mr. Leanid Zhurauski, (No 22), Ms Alena Dmuhaila (No 35), Ms Sviatlana Katsuba (No 39), Mr. Igar Plysheuski (No 41), Ms Marina Rakhmanava (No 42), Mr. Pavel Liohki (No 64), Mr. Ihar Lutsky (No 65), Mr. Dzmitry Kuryan (No 71), Mr. Dzmitry Shumlin (No 73), Mr. Siarhei Kalinnik (No 75), Mr. Aliaksandr Pietrash (No 78), Ms Yuliya Hustyr (No 85), Ms Natallia Buhuk (No 89), Ms Alina Kasianchyk (No 90), Mr. Andrei Hrushko (No 104), Mr. Aleh Beliakou (No 129), Mr. Andrei Dailida (No 131) and Mr. Andrei Prokopuk (No 179) persons appearing in Annex I to Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP (1) and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 (2), as well to the attention of Belagroprombank, Bank Dabrabyt, Development Bank of the Republic of Belarus and Belinvestbank (Belarusian Bank for Development and Reconstruction), major credit institutions appearing in Annex V to Decision 2012/642/CFSP and in Annex XV to Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

The Council is considering maintaining the restrictive measures against the above-mentioned persons and major credit institutions.

Those persons and major credit institutions are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the intended statements of reasons and/or information related to the maintaining of restrictive measures, before 3 January 2023, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1 Horizontal and Global Affairs |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1 Horizontal and Global Affairs

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

---

(1)  OJ L 285, 17.10.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 134, 20.5.2006, p. 1.

---
EXHIBIT
32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of China Dasheng
Biotechnology Company. (the “Company”) certifies that:




1.           
The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31,
2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
and




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







Date:  May
      20, 2008
            By: /s/
      Qi JinjunQi
      Jinjun, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financical
    Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The Potomac Edison Company
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,159
<SECURITIES>                                    31,350
<RECEIVABLES>                                  116,283
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,534
<INVENTORY>                                     41,631
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               207,680
<PP&E>                                       2,322,104
<DEPRECIATION>                                 998,710
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,638,851
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          208,327
<BONDS>                                        510,344<F1>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       447,700
<OTHER-SE>                                     252,722
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,638,851
<SALES>                                        753,257
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               753,257
<CGS>                                          453,410
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  580,251
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,657
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                137,867
<INCOME-TAX>                                    37,284
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            100,583
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (16,949)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    83,634
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Includes $3,133 for funds on deposit with trustees.
<F2>All common stock is owned by parent, no EPS required.
</FN>



</TABLE>
Exhibit 12-1


                  PECO ENERGY COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
                       RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                   SEC METHOD
                                     ($000)




                                                     12 Months Ended
                                                        12/31/95


NET INCOME                                            $  609,732

ADD BACK

-INCOME TAXES:
    OPERATING INCOME                                     396,897
    NON-OPERATING INCOME                                  34,820
    NET TAXES                                         $  431,717

-FIXED CHARGES:
    INTEREST APPLICABLE TO DEBT                       $  408,904
    ANNUAL RENTALS ESTIMATE                                9,981
    TOTAL FIXED CHARGES                               $  418,885

ADJUSTED EARNINGS INCLUDING AFUDC                     $1,460,334

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                          3.49
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2897 

To require the submission of a report to the Congress on parasitic disease 

among poor Americans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2015 

Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. RANGEL, Ms. CLARKE of New York, Ms. NORTON, Ms. BROWN of Florida, 

Mr. FATTAH, and Mr. RUSH) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To require the submission of a report to the Congress on 

parasitic disease among poor Americans. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Neglected Infections 

5 of Impoverished Americans Act of 2015’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2897 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE CURRENT STATE OF 

2 PARASITIC DISEASES THAT HAVE BEEN 

3 OVERLOOKED AMONG THE POOREST AMERI4 CANS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 12 months after 

6 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

7 Health and Human Services shall report to the Congress 

8 on the epidemiology of, impact of, and appropriate funding 

9 required to address neglected diseases of poverty, includ10 ing neglected parasitic diseases such as— 

11 (1) Chagas disease; 

12 (2) cysticercosis; 

13 (3) toxocariasis; 

14 (4) toxoplasmosis; 

15 (5) trichomoniasis; 

16 (6) the soil-transmitted helminths; and 

17 (7) other related parasitic diseases, as des18 ignated by the Secretary. 

19 (b) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—The report under 

20 subsection (a) should provide the information necessary to 

21 guide future health policy to— 

22 (1) accurately evaluate the current state of 

23 knowledge concerning diseases described in such 

24 subsection and define gaps in such knowledge; and 

25 (2) address the threat of such diseases. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS