alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
July 16, 2010 

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Economic Impact Analysis for National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: Group I Polymers and Resins 

FROM: Tom Walton 

Economist 

ABCG (C439-02) 

TO: Randy McDonald 

 Engineer 

CCG (E143-01) 

This document addresses the economic impacts of the national emissions standards for 

hazardous air pollutants for seven facilities in the resin and synthetic rubber 

manufacturing industry for both the selected option and an another option (option 2). 

This is classified under 32521 in the North American Industry Classification System 

(NAICS). 

 

Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with the rule and the distribution 

of these costs among affected facilities can have a role in determining how the market 

will change in response to rule. Total annualized costs for the selected option are 

estimated to be about $1,000,000 and for option 2, $8,600,000. Seven facilities are 

projected to incur costs that range from less than $1,000 for both options and to $600,000 

for the selected option and to $4,800,000 for option 2. 

Because facility sales and production were unavailable, average facility value of 

shipments from their state from American FactFinder for 2007 for facilities in Texas and 

Louisiana for NAICS 32521 was used as a proxy for sales. Because state data were not 

reported for the other states 2002 Census data for average value of shipments per facility 

for the nation was used as a proxy for the two facilities not in Texas or Louisiana (the 

two Zeon Chemicals facilities. 

For the selected option costs are all projected to be less than three tenths of a percent of 

average sales. For option 2 two facilities have costs between 1% and 2% of sales. For 

the selected option, the small costs are not expected to result in a significant market 

impact whether they are passed on to the purchaser or absorbed. 

The Small Business Administration definition for a small business in this industry is 

1,000 employees. None of the facilities that may be owned by small businesses have cost 
to sales ratio of greater than 0.0003%. Therefore there is no significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Total Annual Costs ($/yr) Cost to Sales Cost to Sales

Facility Selected Option Option 2 Selected Option Option 2

Lanxess

Corporation $982 $982 0.0003% 0.0003%

        

Zeon Chemicals L.P. $982 $982 0.0016% 0.0016%

$982 $1,104,543 0.0016% 1.7876%

        

Lion Copolymer $982 $982 0.0003% 0.0003%

        

DuPont

Performance $982 $4,816,013 0.0003% 1.5818%

        

ExxonMobil $415,940 $415,940 0.1297% 0.1297%

$641,500 $2,248,079 0.2107% 0.7384%
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AT MARCH 31, 2000 CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR QUARTER
ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000797542
<NAME> ZAXIS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         362,194
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  108,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,927)
<INVENTORY>                                     62,429
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               549,208
<PP&E>                                         668,827
<DEPRECIATION>                                 522,923
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 727,013
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,380,882
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        83,035
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,947,249)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   727,013
<SALES>                                         87,653
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                87,653
<CGS>                                          115,410
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  400,505
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              49,214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (325,763)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (325,763)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (325,763)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.05)


</TABLE>
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 19

- 1930 Filed August 18, 2021

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

vs. RONALD MICHAEL VANSICKLE , Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, William A. Price , District Associate Judge.

Ronald Vansickle appeals his conviction, following a guilty plea, of driving while barred as a habitual offender. APPEAL DISMISSED.

Patrick W. O'Bryan , Des Moines , for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Sharon K. Hall , Assistant Attorn ey General, for appellee.

Considered by Tabor, P.J. , Greer, J., and Scott, S.J. * *Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2021).2

SCOTT , Senior Judge

. Ronald Vansickle appeals his conviction, following a guilty plea, of driving while barred as a habitual offender. He argues his plea is invalid as not being entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently because he received ineffective
assistance of counsel. J udgment and sentence were entered in November 2019. Vansickl e acknowledges, effective July 1, 2019, Iowa Code section 814.6 (1)(a)(3) (Supp. 2019), with exceptions , including establishment of good cause , prohibits a right of appeal when a defendant pleads guilty and section 814.7 prohibits us from considering claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal. See 2019 Iowa Acts ch. 140, §§ 29 , 31. He also appears to acknowledge the amended versions of the statute control because judgment and sentence were entered after the amendments’ effective date. Se e State v. Macke , 933 N.W.2d 226, 228 (Iowa 2019). Pursuant to section 814.6(1)(a)(3), Vansickle submits he has good cause to appeal because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in relation to his plea because he did not understand the plea offer, did not know of the possibility of being sent to prison, and felt pressured to plead guilty. Based on Vansickle’s limited argument, we are unable to find good cause because his conclusory and un

- substantive ineffective

- assistance claim is insufficient to facilitate our review, as he offers no direction on how competent representation would have changed the outcome. See Dunbar v. State , 515 N.W.2d 12, 15 (Iowa 1996). And while Vansickle offers a passive suggestion that the new limits on a right to appeal do “not comport with due process and equal3

protection guarantees,” he offers no reason why, so we deem any constitutional argument waived. See Iowa R. App. P. 6.903(2)(g)(3). Lastly, he offers no reason why, not considering section 814.6, we would be ab le to disregard the section
814.7 prohibition against this court considering ineffective

- assistance claims on direct appeal. We dismiss the appeal. APPEAL DISMISSED.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3670

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a 100 percent 

tax on amounts received from trading with Cuba if the trading is conditioned explicitly or otherwise on lobbying Congress to lift trade or travel 

restrictions on Cuba. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 8, 2003

Mr. DEUTSCH (for himself and Mr. MENENDEZ) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose 

a 100 percent tax on amounts received from trading 

with Cuba if the trading is conditioned explicitly or otherwise on lobbying Congress to lift trade or travel restrictions on Cuba.

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 ‘‘Anti-Communist Co5 operation Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 3670 IH 

1 SEC. 2. 100 PERCENT TAX ON AMOUNTS RECEIVED BY CER2 TAIN PERSONS FROM TRADING WITH CUBA. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subtitle D of the Internal Rev4 enue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after chapter 

5 44 the following new chapter: 

6 ‘‘CHAPTER 45—TAX ON AMOUNTS RE7 CEIVED BY CERTAIN PERSONS FROM 

8 TRADING WITH CUBA

‘‘Sec. 4986. Imposition of tax.

9 ‘‘SEC. 4986. IMPOSITION OF TAX. 

10 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—There is hereby imposed on any 

11 United States person a tax of 100 percent of the amount 

12 received by such person directly or indirectly from the sale, 

13 lease, or licensing of property or services for consumption 

14 or use in Cuba if there is an agreement or understanding 

15 that such person will directly or indirectly lobby Congress 

16 to lift trade or travel restrictions on Cuba. 

17 ‘‘(b) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.—

18 ‘‘(1) PAYMENTS TAXED ONLY ONCE.—Gross in19 come shall not include any payment on which tax is 

20 imposed by subsection (a). 

21 ‘‘(2) OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.—

22 For purposes of subtitle F, any tax imposed by this 

23 section shall be treated as a tax imposed by subtitle 

24 A.’’
3

•HR 3670 IH 

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of chapters 

2 for subtitle D is amended by inserting after the item relat3 ing to chapter 44 the following new item:

‘‘Chapter 45. Tax on amounts received by certain persons from 

trading with Cuba.’’

4 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

5 this section shall apply to amounts received after the date 

6 of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Editorial Note on Part 21
Editorial Notes: 1. For miscellaneous amendments to cross references in this 21 see Amdt. 21-10, 31 FR 9211, July 6, 1966. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 21 appear at 74 FR 53384, Oct. 16, 2009.

§ 21.119 Privileges. The holder of a supplemental type certificate may— ( a ) In the case of aircraft, obtain airworthiness certificates;
( b ) In the case of other products, obtain approval for installation on certificated aircraft; and
( c ) Obtain a production certificate in accordance with the requirements of subpart G of this part for the change in the type design approved by the supplemental type certificate.
[Doc. No. 5085, 29 FR 14568, Oct. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 21-92, 74 FR 53387, Oct. 16, 2009]
§ 13.226 Public disclosure of information. ( a ) The administrative law judge may order that any information contained in the record be withheld from public disclosure. Any party or interested person may object to disclosure of information in the record by filing and serving a written motion to withhold specific information in accordance with §§ 13.210 and 13.211 respectively. A party may file a motion seeking to protect from public disclosure information contained in a document that the party is filing at the same time it files the document. The person or party must state the specific grounds for nondisclosure in the motion.
( b ) The administrative law judge must grant the motion to withhold if, based on the motion and any response to the motion, the administrative law judge determines that: Disclosure would be detrimental to aviation safety; disclosure would not be in the public interest; or the information is not otherwise required to be made available to the public.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                    $   804,861
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                               6,279,976
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            7,647,901
<PP&E>                                     21,039,057
<DEPRECIATION>                             15,677,098
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             13,348,536
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       4,626,783
<BONDS>                                             0
<COMMON>                                   13,833,965
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (8,084,386)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               13,348,536
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            6,421,937
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               5,679,045
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               34,848
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             45,748
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               662,296
<INCOME-TAX>                                   57,261
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           605,035
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  605,035
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.13
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32 (i)

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

In connection with the Form 10-Q of National Bankshares, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, I, James G. Rakes, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of National Bankshares, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

 

(1)   such Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, 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 such Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of National Bankshares, Inc.

 

 

| /s/ JAMES G. RAKES                                                                                 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| James G. RakesPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)

November 6, 2008 |
• Noticias Puerto Rico

Rescatan a residentes de una égida en Caguas

El alcalde de Caguas indicó que fueron algunos de los 

ciudadanos asistidos en la urbanización Villa Blanca.

Varios residentes de una égida fueron asistidos por personal de rescate. (Captura)

Nota de archivo: esta historia fue publicada hace más de 6 meses.

Por Alex Figueroa Cancel

18 de septiembre de 2022 • 6:53pm

Caguas. Casi una veintena de personas estaban siendo rescatadas esta tarde de la urbanización 

Villa Blanca en Caguas.

El alcalde William Miranda Torres indicó que entre los afectados había varios residentes de una 

égida, que también se afectó cuando se desbordó el río Cagüitas, que también inundó la 

urbanización San Antonio.

“Sacaron a varios residentes, incluyendo varios de un hogar de envejecientes que necesitaron 

ayuda. Recurrimos a la Guardia Nacional”, relató Miranda Torres vía telefónica.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24035-52 Filed:04/19/23 Entered:04/19/23 22:37:35 Desc:

Exhibit Page 1 of 2
Una transmisión en directo del periodista Miguel Ángel Rosa mostró cómo algunos de los 

residentes eran sacados por policías estatales.

Las imágenes mostraban a una adulta mayor y a una mujer con su niño.

Por su parte, el teniente Carlos Iván Figueroa indicó que también rescataron a una mujer 

embarazada.

En la transmisión, el sargento López Pulliza indicó que los rescatados superaban las 15 personas.

Por su parte, el alcalde cagüeño señaló que los desalojados estaban siendo llevados al refugio 

ubicado en la escuela Francisco Valdez.

Dijo que también tuvieron que desalojar familias en la carretera PR-172 en Cidra, por 

deslizamientos.

Por otro lado, la Guardia Nacional de Puerto Rico informó que hasta las 5:00 de la tarde se 

encontraba atendiendo diez misiones de evacuación de personas debido a inundaciones en varios 

municipios y comunidades.

En la urbanización Mansiones de Monte Río en Cayey el personal de la Guardia Nacional 

apoyaba en la evacuación de unas 200 personas. En el barrio Playa en Ponce, por otro lado, se 

llevaba a cabo una misión de evacuación de 50 personas.

De igual modo en el área de El Coco en Salinas, la Guardia Nacional se encontraba evacuando a 

unas 15 personas, así como otras 20 en Guánica, 30 en el barrio Mosquito en Guayama y 200 en 

Toa Baja, debido a inundaciones.

Además, el personal de la Guardia Nacional atendía una evacuación de unas 200 personas en 

Loíza, así como evacuaciones en el barrio Manzanillo de Juana Díaz. En estas dos últimas 

misiones no se precisó la cantidad de personas evacuadas.

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24035-52 Filed:04/19/23 Entered:04/19/23 22:37:35 Desc:

Exhibit Page 2 of 2
----

----

Neffs Bancorp, Inc. 10-Q

|   | · | the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | · | the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the Corporations financial condition and results of operations of the corporation as of the dates and for the periods expressed in this quarterly report. |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  May 11, 2010 |   | By:                     | /s/ John J. Remaley     |
|-------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|-------------------------|
|                          |   | Name:    | John J. Remaley         |
|                          |   | Title:                  | Chief Executive Officer |
Editorial Note on Part 750
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 750 appear at 84 FR 1609, Feb. 5, 2019.

§ 750.0 Scope. ( a ) This part limits and prohibits, in certain circumstances, the ability of federally insured credit unions, including Federally and state chartered natural person credit unions and Federally and state chartered corporate credit unions, to enter into contracts to pay and to make golden parachute and indemnification payments to institution-affiliated parties (IAPs).
( b ) The limitations on golden parachute payments apply to troubled federally insured credit unions that seek to enter into contracts to pay or to make golden parachute payments to their IAPs. A “golden parachute payment” is generally considered to be any payment to an IAP which is contingent on the termination of that person's employment and is received when the federally insured credit union making the payment is troubled. The definition of golden parachute payment does not include payments pursuant to qualified retirement plans, nonqualified bona fide deferred compensation plans, nondiscriminatory severance pay plans, other types of common benefits plans, state statutes and death benefits. Certain limited exceptions to the golden parachute payment prohibition are provided for in cases involving unassisted mergers and the hiring of new management to help improve a troubled federally insured credit union's financial condition. A procedure is also set forth to permit a federally insured credit union to request permission to make what would otherwise be a prohibited golden parachute payment.
( c ) The limitations on indemnification payments apply to all federally insured credit unions, including state chartered credit unions, regardless of their financial health. Generally, this part prohibits federally insured credit unions from indemnifying an IAP for that portion of the costs sustained with regard to an administrative proceeding or civil action commenced by NCUA or a state regulatory authority that results in a final order or settlement pursuant to which the IAP is assessed a civil money penalty, removed from office, prohibited from participating in the affairs of a federally insured credit union or required to cease and desist from an action or take an affirmative action described in section 206 of the Federal Credit Union Act, 12 U.S.C. 1786. There are exceptions to this general prohibition. First, a federally insured credit union may purchase commercial insurance to cover these expenses, except judgments and penalties. Second, the credit union may advance legal and other professional expenses to an IAP directly (except for judgments and penalties) if its board of directors makes certain specific findings and the IAP provides a written affirmation and agrees in writing to reimburse the credit union if it is ultimately determined that the IAP violated a law or regulation or has engaged in certain unsafe or unsound practices or breaches of fiduciary duty. For Federal credit unions, fiduciary duty is defined in 701.4 of this chapter. State chartered credit unions should look to applicable state law.