alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 142 (Friday, July 24, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39893-39894]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19734]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of a Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act

    Notice is hereby given that on June 12, 1998, a proposed Consent 
Decree in United States v. Wells Cargo, Inc., Civil Action No. CV-S-98-
00901-LDG (RLH) was lodged with the United States District Court for 
the District of Nevada.
    In this action the United States sought injunctive relief and the 
assessment of civil penalties against Wells Cargo, Inc., located in Las 
Vegas, Nevada. The United States alleges that Wells Cargo, Inc. 
operated its nonmetallic mineral processing plant and hot mix asphalt 
facility in violation of Sections 110 and 111 of the Clean Air Act, 42 
U.S.C. 7410 and 7411. Specifically, the United States alleges that 
Wells Cargo, Inc., in violation of applicable New Source Performance 
Standards, failed to make required notification to the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency regarding the construction commencement 
date, the start-up date, and the opacity observation date for new 
equipment installed in December, 1994. The United States also alleges 
that Wells Cargo failed to perform timely opacity observations after 
the installation and start-up of new equipment. The United States 
further alleges that Wells Cargo operated its asphalt facility in 
violation of the emission limit for visible air contaminants as set 
forth in the Nevada state implementation plan. The Consent Decree 
entered provides for a civil penalty to be paid by the defendant of 
$61,000 and the installation and operation of a smoke recovery system 
to be placed over the hot mix asphalt storage silos.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the Consent 
Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General 
of the Environment and Natural Resources Division, Department of 
Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530, and should refer to United States v. 
Wells Cargo, Inc., D.J. Ref. 90-5-2-1-2127.
    The Consent Decree may be examined at the Office of the United 
States Attorney, 701 E. Bridger Avenue, Suite

[[Page 39894]]

800, Las Vegas, Nevada, at U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA, and at the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street, N.W., 
4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005, (202) 624-0892. A copy of the 
Consent Decree may be obtained in person or by mail from the Consent 
Decree Library, 1120 G Street, N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005. 
In requesting a copy, please enclose a check in the amount of $6.75 (25 
cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the Consent Decree 
Library.
Joel M. Gross,
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 98-19734 Filed 7-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
<page>					  EXHIBIT 31.01

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jeffrey A. Rothman, President of Demeter Management Corporation
("Demeter"), the general partner of the registrant, certify that:

1.		I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the
registrant;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light
of the circumstances under which such statements were made,
not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;

3.		Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present
in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;

4.		The registrant's other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be
designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;

b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period
covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting; and



<page>
5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of Demeter's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in
the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and

b)	Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role
in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.





Date:  November 15, 2004    /s/Jeffrey A. Rothman
                               Jeffrey A. Rothman
                               President,
                               Demeter Management Corporation,
                               general partner of the registrant
No. 10-10417.

#### Joseph E. Okoh, Petitioner v. Virginia.

565 U.S. 836, 132 S. Ct. 141,

181 L. Ed. 2d 60,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5556.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Virginia denied.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3346 

To guarantee that grants are made under the health profession opportunity 

grant program under section 2008 of the Social Security Act to grantees 

in each State that is not a territory, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 19, 2019 

Mr. PASCRELL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To guarantee that grants are made under the health profession opportunity grant program under section 2008 of 

the Social Security Act to grantees in each State that 

is not a territory, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Health Opportunities 

5 to Promote Equity Act’’ or the ‘‘HOPE Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 3346 IH

1 SEC. 2. GUARANTEE OF GRANTEES IN EACH STATE AND 

2 THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; REPORTS TO 

3 THE CONGRESS. 

4 Section 2008 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

5 1397g) is amended by redesignating subsections (c) and 

6 (d) as subsections (d) and (e), respectively, and by insert7 ing after subsection (b) the following: 

8 ‘‘(c) GUARANTEE OF GRANTEES IN EACH STATE AND

9 THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.— 

10 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For each fiscal year, the 

11 Secretary shall award a grant under this section to 

12 at least 2 eligible entities in each State that is not 

13 a territory, to the extent there are a sufficient num14 ber of applications submitted by the entities that 

15 meet the requirements applicable with the grant. If, 

16 for a fiscal year, there are fewer than 2 such eligible 

17 entities in such a State, the Secretary shall include 

18 that information in the report required by paragraph 

19 (2) that covers the fiscal year. 

20 ‘‘(2) REPORTS TO THE CONGRESS.—During 

21 each Congress, the Secretary shall submit to the 

22 Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 

23 Representatives and the Committee on Finance of 

24 the Senate a report on, with respect to the period 

25 since the period covered in the most recent prior re26 port submitted under this paragraph— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 3346 IH

1 ‘‘(A) the number of applications submitted 

2 under each subsection of this section; 

3 ‘‘(B) the number of the applications that 

4 were approved; and 

5 ‘‘(C) a description of how grants were 

6 made in any case described in the last sentence 

7 of paragraph (1).’’. 

8 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

9 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

10 on October 1, 2019. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

___________________

NO. 09-12-00230-CR

___________________

KEVIN EARL KIRKLAND A/K/A KEVIN KIRKLIN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 11-12197

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In carrying out a plea-bargain agreement, Kevin Earl Kirkland1 pled guilty 

to third-degree felony family assault. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(b)(2)(B) 

(West 2011). Under the terms of the plea-bargain agreement, the trial court 

 1

Kevin Earl Kirkland is also referred to in the clerk’s record as Kevin 

Kirklin, and the record reflects that the defendant signs his name as Kevin Kirklin. 

For purposes of this appeal, we will refer to the defendant as Kirkland, as shown

on the indictment and final judgment.
2

deferred the adjudication of Kirkland’s guilt and placed Kirkland on community 

supervision for a period of three years. Additionally, the deferred adjudication 

order includes a fine of $500.

Subsequently, the State filed a motion to revoke the trial court’s community 

supervision order. After conducting a hearing, the trial court found Kirkland guilty 

of assaulting a family member and sentenced Kirkland to ten years’ imprisonment; 

however, during the revocation and sentencing hearing, the trial court did not 

pronounce that it also intended to impose a fine. Nevertheless, the written 

judgment includes a fine in the amount of $500.

The three issues Kirkland raises in his appeal argue that the trial court should 

not have included a $500 fine in the final judgment because no fine was 

pronounced during Kirkland’s revocation and sentencing hearing. The State 

concedes error. 

Because no fine was pronounced at the revocation and sentencing hearing, 

the trial court should not have included the fine at issue in the final judgment. 

Coffey v. State, 979 S.W.2d 326, 328 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). (“[W]hen there is a 

variation between the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written 

memorialization of the sentence, the oral pronouncement controls.”). The trial 

court’s failure to orally pronounce a fine during the revocation and sentencing 
3

hearing creates a conflict between the oral pronouncement of Kirkland’s sentence 

and the written judgment; in cases of deferred adjudication, the oral 

pronouncement controls. See Taylor v. State, 131 S.W.3d 497, 502 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2004).

We sustain Kirkland’s first issue; we modify the trial court’s judgment, 

reducing “Administrative Fees” from $1,582.00 to $1,082.00. As modified, the 

judgment is affirmed.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

___________________________

 HOLLIS HORTON

 Justice

Submitted on December 27, 2012

Opinion Delivered February 13, 2013

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350

I, Ashutosh Roy, the chief
executive officer of eGain Communications Corporation (the Company), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge,

(i) the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 (the Report), fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

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

/s/    Ashutosh RoyAshutosh RoyMay 15, 2008


A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided to eGain
Communications Corporation and will be retained by eGain Communications Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

In the Matter of the Marriage of John Paul 

Moncey and Tammie Jo Moncey

No. 06-12-00054-CV

Appeal from the 71st District Court of 

Harrison County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 11-

0192). Opinion delivered by Justice Carter, 

Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Hill*

participating. *Justice, Retired, Sitting by 

Assignment.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find reversible error in the judgment of 

the court below. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s judgment finding that the 1967 Chevrolet 

Corvette, vehicle identification number 194377S100978, was community property and render 

judgment that it is John Paul Moncey’s separate property. We affirm the trial court’s judgment 

in all other respects.

We further order that the appellant, John Paul Moncey, pay seventy-five percent and 

appellee, Tammie Jo Moncey, pay twenty-five percent of the costs of this appeal.

RENDERED MAY 17, 2013

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit 31.3

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

RULES 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a),

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, J. Per Brodin, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of
Claires Stores, Inc.; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit
to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.



|             |  |                        
|------------ |  | -----------------------
|May 15, 2012 |  | /s/ J. Per Brodin      
|             |  | J. Per Brodin          
|             |  | Chief Financial Officer
October 4, 2022 DLA-SM-23-3220

ANNUAL MATERIALS PLAN FOR FY 2023

 

The Defense Logistics Agency-Strategic Materials today announced the Fiscal Year 2023

Annual Materials Plan (AMP) for potential acquisitions. The FY 2023 AMP is effective 

October 1, 2022 and will expire September 30, 2023.

 

Annual Materials Plan for FY 2023 (Potential Acquisitions)

Material Unit

Ceiling 

Quantity

Antimony MT 1,100

Carbon Fibers LBS 5,000

Cerium MT 550

Electrolytic Manganese Metal MT 5,000

Lanthanum MT 1,300

Neodymium MT 600

Praseodymium MT 70

Rare Earth Magnet Block MT 100

Rayon MT 600

Titanium MT 1,500

TNT/HMX/RDX LBS 4,000,000

Materials listed are Potential Acquisitions and quantities listed are ceilings.

www.dla.mil/strategic-materials
No. 10-1447.

#### Duane Bonds, Petitioner v. Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.

565 U.S. 941, 132 S. Ct. 398,

181 L. Ed. 2d 255,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7306.

October 11, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 629 F.3d 369.
No. 11-107.

#### Stephanie H. Wheeler, Petitioner v. Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, et al.

565 U.S. 1058, 132 S. Ct. 757,

181 L. Ed. 2d 482,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8534.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 637 F.3d 280.
INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITY SUMMARY

DLA FORM 1752, OCT 84 (EG)

SEQUENCE/CASE NUMBER

DATE, TIME, AND

DETECTIVE NAME SUMMARY OF INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITY

PDF (DLA)
2003 66 RIO BRAVO JASMIN

LIST OF BOILERS AND PROCESS HEATERS IN SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY EMITTING 25 OR M

YEAR

NOx EMISSIONS

 (TONS/YEAR) FACILITY NAME SIC NAME

2002 105.66 OILDALE ENERGY LLC ELECTRIC SERVICES

2003 88.12 AES DELANO INC ELECTRIC SERVICES

2003 63.33 AES DELANO INC ELECTRIC SERVICES

2003 184.05 MT POSO COGENERATION COMPANY

ELECTRIC & OTHER 

SERVICES COMB

2003 34.91 DINUBA ENERGY INC ELECTRIC SERVICES

2003 25.95 DIAMOND WALNUT GROWERS, INC.

CROP PREPARATION SVCS 

FOR MKT

2003 26.71 GENERAL MILLS OPERATIONS, INC

CEREAL BREAKFAST 

FOODS

2003 40.95 POSDEF POWER COMPANY, L.P.

ELECTRIC & OTHER 

SERVICES COMB

2003 37.71 POSDEF POWER COMPANY, L.P.

ELECTRIC & OTHER 

SERVICES COMB

2003 80.58 AES MENDOTA, L.P.

ELECTRIC & OTHER 

SERVICES COMB

2003 59.98 SIERRA POWER CORPORATION ELECTRIC SERVICES

2003 73.73 RIO BRAVO POSO

CRUDE PETRO AND 

NATURAL GAS

2003 69.34 RIO BRAVO POSO

CRUDE PETRO AND 

NATURAL GAS

2003 71.99 RIO BRAVO JASMIN

CRUDE PETRO AND 

NATURAL GAS

2003 66.97 RIO BRAVO JASMIN

CRUDE PETRO AND 

NATURAL GAS

2003 87.61 RIO BRAVO FRESNO

ELECTRIC & OTHER 

SERVICES COMB

2003 170.38 COVANTA STANISLAUS, INC

ELECTRIC & OTHER 

SERVICES COMB

2003 169.24 COVANTA STANISLAUS, INC

ELECTRIC & OTHER 

SERVICES COMB

Source: ARB emissions inventory date base, pulled 11/24/09
M

COGENERATION BOILERS COKE

ORE TONS PER YEAR OF NOX

SCC8 NAME SOURCE MATERIAL 

>100MMBTU/HR EXTF BOILERS NATURAL GAS

WOOD BOILER BOILERS WOOD/BARK WASTE

WOOD BOILER BOILERS WOOD/BARK WASTE

COGENERATION BOILERS BITUMINOUS COAL

COGENERATION BOILERS WOOD

REFUSE DERIVED FUEL BOILERS REFUSE DERIVED FUEL (UNSPECIFIED)

COGENERATION BOILERS NATURAL GAS

ATM FLUIDBD CMBST BOILERS BITUMINOUS COAL

ATM FLUIDBD CMBST BOILERS BITUMINOUS COAL

COGENERATION BOILERS WOOD

COGENERATION BOILERS WOOD

COGENERATION BOILERS LIGNITE

COGENERATION BOILERS COKE

COGENERATION BOILERS LIGNITE

COGENERATION BOILERS COKE

WOOD BOILER BOILERS WOOD/BARK WASTE

REFUSE DERIVED FUEL BOILERS REFUSE DERIVED FUEL (UNSPECIFIED)

REFUSE DERIVED FUEL BOILERS REFUSE DERIVED FUEL (UNSPECIFIED)
OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

57) ll-K- (B) -45 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:50 AM Sheet 57 of 325 

P.1 
P.2 

'IA PP P) 

II-K-(B)-45 

REVISED PARTICULATE CONTROL ALGORITHMS. 

Letter from T. Hogan, EEA to J. Pratapas, EPArSASD. 

July 24, 1980. 

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

II-K-(B)-45
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**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 theglobe.com, inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward A. Cespedes,
      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
      to the best of my knowledge and belief:





(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.




*Date:
                August 11, 2006*
            *By:*
            /s/ *Edward
              A. Cespedes**Edward
                A. Cespedes*
                *Chief
                  Financial
                  Officer*
|   | (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 1st Source. |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By | /s/ CHRISTOPHER J. MURPHY III                              |   |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|

|   | Christopher J. Murphy III, Chief Executive Officer |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|

----
Exhibit 10.1


 


SECOND AMENDMENT TO


AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER


AND EXCHANGE


 


This SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER AND EXCHANGE,
dated as of July 2, 2014 is entered into by and among APPLIED NANOTECH HOLDINGS, INC., a corporation incorporated in the
State of Texas, USA (“APNT”), PEN INC., a corporation incorporated in the State of Delaware and a wholly-owned
subsidiary of APNT (“PEN”), NANOMERGER SUB INC., a corporation incorporated in the State of Delaware
and a wholly-owned subsidiary of APNT (“MergerSub”), NANOHOLDING INC., a Delaware corporation (“Nano”)
AND CARL ZEISS INC., a New York corporation (“Zeiss”).


 


WHEREAS, APNT, PEN, MergerSub, Nano and Zeiss
are parties to an Agreement and Plan of Merger and Exchange Dated as of March 10, 2014, as amended by an earlier Amendment dated
May 28, 2014 (the “Merger & Exchange Agreement”).


 


WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Merger
&Exchange Agreement to change the date when the parties may have the right to terminate the Merger & Exchange Agreement
so that it is after the scheduled meeting of the shareholders of APNT.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements
contained in this Amendment and other good and valuable consideration, the parties agree that the date in Section 14.1 clause (b)(i)
is hereby changed from July 31, 2014 to September 3, 2014. Except as stated in the preceding sentence, the Merger & Exchange
Agreement remains in full force and effect.


 


 


[Signatures begin next page]




    	 



    	 



    


 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have
caused this Second Amendment to be duly executed by their respective authorized signatories as of the date first indicated above.


 


	 	 	 
	 	APPLIED NANOTECH HOLDINGS, INC.
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Robert Ronstadt ___________________
	 	 	Robert Ronstadt, Chairman
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	PEN INC.
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By: 	s/s Robert Ronstadt____________________
	 	 	Robert Ronstadt, Chairman
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	NANOMERGER SUB INC.
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Robert Ronstadt____________________
	 	 	Robert Ronstadt, Chairman
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	
        NANOHOLDINGS INC.

         

	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:	
        /s/ Scott E. Rickert                                           

        Scott E. Rickert, President

	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	
        CARL ZEISS, INC.

         

	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:	
        /s/ James Sharp_______________

        James Sharp, President
DLA/ARMY SHADE TOLERANCE PILOT PROJECT June 9, 

2015

Fabric Nomenclature WEBBING – 1 INCH, TEXTILE, TEXTURED A-A-55301 

Shade Number COYOTE 498 Piece/Roll Number 3891

Equipment type HUNTER ULTRA SCAN PRO Setting Mode: Specular Included -

Reflectance

UV Filter – OUT UV Lamp 

OFF

ID Rectangular L* a* b* c h dL* da* db* DEcmc*

Standard 3891 -------------------- 42.80 5.12 18.34

Tolerance

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

COMMENTS: NUMBERS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY