alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
August 10, 2010

Steve Souders

Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mail Code 5304P

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20460

Re: Identification and Listing of Special Wastes: Disposal of Coal

Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities, FR35128 dated

6/21/2010, Docket No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640

Dear Mr. Souders:

SCANA Corporation and its principal subsidiary, South Carolina Electric & Gas 

Company, requests an additional 120 days to complete an evaluation of our 

internal process and develop comments on the EPA’s proposed rule entitled: 

Identification and Listing of Special Wastes: Disposal of Coal 

Combustion Residuals (CCRs) from Electric Utilities.

We are making this request because we believe the EPA’s 90 day comment 

period does not allow enough time to develop comments on the proposed 

rule. The EPA should seriously consider giving impacted entities more time 

to analyze data and develop comment on this proposed rule because of the 

extensive environmental, energy, and policy implications and the fact that 

there is no statutory or court-ordered deadline to finalize a rule.

The EPA has requested comment on a number of comprehensive and 

complex issues, including an expansive and complicated regulatory impact 

analysis. Responding to the regulatory impact analysis alone will require the 

development of technical economic reports that evaluate the cost effects of 

various regulatory scenarios, including some cost impacts (i.e., compliance 

costs under the Subtitle C option for CCR management units located 

upstream of CCR disposal units, etc.). In addition, collecting, compiling and 

analyzing market data on the adverse impacts to CCR beneficial use that 
Page 2 August 10, 2010

Identification and Listing of Special Wastes: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from 

Electric Utilities FR35128 Dated 6/21/2010, Docket No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640

would result under the Subtitle C option will take more time than is currently 

being allowed in the EPA’s proposal.

We do commend the EPA for its efforts to develop a final rule that will be 

based on sound science, public participation and transparency. However, to 

receive the greatest degree of public participation and valuable scientific 

research results the agency should allow more than 90 days. 

Sincerely,

Shirley M. Ruffin

Shirley Ruffin

Corporate Environmental Services Department

c: Robert Dellinger, EPA 

Betsy Devlin, EPA

Thomas N. Effinger

J. Hagood Hamilton, Jr.

Richard T. Jones

James M. Landreth

Suzette Mangan-Bryson

Tim Miller, Jr.

Michael E. Moore

John W. Preston, Jr.

Michael C. Summer

Joseph K. Todd

Ralph M. Webb

Jean-Claude Younan
<PAGE>


                                 EXHIBIT (10)(a)

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

<PAGE>

                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Independent Auditors"
in the Statement of Additional Information and to the use of our reports (1)
dated February 14, 2003 with respect to the statutory-basis financial statements
and schedules of Transamerica Life Insurance Company of New York and (2) dated
January 31, 2003 with respect to the subaccounts of Separate Account VA-2LNY,
which are available for investment by contract owners of the Dreyfus/
Transamerica Triple Advantage Variable Annuity, included in Post-Effective
Amendment No. 18 to the Registration Statement (Form N-4 No.33-55152) and
related Prospectus of Dreyfus/Transamerica Triple Advantage Variable Annuity.

                                                           /s/Ernst & Young LLP

Des Moines, Iowa
April 25, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 83 (Friday, April 28, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 24981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10686]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Corrected Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the 
Clean Water Act (``CWA'') and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation and Liability Act (``CERCLA'')

    On April 7, 2000, a Notice of Lodging was published in the Federal 
Register stating that a Consent Decree had been lodged in United States 
v. Gulf States Steel, Inc., in the United States District Court for the 
Northern District of Alabama on March 28, 2000 (CV-97-BU-2755-M). See 
65 FR 18351 (April 7, 2000).
    This Notice of Lodging contained a typographical error. 
Specifically, the original Notice of Lodging stated that Gulf States 
Steel had agreed to undertake certain Supplemental Environmental 
Projects (SEPs) in the amount of at least $206 million as part of its 
Consent Decree resolving its Clean Water Act liability. The actual SEP 
amount contained in the Consent Decree with the United States is 42.6 
million.
    Due to the typographical error in the original publication, the 
Department of Justice will extend the comment period for an additional 
ten (10) days. Thus, the Department of Justice will receive, for a 
period of forty (40) days from the date of the original Federal 
Register publication, comments relating to the proposed Consent Decree. 
Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General for the 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 
P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044; and refer to United States v. Gulf 
States Steel, Inc., DOJ Ref. #90-5-1-1-4211.
    The proposed settlement agreement may be examined at the Office of 
the United States Attorney, 1800 Fifth Avenue, North, Birmingham, 
Alabama, 35203, and at the office of the Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, GA 30303. In 
requesting a copy, please refer to the referenced case and enclose a 
check in the amount of $4.25 (25 cents per page reproduction costs).

Bruce Gelber,
Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 00-10686 Filed 4-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3782 

To modify the amount authorized for commitments for 7(a) loans, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 20, 2020 

Ms. DUCKWORTH (for herself, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. COONS, Mr. RISCH, Mrs. 

BLACKBURN, Mr. CARDIN, and Mrs. SHAHEEN) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed 

A BILL 

To modify the amount authorized for commitments for 7(a) 

loans, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Business Lend5 ing Continuity Act of 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. COMMITMENTS FOR 7(A) LOANS. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 

8 amounts authorized for commitments for general business 

9 loans authorized under section 7(a) of the Small Business 

10 Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) under the heading ‘‘BUSINESS


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3782 CPS

1 LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT’’ under the heading ‘‘SMALL

2 BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION’’ under title V of the Consoli3 dated Appropriations Act, 2020 (Public Law 116–93; 133 

4 Stat. 2475) shall apply with respect to loans made under 

5 such section 7(a), other than loans made under paragraph 

6 (36) of such section 7(a), on and after the date of enact7 ment of this Act. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Editorial Note on Part 1251
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1251 appear at 81 FR 3709, Jan. 22, 2016.

§ 1251.203 Preemployment inquiries. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a recipient may not conduct a preemployment medical examination or may not make preemployment inquiry of an applicant as to whether the applicant is a individual with a disabilityor as to the nature or severity of a disability. A recipient may, however, make preemployment inquiry into an applicant's ability to perform job-related functions.
( b ) When a recipient is taking remedial action to correct the effects of past discrimination pursuant to § 1251.105(a), when a recipient is taking voluntary action to overcome the effects of conditions that resulted in limited participation in its Federally assisted program or activity pursuant to § 1251.105(b), or when a recipient is taking affirmative action pursuant to section 504 of the Act, the recipient may invite applicants for employment to indicate whether and to what extent they are handicapped, provided that: ( 1 ) The recipient states clearly on any written questionnaire used for this purpose or makes clear orally if no written questionnaire is used that the information requested is intended for use solely in connection with its remedial action obligations or its voluntary of affirmative action efforts; and
( 2 ) The recipient states clearly that the information is being requested on a voluntary basis, that it will be kept confidential as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, that refusal to provide it will not subject the applicant or employee to any adverse treatment, and that it will be used only in accordance with this part.
( c ) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a recipient from conditioning an offer of employment on the results of a medical examination conducted prior to the employee's entrance on duty, provided that: ( 1 ) All entering employees are subjected to such an examination regardless of disability; and
( 2 ) The results of such an examination are used only in accordance with the requirements of this part.
( d ) Information obtained in accordance with this section as to the medical condition or history of the applicant shall be collected and maintained on separate forms that shall be accorded confidentiality as medical records, except that: ( 1 ) Supervisors and managers may be informed regarding restrictions on the work or duties of individuals with disabilities and regarding necessary accommodations;
( 2 ) First aid and safety personnel may be informed, where appropriate, if the condition might require emergency treatment; and
( 3 ) Government officials investigating compliance with the Act shall be provided relevant information upon request.
# Official Journal C 52I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 052I |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6415 February 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 052I

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6415 February 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 52 I/01 | Commission Decision of 27 November 2015 amending Decision 2011/C 253/04 setting up a Payment Systems Market Expert Group, in order to extend its period of validity | 1 |
| 2021/C 52 I/02 | Commission Decision of 2 December 2020 amending Decision 2011/C 253/04 setting up a Payment Systems Market Expert Group as regards its period of validity | 3 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2021/C 52 I/01

Commission Decision of 27 November 2015 amending Decision 2011/C 253/04 setting up a Payment Systems Market Expert Group, in order to extend its period of validity

1

2021/C 52 I/02

Commission Decision of 2 December 2020 amending Decision 2011/C 253/04 setting up a Payment Systems Market Expert Group as regards its period of validity

3

---

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

EN
0 2 4 8 12 16 20

Miles

Map 174

Roundup Harlowton

T7N

Pompeys Pillar

T Big Timber 1N Billings T2 Columbus S

Bridger

T8S

R18E R29E Montana

R104W R93W

T Wyoming 57N

Wyoming

Location Map

Montana

Billings

Field 

Office

Ü

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

Billings & Pompeys Pillar 

National Monument RMP / EIS

Map scale 1:900,000

Map generated by the Billings Field Office in April 2015

Albers Equal Area, NAD83 Projection

This map is intended for display purposes. No warranty is made by the Bureau of

Land Management as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data for

individual or aggregate use with other data, or for purposes not intended by BLM. 

This map may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product was

developed through digital means and information may be updated without notification.

Legend

Sage Grouse PMHA and 

GMHA and Locatable

Mineral Allocations

State Border

Planning Area Boundary

Sage Grouse PMHA 

Sage Grouse GMHA

Locatable Exiting Withdrawals

Locatable Recommended Withdrawals

^ Towns

Public Lands Survey System
Exhibit 32.2

STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (the
"Form 10-K") of Cardinal Financial Corporation, I, Mark A. Wendel, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



Date: March 15, 2010

/s/ MARK A. WENDEL Mark A. Wendel Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
§ 125.23 Rules applicable to operations subject to this part. Each person operating an aircraft in operations under this part shall— ( a ) While operating inside the United States, comply with the applicable rules in part 91 of this chapter; and
( b ) While operating outside the United States, comply with Annex 2, Rules of the Air, to the Convention on International Civil Aviation or the regulations of any foreign country, whichever applies, and with any rules of parts 61 and 91 of this chapter and this part that are more restrictive than that Annex or those regulations and that can be complied with without violating that Annex or those regulations. Annex 2 is incorporated by reference in § 91.703(b) of this chapter.
[Doc. No. 19779, 45 FR 67235, Oct. 9, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 125-12, 54 FR 34331, Aug. 18, 1989; Docket No. FAA-2022-1563; Amdt. No. 125-74, 88 FR 48090, July 26, 2023]
#### ACME CAB CO. et al. v. BROWN.

No. 31697.

Feb. 13, 1945.

*156 P. 2d 367.*

*165Wm. H. McClarin and John L. Ward, Sr., both of Tulsa, for plaintiffs in error.

James S. Watson and *G.*C. Spillers, both of Tulsa, for defendant in error.

CORN, J.

This is an appeal from the district court of Tulsa county, Okla., from an order of the trial court sustaining plaintiff’s motion for a new trial.

The reason given by the trial judge for sustaining said motion is as follows:.

> “. . . being fully advised in the premises finds that the plaintiff has not had a fair and impartial trial and that the verdict of the jury is erroneous and does not meet the approval of this court and that in order that justice may be done in the premises the verdict of the jury should be vacated. . . .”

The plaintiff sought to recover $10,250 damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained while a passenger in a certain taxicab belonging to said defendants.

The record discloses that a large number of witnesses testified in this case, and that there is a sharp conflict in the evidence as to just how the plaintiff received her injury. It would serve no useful purpose for us to engage in a lengthy discussion of the evidence. The law is well settled by prior decisions of this court, that under the reasons given by the trial court in sustaining the motion for a new trial, the same will not be disturbed unless record shows clearly that court erred on a pure and unmixed question of law or acted arbitrarily or capriciously.

For expressions of this court on the discretionary powers of the trial judge see: Jackson v. Cleage et al., 193 Okla. 210, 142 P. 2d 111; Little v. Lovett et al., 193 Okla. 157, 141 P. 2d 794; Shreve et al. v. Cornell et al., 182 Okla. 193, 77 P. 2d 1; Jarecki Mfg. Co. et al. v. Thames, 151 Okla. 234, 3 P. 2d 428; Cosden Pipe Line Co. v. Lewis, 190 Okla. 523, 125 P. 2d 969; and other cases found in Oklahoma Digest (West) Appeal and Error 977 (3); City of Tulsa v. Bliss, 194 Okla. 255, 149 P. 2d 507; Hogan et al. v. Bailey, 27 Okla. 15, 110 P. 890.

Said order sustained.

GIBSON, C.J., HURST, V.C.J., and RILEY, OSBORN, WELCH, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur.
#### M. E. Bradford, *et al., Appellants,*v. M. E. Watson, *et al., Appellees.*

*On*Rehearing.

Per Curiam.

Even though the policy was payable *eo nomine*to the executor or administrator of the assured, the proceeds were not a part of the estate of the assured for the payment of debts or for distribution, by the administrator or executor, and the widow and children of the assured take the proceeds pursuant to the statute not as heirs or distributees, but as “strangers;” Pace. v. Pace, 19 Fla. 438, therefore under the law it is not the duty of the administratrix to collect the proceeds *as the representative of the decedent’s*estate, and the sureties on her statutory bond “conditioned to faithfully perform all her duties as such administratrix according to law,” are not liable for a misappropriation of such proceeds by the administratrix whatever may be the liability of the administratrix personally or as special trustee to account for proceeds collected. 18 Cyc. 1254, 1259; Morris v. Morris, 9 Heisk (Tenn.) 814; Nickals v. Stanley, 146 Cal. 724, 81 Pac. Rep. 117.

Rehearing denied.
Order entered July 24, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00659-CV

DELORIS PHILLIPS, Appellant

V.

PORSHALA DANYEL PHILLIPS AND WILLIAM BRENT, Appellees

On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-18-00541

ORDER

By order dated June 19, 2018, we directed Dallas County District Clerk Felicia Pitre to 

file a supplemental clerk’s record containing certain documents, including the live pleadings, so 

that we could determine our jurisdiction over this appeal. A copy of that order was sent to the 

parties. 

On June 22, 2018, appellant filed an “emergency expedited motion for 

interpretation/definition of Court’s term/language “live pleadings.” That motion is currently 

before us. Also before us are appellant’s July 23, 2018 (1) “request for preservation of any/all 

record/files/documents, etc.;” and (2) “emergency expedited motion for extension to file letter 

brief regarding jurisdiction matter.” We ORDER as follows.
We DENY the June 22nd motion for interpretation as moot because the supplemental 

clerk’s record has been filed and contains all the documents we requested. We DENY AS 

MOOT the July 23rd request for preservation because all records and documents filed in this 

appeal will be retained in accordance with applicable statutes and the Court’s record retention 

policy. We also GRANT the July 23rd extension motion and ORDER appellant to file the 

jurisdictional letter brief no later than August 6, 2018.

 

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

JUSTICE
#### § 121.219 Ventilation.

Each passenger or crew compartment must be suitably ventilated. Carbon monoxide concentration may not be more than one part in 20,000 parts of air, and fuel fumes may not be present. In any case where partitions between compartments have louvres or other means allowing air to flow between compartments, there must be a means convenient to the crew for closing the flow of air through the partitions, when necessary.
427373 0-57 (In pocket)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. BULLETINO30_PLATE 35
EXPLANATION
> 2
z we
< Shite and ipo joints
z
E wt?
; 3 Strike of vertical joints
f ra
ote
Stike and dip of shear
Vertical shear
= z
g Vere shat
&
< i
é Inne shat sowing di
& =
a Adit
Mine damp
z
WSS A e®
owestcinns [2 Prameton
sons are Fi
8
& cribbing
Contact,
Cutter red
——
vein
tt ear red
vein
Lectin he ors

Vein
Projctd fram underound wrtings

40008

40 14°39.

Strike and dip of foliation

T0008

es
Ste and ip flow ayers

TRUE NORTH

Strike of flow lines

®
"ORT RS
7

\\A

\eensin
\

 o w\

1 n 1 3%)

1
‘Contour interval 20 feet
‘Datum ls mean sea level

Topography and geology by F. 8. Moore and W. S. Cavender, 1951

GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE CARIBOU AREA, BOULDER COUNTY, COLORADO
AAM-11-183-E March 1, 2011

Exemption No. 10217 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0142

Mr. Jerry L. Williams

President Sonoran Wings Flight Training Centre, Inc.

P.O. Box 24158 Tucson, AZ 85734

Dear Mr. Williams:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated February 17, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Sonoran Wings Flight Training Centre, Inc (SWFTC) for an exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow SWFTC to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program while operating under separate parts of the regulation.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because this is not a precedent-setting petition, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to SWFTC.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that2

provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant [Full Company Name] an exemption from 14 CFR part 120 to the extent necessary to allow SWFTC to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program while operating under separate parts of the regulation, subject to the

conditions and limitations described below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of Sonoran Wings Flight Training Centre, Inc. are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol program must be implemented under the auspices of the Sonoran Wings Flight Training Centre, Inc. part 135 operation, not under part 91.

This exemption terminates on March 31, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/ James R. Fraiser, M.D. Deputy Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure
cc: Hon. Patrick Flanagan, District Judge 

Frank Matylinsky 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Washoe County District Attorney 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2