alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Relevant Meetings with External Stakeholders since Publication of the 2013 Final HCFC Allocation Rule:

April 25, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

May 7, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from National Refrigerants

May 14, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy

May 14, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Hudson Technologies*

May 21, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Heating, Air-conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors 

International (HARDI)

May 22, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from DuPont*

May 28, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Arkema

June 3, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)

June 6, 2013 – Meeting with representatives of Honeywell*

June 20, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Combs Gas, Inc. 

July 25, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from DuPont

August 8, 2013 – Meeting with representatives of Honeywell

August 22, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Hudson Technologies

September 24 – Meeting with representatives from Watsco

November 1, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Williams & Associates and USA Refrigerants

November 6, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Arkema

November 7, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

November 12, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Honeywell

November 14, 2013 – Meeting with representatives from Heating, Air-conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors 

International (HARDI)

November 20 – Meeting with representative from EOS Climate*

*These companies provided Confidential Business Information to EPA at their meeting or in subsequent 

correspondence. 

This document does not reflect meetings held at the Office of Management and Budget while the rule was being 

reviewed in accordance with E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563. For a list of those meetings and the participants, please 

visit http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/oira_2060_meetings/.
# EUR-Lex - 52003SA0004 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 52003SA0004

**Special Report No 4/2003 concerning rural development: support for less-favoured areas, together with the Commission's replies **

*
Official Journal C 151 , 27/06/2003 P. 0001 - 0024 *

>NOTEXT>
-----Original Message----- 

From: abm6@columbia.edu [mailto:abm6@columbia.edu] 

Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 7:52 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 29, 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. 

Sincerely, 

Alex Mummery 

2433 Buena Vista Ave., #A 

Alameda, CA 94501
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50220 Conference Calendar

CHRIS HOWARD McDANIEL, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus LESTER E. FLEMING, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution Bastrop,
Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A:97-CV-654

- - - - - - - - - - August 18, 1998 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Chris Howard McDaniel appeals the district court’s denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. He challenges his ineligibility to receive a sentence reduction for successfully completing a substance abuse treatment program due to the Bureau of Prisons’ (“BOP”) determination that a defendant who receives a sentence enhancement for possession of a dangerous weapon is ineligible for the reduction because it only applies to nonviolent offenders. See 18 U.S.C. § 3621(e)(2); BOP ProgramNo. 98-50220 -2- Statement No. 5612.02, Section 9. McDaniel argues that BOP Program Statement No. 5612.02, Section 9, should be set aside because it is a legislative rule and was not promulgated inaccordance with the Administrative Procedure Act’s notice-andcomment requirements and because the BOP exceeded its statutory authority in making this rule. McDaniel’s position lacks merit because this court has previously determined that this ProgramStatement is an interpretive rule not subject to the notice-andcomment requirements of the APA. See Royal v. Tombone , 141 F.3d 596, 600 (5th Cir. 1998); Venegas v. Henman , 126 F.3d 760, 763 (5th Cir. 1997); see also Reno v. Koray , 515 U.S. 50, 61 (1995) (noting BOP program statement was an interpretive guideline not subject to notice-and-comment requirements). McDaniel concedes that his contention that the BOP exceeded its statutory authority by excluding prisoners who receive sentence enhancements pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) from eligibility for sentence reductions is meritless in light of our decision in Venegas
. See Venegas , 126 F.3d at 765.
AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Henry W. Poor et al., as Trustees of Gramercy Park, Respondents, *v.*Frank A. O’Donnel et al., as Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the City of New York, Appellants.

*People ex rel. Poor*v. *O’Donnel,*139 App. Div. 83, affirmed.

(Argued November 14, 1910;

decided December 6, 1910.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June *24,*1910, which affirmed an order of Special Term canceling an assessment for taxation for the year 1905 on real estate known as Gramercy Park.

*Archibald R. Watson, Corporation Counsel (Curtis A. Peters*and *R. M. de Acosta*of counsel), for appellants.

*Roy C. Gasser*and *Henry B. Anderson*for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Dowling, J., below.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       6,323,053
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         102,900
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             2,325,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 35,741,084
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      22,471,543
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        21,976,397
<LOANS>                                     75,252,193
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,388,643
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             143,961,708
<DEPOSITS>                                 120,656,366
<SHORT-TERM>                                 2,500,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,334,359
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,482
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,901,342
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             143,961,708
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              5,220,292
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            2,855,676
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               140,622
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             8,216,590
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           3,412,353
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             277,243
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        4,526,994
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  128,250
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              34,964
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              3,768,455
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,567,024
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,105,966
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.14
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.25
<LOANS-NON>                                    474,859
<LOANS-PAST>                                    22,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                36,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0<F1>
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,343,636
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  140,537
<RECOVERIES>                                    57,293
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,388,643
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
<FN>
<F1>FINANCIAL INFORMATION NOT CONTAINED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32











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 Healthways, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Ben R. Leedle, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Mary A. Chaput, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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/ Ben R. Leedle, Jr.


Ben R. Leedle, Jr.


Chief Executive Officer


November 8, 2010





/s/ Mary A. Chaput


Mary A. Chaput


Chief Financial Officer


November 8, 2010
§ 210.7 Responsibility for noise defective railroad equipment. Any railroad that uses railroad equipment that is noise defective or engages in a car coupling operating that results in excessive noise according to the criteria established in this part and in the Standards is responsible for compliance with this part. Subject to § 210.9, such railroad shall— ( a ) Correct the noise defect;
( b ) Remove the noise defective railroad equipment from service; or
( c ) Modify the car coupling procedure to bring it within the prescribed noise limits.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 230 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 230

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent the misuse of certain 
                        anti-racketeering laws.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

    Mr. Dornan (for himself, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, and Mr. Hyde) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent the misuse of certain 
                        anti-racketeering laws.

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

SECTION 1. RACKETEERING DEFINITION.

    Section 1961(5) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``a profit-seeking purpose and'' after ``requires''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by this Act shall apply with respect to cases 
arising on or after the date of the enactment of this Act and to cases 
pending on that date.
                                 <all>
```
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCharacteristic eddy decomposition of turbulence in a channelThe proper orthogonal decomposition technique (Lumley's decomposition) is applied to the turbulent flow in a channel to extract coherent structures by decomposing the velocity field into characteristic eddies with random coefficients. In the homogeneous spatial directions, a generaliztion of the shot-noise expansion is used to determine the characteristic eddies. In this expansion, the Fourier coefficients of the characteristic eddy cannot be obtained from the second-order statistics. Three different techniques are used to determine the phases of these coefficients. They are based on: (1) the bispectrum, (2) a spatial compactness requirement, and (3) a functional continuity argument. Results from these three techniques are found to be similar in most respects. The implications of these techniques and the shot-noise expansion are discussed. The dominant eddy is found to contribute as much as 76 percent to the turbulent kinetic energy. In both 2D and 3D, the characteristic eddies consist of an ejection region straddled by streamwise vortices that leave the wall in the very short streamwise distance of about 100 wall units.Document ID19910012157Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMoin, Parviz*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Moser, Robert D.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1991Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And Heat TransferReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:100065NASA-TM-100065A-88081Accession Number91N21470Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910012157.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
#### § 236.789 Relay, timing.

A relay which will not close its front contacts or open its back contacts, or both, until the expiration of a definite time intervals after the relay has been energized.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, October 19, 1995 (131), Para 131.8 Medicare Preservation]
[Page 1555]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.131.8  medicare preservation

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. LaHOOD, pursuant to House Resolution 238 
and rule XXIII, declared the House resolved into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2425) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to preserve 
and reform the medicare program.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. LaHOOD, by unanimous consent, designated 
Mr. LINDER as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole; and after some 
time spent therein,
  The Committee rose informally to receive a message from the President.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. STEARNS, assumed the Chair.
```
EXHIBIT 23.1




Consent of Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated January 24,
1996 on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Chesapeake
Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1995 and 1994, and for each
of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1995, which report is
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, in the
following registration statements on Form S-8:
The Chesapeake Corporation of Virginia 1981 Stock Incentive Plan (File No.
2-71595)
Salaried Employees' Stock Purchase Plan (File No. 33-14926)
Hourly Employees' Stock Purchase Plan (File No. 2-79636)
Chesapeake Corporation 1987 Stock Option Plan (File No. 33-14925)
Chesapeake Corporation 401(k) Savings Plan for Salaried Employees (File
No. 33-14927)
Chesapeake Corporation 401(k) Savings Plan for Hourly Employees (File No.
33-26150)
Chesapeake Corporation Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan (File No.
33-53478)
Wisconsin Tissue Mills Inc. 401(k) Savings Plan for Hourly Employees (File
No. 33-55558)
Chesapeake Corporation 1993 Incentive Plan (File No. 33-67384)
Chesapeake Packaging Co. 401(k) Savings Plan for Hourly Employees (File
No. 33-56473)
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on
Form S-8 for the Hourly Employees' Stock Purchase Plan (File No. 2-79636) of
our report dated January 29, 1996 on our audits of the balance sheet of the
Hourly Employees' Stock Purchase Plan of Chesapeake Corporation and
participating subsidiaries as of November 30, 1995 and 1994, and the related
statement of changes in plan equity for each of the three fiscal years in the
period ended November 30, 1995, which report is included in the Annual Report
on Form 11-K (Exhibit 99.1).

                                   /s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
                                   Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
                              
                         
Richmond, Virginia
March 11, 1996
<PAGE>
§ 230.41 Flexible staybolts with caps. ( a ) *General.* Flexible staybolts with caps shall have their caps removed during every 5th annual inspection for the purpose of inspecting the bolts for breakage, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) *Drilled flexible staybolts.* For flexible staybolts that have telltale holes between 3 ⁄ 16 inch and 7 ⁄ 32 inch in diameter, and which extend the entire length of the bolt and into the head not less than one third of the diameter of the head, the steam locomotive owner and/or operator need not remove the staybolt caps if it can be established, by an electrical or other suitable method, that the telltale holes are open their entire length. Any leakage from these telltale holes during the hydrostatic test indicates that the bolt is broken and must be replaced. Before the steam locomotive is placed in service, the inner ends of all telltale holes shall be closed with a fireproof porous material that will keep the telltale holes free of foreign matter and permit steam or water to exit the telltale hole when the bolt is broken or fractured.
( c ) *Recordkeeping.* The removal of flexible staybolt caps and other tests shall be reported on FRA Form No. 3. (See appendix B of this part.)
( d ) *Testing at request of FRA inspector.* Staybolt caps also shall be removed, or any of the tests in this section made, whenever the FRA inspector or the steam locomotive owner and/or operator considers it necessary due to identifiable safety concerns about the condition of staybolts, staybolt caps or staybolt sleeves.
-----Original Message----- 

From: projectfardesign@gmail.com [mailto:projectfardesign@gmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 9:50 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 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. 

Sincerely, 

Judith Toth 

2291 E Hammond Lake Dr 

Bloomfield Twp, MI 48302
#### § 236.736 Cut-section.

A location other than a signal location where two adjoining track circuits end within a block.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2102

To amend subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, United States Code,

to prevent cost-of-living increases in the survivor annuity contributions

of uniformed services retirees from becoming effective before related

cost-of-living increases in retired pay become payable.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 24, 1995

Mr. MORAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on National Security

A BILL

To amend subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, United

States Code, to prevent cost-of-living increases in the

survivor annuity contributions of uniformed services retirees from becoming effective before related cost-of-living

increases in retired pay become payable.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 2102 IH

1 SECTION 1. COST-OF-LIVING INCREASES IN SBP CONTRIBU2 TIONS TO BE EFFECTIVE CONCURRENTLY

3 WITH PAYMENT OF RELATED RETIRED PAY

4 COST-OF-LIVING INCREASES.

5 (a) SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN.—Section 1452(h) of

6 title 10, United States Code, is amended—

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(h)’’; and

8 (2) by adding at the end the following new

9 paragraph:

10 ‘‘(2)(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), when the

11 initial payment of an increase in retired pay under section

12 1401a of this title (or any other provision of law) to a

13 person is later than the effective date of that increase by

14 reason of the application of subsection (b)(2)(B) of such

15 section, then the amount of the reduction in the person’s

16 retired pay shall be effective on the date of that initial

17 payment of the increase in retired pay rather than the ef18 fective date of the increase in retired pay.

19 ‘‘(B) Subparagraph (A) may not be construed as de20 laying, for purposes of determining the amount of a

21 monthly annuity under section 1451 of this title, the effec22 tive date of an increase in a base amount under subsection

23 (h) of such section from the effective date of an increase

24 in retired pay under section 1401a of this title to the date

25 on which the initial payment of that increase in retired
3

HR 2102 IH

1 pay is made in accordance with subsection (b)(2)(B) of

2 such section 1401a.’’.

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

4 subsection (a) shall take effect with respect to retired pay

5 payable for months beginning on or after the date of the

6 enactment of this Act.

Æ
§ 1112.10 Requests for oral hearings and cross examination. ( a ) *Requests.* Requests for oral hearings in matters originally assigned for handling under modified procedure must include the reasons why the matter cannot be properly resolved under modified procedure. Requests for cross examination of witnesses must include the name of the witness and the subject matter of the desired cross examination.
( b ) *Disposition.* Unless material facts are in dispute, oral hearings will not be held. If held, oral hearings will normally be confined to material issues upon which the parties disagree. The decision setting a matter for oral hearing will define the scope of the hearing.
[61 FR 52712, Oct. 8, 1996]
1 From: Angus Crane [acrane@naima.org]

Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 9:50 AM

To: Reeves, David; Hancy, Cindy Wang

Subject: Answer to Mineral Wool Question

Importance: High

Categories: Blue Category



### I received the following response from Rock Wool Manufacturing:

The Curing oven has a activated carbon "C oke" gas scrubber. It was installed 1996-97. The collection chamber has a

cascading water scrubber. It was insta lled 1970 when the plant was built.

Angus E. Crane

Executive Vice President, General Counsel

North American Insulation Manufacturers Association

Ph: (703) 684

‐ 0084 ext. 123

Fax: (703) 684

‐ 0427

Visit NAIMA online at:

www.NAIMA.org

www.PipeInsulation.org