alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 209.329 Assessment considerations. ( a ) Proof of a respondent's willful violation of one of the requirements of parts 213 through 241 (excluding parts 225, 228, and 233) of this title, or of one of the requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapt. 51, or any regulation or order prescribed thereunder, establishes a rebuttable presumption that the respondent is unfit to perform the safety-sensitive functions described in § 209.303. Where such presumption arises, the respondent has the burden of establishing that, taking account of the factors in paragraph (b) of this section, he or she is fit to perform the foregoing safety-sensitive functions for the period and under the other conditions, if any, proposed in the notice of proposed disqualification.
( b ) In determining respondent's lack of fitness to perform safety-sensitive functions and the duration and other conditions, if any, of appropriate disqualification orders under §§ 209.309, 209.323, and 209.327, the factors to be considered, to the extent each is pertinent to the respondent's case, include but are not limited to the following: ( 1 ) The nature and circumstances of the violation, including whether the violation was intentional, technical, or inadvertent, was committed willfully, or was frequently repeated;
( 2 ) The adverse impact or the potentially adverse impact of the violation on the health and safety of persons and the safety of property;
( 3 ) The employing railroad's operating rules, safety rules, and repair and maintenance standards;
( 4 ) Repair and maintenance standards adopted by the railroad industry;
( 5 ) The consistency of the conditions of the proposed disqualification with disqualification orders issued against other employees of the employing railroad for the same or similar violations;
( 6 ) Whether the respondent was on notice of any safety regulations that were violated or whether the respondent had been warned about the conduct in question;
( 7 ) The respondent's past record of committing violations of safety regulations, including previous FRA warnings issued, disqualifications imposed, civil penalties assessed, railroad disciplinary actions, and criminal convictions therefor;
( 8 ) The civil penalty scheduled for the violation of the safety regulation in question;
( 9 ) Mitigating circumstances surrounding the violation, such as the existence of an emergency situation endangering persons or property and the need for the respondent to take immediate action; and
( 10 ) Such other factors as may be warranted in the public interest.
[74 FR 23334, May 19, 2009]
-----Original Message----- 

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

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 2:28 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 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, 

Geralyn Madigan 

347 Galloway Oaks Dr. 

Ballwin, MO 63021
Docket: EBSA-2009-0010 

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Comment On: EBSA-2009-0010-0409 

Interim Final Rules Under the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and 

Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Document: EBSA-2009-0010-DRAFT-0696 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-2167 

Submitter Information 

Name: Krystal S Angevine 

Address: 

9451 Voyles Rd 

Pekin, IN, 47165 

Email: biofeedback@insightbb.com 

Phone: 502-641-5989 

General Comment 

I agree with the mental health parity act. I suggest: 

1. that biofeedback be included as a treatment in all policies if provided by a licensed provider. 

2. that all requirements for preaauthorization be equal . 

3. I request that the Final Rules clarify that benefits for MH/SUD must be comparable in scope to 

the benefits provided in medical/surgical care both across and within each classification. Unless 

parity in scope of services is required in the final regulations, the intent of the Act will not be 

achieved. 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: May 03, 2010 

Received: May 03, 2010 

Status: DoNotPost 

Tracking No. 80ae5a24 

Comments Due: May 03, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Page 1 of 1

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 5/3/2010
#### Aaron B. Whitlock, *Respondent, v.*William J. Sexton, *Administrator, etc., Appellant.*

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, September 19, 1995 (117), Para 117.14 H.R. 1296--Unfinished Business]
[Pages 1376-1377]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.117.14  h.r. 1296--unfinished business

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. FOLEY, pursuant to clause 5, rule I, 
announced the further unfinished business to be the motion to suspend 
the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1296) to provide for the 
Administration of certain Presidio properties at minimal cost to the 
Federal taxpayer; as amended.
  The question being put,
  Will the House suspend the rules and pass said bill, as amended?
  The vote was taken by electronic device.

[[Page 1377]]

It was decided in the

Yeas

317

affirmative

Nays

101
```
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2208

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the percentage

of completion method of accounting shall not be required to be used

with respect to contracts for the manufacture of property if no payments

are required to be made before the completion of the manufacture of

such property.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 4, 1995

Mr. EHLERS 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 provide

that the percentage of completion method of accounting

shall not be required to be used with respect to contracts

for the manufacture of property if no payments are

required to be made before the completion of the manufacture of such property.

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

•HR 2208 IH

1 SECTION 1. EXCEPTION FROM PERCENTAGE OF COMPLE2 TION METHOD FOR CERTAIN MANUFACTUR3 ING CONTRACTS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 460(f)

5 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special

6 rule for manufacturing contracts) is amended by striking

7 ‘‘unless’’ and all that follows and inserting ‘‘unless—

8 ‘‘(A) such contract involves the manufac9 ture of—

10 ‘‘(i) any unique item of a type which

11 is not normally included in the finished

12 goods inventory of the taxpayer, or

13 ‘‘(ii) any item which normally requires

14 more than 12 calendar months to complete

15 (without regard to the period of the con16 tract), and

17 ‘‘(B) any payment for the manufacture of

18 such item is required to be made before the

19 manufacture of such item is completed.’’

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

21 subsection (a) shall apply to contracts entered into after

22 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### Same *v.*William H. Waters, *Appellant*.

Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements. '
-----Original Message----- 

From: amyschu37@yahoo.com [mailto:amyschu37@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 3:28 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 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, 

Amy Schumacher 

4487 Slate Ct Apt J 

Beavercreek, OH 45430
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, August 4, 1995 (109), Para 109.41 Time Limitation of Referred Bill]
[Page 1295]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.109.41  time limitation of referred bill

  Pursuant to clause 5 of rule X the following action was taken by the 
Speaker:

       H.R. 1815. Referral to the Committee on Resources extended 
     for a period ending not later than September 22, 1995.
```
#### § 1019.1 Cross-reference to employee ethical conduct standards and financial disclosure regulations.

Members and employees of the Surface Transportation Board also should refer to the executive branch Standards of Ethical Conduct at 5 CFR part 2635, the STB regulations at 5 CFR part 5001 which supplement the executive branch standards, and the executive branch financial disclosure regulations at 5 CFR part 2634.
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 Realmark Property Investors
Limited Partnership - II (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ending
September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph M. Jayson, Individual General Partner and
Principal Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge:

         (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
               or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
               material respects, the financial condition and results of the
               operations of the Partnership.


              November 14, 2008               /s/ Joseph M. Jayson
              -----------------               --------------------
                  Date                        Joseph M. Jayson,
                                              Individual General Partner and
                                              Principal Financial Officer
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-23-00387-CV

In re David Goad

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM COMAL COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relator has filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the justice 

court’s order denying his motion for change of venue. We lack jurisdiction to issue a writ of 

mandamus against a justice of the peace or justice court unless it is necessary to preserve 

our jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221 (writ power of court of appeals); Twenty 

First Century Holdings, Inc. v. Precision Geothermal Drilling, L.L.C., No. 03-13-00081-CV, 

2015 WL 1882267, at *6 (Tex. App.—Austin Apr. 23, 2015, no pet.) (citing Mullins v. Holt,

No. 10–13–00114–CV, 2013 WL 2257151 (Tex. App.–Waco May 9, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.) 

(court of appeals has no jurisdiction to issue writ of mandamus against judge of justice

court unless necessary to preserve jurisdiction); Rodriguez v. Womack, No. 14–10–01213–CV, 

2012 WL 19659 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 5, 2012, pet. denied) (mem. op.) (noting 

court of appeals’ lack of jurisdiction to issue mandamus against justice court). Relator does not 

argue or show that a writ of mandamus is necessary to preserve our jurisdiction. Therefore, we 

lack jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against the justice of the peace or justice court. See

In re Smith, 355 S.W.3d 901, 901–02 (Tex. App.–Amarillo 2011, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) 
2

(where appellants did not argue or show writ was necessary to preserve jurisdiction, appellate 

court lacked jurisdiction to issue writ of mandamus against justice of peace).

Having reviewed the petition and the record provided, we dismiss the petition for 

want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________

Chari L. Kelly, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly, and Theofanis

Filed: July 18, 2023
-----Original Message----- 

From: georgemische@comcast.net [mailto:georgemische@comcast.net] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 11:53 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 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, 

george mische 

1601 39th ave.n.e. 

columbia Heights, MN 55421
**Exhibit 21.1**

LIST  OF SUBSIDIARES OF 

CHIEF  CONSOLIDATED MINING COMPANY

(AN  ARIZONA CORPORATION)

| 1. | Chief Gold Mines, Inc. (a Delaware corporation) |
|----|-------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Tintic Utah Metals, LLC (a Colorado limited liability company) |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | American Star Mining Company (a Utah corporation) |
|----|---------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | Eagle and Blue Bell Mining Company (a Utah corporation) |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------|

| 5. | East Crown Point Consolidated Mining Company (a Utah corporation) |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 6. | Eureka Mines Company (a Utah corporation) |
|----|-------------------------------------------|

| 7. | Central Standard Consolidated Mines (a Utah company) |
|----|------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

----
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: 5
Federal Reserve Bank of: Richmond

## Filings received during the week ending May 21, 2011

|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 Third Quarter of 2011 (July 1, 2011 - September 30, 2011)

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------

* 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
§ 229.47 Emergency brake valve. ( a ) Except for locomotives with cabs designed for occupancy by only one person, each road locomotive shall be equipped with a brake pipe valve that is accessible to a member of the crew, other than the engineer, from that crew member's position in the cab. On car body type locomotives, a brake pipe valve shall be attached to the wall adjacent to each end exit door. The words “Emergency Brake Valve” shall be legibly stenciled or marked near each brake pipe valve or shall be shown on an adjacent badge plate.
( b ) DMU, MU, and control cab locomotives operated in road service shall be equipped with an emergency brake valve that is accessible to another crew member in the passenger compartment or vestibule. The words “Emergency Brake Valve” shall be legibly stenciled or marked near each valve or shall be shown on an adjacent badge plate.
[45 FR 21109, Mar. 31, 1980, as amended at 71 FR 61857, Oct. 19, 2006]
-----Original Message----- 

From: seculi017@gmail.com [mailto:seculi017@gmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 3:37 AM 

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, 

Enoch Smith 

7277 S. Executive Drive 

West Jordan, UT 84084
#### § 178.33a Specification 2Q; inner nonrefillable metal receptacles.
-----Original Message----- 

From: rdalziel@reed.edu [mailto:rdalziel@reed.edu] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 3:02 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 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, 

Randall Dalziel 

724 J. David St. SE 

Salem, OR 97306
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 239 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 239

 To rescind the fee required for the use of public recreation areas at 
   lakes and reservoirs under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of 
                   Engineers, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

Mr. Emerson (for himself, Mr. Skelton, and Mr. Hancock) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 
                           and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To rescind the fee required for the use of public recreation areas at 
   lakes and reservoirs under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of 
                   Engineers, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. RESCISSION OF RECREATIONAL USER FEES.

    Section 210(b) of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 460d-
3(b)) is amended to read as follows:
    ``(b) User Fees.--User fees at the lakes and reservoirs referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be collected by officers and employees of the 
United States only from users of highly developed facilities requiring 
continuous presence of personnel for maintenance and supervision of the 
facilities and shall not be collected for access to or use of water 
areas, beaches, picnic grounds, overlook sites, scenic drives, or boat 
launching ramps.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, September 12, 1995 (113), Para 113.7 Party Affiliation]
[Page 1323]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.113.7  party affiliation

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. SHAYS, laid before the House a 
communication, which was read as follows:
                                                Democratic Caucus,

                                     House of Representatives,

                                                September 5, 1995.
     Hon. Newt Gingrich,
     Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Speaker: This is to inform you that Representative 
     W.J. (Billy) Tauzin is no longer a member of the Democratic 
     Caucus.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Vic Fazio,
                                                         Chairman.
```
Exhibit 31.2


CERTIFICATIONS








I, Steven R. Staub, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of FirstEnergy Ohio PIRB Special Purpose Trust 2013 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);





2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;





4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, as servicer, and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, as servicer, has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and





5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.








In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: U.S. Bank, National Association, as Certificate Trustee and Indenture Trustee.








Date: March 25, 2022





/s/ Steven R. StaubSteven R. StaubVice President and Treasurer (Senior Officer in Charge of Servicing Function) of The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, as Servicer under the Phase-In-Recovery Property Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 20, 2013, between the Servicer and CEI Funding LLC, as the Bond Issuer