alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 107
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 107 appear at 67 FR 61011, Sept. 27, 2002, 70 FR 56089, Sept. 23, 2005, and 70 FR 73159, Dec. 9, 2005.

§ 107.311 Notice of probable violation. ( a ) The Office of Chief Counsel may serve a notice of probable violation on a person alleging the violation of one or more provisions of the Federal hazardous material transportation law, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or any provision of this subchapter, subchapter B of this chapter, or subchapter C of this chapter, or any special permit, response plan, or order issued thereunder.
( b ) A notice of probable violation issued under this section includes the following information: ( 1 ) A citation of the provisions of the Federal hazardous material transportation law, Federal Water Pollution Control Act, an order issued thereunder, this subchapter, subchapter B of this chapter, subchapter C of this chapter, or the terms of any special permit issued thereunder which the Office of Chief Counsel believes the respondent is violating or has violated.
( 2 ) A statement of the factual allegations upon which the demand for remedial action, a civil penalty, or both, is based.
( 3 ) A statement of the respondent's right to present written or oral explanations, information, and arguments in answer to the allegations and in mitigation of the sanction sought in the notice of probable violation.
( 4 ) A statement of the respondent's right to request a hearing and the procedures for requesting a hearing.
( 5 ) In addition, in the case of a notice of probable violation proposing a compliance order, a statement of the proposed actions to be taken by the respondent to achieve compliance.
( 6 ) In addition, in the case of a notice of probable violation proposing a civil penalty: ( i ) A statement of the maximum civil penalty for which the respondent may be liable;
( ii ) The amount of the preliminary civil penalty being sought by the Office of Chief Counsel, constitutes the maximum amount the Chief Counsel may seek throughout the proceeding; and
( iii ) A description of the manner in which the respondent makes payment of any money due the United States as a result of the proceeding.
( c ) The Office of Chief Counsel may amend a notice of probable violation at any time before issuance of a compliance order or an order assessing a civil penalty. If the Office of Chief Counsel alleges any new material facts or seeks new or additional remedial action or an increase in the amount of the proposed civil penalty, it issues a new notice of probable violation under this section.
[Amdt. 107-11, 48 FR 2651, Jan. 20, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 45730, Nov. 1, 1985; Amdt. 107-24, 56 FR 8624, Feb. 28, 1991; Amdt. 107-32, 59 FR 49131, Sept. 26, 1994; Amdt. 107-35, 60 FR 49108, Sept. 21, 1995; Amdt. 107-36, 61 FR 7184, Feb. 26, 1996; 84 FR 6947, Feb. 28, 2019]
§ 179.200-10 Welding. ( a ) All joints shall be fusion-welded in compliance with the requirements of AAR Specifications for Tank Cars, appendix W (IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter). Welding procedures, welders and fabricators shall be approved.
( b ) Welding is not permitted on or to ductile iron or malleable iron fittings.
[29 FR 18995, Dec. 29, 1964. Redesignated at 32 FR 5606, Apr. 5, 1967, and amended by Amdt. 179-10, 36 FR 21350, Nov. 6, 1971; 68 FR 75761, Dec. 31, 2003]
-----Original Message----- 

From: deand@visi.com [mailto:deand@visi.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 6:18 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 24, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

As a psychologist, I've seen for years patients who get short-changed 

in their care. This is just as important as any other medical 

treatment. 

Sincerely, 

Dean DeGroot 

3232 Buchanan Street NE 

Minneapolis, MN 55418
UNITED STATES NAVY–MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

_________________________

No. 201800105

_________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v.

JONATHAN S. NORMAN

Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

_________________________

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: Major John L. Ferriter, USMC.

Convening Authority: Commanding Officer, Headquarters Battalion, 

1st Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Staff Judge Advocate’s Recommendation: Lieutenant Colonel Matthew 

J. Stewart, USMC.

For Appellant: Lieutenant Jaqueline M. Leonard, JAGC, USN.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________

Decided 23 August 2018

_________________________

Before HUTCHISON, TANG, and ELLINGTON, Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment 

of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening 

authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c). 

FOR THE COURT

RODGER A. DREW, JR.

Clerk of Court
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 3
Federal Reserve Bank of: Philadelphia

## Filings received during the week ending September 15, 2012

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1

48–834 1998

105th Congress, 2d Session – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 105–269

AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL RULES OF

APPELLATE PROCEDURE

COMMUNICATION

FROM

THE CHIEF JUSTICE, THE SUPREME

COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

TRANSMITTING

AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY THE COURT, PURSUANT

TO 28 U.S.C. 2072

MAY 11, 1998.—Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and ordered

to be printed

(iii)

(v)
vi
vii
(1)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252

Æ
#### Isabella Mead, Respondent, v. Isaac J. Stratton and others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, with leave to the defendant to answer within twenty days, on payment of costs of the demurrer and of this appeal. Opinion by

Haight, J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Brunner
Companies Income Properties L.P., I 1996 Year-End 10-KSB and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000830737
<NAME> BRUNNER COMPANIES INCOME PROPERTIES L.P. I
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             332
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      154
<ALLOWANCES>                                        35
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          25,044
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,696
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  20,045
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         18,749
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,010
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    20,045
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,749
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,004
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,726
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (255)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.41)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### § 1302.41 Suspension of statute.

The provisions of section 28 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920, are hereby further suspended from and including the first day of January, 1921, until further order of this Board.
#### In Re Enoch Vincent’s Estate.

October Term, 1910.

Present: Rowell, C. J., Munson, Watson, Haselton, and Powers, JJ.

Opinion filed January 4, 1911.

*Probate Court*— Decree *of Distribution*— Appeal *by Executor.*

Under P. S. 2973, providing that an interested party may appeal to the county court from a decree of the probate court, an executor has no right to appeal from a decree of the probate court distributing the testator’s estate, for in such case the executor has no legal right that can be enlarged or diminished by the decree.

Appeal of Hiram L. Sparrow, as executor of the last will and testament of Enoch H. Vincent, from a decree of the probate court distributing the testator’s estate; the estates of Jane K. Somerville and Ella D. Collins, Appellees. Heard on appellees’ motion to dismiss the appeal, at the March Term, 1910, Washington County, *Butler,*J., presiding. Motion to dismiss overruled. Hearing on an agreed statement of facts. Judgment affirming the decree of the probate court. Appellees excepted. *R. M. Harvey*and *E. M. Harvey*for the appellees.

The motion to dismiss should have been sustained. The executor has no such interest in the decree of distribution as gives him an appeal. *Woodward*v. *Spear,*10 Vt. 420; *Hemenway*v. *Corey,*16 Vt. 226; *In re Varnum,*70 Vt. 147; *In re Clark’s Est.*79 Vt. 62; 18 Cyc. 666; *In re Stineman’s Appeal,*34 Pa. St. 394; *In re Gallagher’s Appeal,*89 Pa. St. *29;Fuhrman’s Est.*21 Pa. Sup. Ct. 27; *In re Hodgman,*69 Hun. 487; *In re Hodgman,*140 N. Y. 421; *Bryant*v. *Thompson,*128 N. Y. 426; *Merrick*v. *Kennedy,*46 Neb. 264; *Norton’s Appeal,*46 Conn. 527; *In re Dewar’s Est.,*25 Pac.1025; 4 Words and Phrases 3702; *Wiggin*v. *Swett,*39 Am. Dec. 194; *Smith*v. *Bradstreet,*16 Pick. 264.

*Fred L. Laird*for the appellant.

Watson, J.

This case is here on the appeal of Hiram L. *90Sparrow, executor of the last will and testament of Enoch H. Vincent, deceased, from the decree of the probate court, by which the estate of the testator is ordered to be distributed. Theappellees moved to dismiss the appeal, for that the appellant-has no such interest in said decree as entitles him to appeal therefrom.

The petition for the appeal shows the appellant’s relation, to the estate to be that of an executor, simply. This relation neither gives him any legal right, nor places him under any-legal liability, which may be enlarged or diminished by the decree-of distribution. It follows that he has no such interest as is necessary by statute to the right of appeal (P. S. 2973), and the-motion to dismiss should have been granted. *Hemenway*v. *Corey,*16 Vt. 225; *In re Clark’s Estate,*79 Vt. 62, 64 Atl. 331, 118 Am. St. Rep. 938.

*Decree overruling the motion to dismiss the appeal*reversed,. *and the appeal dismissed with costs to the appellees. To be certified to the probate court.*
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 2
Federal Reserve Bank of: New York

## Filings received during the week ending June 9, 2012

|Filer                             | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                         | End of Comment Period                                
|--------------------------------- | ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|MAHAM BETEILIGUNGSGESELLSCHAFT AG | CIC           | Notice by Muhammad Habib to retain a controlling interest in Maham Beteiligungsgessellschaft AG, Zurich, Switzerland, and thereby indirectly retain control of Habib American Bank, New York, New York. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:                        | Not available
|Federal Register:                 | Not available

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
;: a n la 1901 North Moore Street * P.O. Box 9245 *Arlington, Virginia 22209 * 703/525-9565 * Fax 703/525-0718

Web Site: httpA/www.garnanet.org

February 5, 1999

Mr. Terry Logee

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Codes and Standards

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Mail Station EE-43

1000 Independence Ave. S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20585-0121

Dear Terry:

Attached for your information is a summary of the results of all the residential gas, electric and oil

water heater tests conducted in the years 1994 through 1997. This summary shows the average ratio

of the measured energy factor compared to the listed energy factor for all units by fuel type. The

information also includes the number of samples tested and rerates. This same information is still

being compiled for the 1998 tests. We will provide it to you when it becomes available.

In reviewing this information, please be aware that the large number of rerates in 1994 and 1995,

particularly for the electric models, was the result of the cumulative effect of 1) the major change

the industry made to use foam insulation that did not use a chlorofluorocarbon blowing agent

(i.e. CFC- 11) and 2) changes made to our program to tighten the acceptance criteria.

There is some other information that I would like to bring to your attention. While there are

hundreds of listings of residential storage water heaters in the GAMA efficiency directory, it must

be recognized that many of these are different brand names of the same basic model. Based on the

last time we did a review of our listings in terms of distinct basic models at the beginning of 1998,

there are 305 distinct basic models of gas storage water heaters and 220 distinct basic models of

electric storage water heaters listed in our program. Of the gas models, there are only 25 distinct

basic models that have a rated volume of 40 gallons or more and an energy factor of .62 or higher.

Of the electric models, there are only 22 distinct basic models that have a rated volume of 50

gallons or more and an energy factor of .Q2 or higher. This information must be considered in any

discussion of the availability of models at the higher levels of efficiency.

There is some more detailed information that I am still in the process of compiling. I hope to be

able to forward that to you sometime next week.

Sincerely,

i to

Frank A. Stanonik

Director of Technical Services

FAS:tyj

Attachment

An Association of Manufacturers of Appliances and Equipment for Utilization, Distribution and Control of Gas t

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 62
SUMMARY OF GAMA WATER HEATER

EFFICIENCY CERTIFICATION PROGRAM TESTS

(1994-1997)

Ave. EF Ratio No. of First/Second Samples EF Rerates

G 0 -E ALL G 0 E ALL G 0 E ALL

1997 101.2 104.5 99.7 100.5 101/7 3/0 95/5 199/12 8 0 8 16

1996 101.4 102.9 99.4 100.4 101/3 3/0 101/3 205/6 6 0 6 12

1995 101.5 104.6 98.4 100 96/2 3/0 89/12 188/14 4 0 24 28

1994 99.4 108.9 97.2 98.5 84/6 3/0 82/17 169/23 14 0 27 41

Ave. EF Ratio = Measured / Listed

G - Gas

- Oil

E - Electric

EE-RM-97-900 COMMENT 62
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) The undersigned executive officer of Banknorth Group, Inc. (the Registrant) hereby certifies
that the Registrants Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Registrant. /s/ William J. RyanName:
    William J. RyanTitle:
    Chief Executive Officer Date: March 7, 2005 Note: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 has been provided to Banknorth Group, Inc. and will be retained by Banknorth Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**HOME | 	  ABOUT US | 	  CONTACT | 	  REGIONAL MANAGERS**Nautical Charts & Pubs****Surveys & Wrecks****GIS & Other Products****Research & Development****Customer Service****Business Opportunities****Education****NGA Chart: 91314          Scale: 60,000          Edition: 3          Edition Date: 26-OCT-85          CORRECTED TO NTM:  1986/07**Notice ListingOCVLeftIndex-  **Click the +/- buttons and drag the slider tool (solid triangle) 				to zoom in and out.** 
-  **Click the arrow buttons to pan left/right and up/down.** 
-  **Drag 				the navigation box in the upper left hand corner to move around 				the chart image.								This chart display or derived product can be used as a planning or analysis tool and may not be used as a navigational aid. 								NOTE: Use the official, full scale NGA nautical chart for real navigation whenever possible.  These are available from authorized 				NGA nautical chart sales agents.  Screen captures of the on-line viewable charts available here do NOT fulfill chart carriage 				requirements for regulated commercial vessels under Titles 33 and 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations.								Adobe Flash Player		  		is required to view the chart image.				Powered by Zoomify.** 
Privacy  |  Disclaimer  |  NOAA's National Ocean Service  |  NOAA  |  U.S. Department of Commerce **
II

Calendar No. 423

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1880

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

DECEMBER 19, 1995

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

MAY 23, 1996

Reported by Mr. STEVENS, without amendment

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office building located

at 102 South McLean, Lincoln, Illinois, as the ‘‘Edward

Madigan Post Office Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States Post Office building located at 102

5 South McLean, Lincoln, Illinois, shall be known and des6 ignated as the ‘‘Edward Madigan Post Office Building’’.

7 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

8 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

9 paper, or other record of the United States to the United
2

•HR 1880 RS

1 States Post Office building referred to in section 1 shall

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Edward Madigan Post

3 Office Building’’.

Calendar No. 423

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1880

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office building

as the ‘‘Edward Madigan Post Office Building’’.located at 102 South McLean, Lincoln, Illinois,

MAY 23, 1996

Reported without amendment