alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EPA Testimony on New Carbon Pollution Standard 

When we look around our nation and the world today, it is easy to see why we need a carbon pollution 

standard: because this standard will not only clean up carbon pollution, it will also clean up the 

industries that emit other toxic substances into the air. These include dirty soot, mercury, and smog 

from coal-fired power plants that induce a wide range of ailments, especially asthma. As someone who 

has a history of asthma, I am very interested in seeing higher standards for clean air, including carbon 

pollution limits. An estimated 680,000 people in the Baltimore/Washington and Northern Virginia areas 

suffer from asthma. With the population of this area at about 7.46 million, that puts the asthma rate at 

9%. I just read an article published last week on Medical Daily's web site that asthma rates rose by 15 

percent from 2001 to 2010. In 2007 alone, asthma cost the American economy $56 billion. People had 

to take over 14 million days off of work and 10.5 million days missed from school due to asthma in 2008 

alone, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2009, there were 

3,400 deaths due to asthma. U.S. hospitals had to handle almost 480,000 cases of asthma. Pollutants 

that accompany the extra carbon emitted into the air also cause cardiovascular disease in the elderly 

and neurological ailments. 

We must also limit this carbon pollution to curb global warming. Last summer, Texas experienced a 

historic drought and heat wave that spawned an unprecedented wildfire season. Ten people lost their 

lives to these heat-induced wildfires and 2,900 homes were destroyed. Closer to home, we have had 

more 100 degree temperatures the last two years than we have had during the previous 20 years 

combined. We just had probably the first winter ever where there were no daytime highs below the 

freezing point of 32 degrees F. This is irrefutable evidence of global warming. 

Public polls consistently show that Americans do not trust industrial polluters police themselves or 

industrial claims that tougher environmental regulations will cost jobs. I personally think that these 

safeguards benefit the economy as companies make new investments in equipment, which will spur the 

growth of hundreds, if not thousands of small businesses. All of this makes it necessary for the EPA to 

step in with this standard to limit all new power plants to 1,000 pounds of carbon pollution per 

megawatt hour. 

Contact Info: 

Doug Aus 

302 East Joppa Road #1309 

Towson, MD 21286 

Dougaus2@Gmaii.Com
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4459 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4459

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the Secretary of 
   the Treasury to issue identity protection personal identification 
       numbers with respect to identity theft-related tax fraud.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 2016

 Mrs. Wagner introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the Secretary of 
   the Treasury to issue identity protection personal identification 
       numbers with respect to identity theft-related tax fraud.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Taxpayer Identity Theft Protection 
Act''.

SEC. 2. IDENTITY PROTECTION PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS.

    (a) In General.--Section 6109 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(i) Use of IP PINs.--
            ``(1) In general.--At the request of any individual, the 
        Secretary shall, after the individual's true identity has been 
        established and verified, issue an identity protection personal 
        identification number to such individual, and such number shall 
        be used as the identifying number for such individual for 
        purposes of this title.
            ``(2) Identity protection personal identification number 
        defined.--For purposes of paragraph (1), an identity protection 
        personal identification number is a number assigned by the 
        Secretary to a taxpayer to help prevent the misuse of the 
        social security account number of the taxpayer on fraudulent 
        Federal income tax returns.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 6109(d) of such Code is amended 
by inserting ``provided by subsection (i) or as'' after ``except as''.
    (c) Publicity of IP PIN Availability.--The Secretary of the 
Treasury, or the Secretary's delegate, shall publicize the availability 
of the use of identity protection personal identification numbers 
pursuant to section 6109(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
including through electronic means.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to requests made after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Wayne M. Rancourt, 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 accompanying Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and


2.     the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Boise Cascade Company at the dates and for the periods indicated in the Report.


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Boise Cascade Company and will be retained by Boise Cascade Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.





/s/ WAYNE M. RANCOURT


Wayne M. Rancourt


Chief Financial Officer


Apr il 30, 2013





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
### §7653. Annual reports on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of the HIV infection

#### (a) In general

Not later than 1 year after May 27, 2003, and annually thereafter for a period of 10 years, the President shall submit to appropriate congressional committees a report on the activities of relevant executive branch agencies during the reporting period to assist in the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of the HIV infection.

#### (b) Report elements

Each report shall include—

(1) a statement of whether or not all relevant executive branch agencies have met the goal described in section 7652(b)(1) of this title; and

(2) a description of efforts made by the relevant executive branch agencies to expand those activities, including—

(A) information on the number of sites supported for the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of the HIV infection;

(B) the specific activities supported;

(C) the number of women tested and counseled; and

(D) the number of women receiving preventative drug therapies.

#### (c) Reporting period defined

In this section, the term "reporting period" means, in the case of the initial report, the period since May 27, 2003, and, in the case of any subsequent report, the period since the date of submission of the most recent report.

(Pub. L. 108–25, title III, §313, May 27, 2003, 117 Stat. 741; Pub. L. 110–293, title III, §308, July 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 2964.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–293 substituted "10 years" for "5 years".

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Delegation of Functions

For delegation of functions of President under this section, see Ex. Ord. No. 12163, Sept. 29, 1979, 44 F.R. 56673, as amended, set out as a note under section 2381 of this title, and Memorandum of President of Feb. 23, 2004, 69 F.R. 9509, set out as a note under section 7611 of this title.
CENTRAL VALLEY OPERATIONS OFFICE

STEELHEAD REPORT

December 2015

Note: Shaded area not verified with CDFW data

Steelhead Estimated Salvage Steelhead Estimated Loss (Incidental Take) Pumping

Daily SWP Daily CVP Daily Combined Season Combined Daily SWP Daily CVP Daily Combined Season Combined Daily Total Daily Total

Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag In CFS In Acre Feet

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated

Salvage Salvage Salvage Salvage Salvage Salvage Salvage Salvage Loss (4.33) Loss (4.33) Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss

1-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 138 796 933 273 1,578 1,851

2-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184 401 584 364 795 1,159

3-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 402 590 373 797 1,170

4-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 565 404 968 1,120 801 1,921

5-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 401 589 373 796 1,169

6-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 405 593 373 803 1,176

7-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 405 593 373 803 1,176

8-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184 404 587 364 801 1,165

9-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 396 584 373 786 1,159

10-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184 406 589 364 805 1,169

11-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 190 406 596 376 806 1,182

12-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 408 596 373 809 1,182

13-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 407 595 373 808 1,181

14-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 459 647 373 911 1,284

15-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 419 613 383 832 1,215

16-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 436 624 373 864 1,237

17-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184 792 976 364 1,571 1,935

18-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 321 806 1,127 637 1,599 2,236

19-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 505 797 1,302 1,001 1,581 2,582

20-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 649 797 1,446 1,288 1,580 2,868

21-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 455 798 1,253 903 1,583 2,486

22-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,645 1,365 3,010 3,263 2,708 5,971

23-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,987 1,615 4,602 5,925 3,203 9,128

24-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,862 1,644 5,506 7,661 3,260 10,921

25-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,187 2,590 5,778 6,322 5,138 11,460

26-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,936 2,605 5,541 5,823 5,168 10,991

27-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,854 2,690 6,544 7,645 5,335 12,980

28-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,923 2,751 6,675 7,782 5,457 13,239

29-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,944 2,743 6,687 7,823 5,440 13,263

30-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,780 2,742 6,522 7,497 5,439 12,936

31-Dec-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,007 2,731 5,737 5,964 5,416 11,380

Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,568 34,420 72,988 76,499 68,273 144,772

DATE

Banks Tracy Combined Banks Tracy Combined
§ 10005.20 Project evaluation procedures. Projects proposed for inclusion in the plan will be subjected to a systematic evaluation using the decision factors delineated in § 10005.19. The Commission may, at any time in the project evaluation process, contact applicants to ask for clarification, to propose modifications, or to otherwise cause the formulation of project proposals that are in keeping with the Commission's authority and mission. The result of the evaluation will be a preliminary list of eligible projects, arrayed by year over the term of the plan. The evaluation will adhere to the following process: ( a ) Each project will be arrayed according to location (by watershed), project type, and the resource that the project seeks to address.
( b ) Each project's consistency with Commission policy delineated in § 10005.12 will be determined.
( c ) Complementary, competing, and duplicative projects will be identified. (If warranted, applicants may be asked to combine efforts or otherwise modify projects.)
( d ) Projects that satisfy obligations described in § 10005.8 will be identified.
( e ) Using best professional judgement, Commission staff will evaluate each project according to the standards delineated in § 10005.19 with the exception of Decision Factor 6, which relates to the Commission's overall portfolio and is, therefore, not applicable to the evaluation of a specific project. ( 1 ) For each standard, a preliminary rating will be made, with the project rated as: ( i ) Exceeding minimum standard,
( ii ) Meeting minimum standard,
( iii ) Minor deficiency in meeting standard,
( iv ) Deficient, or
( v ) Not applicable.
( 2 ) Commission ratings will be contrasted to those of applicants and major discrepancies re-evaluated. Commission findings will be recorded and will be available for review.
( f ) Each project will be given an overall rating based on the extent to which it meets Commission criteria as defined in paragraphs (b) through (e) of this section. The rating will be made on the basis of best professional judgement using quantitative and/or qualitative rating techniques as appropriate. A given project need not meet all standards to be selected for inclusion in the Commission's plan. A project may, for example, be deficient in an area that the Commission determines is not important for that type of project or, alternatively, deficiencies in some areas may be off-set by major assets in others. A tiered rating scale will be used, with projects grouped into two or more categories according to how well they meet Commission criteria.
( g ) Projects with moderate to high ratings will then be re-evaluated from a multiple project perspective. Decision Factor 6, Compatibility with the Commission's Overall Program, will be the focus of this evaluation. For those areas with a concentration of projects this might involve a watershed-wide analysis. It will also involve a state-wide analysis. As with the previous step, the evaluation will be conducted using best professional judgement and may involve a variety of applicable techniques.
### §1124. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 92–309, §3, June 2, 1972, 86 Stat. 200, which related to revision of roll prepared pursuant to former section 1114 of this title, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
#### Catherine E. Hunt, Respondent, v. F. J. Boutell Driveway Co., Inc., et al., Appellants.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Taylor, P. J., McCum, Love, Vaughan and Kimhall, JJ.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsThe Development of the CONDUIT Advanced Control System Design and Evaluation Interface with a Case Study Application to an Advanced Fly by Wire Helicopter DesignThis report details the development and use of CONDUIT (Control Designer's Unified Interface). CONDUIT is a design tool created at Ames Research Center for the purpose of evaluating and optimizing aircraft control systems against handling qualities. Three detailed design problems addressing the RASCAL UH-60A Black Hawk are included in this report to show the application of CONDUIT to helicopter control system design.Document ID19990051006Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsColbourne, Jason*(California Polytechnic State Univ. San Luis Obispo, CA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1999Subject CategoryAircraft Stability And ControlReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-1999-208763A-99V-001AFDD/TR-99-A-005NAS 1.15:208763Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NCC2-983PROJECT: RTOP 581-30-22Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19990051006.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Exhibit 31.4


CERTIFICATIONS


I, Stebbins B. Chandor Jr., certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amended Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of NTELOS HOLDINGS CORP.;


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;


Date: April 30, 2015





By:/s/ Stebbins B. Chandor Jr.Stebbins B. Chandor Jr.Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary
## Adams. Kevin (OST) From: 

### Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hi All, Adams, Kevin (OSn Monday, November 18, 2013 8:23AM Aberdeen, City Attorney, Adam Altman; Aberdeen, City Manager, Lynn Lander; Aberdeen, Julie Johnson; Aberdeen, Mayor, Mike Levsen;Aberdeen, Mike Wilson, Airport Manager SkyWest, Brad Rawson; Schlemmer, Kevin (OST) . Request for Comments re EssentialAir Service atAberdeen, SD ABR_ Octobe0013 _EAS_Bid.pdf
Attached above isacopy of the one timely-filed proposal for Essential Air Service lEAS) at Aberdeen, submitted by 

# AkvWest, in response to Order 2013-10-2. We are currently reviewing that proposal. The attached proposal isdirectly from the carrier and will soon be reflected in the Docket, which you may accessthrough Regulations.gov at DOT-OST2011-0137, along with other pertinent information on this proceeding. The next step in the carrier-selection process isfor you to provide uswith your community's comments, acritically important element in our carrier-selection decision, especially the comments of civic officials. Accordingly, Iaskthat everyone get back to us, preferably by email, no later than December 17, 2013. We will docket this email, aswell asany replies. In brief, look at the proposal, and ifyou have any questions, call me, and get backto us bythe deadline, December 17, 2013. Best, Kevin Adams 202-366-1047 

### '-. 

# r-~~E~)

-- •• _~'> 

### (~~~~~

'" ,)

1
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 83 (Monday, April 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 25480]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10345]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Corporation To Do Business Under the Federal Reserve Act

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to Section 25A of the Federal Reserve Act (Edge 
Corporation) 12 U.S.C. Sec. 611 et seq., and all other applicable 
statutes and regulations to establish an Edge Corporation. The Edge 
Corporation will operate as a subsidiary of the applicant, Lake Forest 
Bank and Trust Company, Lake Forest, Illinois. The factors that are to 
be considered in acting on the application are set forth in the Board's 
Regulation K (12 CFR 211.4).
    The applications below, as well as other related filings required 
by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The applications also will be available for 
inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in 
Section 25 of the Federal Reserve Act.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications may be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than May 15, 2012.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant 
Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Lake Forest Bank and Trust Company, Lake Forest, Illinois; to 
establish FIFC Edge International Corp., Lake Forest, Illinois, as an 
Edge Corporation.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 25, 
2012.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2012-10345 Filed 4-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
#### In the Matter of the Probate of a Paper Writing Purporting to Be the Last Will and Testament of Julia Lorillard Butterfield, Deceased.

Motion for stay pending determination of appeal in the Court of Appeals granted. Decision reserved on the motion for a certificate pending the determination of the present appeal in the Court of Appeals. Present—Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ.; Jenks, P. J., taking no part.