alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000020104
<NAME> CST
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       5,539,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,564,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   222,000
<INVENTORY>                                    233,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,003,000
<PP&E>                                      99,079,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              27,967,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             239,241,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,510,000
<BONDS>                                     30,125,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,209,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 131,020,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               239,241,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            90,179,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               76,057,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,364,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               119,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,691,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              9,927,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,920,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          6,007,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 6,007,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.15
        

</TABLE>
§ 234.263 Relays. ( a ) Except as stated in paragraph (b) of this section, each relay that affects the proper functioning of a crossing warning system shall be tested at least once every four years.
( b ) ( 1 ) Alternating current vane type relays, direct current polar type relays, and relays with soft iron magnetic structure shall be tested at least once every two years.
( 2 ) Alternating current centrifugal type relays shall be tested at least once every 12 months.
( c ) Testing of relays requiring testing on four year intervals shall be completed in accordance with the following schedule: ( 1 ) Not less than 50% by the end of calendar year 1996;
( 2 ) Not less than a total of 75% by the end of calendar year 1997; and
( 3 ) One hundred percent by the end of calendar year 1998.
( d ) Testing of relays requiring testing on two year intervals shall be completed by the end of calendar year 1996.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

TOWER ACCESS GROUP, LLC,

Respondent

v.

THE SOUTH UNION TOWNSHIP 

ZONING HEARING BOARD,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 338 WAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 11th day of March, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                              56
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      658
<ALLOWANCES>                                        76
<INVENTORY>                                         83
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   797
<PP&E>                                             122
<DEPRECIATION>                                      24
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,746
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,139
<BONDS>                                             69
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           470
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,068
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,746
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   449
<CGS>                                              148
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (374)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (374)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (374)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.03)
        

</TABLE>
way of extraordinary relief is warranted. 

### See NRS 34.160; 

### Pan, 120 Nev.

at 228, 88 P.3d at 844. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.' Gibbons Saitta cc: Brian Keith Lawhorn Attorney General/Carson City

"We direct the clerk of this court to file petitioner's letter, which was provisionally received in this court on March 26, 2012. As this court has granted petitioner's motion to waive the filing fee, no action will be taken as to that letter. SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 2
#### § 236.74 Protection of insulated wire; splice in underground wire.

Insulated wire shall be protected from mechanical injury. The insulation shall not be punctured for test purposes. Splice in underground wire shall have insulation resistance at least equal to the wire spliced.
Editorial Note on Part 173
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 173 appear at 70 FR 56098, Sept. 23, 2005.

§ 173.213 Non-bulk packagings for solid hazardous materials in Packing Group III. ( a ) When § 172.101 of this subchapter specifies that a solid hazardous material be packaged under this section, only non-bulk packagings prescribed in this section may be used for its transportation. Each package must conform to the general packaging requirements of subpart B of part 173, to the requirements of part 178 of this subchapter at the Packing Group I, II or III performance level, and to the requirements of the special provisions of column 7 of the § 172.101 table.
( b ) The following combination packagings are authorized: *Outer packagings:* Steel drum: 1A1 or 1A2 Aluminum drum: 1B1 or 1B2 Metal drum other than steel or aluminum: 1N1 or 1N2 Plywood drum: 1D Fiber drum: 1G Plastic drum: 1H1 or 1H2 Wooden barrel: 2C2 Steel jerrican: 3A1 or 3A2 Plastic jerrican: 3H1 or 3H2 Aluminum jerrican: 3B1 or 3B2 Steel box: 4A Aluminum box: 4B Natural wood box: 4C1 or 4C2 Plywood box: 4D Reconstituted wood box: 4F Fiberboard box: 4G Solid plastic box: 4H2 Metal box other than steel or aluminum: 4N *Inner packagings:* Glass or earthenware receptacles Plastic receptacles Metal receptacles Glass ampoules
( c ) The following single packagings are authorized:
Steel drum: 1A1 or 1A2 Aluminum drum: 1B1 or 1B2 Plywood drum: 1D Plastic drum: 1H1 or 1H2 Fiber drum: 1G Metal drum other than steel or aluminum: 1N1 or 1N2 Wooden barrel: 2C1 or 2C2 Steel jerrican: 3A1 or 3A2 Plastic jerrican: 3H1 or 3H2 Aluminum jerrican: 3B1 or 3B2 Steel box: 4A Steel box with liner: 4A Aluminum box: 4B Aluminum box with liner: 4B Metal box other than steel or aluminum: 4N Natural wood box: 4C1 Natural wood box, sift proof: 4C2 Plywood box: 4D Reconstituted wood box: 4F Fiberboard box: 4G Expanded plastic box: 4H1 Solid plastic box: 4H2 Bag, woven plastic: 5H1, 5H2 or 5H3 Bag, plastic film: 5H4 Bag, textile: 5L1, 5L2 or 5L3 Bag, paper, multiwall, water resistant: 5M2 Plastic receptacle in steel, aluminum, plywood, fiber or plastic drum: 6HA1, 6HB1, 6HD1, 6HG1 or 6HH1 Plastic receptacle in steel, aluminum, wood, plywood or fiberboard box: 6HA2, 6HB2, 6HC, 6HD2 or 6HG2 Glass, porcelain or stoneware in steel, aluminum, plywood or fiber drum: 6PA1, 6PB1, 6PD1 or 6PG1 Glass, porcelain or stoneware in steel, aluminum, wooden or fiberboard box: 6PA2, 6PB2, 6PC or 6PG2 Glass, porcelain or stoneware in expanded or solid plastic packaging: 6PH1 or 6PH2 Cylinders, as prescribed for any compressed gas, except for Specification 8 and 3HT
[Amdt. 173-224, 55 FR 52643, Dec. 21, 1990, as amended by Amdt. 173-241, 59 FR 67511, 67518, Dec. 29, 1994; Amdt. 173-261, 62 FR 24734, May 6, 1997; 69 FR 76158, Dec. 20, 2004; 70 FR 34398, June 14, 2005; 78 FR 1089, Jan. 7, 2013]
§ 179.500-15 Handling of tanks failing in tests. ( a ) Tanks rejected for failure in any of the tests prescribed may be reheat-treated, and will be acceptable if subsequent to reheat-treatment they are subjected to and pass all of the tests.
( b ) [Reserved]
Grafe , Jerom e (DEP ) From : Jea n Staropol i [jeanstaropoli@verizon.net ] Sent : Thursday , Septembe r20 , 201 2 3:1 4 P M To : Grafe , Jerom e (DEP ) Subject : Red-Blu e Connecto r Dea rMr . Grafe : I a m writin g i n supporto fth e fina l desig n an d constructio n o fth e Red-Blu e Connecto rbetwee n Bowdoi n an d Charle s Stree tstations . Thi s additio n woul d b e o fgrea tassistanc e t o thos e fro m th e Nort h Shor e s o tha tthe yca n mor e easil yacces s MG H an d Cambridge . A s I understand , th e tunne l alread yexist s an d wit h som e structura l wor k i twil l mee tth e need s o fa moder n facility . I a m askin g Commissione rKimmel l t o approv e th e fina l desig n an d constructio n o fth e Red-Blu e Connector . Sincerely , Jea n Staropol i

I
#### § 234.9 Grade crossing signal system failure reports.

Each railroad shall report to FRA within 15 days each activation failure of a highway-rail grade crossing warning system. FRA Form No. 6180-83, “Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Warning System Failure Report,” shall be used for this purpose and completed in accordance with instructions printed on the form.
FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNIT E D ST AT E S CO URT O F APPE AL S FO R T H E NINT H CIRCUIT

RE T AIL DIG I T AL NE T W O RK , L L C ,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt,
v. T IM O T H Y G O RSUCH , as Dir e c torof the Califor nia De par tm e nt of Alc oholic B e v e r age Contr ol ,

De fe nda nt-Appe l le e . No. 13-56069 D.C . No. 2:11-c v-09065-C B M -PJW C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia , Los Ange le s
O R DE R

T H O M A S , C hie f Judge : Upon thevote of a

m a jority of nonre c use d

a c tive judge s, it is ordere d tha t this c a s e be he ard e n ba

nc pursua nt to Fe de ra l R

ule of Appe lla

te Proc e dure 35(a )
and C irc u it R

ule 35-3. Thethre e -judge pa ne l opinion sha

ll not be c ite d a s pre c e de nt by

or to a ny c ourt of theNinth C irc uit. Judge Owe ns did not pa

rtic ipate in thede l ibe rat ions or votein this c a se .



# F IL ED
NOV 16 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS
|   | (1)    | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three month period ended March 31, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|   | (2)    | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                                                                       |

| Date: August 22, 2011 | By:    | /s/ James Michael Whitfield                                                |   |
|-----------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                  |   | James Michael Whitfield,Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Offer) |   |
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Brian F. Lavin, President of NTS
Capital Corporation, the general partner of NTS-Properties Associates, the general partner
of NTS-Properties III (the Partnership), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

|1. |  | The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Partnership for the period ended June
               30, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
               Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|-- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Dated: August 16, 2004

/s/ Brian F. Lavin

---

President of NTS Capital Corporation,
General Partner of NTS-Properties Associates,
General Partner of NTS-Properties III

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be
retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
Page 1 0f2 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION 

Docket: JRS-2009-0008 

Request for Infurmation for Paul Wellstone and Pete Domet~ici Mental I lealth Parity and 

Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Comment On: IRS12009-0U&&!lU01 

Rey ucst for lri formation Regarding tllc Paul Wellstone and Pete Dorncnici Mental Health Parity 

and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Document: IR.SSZ.UO9-000R-OQCIComment on FR Doc # E9-09629 

Submitter In formation 

Name: Christine Sheffer 

Address: 

Little Rock, AR, 

Orgalthation: UAMS 

General Comment 

Commmts regarding Reguf atory Guidance USCG-2007-27022 

page 1 9 1 57,II B spcci fic areas 1 and 4 

I am a clinical psychologist who pruvidcs EErJ biofeedback treatment to 

individuals with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Mood Disorders. EEG 

biofeedback is an empirically validated and widcly recognized effective nonmedication treatment liur ADHD, as well a. other wnditions. Thm are over 50 

studies evaluating the effcdiveness of EEG hiofeedback in tht: treatment of ADHD, 

Substance Use disorders and Autism. A reccnt review of this literature 

concluded "EEG biofedback meets the Amtrican Academy of Child and 

Adolescent Psychiatry aiteria for" Clinical Guidclincs "for treatment of ADHD." 

This means that EEG biofccdhack meets the same criteria as ~rledicntion for 

treating ADHD, and that EEG biofeedback "should always bc considered as an 

intervention for this disorder by the clinician". 

This scw ice has been denied by Georgia Medicaid, Aetna United Behavioral 

Heallh Blue Cross, Cigna, and Arnaripup. 

This is limitation of an effective and validated treatment for a mental hcalth 

pmblcrn. ?'he reasons given by the insurance companies for this denial fcl l into two 

categories: I ) our company does nut cover hiofeedback for Mmtal Hcalt h 

prvblcms or 2) there is not yet sufii~jent cvide~lce for the effica~y oSEEti 
Page 2 of 2 

biofeedback. As such, they are using evidence- bascd criteria that are far more 

restrictive for mcrltal health services than the criteria which are used for 

medical/surgical services. There are many routinc medical and surgical 

proccrlures which have far fewer controlled studies abuut their efficacy than does 

EEG biu feedback. These medical and surgical procedures are generally not 

limited because of conccnls about how many contmlled studies have been 

performed about them. 

We believe that the parity regulations, based on legal reviews of thc parity statute 

should require that crnpioyers md plans pay for the sane range and scope of 

services for Behaviurrll Treatments as they do for Md Surg benefits and that a 

plan cannot be more restrictive in their managd care criteria and reviews for MH 

and S.4 disorders when compared to Mtxl Surg. Today plans arc bcing itore 

restrictive in Iiow they review evidencwl-based Mental IIealth and Substance 

Abuse Treatments when cornpared to Med Surg treatments. This violates both the 

intent and letter of the parity statute and we hopc that the regulations will clari@ 

that this can't continue.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2146

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the nonconventional

fuel tax credit.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 31, 1995

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut 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 extend

the nonconventional fuel tax credit.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF NONCON4 VENTIONAL FUEL CREDIT.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 29(g)(1) of the Internal

6 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to the nonconventional

7 fuel credit) is amended—

8 (1) by striking ‘‘1997, pursuant to a binding

9 written contract in effect before January 1, 1996’’

10 and inserting ‘‘2001’’ in subparagraph (A),
2

HR 2146 IH

1 (2) by striking ‘‘if such facility is originally

2 placed in service after December 31, 1992’’ in sub3 paragraph (B), and

4 (3) by striking ‘‘2008’’ and inserting ‘‘2012’’ in

5 subparagraph (B).

6 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

7 this section shall take effect upon enactment.

8 SEC. 2. PERMISSION FOR PRODUCERS TO USE QUALIFIED

9 FUEL TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY.

10 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 29(d) of such Code is

11 amended by adding at the end thereof the following new

12 paragraph:

13 ‘‘(9) CERTAIN ELECTRICITY SALES.—A quali14 fied fuel shall be treated as sold by the taxpayer to

15 an unrelated person if the taxpayer uses the fuel to

16 generate electricity which it sells to an unrelated

17 person.’’

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

19 this section shall apply to qualified fuels used to generate

20 electricity after enactment.

Æ
-----Original Message----- 

From: yulianaquinones@hotmail.com [mailto:yulianaquinones@hotmail.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 2:25 AM 

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, 

Yuliana Quinones 

13917 Lynhurst Dr 

WOODBRIDGE, VA 22193
#### Chauncey Cramer, *Respondent, v.*John T. Lovejoy, Appellant.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered m Cayuga county, costs ' to abide event. Opinion by

Smith, P. J.
Editorial Note on Part 195
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 195 appear at 71 FR 33409, June 9, 2006.

§ 195.52 Immediate notice of certain accidents. ( a ) *Notice requirements.* At the earliest practicable moment following discovery, of a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in an event described in § 195.50, but no later than one hour after confirmed discovery, the operator of the system must give notice, in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section of any failure that: ( 1 ) Caused a death or a personal injury requiring hospitalization;
( 2 ) Resulted in either a fire or explosion not intentionally set by the operator;
( 3 ) Caused estimated property damage, including cost of cleanup and recovery, value of lost product, and damage to the property of the operator or others, or both, exceeding $50,000;
( 4 ) Resulted in pollution of any stream, river, lake, reservoir, or other similar body of water that violated applicable water quality standards, caused a discoloration of the surface of the water or adjoining shoreline, or deposited a sludge or emulsion beneath the surface of the water or upon adjoining shorelines; or
( 5 ) In the judgment of the operator was significant even though it did not meet the criteria of any other paragraph of this section.
( b ) Information required. Each notice required by paragraph (a) of this section must be made to the National Response Center either by telephone to 800-424-8802 (in Washington, DC, 202-267-2675) or electronically at *http://www.nrc.uscg.mil* and must include the following information: ( 1 ) Name, address and identification number of the operator.
( 2 ) Name and telephone number of the reporter.
( 3 ) The location of the failure.
( 4 ) The time of the failure.
( 5 ) The fatalities and personal injuries, if any.
( 6 ) Initial estimate of amount of product released in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
( 7 ) All other significant facts known by the operator that are relevant to the cause of the failure or extent of the damages.
( c ) Calculation. A pipeline operator must have a written procedure to calculate and provide a reasonable initial estimate of the amount of released product.
( d ) *New information.* Within 48 hours after the confirmed discovery of an accident, to the extent practicable, an operator must revise or confirm its initial telephonic notice required in paragraph (b) of this section with a revised estimate of the amount of product released, location of the failure, time of the failure, a revised estimate of the number of fatalities and injuries, and all other significant facts that are known by the operator that are relevant to the cause of the accident or extent of the damages. If there are no changes or revisions to the initial report, the operator must confirm the estimates in its initial report.
[75 FR 72907, Nov. 26, 2010, as amended by Amdt. 195-101, 82 FR 7999, Jan. 23, 2017]