alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Su pport Documents for

Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) on

Premanufacture Notice (PMN)

P-09-628

EPA Docket EPA

- HQ

- OPPT -2011-0577

# Index

A-001 Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report for

PMN P-09-628

A-002 Initial Review Engineering Report for

PMN P-09-628

A-003 Initial Review Exposure Report for

PMN P-09-628

# A-001

Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report

for PMN P-09-628

# A-002

Initial Review Engineering Report

for PMN P-09-628Support - P-09-0628 Engineering.3.txt

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 09-0628

Post-Focus Draft Revision 3 12/6/2010

ENGINEER: Jon \ AH

PV (kg/yr):

Revision Notes / Assessment Overview:

SUBMITTER:

USE:

OTHER USES: None found.

MSDS: Yes Label: No

Gen Eqpt:

TLV/PEL:

none established

CRSS :

Chemical Name:

S-H20: Reacts g/L @

VP:

MW: Physical State and Misc CRSS Info:

Neat: Mfg: Proc/Form:

End Use:

Page 1Support - P-09-0628 Engineering.3.txt

Consumer Use: No

SAT (concerns) (09/25/2009):

Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info:

Migration to groundwater: Moderate to Rapid

PBT rating: P2B1T1 PMN: P1B1T1; Hyd Pdt P2B1T1

Health: 1-2 Dermal, Inhalation

Eco: 1 No releases to Water

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1A

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

P2 Claims:

Page 2Support - P-09-0628 Engineering.3.txt

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW:

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 09-0628

Use:

Number of Sites/ Location:

unknown sites

Days/yr:

Basis:

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

High End:

to:

from:

basis:

Page 3Support - P-09-0628 Engineering.3.txt

RELEASE TOTAL

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes:

Basis:

Inhalation:

Dermal:

Exposure to High End:

Number of workers (all sites) with dermal exposure:

Basis:

Page 4

# A-003

Initial Review Exposure Report

for PMN P-09-628
# C_2005330EN.01001401.xml

| 24.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 330/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 330/14

---

Removal from the register of Case C-156/05 (1)

1

(2005/C 330/36)

Language of the case: Greek

Language of the case: Greek

By order of 26 September 2005, the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-156/05: Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic.

---

(1)  OJ C 132, 28.5.2005.

1

---
### R eg ul a t ory Eva lu a ti o n DocketNo. FAA

- lo
l 5 

# -0). {-'1

1 

## 5 , f\t 

## ·Of Directorate

I dentifier

: -AD 

## If you mak e c hang es to the valu es in th e tabl e b e low
. yo u mu s t e mur e th e t o tal s updat e a cc ordin g l y. 

## If they do not , click
( o r Tab ) into and then out of the c han ge d cell. Es tim a ted Cos t s: Action Costs

per Pr o du c t (e.g., aircraft

, engine

, (e.g.

, Inspection

, propeller

, app
l iance) Work-hour

s Labor Parts Co s t Total Costs Number of Total C o s t replacement

)

( include
co s t (labor + 

## u.s. for U
. S. Fleet D o not includ eonc ondition cost s here

access, testin g,

( @ $85/h parts)

R eg i s t e r e d and close-up) our)

Pr o du c t s 

### MCD Inspection

1


### $0

67 Line 6 Gear
8.0 $12,480



### 36 Replacement Line 7 Gear
8.0 $7,680



## 40 Replacement

The known number of products in compliance: Total Cos ts of c o mpliance

f o r 

### U .S. fle e t: 5>81 3, 8 5 5 Co s t s cov ered und e r warrant) 

### (if 

### /mown)

$ 

## - O n -Co n ditio n Costs: 

## @ Acti o n
W

o rk-h o ur s Labo r c os t

P a rt s Cos t Cost pe r P roduc

t (e
. g .. In s p ec ti o n ,

(

includ e access

. (fai$ 8 5/ h o ur ) re plac e m e nt )

t es tin g, and c l ose - up )

I



## 8S p ec i a l co n s id e r a ti o n s for Eco n o mi c Anal ys i s (Use this .field to explain anything in the Estimated Cos t s table that was assumed or might not be obl'ious. This field can also be used to e.x:plain warranty costs): Ex ec utiv e Order 12866: Could the AD be considered

a ·· s ig n ificant regulatory action "? 

# 0 YES*0 **NO~** *Exp

l anat
i on: DOT Regulatory Policies and Proc e dure s: I s t he AD significant?
YES*0 **NO~** *Exp

l anation: R eg ulat o ry Fl ex ibili ty A ct : Will the AD have a s ignificant economic impa ct o n a substantial number of s mall entities? Explain for e i t h er a Ye s or No answe
r . 

# G
YESO **NO~** Explanatio

n : Intra
s tate Aviation in Ala s ka: Th i s AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

l s it appr op riate to include

s pecific requirement

s for aircraft
o perated in Alaska where aviation mi g ht be the only m o de o f tran s p o rtation
? 

# 0 Y ES* 

## D **NO~** *Explanation:

9
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 169 (Wednesday, September 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 45487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21304]


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

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

    Name of Agency: Postal Regulatory Commission.
    Time and Date: Monday, September 14, 2009, at 3 p.m.
    Place: Commission conference room, 901 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 
200, Washington, DC 20268-0001.
    Status: Open.
    Matters To Be Considered: 1. Consideration and adoption of FY 2011 
budget. (2) Election of vice-chairman.
    Contact Person for More Information: Stephen L. Sharfman, General 
Counsel, Postal Regulatory Commission, 901 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 
200, Washington, DC 20268-0001, 202-789-6820 and 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#87f4f3e2f7efe2e9a9f4efe6f5e1eae6e9c7f7f5e4a9e0e8f1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="abd8dfcedbc3cec585d8c3cad9cdc6cac5ebdbd9c885ccc4dd">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: August 31, 2009.
Judith M. Grady,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-21304 Filed 8-31-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Conclusion of the Twelfth Round of the Columbia River Treaty Negotiations

# 									Conclusion of the Twelfth Round of the Columbia River Treaty Negotiations							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

January 11, 2022

The United States and Canada concluded the twelfth round of negotiations to modernize the Columbia River Treaty regime on January 10.  During this round, the United States and Canada discussed post-2024 flood risk management, Canada’s desire for more operational flexibility, and mechanisms for achieving ecosystem objectives.

The U.S. Department of State leads a negotiating team consisting of representatives from the Bonneville Power Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division, the U.S. Department of the Interior, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.  The U.S. delegation also included the U.S. Department of Energy and expert-advisors from the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation.

The United States aims to modernize the Treaty regime to reflect enduring values, especially relating to ecosystem priorities and our commitments to the basin’s people, including to support a healthy and prosperous Columbia River basin.

For more information on the Treaty, please visit: www.state.gov/columbia-river-treaty or send an email to ColumbiaRiverTreaty@state.gov.

Tags

Bureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsCanadaOffice of the SpokespersonTreatiesWater

Back to Top
###### Editorial Note on Subpart R of Part 405

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subpart R of part 405 appear at 79 FR 55031, Aug. 22, 2014.

#### § 405.1825 Witnesses at contractor hearing.

The hearing officer(s) may examine the witnesses and shall allow the parties and their representatives to do so. Parties to the proceedings may also cross-examine witnesses.
HomeSaint Lucia

# Saint Lucia

59 items

        -    		Caribbean Basin Security Initiative: St. Lucia	   
        -    		Caribbean Basin Security Initiative	   
        -    Report  		Saint Lucia	  July 19, 2018 
        -    Report  		St. Lucia	  June 28, 2018 
        -    Report  		Saint Lucia	  May 29, 2018 
        -    Report  		Saint Lucia	  April 20, 2018 
        -    Report  		Saint Lucia	  August 15, 2017 
        -    Report  		Saint Lucia	  June 29, 2017 
        -    Report  		St. Lucia	  June 27, 2017 
        -    Report  		Saint Lucia	  March 3, 2017 

previous page1…3456next page

Back to Top
# RECEIVE D MA R 

### 2 2 201 0 U.S . DEPARTMEN

T O FTRANSPORTATAION OFFIC E O FHEARING S FEDERA L AVIATION ADMINISTRATIO N HFARi^l G '^^-'iCKF T FEDERA L AVIATION ADMINISTRATION , Complainant , V . CLOU D DANCE

RAVIATIO

N ANI > FLYIN G CLUB , INC . Respondent . FA A Docke t No : Judg e • - a —r l

• •;— t —i- o

C ? JUDGE NO T YE

T ASSIGNE

D REQUES T T O PRODUC E T O COMPLAINAN T FA A Respondent , CLOUD DANCE RAVIATION AN

D FLYIN GCLUB , INC. , b y an dthroug h undersigne dcounsel , hereb y request s Complainan t FA A t o produc e document s o n th e attache dlis t withi n thirt y (30 ) days . Certificat e of Servic e I HEREB Y CERTIF

Y tha t th e foregoin g wa s submitte dvi amai l o n thi s 1 5 da y o f Marc h201 0 t o Andre aMichell e Harper , Esq. , Cffice o f Regional Counsel , ASO'7 , Southern Region , P.O . Bo x 20636 , Atlanta , G

A 30320 . Respectfully submitted , Denni s R . Haber , P

A 892 5 SW14 8 Street , Suit e 20 0 Miami , Fl 3317 6 Phone : 305-256' ; Fax : 305'256'3004 /

Denni s R . ffatter , Esq . FBN : 660817 1DOCUMENT S T O B E PRODUCE D

Complete cop y o f

th e file relate dt o th e allegation s an dincident s asse t fort h i n th e complaint , includin g bu t

no t limite dto , al l letter s sen t t o th e Respondent , notations , interna l memorandu m o f th e Administrato r

relatin g t o th e subjec t

investigation , telephon e lo g o f al l phon e call s mad e an dwith al l person s with who mth e Responden t and/o r representative s o f

th e Administrato r wh o migh t

hav e spoken .

2 . A cop y o f

th e initia l inspectin g representative' s work histor y an dpersonne l file , includin g but not limite dto , an y complaint s registere dagains t th e inspecto r

and/o r medica l condition s affectin g th e inspector' s ability t o performhi s ordinary an ddail y duties .
693 A.2d 580

#### In the Matter of Frederick C. CREASY, Jr.

No. 294 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Feb. 28, 1997.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 1997, Frederick C. Creasy, Jr., having been disbarred from the practice of law in *30the State of Arizona by Order of the Supreme Court of Arizona dated September 19, 1996; the said Frederick C. Creasy, Jr., having been directed on January 3, 1997, to inform this Court of any claim he has that the imposition of the identical or comparable discipline in this Commonwealth would be unwarranted and the reasons therefor; and no response having been filed, it is

ORDERED that Frederick C. Creasy, Jr., is disbarred from the practice of law in this Commonwealth, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

###### Editorial Note on Part 363

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 363 appear at 70 FR 57433, Sept. 30, 2005, 70 FR 57442, Sept. 30, 2005, and 75 FR 70815, Nov. 19, 2010.

#### § 363.140 May a zero-percent certificate of indebtedness be pledged or used as collateral?

A zero-percent certificate of indebtedness may not be pledged or used as collateral for the performance of an obligation.

[69 FR 50309, Aug. 16, 2004. Redesignated at 70 FR 57437, Sept. 30, 2005, and further redesignated at 75 FR 70816, Nov. 19, 2010]
#### § 137.147 Do those portions of the compact, funding agreement, or amendment not in dispute go into effect?

Yes, subject to section 507(c)(1)(D) of the Act [25 U.S.C. 458aaa-6(c)(1)(D)].
From: Angus Crane < acrane@naima.org >

To: Susan Fairchild/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Steve

Fruh/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "Granta Nakayama ( granta.nakayama@kirkland.com )" < granta.nakayama@kirkland.com >

Date: 06/06/2012 12:43 PM

Subject: NAIMA Letter Regarding Voluntary Policing of Chrome Emiss ions at "Area Sources" and Formaldehyde, Phenol, and Methanol

Limits

Dear Ms. Fairchild:

Please find attached a letter in response to EPA’s request for an industry proposal on policing chrome emissions at

“area sources.” This letter will be the basis of the telephone conference call scheduled for Thursday, June 7, 2012

at 10:30 AM (Eastern).

Sincerely,

Angus E. Crane

Executive Vice President, General Counsel

North American Insulation Manufacturers Association

Ph: (703) 684

- 0084 ext. 123

Fax: (703) 684

- 0427

Visit NAIMA online at:

www.NAIMA.org

www.PipeInsulation.org



### (See attached file: RR3317.pdf)
----

|   | 1. | Confidential information with respect to the bank or its customers acquired in the course of duty is to be used only for bank purposes. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Your conduct reflects on the bank’s reputation, image and level of public confidence. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3. | Information derived from the bank is not to be used for personal gain. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 4. | If you have a conflict of interest in a given situation, you should not participate in the decision and abstain from any board actions or votes. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 5. | You are required to administer the affairs of the bank with personal honesty and integrity.  You are prohibited from advancing your own personal or business interests, or those of others, at the expense of the bank. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 6. | The duty of care requires directors to act as prudent and diligent businesspersons in conducting the affairs of the bank. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 7. | Directors shall attend at least 75% of the board meetings and should attend, as much as possible, all meetings of the committees to which they are assigned. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 8. | Any director who cannot give the bank the time and effort required to fulfill his/her duties and responsibilities should re-evaluate continued participation as a director. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 9. | Any director who does not fulfill his/her obligation to the bank may be replaced by a vote of the stockholders of United Bank, i.e. the Board of Directors of United Bancorporation of Alabama, Inc. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
§ 3.534 The hearing. ( a ) The ALJ must conduct a hearing on the record in order to determine whether the respondent should be found liable under this part.
( b ) ( 1 ) The respondent has the burden of going forward and the burden of persuasion with respect to any challenge to the amount of a proposed penalty pursuant to §§ 3.404 and 3.408, including any factors raised as mitigating factors.
( 2 ) The Secretary has the burden of going forward and the burden of persuasion with respect to all other issues, including issues of liability and the existence of any factors considered as aggravating factors in determining the amount of the proposed penalty.
( 3 ) The burden of persuasion will be judged by a preponderance of the evidence.
( c ) The hearing must be open to the public unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ for good cause shown, which may be that identifiable patient safety work product has been introduced into evidence or is expected to be introduced into evidence.
( d ) ( 1 ) Subject to the 15-day rule under § 3.518(a) and the admissibility of evidence under § 3.540, either party may introduce, during its case in chief, items or information that arose or became known after the date of the issuance of the notice of proposed determination or the request for hearing, as applicable. Such items and information may not be admitted into evidence, if introduced— ( i ) By the Secretary, unless they are material and relevant to the acts or omissions with respect to which the penalty is proposed in the notice of proposed determination pursuant to § 3.420 of this part, including circumstances that may increase penalties; or
( ii ) By the respondent, unless they are material and relevant to an admission, denial or explanation of a finding of fact in the notice of proposed determination under § 3.420 of this part, or to a specific circumstance or argument expressly stated in the request for hearing under § 3.504, including circumstances that may reduce penalties.
( 2 ) After both parties have presented their cases, evidence may be admitted in rebuttal even if not previously exchanged in accordance with § 3.518.
§ 31.8 Retired personnel; extent of treatment. ( a ) A retired member of the Coast Guard, National Ocean Survey, or Public Health Service specified in § 31.2 shall be entitled to medical, surgical, and dental treatment and hospitalization at medical relief stations of the first-, second-, and third-class, upon presentation of satisfactory evidence of his status.
( b ) Elective medical or surgical treatment requiring hospitalization shall be furnished only at hospitals operated by the Service.
( c ) Dental treatment shall be furnished to the extent of available facilities only at medical relief stations where full-time dental officers are on duty; at other medical relief stations the dental treatment shall be limited to emergency measures necessary to relieve pain.
(Sec. 326, 58 Stat. 697, as amended; 42 U.S.C. 253)
§ 548.205 Expenses of maintaining blocked tangible property; liquidation of blocked property. ( a ) Except as otherwise authorized, and notwithstanding the existence of any rights or obligations conferred or imposed by any international agreement or contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date, all expenses incident to the maintenance of tangible property blocked pursuant to § 548.201 shall be the responsibility of the owners or operators of such property, which expenses shall not be met from blocked funds.
( b ) Property blocked pursuant to § 548.201 may, in the discretion of OFAC, be sold or liquidated and the net proceeds placed in a blocked interest-bearing account in the name of the owner of the property.
#### § 137.169 How much time does the Federal Government have to make a claim against a Self-Governance Tribe relating to any disallowance of costs, based on an audit conducted under § 137.165?

Any right of action or other remedy (other than those relating to a criminal offense) relating to any disallowance of costs is barred unless the Secretary provides notice of such a disallowance within 365 days from receiving any required annual agency single audit report or, for any period covered by law or regulation in force prior to enactment of the Single Agency Audit Act of 1984, any other required final audit report.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Williams CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.

No. *00-30203.*

D.C. No. CR-99-00401-AJB.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 12, 2001.1

Decided Feb. 22, 2001.

Before LEAVY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

1

. The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM2

James Williams Clark, currently serving a 197-month prison term, appeals a special condition of supervised release imposed following his conviction by guilty plea to one count of unarmed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) and affirm.

Clark contends that the district court erred by imposing as a special condition of supervised release the requirement that he take appropriate medication for the treatment of mental or emotional disorder, if a current mental health evaluation recommends that he do so, taking into consideration any history of negative side effects previously experienced with the prescribed medication. To the extent Clark’s contention is not waived because he did not specifically object in the district court, *United States v. Robertson, 52*F.3d 789, 791 (9th Cir.1995), we review for abuse of discretion, *United States v. Pinjuv,*218 F.3d 1125, 1129 (9th Cir.), *cert. denied,*531 U.S. *4771025, 121 S.Ct. 597, 148 L.Ed.2d 511 (2000).

Based on the record in this case, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the special condition is reasonably related to the statutory factors, and does not involve an excessive deprivation of liberty. *See*18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a), 3563(b), and 3583(d); *Pinjuv,*218 F.3d at 1132.

AFFIRMED.

2

. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
R-r.r I, . ,-o ,t..,c '1':.1 

OPPT CBIC 

2012 AUG -3 AM 9: 50 

AUG 14 2012 

July 31, 2012 

Director, Chemical Control Division 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

EPA East 

Room4146 

1201 Constitution Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

Re: EPA- HQ - OPPT - 2003 - 0012 

0 

DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts 

Chambers Works 

Deepwater, NJ 08023 

DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100 

PFOA Data Submittal- Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples 

April/May/June 2012 Sample Data 

Dear Chemical Control Division: 

Attached please find a summary of PFOA analytical results for the DuPont Chambers Works 

weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A for April, May, and June 2012. In 

accordance with the current site NJPDES permit (NJ00051 00, effective September 2011 ), these 

results are provided to NJDEP on a monthly basis via electronic discharge monitoring reports. 

Per your request, the enclosures include two paper and two electronic copies of the analytical 

results from this monitoring period. 

Sincerely, 

Jacques Monteux 

Unit Manager-Site Manufacturing Systems 

DuPont Chambers Works 

JM/clc 

Enclosures 

CONTAINS NO CBI 
Copy to: 

I Document Control Office 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

EPA East 

Room6428 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Ms. Susan Rosenwinkel (cover letter only) 

Principal Environmental Engineer 

NJDEP Division of Water Quality 

Bureau of Point Source Permitting -Region 2 

401 E. State Street 

P.O. Box029 

Trenton, NJ 08625-0029 

CONTAINS NO CE'