alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on Draft	Language	under									

E.O.	13563	and	12866	Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

Comments on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Proposed Rule, “Control of Air Pollution from 

Motor Vehicles: Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards,” RIN 2060-AQ86

As EPA granted the waiver for California’s program in December 2012, the costs and benefits for that 

program should be included in the baseline of the RIA analysis for Tier 3. California’s air pollutant 

standards have long been different than other parts of the country so it makes both analytic and policy 

sense to consider the incremental impacts, costs and benefits of the rule with and without the California 

program. It is requested that EPA breakdown and present these incremental impacts for the scenarios 

laid out in the matrix below. 

A clarifying question would be whether the seven other states that adopted California’s standard would 

also be included in the baseline for Tier 3. Presumably they should be included in the baseline if they 

adopted California’s program; however, would the seven other states be preempted by the federal 

program if Tier 3 goes into effect? 

Fuel Sulfur Only Fuel Sulfur and Vehicle Controls

Tier 3 (not counting CA) A B

Tier 3 (entire country) C D

A – This breakout will incorporate the impacts of the California program in the Tier 3 baseline so it 

separates the costs and benefits of the California program from the Tier 3 program. The costs and 

benefits of the Tier 3 program will be estimated for all states outside of California and just for the fuel 

sulfur portion of Tier 3, not the vehicle controls portion of Tier 3. 

B - This breakout will incorporate the impacts of the California program in the Tier 3 baseline so it 

separates the costs and benefits of the California program from the Tier 3 program. The costs and 

benefits of the Tier 3 program will be estimated for all states outside of California covering both the fuel 

sulfur and vehicle controls portions of Tier 3. 

C – This breakout will incorporate the impacts of the California program in the Tier 3 cost and benefit 

analysis, although would only apply to the fuel sulfur portion of Tier 3 and not the vehicle controls 

portion of the program. 

D - This breakout will incorporate the impacts of the California program in the Tier 3 cost and benefit 

analysis and is what the agency has provide to date.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 6
<CIK> 0000835663
<NAME> THE GLENMEDE FUND
<SERIES NUMBER> 6
[NAME] SMALL CAP EQUITY PORTFOLIO INSTITUTIONAL CLASS
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         12 MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR END>                    31-Oct-99
<PERIOD-END>                         31-Oct-99
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>                     262,920,946
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>                    282,597,473
<RECEIVABLES>                               2,421,592
<ASSETS-OTHER>                             11,425,527
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            296,444,592
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                    2,795,249
<OTHER-ITEMS LIABILITIES>                  11,836,885
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                        14,632,134
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>                   35,682,115
<SHARES-COMMON-CURRENT>                     1,896,077
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>                       2,078,876
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>                      63,737
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>                   (20,551,930)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                            0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>                   19,676,527
<NET-ASSETS>                               28,428,132
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                           6,537,099
<INTEREST-INCOME>                             267,097
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 37,034
<EXPENSES-NET>                              2,743,477
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>                     4,097,753
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>                  (21,112,207)
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>                  15,487,511
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>                      (1,526,943)
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>                     518,163
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                            0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                               0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>                       369,846
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>                   581,803
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                            33,935
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>                    (57,577,548)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>                             0
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>                     281,484
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                             0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>                          0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>                               0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                             2,743,477
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>                       30,377,403
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                           15.29
<PER-SHARE-NII>                                  0.23
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>                         (0.24)
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                             0.27
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>                        0.00
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                             0.00
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                              15.01
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                                  0.68%



</TABLE>
Dry Urea Cost

500 $ x 1 ton 100% urea x 1 1 ton 100% urea 2.0 tons 50% solution 2,00050% Solution Cost

ton 50% urea x 9.5 lb 50% solution = 1.19 $ lbs 50% solution 1 gal 50% solution gal of 50% solution
§ 5.1 Applicability, definitions, and requirement to consult. ( a ) This part applies to the filing and processing of an application for an: ( 1 ) Original license;
( 2 ) New license for an existing project subject to Sections 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act; or
( 3 ) Subsequent license.
( b ) *Definitions.* The definitions in § 4.30(b) of this chapter and § 16.2 of this chapter apply to this chapter.
( c ) *Who may file.* Any citizen, association of citizens, domestic corporation, municipality, or state may develop and file a license application under this part.
( d ) *Requirement to consult.* ( 1 ) Before it files any application for an original, new, or subsequent license under this part, a potential applicant must consult with the relevant Federal, state, and interstate resource agencies, including as appropriate the National Marine Fisheries Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, the National Park Service, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal agency administering any United States lands utilized or occupied by the project, the appropriate state fish and wildlife agencies, the appropriate state water resource management agencies, the certifying agency or Indian tribe under Section 401(a)(1) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act), 33 U.S.C. 1341(c)(1)), the agency that administers the Coastal Zone Management Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1451-1465, any Indian tribe that may be affected by the project, and members of the public. A potential license applicant must file a notification of intent to file a license application pursuant to § 5.5 and a pre-application document pursuant to the provisions of § 5.6.
( 2 ) The Director of the Office of Energy Projects will, upon request, provide a list of known appropriate Federal, state, and interstate resource agencies, Indian tribes, and local, regional, or national non-governmental organizations likely to be interested in any license application proceeding.
( e ) *Purpose.* The purpose of the integrated licensing process provided for in this part is to provide an efficient and timely licensing process that continues to ensure appropriate resource protections through better coordination of the Commission's processes with those of Federal and state agencies and Indian tribes that have authority to condition Commission licenses.
( f ) *Default process.* Each potential original, new, or subsequent license applicant must use the license application process provided for in this part unless the potential applicant applies for and receives authorization from the Commission under this part to use the licensing process provided for in: ( 1 ) 18 CFR part 4, Subparts D-H and, as applicable, part 16 (*i.e.,* traditional process), pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section; or
( 2 ) Section 4.34(i) of this chapter, *Alternative procedures.*
[Order 2002, 68 FR 51121, Aug. 25, 2003; 68 FR 61742, Oct. 30, 2003; 68 FR 69957, Dec. 16, 2003]
CLEVELAN D AIRPOR TSY*:TE M 

### CL E CLFVEIAN D HOPKIN S

tWTEI>NAT}ONA l AUtfOS T Jul y 30 , 201 0 

### B i/ ' I CLCVELAN D I V L LAKEFRON TA D BUHK E IftPOR T

Mr

. Denni s J

. DeVan y Chief , EA S & Domesti c Analysi s Offic e o f Aviatio nAnalysis , X-5 3 U.S

. Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E

. Washington , D.C

. 2059 0 Mr

. DeVany : Iwoul dlik et o expres s m y suppor t an dtha t o f th e City o f

Cleveland , Ohi o for

th e continuatio no f

Gulfstrea mInternationa l Airline s Essentia l Ai r Servic e fo r

Bradford , PA , DuBois , PA , Franklin , PAan dJamestown , N Yt o Clevelan dHopkin s Internationa l Airport

. Th e City o f

Clevelan ddesire s t o gro w ai r service s a t

Clevelan dHopkin s Internationa l Airpor t fo r Northeas t

Ohi o traveler s a s wel l a s offer additiona l convenien t

connection s t o traveler s wh o migh t

otherwis e suffe r

delay s a t

busie r competin g airports

. Bradford , DuBois , Frankli nan dJamestow ntraveler s shoul dcontinu e t o enjo y th e benefit s o f connectin g throug hth eContinenta l Airline' s CL Ehub , a neas y t o navigat e facility wit h asignifican t

variet y o f

connectin g marke t

destination s unlik e som e othe r airport s tha t ma y b esimilarl y freeo f congestio nbu t

no t offer nea r s o man y connectin g marke t destinations

. Lastly , thi s servic e als o offer s nonsto p flights t o resident s i nthes e communitie s seekin g critica l medica l car e provide db y Cleveland' s world-clas s hospitals

. Iappreciat eyou r

consideratio no f

ou r suppor t fo r th e continuatio no f

EA S servic e fro m Bradford , DuBois , Frankli nan dJamestow nt o CLE

. Sincerely ,

/^ick y D/»ml t Directo r o f Airport s

Clevelan d Hopkin s Internationa l Airpor t 530 0 Riversid e Driv e P.O

. Bo x8100 9 Cleveland , O H 44181-000 9 US A 1 21 6 26 5 600 0 Clevelan d Burk e Lakefron l Airpor t 150 1 Nort h Margina l Roa d Cleveland , O H 44114-375 9

US A 1 21 6 78 1 641 1 clevelandairport.co m
Exhibit






EXHIBIT 10.61


TERMS OF DEFERRED STOCK UNIT AWARD AGREEMENT WITH CERTAIN EXECUTIVE OFFICERS


The form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (the “Agreement”), filed as Exhibit 10.6 to the Registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008, contains blanks where the executive's name, target number of shares, grant date, vesting date, performance period, shortened performance period start date, and months in term provided under the Agreement vary for each executive.  


On January 20, 2016, performance share awards were granted providing certain executives the opportunity to earn common stock, the number of which is determined pursuant to, and subject to the attainment of, performance goals.  The performance share awards were granted with a term of 36 months and vest on January 20, 2019.  The performance period start date was January 1, 2016 thereby making the performance period January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2018.  The target number of shares for each executive awarded performance shares on January 20, 2016 is listed below.




	
		
	Executive Officer
	Target number of shares

	Joseph J. MarcAurele
	9,500

	David V. Devault
	4,500

	Edward O. Handy, III
	4,600

	James M. Hagerty
	3,100

	Mark K.W. Gim
	3,100

	Barbara J. Perino
	2,300

	Kristen L. DiSanto
	2,100

	Debra A. Gormley
	2,300

	Mary E. Noons
	2,200

	William K. Wray
	2,600
`[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 11, 2011)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 1977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-590]



[[Page 1975]]

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

Part VII





The President





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



Memorandum of January 6, 2011--Disestablishment of United States Joint 
Forces Command
 
 
                         Presidential Documents 
 
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / 
Presidential Documents  

 ___________________________________________________________________

 Title 3--
 The President

[[Page 1977]]

                Memorandum of January 6, 2011

                
Disestablishment of United States Joint Forces 
                Command

                Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense

                Pursuant to my authority as Commander in Chief and 
                under 10 U.S.C. 161, I hereby accept the 
                recommendations of the Secretary of Defense and 
                Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and approve the 
                disestablishment of United States Joint Forces Command, 
                effective on a date to be determined by the Secretary 
                of Defense. I direct this action be reflected in the 
                2010 Unified Command Plan.

                Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 161(b)(2) and 3 U.S.C. 301, you 
                are directed to notify the Congress on my behalf.

                You are authorized and directed to publish this 
                memorandum in the Federal Register.
                
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, January 6, 2011

[FR Doc. 2011-590
Filed 1-10-11; 11:15 am]
Billing code 5000-04-P`
### SUBCHAPTER II—SCENIC AREAS
#### Beale *v.*Thompson and Morris. *(a)*

*Deposition de bene esse.*

It is a fatal objection- to a deposition taken under the judiciary act of 1789 § 30, that it was opened out of court.

Error to the Circuit Court for the district of Columbia.

On the trial in the court below, the defendant, Beale, offered in evidence, the deposition of Tunis Craven, taken before the judge of the district court of the United States for the district of New Hampshire, under the 30th section of the judiciary act of September 24th, 1789 (1 U. S. Stat. 88), which, after prescribing the mode of taking ^'depositions, directs that “the depositions so taken shall be retained by such magistrate, until he L deliver the same, with his own hand, into the court for which they are taken ; or shall, together with a certificate of the reasons aforesaid of their being taken, and of the notice, if any, given to the adverse party, be, by him, the said magistrate, sealed up and directed to such court, and remain under his seal, until opened in court.”

*47The deposition was sealed up by the judge, but directed to the clerk of the court, and he, supposing it to be a letter respecting his official business, opened it out of court. The court below rejected the deposition ; which being stated in a bill of exceptions, the defendant, Beale, brought his writ of error.

The question respecting the informality of opening the deposition out of court, was not argued in this court, there being another objection to it, which the counsel deemed more important, viz., that the deponent was the maker of the note upon which the suit was brought against the defendant, Beale, as indorser ; the purport of the deposition being to show that Beale had not due notice of the non-payment of the note by the deponent.

*Law*and *Jones,*for the plaintiff in error: *Morsell,*for the defendants in error.

February 23d, 1814.

(a)

 February 18th, 1814. Absent, Washington and Johnson, Justices.

Story, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court, as follows : — The single point in this case is, whether the circuit court of the district of Columbia, erred in rejecting the deposition of Tunis Craven?

Independent of all other grounds, the court are of opinion, that the fact of the deposition’s not having been opened in court, is a fatal objection. The statute of 24th September 1789, ch. 20, § 80, is express on this head. The judgment of the circuit court must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.
### §1611. Criminal liability for willful and knowing violation

Whoever willfully and knowingly

(1) gives false or inaccurate information or fails to provide information which he is required to disclose under the provisions of this subchapter or any regulation issued thereunder,

(2) uses any chart or table authorized by the Bureau under section 1606 of this title in such a manner as to consistently understate the annual percentage rate determined under section 1606(a)(1)(A) of this title, or

(3) otherwise fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this subchapter,

shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

(Pub. L. 90–321, title I, §112, May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 151; Pub. L. 111–203, title X, §1100A(2), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2107.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2010—Par. (2). Pub. L. 111–203 substituted "Bureau" for "Board".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the designated transfer date, see section 1100H of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 552a of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
State of California 

AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

ERRATA 

STAFF REPORT: INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS 

PROPOSED REGULATION TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM 

HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES 

Public Hearing Date: December 11, 2008 

 Date of Initial Statement of Reasons: October 24, 2008 

 Errata Release Date: November 25, 2008 

PLEASE BE ADVISED that this errata corrects an error in an appendix to the Initial 

Statement of Reasons for the Proposed Regulation to Reduce Greenhouse Gas 

Emissions from Heavy-Duty Vehicles, dated October 24, 2008. This correction updates 

the material made available and posted to the Air Resources Board (ARB) rulemaking 

website on October 24, 2008. 

Change to Appendix E of Staff Report 

On page E-4 of Appendix E: Fleet Summaries, under the subheading of “Other devices 

have tried/tested in the past,” ARB has determined that the following statement is 

inaccurate and is therefore removing it from the Staff Report: 

• “Strakes on side of trailer – did not find fuel economy improvement (in fact, 

saw a 1% increase in fuel consumption with them)”

The balance of the Staff Report and appendices remains the same as released on 

October 24, 2008. 

The complete text of the notice and the Initial Statement of Reasons are available on 

the ARB Internet site for this rulemaking at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008/ghghdv08/ghghdv08.htm
2

Any questions regarding these corrections should be directed to Lori Andreoni, 

Manager, Board Administration & Regulatory Coordination Unit, at (916) 322-4011, or 

Trini Balcazar, Regulations Coordinator, at (916) 445-9564. 

For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document and other related material can be 

made available in Braille, large print, audiocassette, or computer disk. For assistance, 

please contact ARB's Reasonable Accommodations/Disability Coordinator at 

916-323-4916 by voice, or through the California Relay Services at 711, to place your 

request for disability services, or go to http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/ada/ada.htm. 

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

 /s/ 

James N. Goldstene 

Executive Officer 

Date: November 17, 2008
---

CERTIFICATION OF
  CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 
  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Christopher Smith, Chief Financial Officer of Image Innovations
  Holdings Inc. (the Company), hereby 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:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company,
        for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2003, and to which this certification
        is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Report) fully complies with
        the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
        Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Company.                                                                                                                                                                  

| | By:    | /s/ Christopher Smith  
| | ------ | -----------------------
| |        |                        
| | Name:  | CHRISTOPHER SMITH      
| |        |                        
| | Title: | CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
| |        |                        
| | Date:  | November 12, 2003      

---
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Luna Gold Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Marcel de Groot, 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:

(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 12th day of August, 2005.

 
/s/ Marcel de GrootMarcel de GrootChief Financial Officer
#### § 3c.1 Cross-reference to employee ethical conduct standards and financial disclosure regulations.

Employees of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) are subject to the executive branch-wide financial disclosure regulations at 5 CFR part 2634, the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch at 5 CFR part 2635, the Commission regulations at 5 CFR part 3401 which supplement the Standards of Ethical Conduct, and the executive branch-wide employee responsibilities and conduct regulation at 5 CFR part 735.