alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. Department of Energy & Mitsubishi Electric Cooling & Heating 

Ex Parte Communications 

Meeting Date: August 7, 2012 

Attendees: 

Paul Doppel, MEUS 

Jay Perkins, MEUS 

Lucas Adin, DOE 

Laura Barhydt, DOE 

Ex Parte Communication: AEDM

1. Scope of AEDM rulemaking: 

Discussed inclusion of VRF products -- see CFR 431(f) 

2. Pre-Approval of AEDM 

MEUS recommendation: Unnecessary if a member of a voluntary industry certification program 

(VICP). 

3. Product Class 

MEUS recommendation: Only two (2) product classes for VRF; 

1. Heat Pump and Heat Recovery 

2. Water-sourced Heat Pump and Heat Recovery 

4. Tolerance 

MEUS recommendation: Strongly recommend that 5% tolerance should be used for all testing instead 

of DOE criteria in 10 CFR 429 

5. Certified Rating Failure 

Discussed DOE’s testing protocol for certified rating failure 

6. Willful Mis-Rating 

MEUS recommendation: 

1. More clearly define “Willful” 

2. Concern about accusatory language of “Willful” 

7. Release of Test Reports 

MEUS recommendation: DOE not release manufacturers testing data into the public domain: 

1. Data could be mined to obtain competitive information about the manufacturer (e.g. 

compressor speed) 

2. Designating what is “confidential” and what is not “confidential” during the DOE test could 

be unduly burdensome on the manufacturer 

8. Basic Model 

Discussed affect of ARM/AEDM on basic model 

Ex Parte Communication: Regional Standards 

Discussed burden of reporting on manufacturers, specifically tracking non-compliant systems 

Ex Part Communication: Furnace Fans

Discussed the scope of the electric furnace fan rulemaking – see CFR Section 430.2. 

Ex Parte Communication: Refrigerants

Discussed refrigerants and efficiency and impact of equipment if R410a is banned -- general concern that 

once we move from R410a we will not have a cost effective refrigerant/efficiency combination and we 

would not be able to go back to lower efficiency levels.
41826.

#### NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION v. ALGERNON BLAIR, INC.

Decided November 28, 1966.

*Nall, Miller, Cadenhead & Dennis, James W. Dorsey,*for appellant.

*Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Eugene Partain, Wayne Shortridge,*for appellee.

Per Curiam.

The judgment of this court in 114 Ga. App. 30 (150 SE2d 256), having been reversed by the Supreme Court in *Algernon Blair, Inc. v. National Surety Corp.,*222 Ga. 672 (151 SE2d 724), is hereby vacated. The judgment of the trial court is

*Affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., Jordan and Eberhardt, JJ., concur.*
Exhibit 32.1 

 

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of QMed, Inc. (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended February 29, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Jane A. Murray, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and William T. Schmitt, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his knowledge: 

 

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

 

/s/ Jane A. Murray

Jane A. Murray

Chief  Executive Officer

April 18, 2008

 

/s/ William T. Schmitt, Jr.

William T. Schmitt, Jr. 

Chief  Financial Officer

April 18, 2008 

 

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to QMed, Inc. and will be retained by QMed Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 189 (Thursday, October 1, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50789-50790]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23682]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


State Energy Advisory Board; Notice of Open Teleconference

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the State Energy Advisory 
Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 86 
Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced 
in the Federal Register.

DATES: October 21, 2009, 2 to 3 p.m. EDT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Burch, STEAB Designated Federal 
Officer, Office of Commercialization and Project Management, Energy 
Efficiency Division, Golden Field Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 
1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, CO 80401, Telephone 303-275-4801.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: To make 
recommendations to the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy regarding goals and objectives, 
programmatic and administrative policies, and to otherwise carry out 
the Board's responsibilities as designated in the State Energy 
Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-440).
    Tentative Agenda: Discuss ways STEAB can support DOE's

[[Page 50790]]

implementation of the Economic Recovery Act, review details of the 
upcoming November Board Meeting in Raleigh, NC, and update members on 
the Board's routine business matters.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact Gary Burch at the address or 
telephone number listed above. Requests to make oral comments must be 
received five days prior to the meeting; reasonable provision will be 
made to include requested topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the 
Board is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will 
facilitate the orderly conduct of business.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public 
review and copying within 60 days on the STEAB Web site, http://www.steab.org.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on September 24, 2009.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-23682 Filed 9-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
8 c~ Cl ~ e 0 ~ 0 tif '~' -1 ,. D "IIIII ~ c c c 

;u ~ "II "'Ill ~i: ~i: z !::C ~~ ~ 0 0 0 

~ :::J t:l-1 :z:?:;: 1'1'1?:;: 1'1'1 

i:'" "Ill z z z :!ig '"'" 01'1'1 

Ul;!:l p ;Ill 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ZUI "II ]J :1:~ -tC c- 5 !( "II "II "II 

i ;lllt:l !!!z i!i~ ~~ ;~~~:I: !( !( !( 

G'l-1 

• • -1 --t o-t 0 ~ z z :l::z: =i~ ;lll:z: c;~~~ "II ;! ~ ~ IJ 0 ::::!1'1'1 8'" zE "II 

~ 1'1'1 c 111;1111 

~~ ;lllp 5!c -1 g ;Ill ;Ill 

-1 z~ :1: z ~ n 

eo 

z- 1'1'1 c 

D -1 

~~ ~~ t:l;lll :1: Ul ~ 2g ~ 

~~ IDCI ~ -1 1'1'1 'U :1: 0 :e: 

§ Ull'l'l c> z 1'1'1 ;!:j 

:z:ID 

-~~ 1'1'10 zc~ r=~ z c ~ ~ 

~8 c- z 0 ~ !!! -,. -z 

'" ~J;:; zz z- G'l ;Ill 

~ ~~ t:lc t:I:S:: 'U > 1'1'1 

w> UIC ~ !:j 1'1'1 

~ ~z ~n ~~ c 

-'" ~0 1'1'1 

· 5! O!l 'U oP iJ: "" 1'1'1 N 

'" z z- oc r- ;Ill c ~ 

8 oO jg~ ;Ill£! r- "II ;~~~Z 1'1'1 'U "Ill 

!( ~ ·- 1'1'1 ~~ ~ ~ :1: 

cO I!: ;::: z ;Ill ~"II ~~ 'U 

0 0 1'1'1 ~ "" ID 01'1'1 r- ra '" ~r- n r- "II 

:!!~ 1'1'1 0 Clc ~ ~ .e iJ: ·-~ r- Ul "" 

~ i '" 1'1'1 

~ "Ill 

c i: ~ z Ul "Ill 1'1'1 t:l iii 

~ !;; :::1 

:1: t:l ~ '" :1: z -1 -1 

:1: '" z 

'" p '" 
TCRnRCC H51i:!!C 

LED STATUS INDICAnONS DURING STARTUP 

Mil in LED Statw Indicator 

- Initialization in Progress 

-The Aircraft is in 'Bind'Mode 

-The Aircraft Is Not Connected/Linked to the Transmitter 

-The Aircraft is in a No-Fly Zone • 

• Please see the instruction manual for more information 

regarding n~fly zones 

LED STATUS INDICAnONS BEFORE/DURING FLIGHT 

Mllln LED Statw Indicator 

-The Aircraft Is In Smart Mode with GPS lock 

-The Aircraft is in Smart Mode without GPS lock 

-The Aircraft is in Angle Mode with GPS lock 

-The Aircraft is in Angle Mode without GPS lock 

-The Aircraft Is In Home Mode 

- First level low Voltage Battery Warning 

-Second Levell ow Voltage Battery Warning 

- GPS Disabled 

-Compass calibration Required 

LED STATUS INDICAnONS FOR CALIBRATION MODES 

-Compass calibration Mode Entered 

-Compass calibration Started 

-Accelerometer Calibration Mode Entered/Data Collection 

Finished 

-calibration Failed 

Flashes red, green and blue (2 times per second) 

Flashes Orange very rapidly (3 times per second) 

Flashes blue rapidly (5 times per second} 

Flashes red and white rapidly (5 times per second) 

Glows solid green 

Flashes red and white (red for one second. white for another 

second and then circulate) 

Glows solid purple 

Flashes purple slowly 

Flashes red rapidly (2 times per second) 

Flashes red,green and blue every 3 seconds 

Flashes red,green and blue continuously 

Flashes purple( I flash per second) 

Flashes orange twice between any LED indication 

Flashes red and green slowly 

Flashes red,green and rapldly(3 times per second} 

Flashes red.green and blue slowly (1 time per second) 

Glows solid red 

LED STATUS INDICATIONS v1.o 

1 second 

I I I I 

--I I I I --I I 

- 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - I 

1 second 

I 

I 

----

1 second 

1 second 

I I I 

I -- I I - I - I 

1 second 

-

1 second 

I 

I 

-

I 

I 

1 second 

I I I I 

-I I -I I -I 

- 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 

-

1 second 

-

1 second 

I 

I 

-
#### § 1080.12 Orders requiring witnesses to testify or provide other information and granting immunity.

The Director has the nondelegable authority to request approval from the Attorney General of the United States for the issuance of an order requiring a witness to testify or provide other information and granting immunity under 18 U.S.C. 6004.
EXHIBIT 32.1

          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 IR  BioSciences  Holdings,
Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned,  in the capacities and on the dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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


/s/ Michael Wilhelm
----------------------------
Michael Wilhelm
Chief Executive Officer
August 23, 2004

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to the company and will be retained by the company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 1208.63 Form of hearing. ( a ) If the debtor submits a timely written request for a hearing as provided in § 1208.62(c), FHFA will afford the debtor a hearing, which at FHFA's option may be oral or written. FHFA will provide the debtor with a reasonable opportunity for an oral hearing when FHFA determines that the issues in dispute cannot be resolved by review of the documentary evidence, for example, when the validity of the claim turns on the issue of credibility or veracity.
( b ) If FHFA determines that an oral hearing is appropriate, the time and location of the hearing shall be established by FHFA. An oral hearing may, at the debtor's option, be conducted either in person or by telephone conference. All travel expenses incurred by the debtor in connection with an in-person hearing will be borne by the debtor. All telephonic charges incurred during the hearing will be the responsibility of the agency.
( c ) In cases when it is determined that an oral hearing is not required by this section, FHFA will accord the debtor a “paper hearing,” that is, FHFA will decide the issues in dispute based upon a review of the written record.
CEDELL HENDERSON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-1469

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 3, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.

Brantley S. Clark, Jr., Judge.

Cedell Henderson, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Virginia Harris, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, C.J., CLARK, and MARSTILLER, JJ., CONCUR.
# Official Journal C 198/5 Au

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 198 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 475 August 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 198

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 475 August 2004

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2004/C 198/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2004/C 198/1

Euro exchange rates

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 10.15


 


January 13, 2015


 


FEE WAIVER


 


Sidoti Micro Cap Fund, LP

122 East 42nd Street, 4th Floor


New York, New York 10168


 


Ladies and Gentleman,


 


On June 16, 2014, Sidoti Micro Cap GP, LLC
(the “General Partner”) entered into a limited partnership agreement (the “Limited Partnership Agreement”)
with the limited partners of the Sidoti Micro Cap Fund, LP (the “Partnership”). Pursuant to the Limited Partnership
Agreement, the Partnership has agreed to pay the General Partner an incentive allocation, payable yearly, of 20% of the net profits
allocated to each investor after any prior losses allocated to each investor have been recouped.


 


The General Partner hereby exercises its
discretion to waive the incentive allocation, as set forth in the Limited Partnership Agreement. This waiver shall continue until
the Partnership attains $10 million of unaffiliated limited partner subscriptions, at which time the Partnership’s obligation
to pay the incentive allocation shall be restored.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




    	 



    	 



    

  


The undersigned have executed this letter
as of the date first written above.


 


	 	SIDOTI MICRO CAP GP, LLC
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Peter T. Sidoti
	 	 	Peter T. Sidoti, Manager


 


	Acknowledgement:	 
	SIDOTI MICRO CAP FUND, LP	 
	 	 
	By:	/s/ Peter T. Sidoti	 
	 	Peter T. Sidoti	 


 


[Signature
Page to General Partner Fee Waiver]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000793631
<NAME> AEI REAL ESTATE FUND XV LTD PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,965,750
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,965,750
<PP&E>                                       4,899,851
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,090,252)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,775,349
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          158,274
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,472,588
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,775,349
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               482,627
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  190,963
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                947,305
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            947,305
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   947,305
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   127.53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   127.53
        

</TABLE>
# Official Journal C 266A/2012

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2012.266.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 266A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 554 September 2012 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.CA2012.266.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 266A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 554 September 2012

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 266A/01 | Vacancy for the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (grade AD 14) — COM/2012/10332 | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2012/C 266A/01

Vacancy for the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (grade AD 14) — COM/2012/10332

1

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 8 | (DA/EL/HU/IT/MT/PL) |
| --- | --- |
| 10 | |
| 17 | (LT) |
| 20 | (EN) |
| 22 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 27 | |
| 30 | (FR) |
| 31 | (ES) |
| 37 | |
| 44 | |
| 46 | |
| 53 | |
| 55 | |
| 59 | |
| 69 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 70 | (EL) |
| 71 | (ES) |
| 74 | (HU) |
| 75 | (NL) |
| 76 | |
| 77 | (RO) |
| 84 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 86 | |
| 90 | (EN) |
| 101 | |
| 110 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 114 | |
| 121 | (BG) |
| 122 | |
| 134 | |
| 136 | (PT) |
| 140 | |
| 144 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 146 | (CS/DA) |
| 160 | |
| 161 | |
| 169 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 180 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 187 | |
| 189 | |
| 197 | (DA/DE/EN/SK) |
| 198 | (EN/FR) |
| 199 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 204 | (ET/GA/LV/PT) |
| 206 | (CS) |
| 210 | (LT) |
| 211 | (MT) |
| 212 | (PL) |
| 214 | (SK) |
| 215 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 228 | (SL) |
| 266 | |

8

(DA/EL/HU/IT/MT/PL)

10

17

(LT)

20

(EN)

22

(DE/EN/FR)

27

30

(FR)

31

(ES)

37

44

46

53

55

59

69

(DE/EN/FR)

70

(EL)

71

(ES)

74

(HU)

75

(NL)

76

77

(RO)

84

(DE/EN/FR)

86

90

(EN)

101

110

(DE/EN/FR)

114

121

(BG)

122

134

136

(PT)

140

144

(DE/EN/FR)

146

(CS/DA)

160

161

169

(DE/EN/FR)

180

(DE/EN/FR)

187

189

197

(DA/DE/EN/SK)

198

(EN/FR)

199

(DE/EN/FR)

204

(ET/GA/LV/PT)

206

(CS)

210

(LT)

211

(MT)

212

(PL)

214

(SK)

215

(DE/EN/FR)

228

(SL)

266

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

STEVEN BITTER, individual and on

behalf of a class of others similarly

situated,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

RADIOSHACK CORP., a Delaware

corporation,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 11-56057

D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01736-PA-VBK

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Percy Anderson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 8, 2013** 

Pasadena, California

Before: CALLAHAN, IKUTA, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

FILED

FEB 15 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Plaintiff Steve Bitter appeals the district court’s order staying this putative

class action pursuant to the Colorado River doctrine. See Colorado River Water

Conservation Dist. v. United States, 424 U.S. 800, 817 (1976). We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, Nakash v. Marciano, 882 F.2d 1411, 1413

(9th Cir. 1989), and we affirm. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that the state court

plaintiff’s pursuit of mediation did not reflect a lack of diligence or suggest that the

state proceeding was inadequate. Nor did the district court err in concluding that

the threat of piecemeal litigation weighed in favor of granting a stay because,

contrary to Bitter’s argument, certification of a federal class would not have

terminated the parallel state court action. Negrete v. Allianz Life Ins. Co. of N. Am.,

523 F.3d 1091, 1100 (9th Cir. 2008). 

We also reject Bitter’s contention that the district court erred in failing to

consider Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 in applying the Colorado River

doctrine. Rule 23 governs the procedure for maintaining a federal action on behalf

of a class, Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. It does not apply to the antecedent question of

whether a district court should stay the federal action in deference to a parallel state

court action. In any event, the Colorado River doctrine already takes into account
3

Rule 23’s concerns about fairness, adequacy, and efficiency. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

23(a)(4), (b)(3); Marciano, 882 F.2d at 1415.

 We grant Bitter’s request, filed February 13, 2012, that this court take

judicial notice of the Los Angeles Superior Court’s case summary of the parallel

state court action. 

AFFIRMED.
§ 1208.62 Debtor's rights. FHFA shall afford the debtor the opportunity: ( a ) To inspect and copy records related to the debt;
( b ) To enter into a written repayment agreement with FHFA, under terms agreeable to FHFA; and
( c ) To the extent that a debt owed has not been established by judicial or administrative order, to request a hearing concerning the existence or amount of the debt or the terms of the repayment schedule. With respect to debts established by a judicial or administrative order, a debtor may request a hearing concerning the payment or other discharge of the debt. The debtor is not entitled to a hearing concerning the terms of the proposed repayment schedule if these terms have been established by written agreement.