alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 325 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 325

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To amend the Clean Air Act to provide for an optional provision for 
  the reduction of work-related vehicle trips and miles travelled in 
ozone nonattainment areas designated as severe, and for other purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 325

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend the Clean Air Act to provide for an optional provision for 
  the reduction of work-related vehicle trips and miles travelled in 
ozone nonattainment areas designated as severe, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. OPTIONAL EMPLOYER MANDATED TRIP REDUCTION.

    Section 182(d)(1)(B) of the Clean Air Act is amended to read as 
follows:
            ``(B) The State may also, in its discretion, submit a 
        revision at any time requiring employers in such area to 
        implement programs to reduce work-related vehicle trips and 
        miles travelled by employees. Such revision shall be developed 
        in accordance with guidance issued by the Administrator 
        pursuant to section 108(f) and may require that employers in 
        such area increase average passenger occupancy per vehicle in 
        commuting trips between home and the workplace during peak 
        travel periods. The guidance of the Administrator may specify 
        average vehicle occupancy rates which vary for locations within 
        a nonattainment area (suburban, center city, business district) 
        or among nonattainment areas reflecting existing occupancy 
        rates and the availability of high occupancy modes. Any State 
        required to submit a revision under this subparagraph (as in 
        effect before the date of enactment of this sentence) 
        containing provisions requiring employers to reduce work-
        related vehicle trips and miles travelled by employees may, in 
        accordance with State law, remove such provisions from the 
        implementation plan, or withdraw its submission, if the State 
        notifies the Administrator, in writing, that the State has 
        undertaken, or will undertake, one or more alternative methods 
        that will achieve emission reductions equivalent to those to be 
        achieved by the removed or withdrawn provisions.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 12, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
HomeStart Here – Steps to a Medical Clearance...Fellows – Medical Clearances

# 									Fellows – Medical Clearances							

We’ve restructured our guidance, check out our updated Start Here – Steps to a Medical Clearance page for the latest information.

Tags

Bureau of Medical ServicesHealth InformationUnder Secretary for Management

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                              45
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,305
<ALLOWANCES>                                       706
<INVENTORY>                                      3,139
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                55,354
<PP&E>                                         304,873
<DEPRECIATION>                                 111,516
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 273,414
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           59,539
<BONDS>                                        167,999
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            63
<OTHER-SE>                                      36,421
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   273,414
<SALES>                                        217,390
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               217,390
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  208,504
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,280
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,394)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,324)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,070)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,070)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.39)<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Fully diluted EPS calculation is anti-dilutive.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
§ 412.320 Disproportionate share adjustment factor. ( a ) *Criteria for classification.* A hospital is classified as a “disproportionate share hospital” for the purposes of capital prospective payments if either of the following conditions is met: ( 1 ) The hospital is located in an urban area, has 100 or more beds as determined in accordance with § 412.105(b), and serves low-income patients as determined under § 412.106(b). ( i ) For discharges occurring on or before September 30, 2004, the payment adjustment under this section is based on a hospital's location, for the purpose of receiving payment, under § 412.63(a).
( ii ) For discharges occurring on or after October 1, 2004, the payment adjustment under this section is based on the geographic classifications specified under § 412.64, except as provided for in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section.
( iii ) For purposes of this section, the geographic classifications specified under § 412.64 apply, except that, effective for discharges occurring on or after October 1, 2006, and before October 1, 2023, for an urban hospital that is reclassified as rural as set forth in § 412.103, the geographic classification is rural.
( 2 ) The hospital meets the criteria in § 412.106(c)(2).
( b ) *Payment adjustment factor.* ( 1 ) If a hospital meets the criteria in paragraph (a)(1) of this section for a disproportionate share hospital for purposes of capital prospective payments, the disproportionate share payment adjustment factor equals [e raised to the power of (.2025 × the hospital's disproportionate patient percentage as determined under § 412.106(b)(5)), −1], where e is the natural antilog of 1.
( 2 ) If a hospital meets the criteria in § 412.106(c)(2) for purposes of hospital inpatient operating prospective payments, the disproportionate share adjustment factor is the factor that results from deeming the hospital to have the same disproportionate share patient percentage that would yield its operating disproportionate share adjustment.
[56 FR 43449, Aug. 30, 1991; 57 FR 3016, Jan. 27, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 46339, Sept. 1, 1993; 69 FR 49250, Aug. 11, 2004; 71 FR 48140, Aug. 18, 2006; 88 FR 59334, Aug. 28, 2023]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsA New Technique for Compensating Joint Limits in a Robot ManipulatorA new robust, optimal, adaptive technique for compensating rate and position limits in the joints of a six degree-of-freedom elbow manipulator is presented. In this new algorithm, the unmet demand as a result of actuator saturation is redistributed among the remaining unsaturated joints. The scheme is used to compensate for inadequate path planning, problems such as joint limiting, joint freezing, or even obstacle avoidance, where a desired position and orientation are not attainable due to an unrealizable joint command. Once a joint encounters a limit, supplemental commands are sent to other joints to best track, according to a selected criterion, the desired trajectory.Document ID19970020204Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsLitt, Jonathan*(Army Research Lab. Cleveland, OH United States)*Hickman, Andre*(Morehouse Coll. Atlanta, GA United States)*Guo, Ten-Huei*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 1996Subject CategoryCyberneticsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:107330ARL-TR-1101NASA-E-10451NASA-TM-107330AD-A316960Accession Number97N21651Funding Number(s)PROJECT: DA Proj. 1L1-61102-AH-45PROJECT: RTOP 505-62-50Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970020204.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
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCharacterization of Three-Stream Jet Flow FieldsFlow-field measurements were conducted on single-, dual- and three-stream jets using two-component and stereo Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV). The flow-field measurements complimented previous acoustic measurements. The exhaust system consisted of externally-plugged, externally-mixed, convergent nozzles. The study used bypass-to-core area ratios equal to 1.0 and 2.5 and tertiary-to-core area ratios equal to 0.6 and 1.0. Axisymmetric and offset tertiary nozzles were investigated for heated and unheated high-subsonic conditions. Centerline velocity decay rates for the single-, dual- and three-stream axisymmetric jets compared well when axial distance was normalized by an equivalent diameter based on the nozzle system total exit area. The tertiary stream had a greater impact on the mean axial velocity for the small bypass-to-core area ratio nozzles than for large bypass-to-core area ratio nozzles. Normalized turbulence intensities were similar for the single-, dual-, and three-stream unheated jets due to the small difference (10 percent) in the core and bypass velocities for the dual-stream jets and the low tertiary velocity (50 percent of the core stream) for the three-stream jets. For heated jet conditions where the bypass velocity was 65 percent of the core velocity, additional regions of high turbulence intensity occurred near the plug tip which were not present for the unheated jets. Offsetting the tertiary stream moved the peak turbulence intensity levels upstream relative to those for all axisymmetric jets investigated.Document ID20160009769Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsHenderson, Brenda S.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Wernet, Mark P.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredAugust 2, 2016Publication DateJuly 1, 2016Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And ThermodynamicsReport/Patent NumberE-19227GRC-E-DAA-TN30556NASA/TM-2016-219098Meeting InformationMeeting: SciTech 2016Location: San Diego, CACountry: United StatesStart Date: January 4, 2016End Date: January 8, 2016Sponsors:American Inst. of Aeronautics and AstronauticsFunding Number(s)WBS: WBS 110076.02.03.04.02Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.KeywordsNoiseThree-Stream JetsAircraftAvailable DownloadsNameType20160009769.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsIDRelationTitle20160004681See AlsoCharacterization of Three-Stream Jet Flow Fieldsvisibility_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
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Establishing an Ambassador-at-Large for the Arctic Region

# 									Establishing an Ambassador-at-Large for the Arctic Region							

Press Statement

Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesperson

August 26, 2022

An Arctic region that is peaceful, stable, prosperous, and cooperative is of critical strategic importance to the United States and a priority for Secretary Blinken.  As one of eight Arctic nations, the United States has long been committed to protecting our national security and economic interests in the region, combating climate change, fostering sustainable development and investment, and promoting cooperation with Arctic States, Allies, and partners.  To further American interests and cooperation with Allies and partners in the Arctic, and after extensive consultations with Members of Congress, local and federal government officials, and external stakeholders, the President plans to elevate the Arctic Coordinator position by appointing an Ambassador-at-Large for the Arctic Region, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate.

The Ambassador-at-Large for the Arctic Region will advance U.S. policy in the Arctic, engage with counterparts in Arctic and non-Arctic nations as well as Indigenous groups, and work closely with domestic stakeholders, including state, local, and Tribal governments, businesses, academic institutions, non-profit organizations, other federal government agencies and Congress.  The United States remains committed to constructive cooperation in the Arctic, foremost through the Arctic Council, and the Ambassador-at-Large will work in close partnership with the U.S. Senior Arctic Official, the federal Arctic science community, and the Arctic Executive Steering Committee.

We look forward to continuing our strong partnership with the Congress to swiftly confirm the Ambassador-at-Large, once a nomination is sent to the Senate.

Tags

ArcticClimate ChangeInvestmentsOffice of the SpokespersonOffice of the Ambassador-at-Large for Arctic AffairsUnited States

Back to Top
REVISED 10/11/2000

PUBLIC WORKSHOP ON THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY RULEMAKING PROCESS FOR DISTRIBUTION T RA NSFORMERS The Department of Energy ( Department ) is convening a public workshop to discuss and receive comments on issues it will address and the process it will follow in considering the adoption of energy conservation standards for electric distribution transformers . The Department has prepared a Framework Document to explain and discuss the process , analyses and issues concerning the development of such standards . For many of the issues and analyses , the Framework Document sets forth approaches that the Department is considering. The workshop will be held on Wednesday , November 1, 2000 from 9:00 a.m . until 5 : 00 p.m. in Room I E-245 at the U. S. Department of Energy , 1000 Independence Avenue , SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 . Please note that foreign nationals visiting DOE Headquarters are subject to advance security screening procedures . If you are a foreign national and wish to participate in the workshop , please inform DOE of this fact as soon as possible by contacting Ms.Geraldine Paige at (202)586-9130 so that the necessary procedures can be completed . The agenda is enclosed and a copy of the Federal Register Notice and Framework Document is located at "http ://www.eren . doe.gov/buildings/ codes standards/ applbrf/dist transformer . html". If you plan to attend the workshop , have any questions , or wish to obtain additional background materials, please contact Ms . Geraldine Paige by telephone at 202 -586-9130, or by telefax at 202- 586-4617. 1 look forward to seeing you at the workshop. Sincerely,

Edward O . Pollock, Jr., Director Office of Building Research and Standards Office of Building Technology, State and Community Programs Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

Deloitte& Touche LLPTwo Prudential Plaza180 North Stetson AvenueChicago, Illinois  60601-6779

(logo)

Telephone   (312) 946-3000Facsimile:     (312) 946-2600www.us.deloitte.com

 

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’CONSENT**

We consent to the incorporation by referencein Registration Statement Nos. 333-66089, 333-54934, and 333-33096  ofWells Fargo Financial, Inc. on Form S-3 of our report dated January 18,1999, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Wells Fargo Financial,Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000.

\s\       Deloitte & Touche LLP

March 15, 2001Chicago, Illinois
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 8, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46231-46232]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21522]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to Sec.  1301.33(a) of Title 21 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on July 8, 2009, Cody 
Laboratories, 601 Yellowstone Avenue, Cody, Wyoming 82414, made 
application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to 
be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled 
substances listed in schedules I and II:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dihydromorphine (9145).....................  I
Amphetamine (1100).........................  II
Methamphetamine (1105).....................  II
Amobarbital (2125).........................  II
Pentobarbital (2270).......................  II
Secobarbital (2315)........................  II
Phenylacetone (8501).......................  II
Cocaine (9041).............................  II
Codeine (9050).............................  II
Dihydrocodeine (9120)......................  II
Oxycodone (9143)...........................  II
Hydromorphone (9150).......................  II
Diphenoxylate (9170).......................  II
Ecgonine (9180)............................  II
Hydrocodone (9193).........................  II
Meperidine (9230)..........................  II
Methadone (9250)...........................  II
Morphine (9300)............................  II
Oxymorphone (9652).........................  II
Alfentanil (9737)..........................  II
Remifentanil (9739)........................  II
Sufentanil (9740)..........................  II
Fentanyl (9801)............................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans on manufacturing the listed controlled substances 
in bulk for sale to its customers.
    Any other such applicant, and any person who is presently 
registered with DEA to manufacture such substances, may file comments 
or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration pursuant to 
21 CFR 1301.33(a).
    Any such written comments or objections should be addressed, in 
quintuplicate, to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of 
Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), 8701 
Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and must be filed no 
later than November 9, 2009.


[[Page 46232]]


    Dated: August 28, 2009.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-21522 Filed 9-4-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

April 5, 2013

s0402

Order 

April 5, 2013

`

146502-3

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 146502

COA: 311865

Wayne CC: 87-006345-01-FC

RAYMOND LOUIS HIGHERS,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________/

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 146503

COA: 311875

Wayne CC: 87-006345-02-FC

THOMAS ROBERT HIGHERS,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 20, 2012 

orders of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

MCCORMACK, J., not participating because of her prior involvement as counsel for 

a party.