alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Greg Stella, Alpine Geophysics

February 25, 2016

Estimated Ozone Contribution from U.S. Anthropogenic 

Emissions

(3 pages)
2017 CSAPR MDA8 DVs without 

IC/BC and Can/Mex Contributions

No monitor with dv greater than 66 ppb

Only 11 monitors with dv greater than 60 ppb

Data source: http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/2017_ozone_contributions_transport_noda.xlsx
Modeled % Ozone from Transport 

Aggregate of 60ppb+ Modeled Days 

7 
13 

Date Domain Ozone Transport Ozone Obs06_01_2012 38.39 24.62 6606_02_2012 47.92 21.25 4106_04_2012 28.23 32.01 4006_05_2012 41.00 24.37 5706_06_2012 51.44 19.97 7006_07_2012 50.39 13.06 5706_08_2012 52.92 10.85 4806_09_2012 58.47 12.63 5106_10_2012 42.21 18.55 4206_13_2012 48.76 16.86 3906_17_2012 41.42 24.45 5306_18_2012 41.06 19.79 4106_22_2012 38.01 23.37 5006_24_2012 47.28 15.99 4706_25_2012 50.96 15.83 6006_26_2012 61.64 11.44 6906_27_2012 80.56 11.32 9506_28_2012 57.41 16.37 5506_29_2012 47.08 22.34 49Aldine - Daily Modeled ContributionTCEQ 2012 Modeling PlatformAlpine Generated OSAT Results (60 pbb Threshold)

Transport Ozone

Date Domain Ozone Transport Ozone Obs06_01_2012 60.9% 39.1% 6606_02_2012 69.3% 30.7% 4106_04_2012 46.9% 53.1% 4006_05_2012 62.7% 37.3% 5706_06_2012 72.0% 28.0% 7006_07_2012 79.4% 20.6% 5706_08_2012 83.0% 17.0% 4806_09_2012 82.2% 17.8% 5106_10_2012 69.5% 30.5% 4206_13_2012 74.3% 25.7% 3906_17_2012 62.9% 37.1% 5306_18_2012 67.5% 32.5% 4106_22_2012 61.9% 38.1% 5006_24_2012 74.7% 25.3% 4706_25_2012 76.3% 23.7% 6006_26_2012 84.3% 15.7% 6906_27_2012 87.7% 12.3% 9506_28_2012 77.8% 22.2% 5506_29_2012 67.8% 32.2% 49

Modeled Relative Contribution (%)

Modeled Ozone Concentrations (ppb)

0%

90%80%70%60%50%40%30%

20%10%

100%

Transport Ozone Domain Ozone

0.00

90.0080.0070.0060.0050.0040.0030.0020.0010.00

100.00

Transport OzoneDomain OzoneObs
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 49/2007

of 22 January 2007         

on the issue of licences for the import of garlic in the quarter from 1 March to 31 May 2007         

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1870/2005 of 16 November 2005 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas and introducing a system of import licences and certificates of origin for garlic imported from third countries (2), and in particular Article 10(2) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Applications for import licences lodged pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1870/2005, during the first five working days of January 2007 and sent to the Commission by 15 January 2007, shall be met at a percentage rate of the quantities applied for as set out in Annex I to this Regulation.

Article 2

For each category of importer and the origin involved, applications for import licences pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1870/2005 relating to the quarter from 1 March to 31 May 2007 and lodged after the first five working days of January 2007 but before the date in Annex II to this Regulation, shall be rejected.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on 23 January 2007.

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

Done at Brussels, 22 January 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 47/2003 (OJ L 7, 11.1.2003, p. 64).

(2)OJ L 300, 17.11.2005, p. 19. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2000/2006 (OJ L 379, 28.12.2006, p. 37).

----

ANNEX I

----

ANNEX II

----
Exhibit 31.2
 
      (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)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    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 period covered by this report based on
such evaluation; and(d)
    
    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
  (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 14, 2008
    By:
    /s/ Roman GregorigRoman GregorigVice President and Principal Financial Officer E-3
KPMG
      LLP
      Chartered Accountants
      200-205 5 Avenue SW
      Calgary AB
      T2P 4B9
    Telephone    
      (403) 691-8000
      Fax            
      (403) 691-8008
      Internet    
      www.kpmg.ca








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM







The Board of Directors

QSound Labs, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-09228, 333-117165 and 333-82844) on Form S-8 of QSound Labs, Inc. of our report dated February 25, 2005, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of QSound Labs, Inc. as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations and deficit and cash flows, for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004, which report appears in the December 31, 2004, annual report on Form 20-F of QSound Labs, Inc.  Our report refers to a change to the method of accounting for stock-based compensation.







Chartered Accountants

Calgary, Canada

March 21, 2005



















KPMGLLP, a Canadian owned limited liability partnership, is the Canadian

member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss association
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, the undersigned, Betsy Henley-Cohn and John S.
Tomac, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer, respectively, of
BIW Limited (the "issuer"), do each hereby certify that the report on Form 10-Q
accompanying this certification (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 that information contained in the report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the issuer.


/s/ Betsy Henley-Cohn
--------------------------
Betsy Henley-Cohn
Chairwoman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
(chief executive officer)
BIW Limited

May 15, 2007


/s/ John S. Tomac
--------------------------
John S. Tomac
President and Treasurer
(chief financial officer)
BIW Limited

May 15, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          52,500
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  137,822
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,645
<INVENTORY>                                    124,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               323,383
<PP&E>                                         202,531
<DEPRECIATION>                                (97,461)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 930,231
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          146,875
<BONDS>                                        931,418
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           21,835
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                   (175,285)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   930,231
<SALES>                                        707,112
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               707,112
<CGS>                                          446,580
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  651,668
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              82,455
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,173)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,575
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,260)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 31,358
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (45,618)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN**  **-c.yun --** 

**‘ a.**  **aMus Au8M8,**  **Tau kWUjlr** 

**-l-r AmaBax?mmbb48fllll,**  FIRST ASSIS ’TA 

## ATTORNEY GENEHAL madoj
Subsidiaries of the Registrant(1)


                                                 State of           Percentage
                                              Incorporation         Ownership
                                              -------------         ---------

Farmers and Mechanics Bank                     United States           100%

FMS Financial Services, Inc.(2)(4)             New Jersey              100%

Land Financial Services, Inc.(2)(4)            New Jersey              100%

First Plunge, Inc. (3)(4)                      New Jersey              100%

Fishpond, Inc. (3)(4)                          New Jersey              100%

Angell Ayes, Inc. (3)(4)                       New Jersey              100%

Peter's Passion, Inc. (3)(4)                   New Jersey              100%

Atlantic Adventures, Inc.(3)(4)                New Jersey              100%


---------------
(1)  The  operations  of the  subsidiaries  are  included  in  the  consolidated
     financial  statements  contained  in  the  Annual  Report  to  Stockholders
     attached as Exhibit 13 to the Form 10-K.
(2)  Subsidiary of Farmers and Mechanics Bank.
(3)  Subsidiary of Land Financial Services, Inc.
(4)  Currently an inactive subsidiary.
#### Sidney Morris, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.'

Decision Filed June 2, 1928.

*C. D. Abbott,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*997
      *Fred II. Davis,*Attorney General, and *Boy Campbell,*Assistant, for the State.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 

 The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of 

Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27, 

1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice 

Thomas J. Moyer. 

 Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's 

Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S. 

Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Whitten, Administrative 

Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010. 

Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome. 

 NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the 

full texts of the opinions after they have been released 

electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised 

to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West 

Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions. 

The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume 

and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound 

volumes of the Ohio Official Reports. 

 

Board of Education of the Cleveland City School District, 

Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Appellee, v. Don M. Hisaka & 

Associaties, Inc.; United Pacific Insurance Company, Appellant. 

[Cite as Cleveland City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Don M. 

Hisaka & Assoc., Inc. (1992), Ohio St.3d .] 

Appeal dismissed as improvidently allowed. 

 (No. 91-1776 -- Submitted October 21, 1992 -- Decided 

December 30, 1992.) 

 Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 

60374. 

 

 Cavitch, Familo & Durkin Co., L.P.A., Douglas A. DiPalma 

and E. John Brzytwa, for appellee. 

 Weston, Hurd, Fallon, Paisley & Howley, David Arnold, 

Jerome W. Cook and William H. Baughman, Jr., for appellant. 

 This cause is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been 

improvidently allowed. 

 The court orders that the court of appeals' opinion not be 

published in the Ohio Official Reports, and that it may not be 

cited as authority except by the parties inter se. 

 Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown 

and Resnick, JJ., concur.
### State 

### ofUtah GARY R. HERBERT Governor SPENCER J. COX Lieutenant Governor

December 10, 2015 

### Department of Environmental Quality Alan Matheson Executive Director DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY Bryce C. Bird

Director

Carl Daly, Air Program Director U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 (8P-AR) 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Dear Mr. Daly: DAQP-120-15

The purpose ofthis letter is to acknowledge a deficiency in Utah's state implementation plan (SIP) revisions for regional haze (adopted by the Utah Air Quality Board onJune 3, 2015) related to particulate matter (PM) reporting and to committo submit, upon final adoption by the Utah Air Quality Board, a revision to correct the deficiency. During review ofUtah's regional haze SIP submittal, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) noted a deficiency in the reporting requirements for PM. The current language (submitted to EPA on June 4, 2015) in SIP Section IX.H.21 requires sources to report excess PM emissions resulting only from breakdowns (R307-107-2). The Utah Division ofAir Quality (UDAQ) acknowledges that the PM reporting requirements applicable to the state's regional haze rule should be revised. Below is an example revision to Section IX.H.21(e) ofUtah's SIP that would require reporting ofall deviations from PM emission limitations: "Each source shall submit a report ofany deviation from the applicable requirements of Subsection IX.H, including those attributable to upset conditions, the probable cause ofsuch deviations, and any corrective actions or preventive measures taken. The report shall be submitted to the Director no later than 24-months following the deviation, or earlier, as specified by an underlying applicable requirement. Deviations due to breakdowns shall be reported according to the breakdownprovisions ofR307-107."

195 North 1950 West• Salt Lake City, UT Mailing Address: P.O
. Box 144820 •Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820 Telephone (801) 536-4000 •Fax (801)536-4099 • T.D.D. (801) 903-3978 www deq utah
.gov Printed on I00% recycled paperDAQP-120-15 Page2 The UDAQ commits to working with the Utah Air Quality Boardto approve this revisionto State rules so that itis applicable to sources subject to IX.H22. Source Specific Emission Limitatiorzs: RegionalHaze Requirements, BestAvailableRetrofit Technology. Further, UDAQ commitsto submittingthis revisionto EPAwithin one year ofEPA'sfinal action onthe June 3, 2015, SIP revisions. 

### Ifyou have any questions, please contactJay Bakerofmy staffat (801) 536-4015.

Bryce C. Bird Director
Exhibit 32   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    In connection with the Quarterly Report of Zaldiva, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly Report), we, Nicole Leigh, President, and Robert B. Lees, CFO of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.  Date:February 12, 2010By:/s/Nicole LeighNicole Leigh, President and Director  Date:February 12, 2010By:/s/Robert B. LeesRobert B. Lees, CFO and Director
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906					OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

     This certification is being filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This certification is included solely for the purpose of complying with the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and is not to be used for any other purpose. In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc. for the quarter ended November 30, 2005, I, Lisa R. Powell, hereby certify in my capacity as an officer of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc. that to my knowledge:

- The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc. for the quarter ended November 30, 2005, 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc. for the quarter ended November 30, 2005, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc.		
			Date:  January 18, 2006                                            /s/ Lisa R. Powell                                                                                                                       Lisa R. Powell,  President, Secretary,			                                                                                Treasurer  and  Director (Principal			                                                                                Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)
From: Wilson, Erika

Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 3:19 PM To: arjun@ieer.org Cc: Bremer, Kristen; Risley, David; Hackel, Angela Subject: Web comment on the Clean Power Plan
Hello Thank you for your inquiry. In response to the question you submitted to the Clean Power Plan web site regarding differences in redispatched electricity: The difference you reference in your question is attributable to states with "under construction" NG CC or IGCC. As explained in Step 3b on page 12 of the Goal Computation TSD at http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014

- 06/documents/2014060 2tsd

- goal

- computation.pdf, "'under construction' is defined as anything that came online in 2013 or that was under construction, site prep, or testing by January 8, 2014. The EPA looked at reported data for 2012 and calculated the average performance of NG CCs that came online in the past 5 years and observed that 55% was the average capacity factor for these units. Therefore, the EPA assumed that a 55% capacity factor would be a reasonable representation for the expected generation of "under construction" N GCCs capacity under a business as usual scenario. The EPA conservatively designated the generation associated with this 55% capacity factor as unavailable for redispatch to reduce CO2 (i.e., not qualifying for building block 2), instead, reserving that amo unt of generation potential to meet other system needs presumed to have motivated the construction of the "under construction" NGCCs. Because these sources are nevertheless covered under the state emission rate goal, the emissions and generation from this 55% generation are added to the "other" category and averaged into the state goal calculation." Thank you for your interest in the Clean Power Plan.

Erika Wilson Clean Air Markets Division Office of Atmospheric Programs Office of Air and Radiation U.S. EPA 202.343.9113 wilson.erika@epa.gov Submitted on 08/22/2014 2:52PM Submitted values are: Name: Arjun Makhijani Email: arjun@ieer.org Comments: Question: For some states, such as Virginia and Wyoming, the redispatched total electricity is not the same as the 2012 total. But it is the same for most states. Please provide an explanation for the cases where the redispatched amount is diff erent from 2012. Thank you. Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards
Frankie DOBBS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 105549

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.

FILED: March 6, 2018 Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 10, 2018 Application for Transfer Denied May 22, 2018

Samuel Buffaloe, 1000 West Nifong, Bldg 7, Ste 100, Columbia, MO 65203, for appellant.

Joshua Hawley, Shaun J. Mackelprang, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.

Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Frankie Dobbs ("Dobbs") appeals from the motion court's denial of his Rule 24.035 motion seeking post-conviction relief. Dobbs pleaded guilty to a class C felony, pursuant to Section 570.030.3, for stealing a motor vehicle. On appeal, Dobbs argues that, pursuant to *State v. Bazell*, 497 S.W.3d 263 (Mo. banc 2016), his sentence should have been based on a class A misdemeanor, not a class C felony. Because *Bazell* does not apply retroactively to Dobbs's plea and sentencing, we affirm the motion court's judgment.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
Memorandum

To:   Docket EPA‐R09‐OAR‐2013‐0009, Proposed BART Rulemaking for Navajo Generating Station

From: Ann Lyons, EPA Region 9

Date: January 13, 2014

Fennemore Craig, P.C. submitted a comment letter on behalf of Peabody Energy Corporation, dated January 2,

2014, to EPA Region 9. On January 13, 2014, EPA staff viewed the comment letter and found that Figure 7

contained a “Confidential” stamp. On January 13, 2014, I contacted Mr. Philip Fargotstein of Fennemore Craig to

determine if the information in Figure 7 was considered confidential. Mr. Fargotstein indicated the information

was not confidential.