alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17I0055. OK LAKE LANIER, LLLP et al. v. CHARLES HOLSTON et al.

OK Lake Lanier LLLP and Kolter Signature Homes GA, LLC (collectively the

“Lanier Defendants”) filed this application for interlocutory review of the trial court’s

order denying their motion for summary judgment. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

Pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-34 (b), a party may request interlocutory review only

if the trial court certifies within ten days of entry of the order at issue that immediate

review should be had. The trial court reentered its order denying summary judgment

on September 26, 2016, because the Lanier Defendants sought a certificate of

immediate review outside the ten-day window proscribed by statute. The Lanier

Defendants then obtained a timely certificate of review on that same date. However,

OCGA § 5-6-34 (b) also mandates the filing of the interlocutory application within

ten days after entry of the certificate of immediate review. The Lanier Defendants

filed their interlocutory application on October 13, 2016, 17 days after the entry of

the certificate of immediate review. Accordingly, this application is untimely.

In light of their untimely application, the Lanier Defendants filed an emergency

motion for extension of time to file their application. Pursuant to Court of Appeals

Rule 30 (g), however, “[n]o extension of time shall be granted for filing of

interlocutory applications.” “[W]hen the order appealed from is an interlocutory

order, the appellate court does not acquire jurisdiction unlessthe procedure of OCGA

§ 5-6-34 (b) for interlocutory appeal is followed.” Cherry v. Coast House, Ltd., 257

Ga. 403, 404 (2) (359 SE2d 904) (1987). 

November 08, 2016
In light of the above, the Lanier Defendants’ emergency motion is hereby

DENIED, and because they failed to follow our interlocutory appeal procedure, this

application is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

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.

2

11/08/2016
Exhibit24.5

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOWN ALL MEN BYTHESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appointseach of Robert K. Kretzman and Michael T. Sheehan or either of them,each acting alone, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, withfull power of substitution, for him and his name, place and stead, inany and all capacities, in connection with the REVLON CONSUMER PRODUCTSCORPORATION (the "Corporation") Annual Reporton Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the"Form 10-K") under the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, including, without limiting the generality ofthe foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in the name and on behalf of theCorporation or on behalf of the undersigned as a director or officer ofthe Corporation, and any amendments to the Form 10-K and anyinstrument, contract, document or other writing, of or in connectionwith the Form 10-K or amendments thereto, and to file the same, withall exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith,including this power of attorney, with the Securities and ExchangeCommission and any applicable securities exchange or securitiesself-regulatory body, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents,each acting alone, full power and authority to do and perform each andevery act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about thepremises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could doin person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that saidattorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his substitute orsubstitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed these presents this8th day of March,  2005.

|  | /s/ BARRY F.SCHWARTZ                      BARRY F.SCHWARTZ |
|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

ASHLEY GENNOCK AND JORDAN BUDAI,

INDIVIDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY ON

BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,

Respondents

v.

KIRKLAND'S INC.,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 335 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior

Court at No. 88 WDM 2020 entered on October 16, 2020, denying the Petition for Permission to Appeal

from the Order of the Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas at

No. 11119 of 2019 entered on August 20, 2020

.

JORDAN BUDAI, ANDREA SCIOLA, AND ASHLEY GENNOCK, INDIVIDUALLY AND

ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,

Respondents

v.

COUNTRY FAIR, INC.,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 336 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior

Court at No. 89 WDM 2020 entered on October 16, 2020, denying the Petition for Permission to Appeal

from the Order of the Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas at

No. 10896 OF 2019 entered on August 20, 2020

.

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 29 th day of December , 2021 , the Petitions for Allowance of Appeal

are GRANTED , the orders of the Superior Court are VACATED , and the cases are[ 335 WAL 2020 and 336 WAL 2020 ]

- 2

REMANDED to the Superior Court to provide its rationale for the denial of Petitioners’

petitions for permission to appeal.
REF ID:A67609 

l5 Janu&1'7 1953 

P. s. 

v.r st.wart z 

The inclosed 1a ot course jwlt a form letter 'lllbich 1a 

beilJg sent to all the member• ot the Board. You vlll be DO 

doubt interested to know tll.at the tollmdng 111.ll be in 

attendancei WillaJ1 Hoard T. Engstrcu, von !leumann,, H. o. 

Corwith• o.r Weatern Union,. McPherson of IBM, H. P. Robertson,, 

and. Elmer w. Engatran. Ve were fortunate in gettirJg acceptance 

.tran the Jut named man,. 1lbo was the tirst choice on JOUr liat 

vlth Forrester, Arthur Samuel .. and Shocklq aa alternates. The 

Bell Laboratories representative 1• not yet. known lll'ld, becauee ~the time it tabs to ascertain the clearance status or an 

1nd1 vidual• he JDIV' not be able to participate in this first 

meeting. The RDS repre&entative ie llkeq to be Dr. L. T. I. 

Thompson who's clearance status I 'ld.ll learn qy tomorrow or 

the matt cl.,- and I think it 11111 be eattstactor:r. However, 

U' ?JDt. ascertainable veey soon, w ~ have Mr. Sputmen eerve 

u RDB representative tor the .t'irat meetiq. I v1ll keep you 

tntormed. ot &l\Y changes in the tbrgo1r1g Woniation. 

You m1Q" a.1reat:tY ha"i8 received your travel orders, u 

requested in 70\Jr latter or 23 Decanber, tor a period or apprax.1-

-~ 5 dlQ"s, ccmnencit>g on or about 1 Februa.r7• It vU.l be 

V61'7 nice it JOU can be here a dlV or two be.tore the opening ot 

the Board meeting. 

@'pp roved for Release bv NSA on 06-30-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352\3 

•
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 Fleming Companies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending July 13, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark S.
Hansen, Chairman of the Board 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:

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

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


                                            /s/ Mark S. Hansen
                                            ----------------------------------
                                            Mark S. Hansen
                                            Chairman of the Board and
                                            Chief Executive Officer
From: "Sponseller, Bart A - DNR" <Bart.Sponseller@Wisconsin.gov> To: Douglas Aburano/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Cc: Andy Chang/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, "Hoch, Joseph A - DNR" <Joseph.Hoch@wisconsin.gov>, "Stewart, Andrew M - DNR" <Andrew.Stewart@Wisconsin.gov> Date: 06/29/2012 10:56 AM Subject: Section 110(G) Confirmation

Dear Mr. Aburano, This e-mail is in response to an e-mail dated June 25, 2012 from Andy Chang requesting confirmation that 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) values have remained below 140 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) throughout the state since January 24, 2011. My staff have confirmed that 24-hour PM2.5 levels have stayed well below this level. The highest continuous rolling 24-hour value during from January 24, 2011 - June 28, 2012 statewide was 60.8 ug/m3. The highest quality assured federal reference method (FRM) 24-hour value from January 24, 2011 - March 31, 2012 statewide was 44.8 ug/m3. If you have any questions please contact Joseph Hoch of my staff at (608) 267 - 7543 or Joseph

. Hoch @ wisconsin

. gov

. 

## Bart Sponseller
Director, Bureau of Air Management Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (  ) phone: (608) 264-8537 (  ) cell: (608) 219-6430 (  ) fax: (608) 267-0560
REF ID:A58818 

8•2815~ 

ccT 

¢ 82~ 24Z IQil ISRlllt 

woarn 

T01 SULiO, .LOIDOI 

I 

PL86-36/50 USC 3605 

~ ADY~ CO..JMJW4 C.H~. JJ\4~ JWt. DI FBMiCH 1r1Cl>ll'JCATIC>i 1~09-1 

BAGILD l>l~RIBS> .ii I l:o11Tl!D 28 llil. .al(;b;lj1'J,I DAS~ 

Al4~•.ER lOL&.011DG "Ut$EIOlu~1 lo BAS fA'liM' OB ICIUFICATIO!J . ci ULD Alm a .. HAT 

(;01Jh!1Uii$, ~t1AICll'!IhG &\ TU.'T d'Ul1B..cia1 Afi'LB;4JtT 1 A.rH.i&i~tlO.til DA'.l'!I: AN> .UAi:i: at 

l&>~b.o 2., tlB'l Ia DJWl:U>HldtT AU'lll>Rlft lUJ'IRRiD '£0 aaT Ta\l!.'S l'ARo IDi 

,___ _ __.IW<l.ti1' G Jo rl&T l'it.T.blit i-;a;»iSl.i GftANl'd) l1 Al?a D~lRh ~liM iO~lWJI': 

con or .t'A'E.rltl OB, D' .tiOT !1'l i.. ... Ull.D, Cle' .t'.ATAiwf Jt.l'.t-1-JAiATlOlto 11' !•.llCJs:.i..JUa TO 

ObtAD .:5iJIJL IOU CJU. GUAWT.I& OJI OUR .DlllAU 1!10 U::ll klLL .blli ldl>Jli '11 Dli.awvTlCll 

nlTK>lll' -~~iR! AVl'rl>RlD JSUJ: '1il£B ADDJTIOIAL Jllt'OSIATlOI ru.QulRJll) FOR 018 

l>Ul.RllaATlOlo 

OCa Ai'~litl._. ___ (15) ·~-----

PARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED. CONSULT CRYPTOCENTER BEFORE DECLASSIFYING. 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 06-17-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

!Sf dltd l 1 

DBo llo I' o nlll>llAI 

I 

~lFSECIET-
ADDftESSGNLY 

'IM-181110Nl:R 01' PATDf1'9 

-HGTON II, D. C:. 

REF ID:A3.1B 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

PAPER No. 11 

UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE 

WASHINGTON 

U. S. PATENT OFFf CE 

JUN -9 ;g4a 

Dt&Uion: 16 MAILED 

Applkunl: \11111• 'I• P.lt1e dmaft 8 tal 

S.. No. 470,668 

FiW .... 121 19U3 . Far S')B ·mM FOB DCif11u..IWG FAC• 

81KJ:I.a 

Reapc:m1'M to -.ndmtnt t'lled Oot• 20, 1947t 

Add.t•lonal reterenoee Nlled oau 

Ju.17 

JulJ' 

ClaU. 8 and 9 are reJeotutd u being d1Notl7 readab1-

on •ltbe:r of ttMt aboft o1••4 patenta• The word taotlmll• 1n ti. 

cl.a.. loea m• lend patentab111'1 to tbl alaiM. 

Cla1• l to 7 S.1ua1ve •'111 tppoar t.o be allowed. 

!bu appllca tS.cn ehould be prepared tar tlnal aot1on. 

lo twtb•• --.dmenta tba' do not plaoe. b oa• 1n OOl:d1'1on 

te atic.enoe or b•"•• fOJllR t• appeal wUl be en'9N d a.ttle 

ttm.l actd.on unleaa aotompenied b7 a paaoper abowS.ng ot good 

and au ttle1en• N•HM 'lb7 tlw7 ••N ~ •d.191' pMMDted, 

Bul9 6a and ccm11u1oner• • lotloe or ApPU 26, 19481 &10 o.a. 258 • 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-22-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
.• 

I.;: I 

I :S. I 

DATE: 5 Oct 1951 

111... ... 

APSA-Or/t 

SUBJECT: . -

'. 

· -, 1'ran-1.tt.ed herewith tor inclusion on extemed loan in the AFSA historical 

· tlles11 a pb.ot.ostatic copy~ the tive-voha.e •Hietor;y ot Specia1 securit.T 

·-' Xfperationa Oversea.a•, which has been furnished thia .AgenCJ' bJ' the Chiet, Section A, '. ~; nsa. The vo1umes include: 

I ltt.SmtY OP SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIIS, 1IIS 

II - llISTORr or EUROPF.All TRIATER 

l;r IJOl't FORCES, PACD'IC 

. . IY - PA.CD'IC OC!All AREAS 

. ' ' . v ' - nmn-BORJO. AND CllIIA 'l'HEATERs 

It. will be noted that Volume I contains (pp. 161-192) a history or the Specia1 Branch, m, a photostatic cow or which haa previoual7 been :tarnished ;your office . for permanent retention. ; . 

a lll-. Winkler, the Chiet, Section A, 0-2, PRSll bas been assured that the 

~t; to recall _the volumes, it thq are needed at &JV time 'bJ' G-2, ia guaranteed. 

. ,. ~ . . 

. ... ,. 

,, 

• 1 

' I .. . 

--

'IXLLIA1I ., • :mm>JWl 

Consult.ant. 

' 

· . O.ONFIDENTIAL 

q~;classifi ed and approved for release by NSA on ·o 1-10-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

• _-_, .
.. 

Op-20-G 2 June 1934 

MEMORANDUM 

Captain Hooper took up with Lieut. 

Commander Webster 0£ the Coast Guard this 

question of undesirable publicity in connection with the cryptanalytical activities by 

Government agencies. ~ebster took it up with his Chie£, Pdmiral Hammond, whose 

reaction is not entirely in sympathy ~ith 

our attitude. However, Hammond stated that 

he would be glad to cooperate in this matter. 

H. F'. Kingman. 

ro ed fo Rele se b NSA on 0 -18-2013 ursuantto E .0. 13 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         535,294
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,452,391
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (756,407)
<INVENTORY>                                 11,264,286
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            19,832,407
<PP&E>                                       8,995,643
<DEPRECIATION>                             (3,094,573)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              43,048,836
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       30,921,902
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        648
<COMMON>                                        64,111
<OTHER-SE>                                 (4,017,690)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                43,048,836
<SALES>                                     57,349,625
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            57,349,625
<CGS>                                       39,275,096
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               20,649,454
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               250,985
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,845,950
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,671,860)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   678,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,349,860)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,349,860)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.06)


</TABLE>
-2. 

• -ANDIOR~a-~A IN~-JA 

MUST REMAIN WITH ATTACHED PAPERS 

NUMBER EACH MEMO OR REPLY IN LEFT BORDER, PLACE NAME, RANK AND 

TELEPHONE NUMBER BOTTOM OF EACH ACTION. DRAW Lllll!E UNDER EACH ACTION 

ENTER FILE CLASSIFICATION ADJUTANT ------

TO FROM DATE SUBJECT 

a not been neceaaary to catalog the equipnenta under 

control of this ency pr cipally becauae of their limited number. Considering 

the lar e number of crypt -equipments now under development,, it i8 believed that 

tbe sub ect cata og will oon be a neceSBity. 

5. 

6. 

J. 

CSGAS Fann No. 1078 

t6 eclassifi ed and a 

t AS-83 undertake production of thia catalog. 

coordinator on this project. 

\~~ WILLIAM BRAD 

Chief, Technical Staff' 

Securi Division 

I 

PAGE N0.-1 __ 

ursuantto E .0. 1352 J; ~-o
Court of Appeals, State of Michigan 

ORDER 

David H. Sawyer 

In re Hart, Minors 

Presiding Judge 

Docket No. 332435 

Jane E. Markey 

LC No. 2014-000679-NA 

Colleen A. O'Brien 

Judges 

The Court orders that the October 10, 2016 opinion is hereby AMENDED to correct a 

clerical error. The opinion is corrected to read November 10, 2016 as the date of the opinion. 

In all other respects, the opinion remains unchanged. 

A true copy entered and certified by Jerome W. Zimmer Jr., Chief Clerk, on 

NOV 1 8 2016 

Date
OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

56) 11-K- (B) -44 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

p.i 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:50 AM Sheet 56 of 325 
r 

P.2 

II-K-(B)-44 

SUMMARIZATION OF ISSUES DISCUSSED ON JULY 16TH AT 

POST-NAPCTAC REVIEW SESSION. 

Letter from E. Medine, EEA to R. Short, EPA:SASD. 

July 24, 1980. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(B)-44
**Exhibit 7.1**

**Videotron Ltd.**

**Statement Regarding Calculation of Ratio of Earnings toFixed Charges as Disclosed in**

**Videotron Ltd.’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Year EndedDecember 31, 2012**

For the purpose of calculating the ratio of earnings to fixed charges disclosed in VideotronLtd.’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012, (i) earnings consist of net income plus income taxes, fixed charges, amortized capitalized interest, amortized capitalized interest, less interest capitalized,and (ii) fixed charges consist of interest expensed and capitalized, excluding interest on QMI subordinated loans, plus premiums and discounts amortization, financing fees amortization and an estimate of the interest within rental expense.
Exhibit 13.2

Certification of the Principal Financial Officer of

Videotron Ltd.

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Videotron Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ending December 31, 2016, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Hugues Simard, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 21, 2017



/s/ Hugues SimardName: Hugues Simard Title:
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


Our report on the consolidated financial statements of Corel Corporation has
been incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K from page 45 of the 1999 Annual
Report to Shareholders of Corel Corporation. In connection with our audits of
such financial statements, we have also audited the related financial statement
schedule listed in the index on page 23 of this Form 10-K.

In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly, in all material respects, the information required to be
included therein.






PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP                                   Ottawa, Canada
Chartered Accountants                                       January 18, 2000


                                     F-66
May 23, 2012 

Mr. Gerardo Rios 

Chief, Permits Office 

U.S. EPA Region 9 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Subject: Pio Pico Energy Center PSD Permit Application 

 Alternative Modeling Analysis (Donovan NO2/NOx ratio) 

 

Dear Mr. Rios: 

As requested by EPA in an email message from Shirley Rivera to Steve Hill, dated 

May 11, 2012, we are providing the results of an alternative modeling evaluation that 

uses an in-stack NO2/NOx ratio of 0.56 for Donovan Detention Center. The modeling 

previously submitted was based on the in-stack NO2/NOx ratio of 0.1 that was 

recommended by the San Diego APCD for use in their evaluation of the project. 

Applicant understands that this alternative analysis is a merely a sensitivity analysis to 

demonstrate that the value selected for this stack parameter does not affect the relevant 

conclusion of the air quality impact analysis: the project will not cause or contribute to a 

violation of the 1-hour NO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). 

 

All other stack parameters for all other sources were unchanged from the values in the 

modeling previously submitted. As before, meteorological data and regional ambient 

background values from 2004 through 2008 were used in this analysis. 

The applicant has conducted the requested modeling and evaluated the potential 

cumulative impact of the project, nearby sources, and regional background concentrations 

on hourly NO2 concentrations. The synthetic background data used to demonstrate 

compliance with the federal 1-hour NO2 NAAQS are the same used in the previously 

submitted demonstration. 

The highest 5-year average of 98th percentile maximum daily 1-hour NO2 concentrations 

was 179.4 μg/m3, which complies with the standard of 188 μg/m3. This is the same value 

as previously determined using an in-stack NO2/NOx ratio of 0.1 for Donovan Detention 

Center. The change in the Donovan NO2/NOx does not affect the concentration at the 

point of maximum impact; nor does it result in impacts elsewhere that are high enough to 

supplant the point of maximum impact. 

 

The calculations at the critical receptor are summarized in Table 1. 

sierra 

research

1801 J Street 

Sacramento, CA 95811 

Tel: (916) 444-6666 

Fax: (916) 444-8373

Ann Arbor, MI 

Tel: (734) 761-6666 

Fax: (734) 761-6755 
Gerardo Rios -2- May 23, 2012 

Modeling files are included in the attached electronic files. 

Table 1 

One-hour NO2 NAAQS Compliance Calculation 

(Receptor 8164a

)

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

5-year 

Average 

Date March 7 Oct. 19 Dec. 14 March 23 Oct. 14 

Hour 21 3 18 23 19 

Cumulative 

Impact (μg/m3

) 175.5 170.5 193.9 172.9 184.4 179.4 

Regional 

Background 

(μg/m3

) 

125.9 79.0 107.1 101.5 110.9 

Project Impact 

(μg/m3

) 37.4 62.1 67.0 20.0 36.6

a . Receptor with the highest 5-year average 98th percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour cumulative 

impact (monitor data plus modeled impact from project and non-project nearby sources). 

Sincerely, 

Steve Hill 

Attachments 

cc: John McKinsey, Stoel Rives LLP 

David Jenkins, Apex Power Group 

 Steve Moore, SDAPCD