alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The Honorable Eddie Baza Calvo

Ricardo J. Bordallo Governor’s Complex

Adelup, Guam 96910

Dear Governor Calvo:

Thank you for your staff’s recommendations dated June 6, 2011 on air quality designations for the territory of Guam for the 2010 revision to the primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for sulfur dioxide (SO 2).Reducing levels of SO2pollution is an important part ofthe U. S. Environmental

Protection Agency’s (EPA) commitment to a clean, healthy environment. Exposure to SO2can cause a

range of adverse health effects, including narrowing ofthe airways which can cause difficulty breathing and increased asthma symptoms. This letter is to notify you ofthe EPA’s preliminary intentions regarding your recommended designations.

On June 3, 2010, the EPA strengthened the health-based or “primary” standard for SO2by establishing a standard for 1-hour average SO2concentrations at a level of 75 parts per billion. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to complete the initial designations process within two years ofpromulgating a new or revised standard. Ifthe Administrator has insufficient information to make these designations, the EPA has the authority to extend the designation process by up to one year. On July 27, 2012, the EPA announced that it had insufficient information to complete the designations for the 1-hour SO2standard

within two years and extended the designations deadline to June 3, 2013.

At this time the EPA is proceeding with designating as nonattainment most areas in locations where

existing monitoring data from 2009-20 11 indicate violations ofthe 1-hour SO2standard. The EPA

intends to address the designations for all other areas in separate future actions. With input from a diverse group ofstakeholders, EPA has developed a comprehensive implementation strategy for these future actions that focuses resources on identifying and addressing unhealthy levels of SO2.The

strategy is available at: www.epa. gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/irnplernent.html. The EPA will continue

to work closely with you and our other partners at the state, tribal and local levels to ensure healthprotective, common sense implementation ofthe 1-hour SO2standard.

The EPA’s review ofthe most recent monitored air quality data from 2009-2011 shows no violations of

the 2010 SO2standard in any areas in Guam. Consequently, the EPA is not yet prepared to propose designation action in Guam and is therefore currently deferring action to designate areas in Guam. The EPA expects to be able to proceed with designation action in Guam once additional data are gathered pursuant to our comprehensive implementation strategy. In a separate future action or actions the EPA

Printed on Recycled Paper
415-947-8715, or jordan.deborah(iepa.gov.

Sincerely,

fiJared Blumenfeld

cc: Eric Palacios, Administrator, Guam Environmental Protection Agency

Conchita Taitano, Administrator, Air and Land Division, Guam Environmental Protection Agency

Peter Cruz, Air Pollution Control Program Manager, Guam Environmental Protection Agency

Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation

Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1



                          Independent Auditors' Consent




The Board of Directors
eResearchTechnology, Inc.:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on
Form S-3 (No. 333-88361) and in the registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos.
333-61954, 333-26471 and 333-80121) of eResearchTechnology, Inc. of our report
dated February 3, 2003, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of
eResearchTechnology, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002 and the
related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash
flows for the year ended December 31, 2002, and the related consolidated
financial statement schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2002
annual report on Form 10-K of eResearchTechnology, Inc.

Our report refers to our audit of the adjustments that were applied and
disclosures that were added to revise the 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial
statements, as more fully described in Note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements. However, we were not engaged to audit, review, or apply any
procedures to the 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements other than
with respect to such adjustments and disclosures.


                                            /s/ KPMG LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 10, 2003
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1500 Prepped byOllie Stewart

Document

Number: 

# 34 ) ll-C-6 0 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 8/5/2008 1:51:28 PM

Sheet 34 of 343P. 2



### $ *-t% \ 

# VSH} UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENCY |VJg 7 8 - RESEARC H TRIANGL E PARK , N C 2771 1



### DE C 2 3199 6 IC E O F IT YPLANNIN G ANDARD S Mr . Joh n Jambois , Presiden t Tecto n Product s 440 1 15t hAvenue , NW Pos t Offic e Bo x271 2 Fargo , Nort hDakot a 5810 8 Dea r Mr . Jambois : Enclose d i s a cop yo f th e fina l non-confidentia l sit e visi t repor t fro mth e Environmenta l Protectio n Agency' s (EPA ) visi t t o you r facilit yJun e 4 and 5 , 1996 . W e prepare d th e repor t b y incorporatin g you r comment s t o th e draf t whic hyo u submitte d o n Novembe r 20 , 1996 . Pleas e confir mtha t a cop yo f thi s fina l non CB I versio n ca n b e place d i n th e docket , whic hi s accessibl e t o th e public , b ysendin g u s a not e o r a facsimil e t o tha t effect . Pleas e addres s thi s t o Madelein e Strum , fa xnumbe r 91 9 54 1 5689 , o r t o MD-13 , U S EPA , Researc hTriangl e Park , N C 27711 . I f th e EP Adoe s no t receiv e a respons e fro myo u b yJanuar y31 , 1996 , th e enclose d repor t wil l b e considere d non-confidentia l and final . Th e fina l confidentia l versio n o f th e sit e visi t repor t wil l b e kep t i n th e confidentia l busines s informatio n (CBI ) file s a t Researc hTriangl e Park . W e conside r th e fina l versio nt o b e th e draf t CB I versio n tha t contain s you r comment s o f Novembe r 20 , 1996 . Than k yo u fo r you r assistanc e wit hth e developmen t o f th e proposa l fo r th e Nationa l Emissio n Standard s fo r Hazardou s Ai r Pollutant s fo r Reinforce d Plasti c Composite s Production . I f yo u hav e anyquestion s regardin g thi s letter , pleas e contac t Madelein e Struma t (919 ) 541-2383 .

Lind a S . Herrifr

g K^yGroup Leade r Coating s and Consume r Product s Group Enclosur e
/ Recycled/Recyclabl e . Printe d wit h Vegetabl e Oi l Base d Ink s o n 100 % Recycle d Pape r(40 % Postconsumer )P. 3

4 A, DocketNo . A ^ ^2 - Subcategor

yII - O Theenclosures wit

hthis documen

tareidentica

lt o theenclosures wit

hdocketite

mII-$'{'2 -



## 2 -
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 158 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 158

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for 
                  travel expenses of certain loggers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 21 (legislative day, January 5), 1993

  Mr. Daschle introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for 
                  travel expenses of certain loggers.

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

SECTION 1. DEDUCTION FOR TRAVEL EXPENSES OF CERTAIN LOGGERS.

    (a) In General.--Section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to trade or business expenses) is amended by redesignating 
subsection (m) as subsection (n) and by inserting after subsection (l) 
the following new subsection:
    ``(m) Special Travel Expense Rules for Loggers.--
            ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2) and 
        section 262, in the case of an individual, there shall be 
        allowed as a deduction under this section an amount equal to 
        the travel expenses of such individual in connection with the 
        trade or business of logging (including the miles to and from 
        such individual's home).
            ``(2) Trade or business of logging.--For purposes of this 
        section, the term `trade or business of logging' means the 
        trade or business of the cutting and skidding of timber.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1992.

                                 <all>
```
#### Blackhawk Neff, Inc. v. Kusevich Contracting, Inc.

09/06/2016

118 WAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Super., 141 A.3d 606
* Local Rule 47.5 provides:

"The publication of opini ons that have no precedential value and merely decide p articular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-50038 Summary Calendar

In re EVELYN J. WOOD, and ERIK C. MOEBIUS, Debtors.

MICHAEL A. WASH, and NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellees,

versus

EVELYN J. WOOD, and ERIK C. MOEBIUS,

Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(94-CV-594)

(June 9, 1995)

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The j udgment of the district court affirming the bankruptcy

court's summary judgment in favor of Michael A. Wash and Nationwide

Insurance Company is AFFIRMED for the reasons given by the district

court in its order and opinion of December 2, 1994.
No. 11-9843.

#### Lyons *v.*Mitchell, Superintendent, Old Colony Correctional Center.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 12-7778.

#### McKinney *v.*Cartledge, Warden, et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Kira G., Matter of (Dustin L.)

2d Dept: 141 AD3d 657 (Proceeding No. 2)

denied
No. 12-7850.

#### Funes *v.*Louisiana.

Ct. App. La., 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 04a0060n.06 Filed: November 1, 2004 No. 03-1948 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. LEONARD McCALL, Defendant-Appellant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

BEFORE: MERRITT, DAUGHTREY and SUTTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM. This appeal from a judgment revoking the federal term of supervised release of the defendant, McCall, raises the questi on of whether due process forbids a delay in the issuance of a warrant for violation of supervised release while the defendant remains in state custody. McCall concededly violated his federal parole in connection with the state crime of receiving and concealing stolen property for which he was sentenced to state custody. The U.S. Probation Office requested issuance of a parole violations warrant on November 8, 2001. The warrant was not served until June 6, 2003, when McCa ll was released by the state. A hearing was conducted thereafter. McCall argues that this delay violates due process. U.S. v. Throneburg , 87 F.3d 851, 853 (6th Cir. 1996), rejects this very argumen t in a case in which there was a delay of twoNo. 03-1948 United States v. McCall

-2- years while the defendant served his state term fo r a crime which gave rise to the federal parole violation. McCall also argues that the record below s upports a finding that the District Judge was unfamiliar with the federal sentencing guidelines a nd did not know that the guidelines are advisory only with respect to sentencing for parole violati ons. To the contrary, McCall’s own lawyer advised the District Court at Appendix page 69 that the guideline range is advisory only. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,507,580
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               18,244,577
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 32,249,506
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            55,117,774
<PP&E>                                      41,027,855
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,393,514
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              89,832,126
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       21,443,344
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,334,013
<OTHER-SE>                                  21,625,887
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                89,832,126
<SALES>                                     66,372,622
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            66,372,622
<CGS>                                       51,520,407
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               51,520,407
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,511,449
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,197,169
<INCOME-TAX>                                   747,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,450,169
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,450,169
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# L_2010152EN.01000401.xml

| 18.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 152/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 152/4

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 524/2010

of 17 June 2010

granting no export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 164(2), in conjunction with Article 4, thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a standing invitation to tender procedure. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a standing invitation to tender procedure.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 15 June 2010. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 15 June 2010.

| (3) | The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 619/2008, for the tendering period ending on 15 June 2010, no export refund shall be granted for the product and destinations referred to in point (c) of Article 1 and in Article 2 respectively of that Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 June 2010.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 June 2010.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 168, 28.6.2008, p. 20.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 325, 11.12.2007, p. 69.

3

---
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 102 (Thursday, May 28, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 29219]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14223]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.
* * * * *
FEDERAL REGISTER NUMBER: 98-13018.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED DATE & TIME: Thursday, May 21 1998, 10:00 a.m., 
meeting open to the public.
    The Following Item Was Added to the Agenda: Electronic Filing for 
Presidential Committees.
* * * * *
DATE & TIME: Tuesday, June 2, 1998 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

STATUS: This Meeting Will Be Closed to the Public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 
Sec. 437g.
    Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. Sec. 437g, Sec. 438(b), and 
Title 26, U.S.C.
    Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
    Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a 
particular employee.
* * * * *
DATE & TIME: Thursday, June 4, 1998 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. (ninth floor).

STATUS: This meeting Will Be Open to the Public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: Correction and Approval of Minutes. 
Administrative Matters.

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: Mr. Ron Harris, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
Marjorie W. Emmons,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 98-14223 Filed 5-26-98; 10:37 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
No. 12-892.

#### New *v.*United States.

C. A. Armed Forces. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 97 (Wednesday, May 20, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 27731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-13346]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreements(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984.
    Interested parties can review or obtain copies of agreements at the 
Washington, DC offices of the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, 
N.W., Room 962. Interested parties may submit comments on an agreement 
to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, 
within 10 days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register.

Agreement No.: 217-011622
Title: Space Charter Agreement between Croatia Line and the CMA/Italia 
Space Charter and Sailing Agreement
Parties:
    Croatia Line
    The CMA/Italia Space Charter and Sailing Agreement and its member 
lines: Companie Maritime
    d'Affretement (``CMA'') and Italia d'Navigazione S.p.A.
Synopsis: The proposed Agreement authorizes the CMA/Italia Space 
Charter and Sailing Agreement to charter space to Croatia Line and to 
enter into cooperative arrangements in the trades between ports on the 
Mediterranean Sea and the U.S. Atlantic Coast. The parties have 
requested expedited review.

    Dated: May 14, 1998.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-13346 Filed 5-19-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.02

                            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 DRYCLEAN USA, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Venerando J. Indelicato, Principal 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, 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.

November 10, 2005

                                                /s/ Venerando J. Indelicato
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Venerando J. Indelicato
                                                Principal Financial Officer
No. 12-7805.

#### Lopez *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
#### Pyotr Yadgarov, Appellant, v Gadi Dekel, Respondent.

[768 NYS2d 337]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hart, J.), dated March 31, 2003, which denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

*632Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, his motion was premature since substantial discovery remains outstanding *(see generally Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co.,*81 NY2d 494, 506 [1993]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion. Smith, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and Townes, JJ., concur.