alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-----Original Message----- 

From: arnoldporter@shaw.ca [mailto:arnoldporter@shaw.ca] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 2:42 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

As a counsellor, 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, 

arnold porter 

120 Linden ave 

Victoria, BC, Canada, CA 95470
-----Original Message----- 

From: jeanf99@aol.com [mailto:jeanf99@aol.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 11:00 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, 

JEAN FLEMING 

10961 Alta View Drive 

Studio Cithy, CA 91604
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2381 Introduced in House (IH)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 2381

     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to disregard up to 
    $15,000,000 of capital expenditures in applying the provisions 
     permitting a $10,000,000 limit on qualified small issue bonds.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 21, 1995

  Mr. McHale 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 disregard up to 
    $15,000,000 of capital expenditures in applying the provisions 
     permitting a $10,000,000 limit on qualified small issue bonds.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Capital Expenditure Expansion Act of 
1995''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURE RULES RELATING TO QUALIFIED 
              SMALL ISSUE BONDS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 144(a)(4) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to $10,000,000 limit in certain 
cases) is amended by adding at the end the following new flush 
sentence:
                ``Capital expenditures (financed otherwise than out of 
                the proceeds of outstanding tax-exempt issues) shall 
                not be taken into account under clause (ii) to the 
                extent such expenditures do not exceed $15,000,000.''
    (b) Technical Amendment.--Paragraph (4) of section 144(a) of such 
Code is amended by striking subparagraph (F).
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to--
            (1) obligations issued after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act, and
            (2) capital expenditures made after such date with respect 
        to obligations issued on or before such date.
                                 <all>
```
Editorial Note on Part 195
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 195 appear at 71 FR 33409, June 9, 2006.

§ 195.50 Reporting accidents. An accident report is required for each failure in a pipeline system subject to this part in which there is a release of the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide transported resulting in any of the following: ( a ) Explosion or fire not intentionally set by the operator.
( b ) Release of 5 gallons (19 liters) or more of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide, except that no report is required for a release of less than 5 barrels (0.8 cubic meters) resulting from a pipeline maintenance activity if the release is: ( 1 ) Not otherwise reportable under this section;
( 2 ) Not one described in § 195.52(a)(4);
( 3 ) Confined to company property or pipeline right-of-way; and
( 4 ) Cleaned up promptly;
( c ) Death of any person;
( d ) Personal injury necessitating hospitalization;
( e ) Estimated property damage, including cost of clean-up and recovery, value of lost product, and damage to the property of the operator or others, or both, exceeding $50,000.
[Amdt. 195-22, 46 FR 38360, July 27, 1981, as amended by Amdt. 195-39, 53 FR 24950, July 1, 1988; Amdt. 195-45, 56 FR 26925, June 12, 1991; Amdt. 195-52, 59 FR 33396, June 28, 1994; Amdt. 195-63, 63 FR 37506, July 13, 1998; Amdt. 195-75, 67 FR 836, Jan. 8, 2002]
#### In the Matter of the Probate of the Last Will and Testament of Barton W. S. Martindale, Deceased.

(Surrogate’s Court, Kings County,

November, 1910.)

Mandamus — Procedure and relief (Code Civ. Pro., §§ 2067-3085) — Peremptory writ — Against whom issued.

Wills — The testamentary instrument or act — Requisites, form and validity—'Instruments referred to.

Where testator gave and devised his entire estate to his wife and directed that certain corporate stock mentioned in a certain agreement should pass under his will, the agreement referred to is no part of the will and should not be included in the probate and record.

Proceedings npon the probate of a will.

Dykman, Oeland & Kuhn (John J. Kuhn and William W. Taylor, of counsel), for proponent.

Foley & Powell (Henry A. Powell, of counsel), for respondent.

Ketcham, S.

The will propounded contains a gift and devise of the entire estate to the testator’s wife. It then proceeds as follows:

> *“ Third.*It is my will and I hereby direct that the capital stock of the Martindale Agency, mentioned in a certain agreement entered into between George B. Martindale and myself and bearing date the 7th day of January, 1909, of which I-may die possessed, shall pass under this will subject to all the terms and provisions of the said agreement.”

‘The question is presented by proper answer whether or not, in the probate and record of the will, shall be included, as a part thereof, the entire agreement referred to in the third paragraph of the will.

It is “ unquestionably the law of this state that an unattested paper which is of a testamentary character cannot be taken as a part of the will, even if referred to by that instrument.” Booth v. Baptist Church, 126 N. Y. 215, 224.

*523Whether or not an instrument purely contractual can over be made a part of a will by reference, there is no intention revealed in this will that the instrument therein mentioned shall he a part thereof.

Even when a testator’s meaning is in balance, it is the duty to ascribe normal rather than eccentric purposes. In this case the incorporation of the extrinsic paper would be useless, for it would change nothing. There is no indication that the testator intended to load his will with a mass of words which, if introduced, would not affect the disposition of his estate.

Hence, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it must be found that he did not harbor an idle and fantastic purpose and that it did not occur to him that a part of his will was the contract in question.

The will should be admitted according to its face.

Decreed accordingly.
§ 242.511 Appeals. ( a ) Any party aggrieved by the presiding officer's decision may file an appeal in the presiding officer's docket. The appeal must be filed within 35 days of issuance of the decision. A copy of the appeal shall be served on each party. The appeal shall set forth objections to the presiding officer's decision, supported by reference to applicable laws and regulations and with specific reference to the record. If no appeal is timely filed, the presiding officer's decision constitutes final agency action.
( b ) A party may file a reply to the appeal within 25 days of service of the appeal. The reply shall be supported by reference to applicable laws and regulations and with specific reference to the record, if the party relies on evidence contained in the record.
( c ) The Administrator may extend the period for filing an appeal or a response for good cause shown, provided that the written request for extension is served before expiration of the applicable period provided in this section.
( d ) The Administrator has sole discretion to permit oral argument on the appeal. On the Administrator's own initiative or written motion by any party, the Administrator may grant the parties an opportunity for oral argument.
( e ) The Administrator may remand, vacate, affirm, reverse, alter or modify the decision of the presiding officer and the Administrator's decision constitutes final agency action except where the terms of the Administrator's decision (for example, remanding a case to the presiding officer) show that the parties' administrative remedies have not been exhausted.
( f ) An appeal from an Operating Crew Review Board decision pursuant to § 242.503(d) must be filed in the Board's docket within 35 days of issuance of the decision. A copy of the appeal shall be served on each party. The Administrator may affirm or vacate the Board's decision, and may remand the petition to the Board for further proceedings. An Administrator's decision to affirm the Board's decision constitutes final agency action.
[76 FR 69841, Nov. 9, 2011, as amended at 85 FR 81325, Dec. 15, 2020]
-----Original Message----- 

From: katieactress@verizon.net [mailto:katieactress@verizon.net] 

Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 2:03 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 27, 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, 

Katie Malloy 

225 Morningside Road 

Venice, FL 34293
#### § 209.17 Motions.

Motions shall be in writing, filed with the presiding officer, and copies served upon the parties in accordance with § 209.5, except that oral motions may be made during the course of any hearing or appearance before the presiding officer. Each motion shall state the particular order, ruling, or action desired and the grounds therefor. Unless otherwise specified by the presiding officer, any objection to a written motion must be filed within 10 days after receipt of the motion.

[54 FR 42907, Oct. 18, 1989]
Exhibit 35.2





COMPLIANCE STATEMENT


OF


THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY, AS SERVICER


The undersigned hereby certifies that he is the duly elected and acting Vice President and Treasurer of The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, as servicer (the “ Servicer ”) under the Phase-In-Recovery Property Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 20, 2013 (the “ Servicing Agreement ”), between the Servicer and CEI Funding LLC, as Bond Issuer, and further certifies on behalf of the Servicer that:


|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | A review of the activities of the Servicer and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement during the period that commenced January 1, 2017 and ended December 31, 2017 has been made under the supervision of the undersigned pursuant to Section 3.03 of the Servicing Agreement; and

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|2. | To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations in all material respects under the Servicing Agreement throughout the period that commenced January 1, 2017 and ended December 31, 2017.

Executed as of this 30th day of March 2018.





THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANYBy:/s/ Steven R. StaubName:Steven R. StaubTitle:Vice President and Treasurer
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Danice L. Chartrand, the Chief Financial Officer of
Southern Michigan Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that, to the
best of his knowledge:

     1.  The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March
         31, 2003, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.2
         (the "Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in
         all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Company.


Date:  May 14, 2003


                                  /s/ Danice L. Chartrand
                                  --------------------------------------------
                                  Danice L. Chartrand, Chief Financial Officer


This certification accompanies the Periodic Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for the purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

                                       19
§ 242.401 Denial of certification. ( a ) A railroad shall notify a candidate for certification or recertification of information known to the railroad that forms the basis for denying the person certification and provide the person a reasonable opportunity to explain or rebut that adverse information in writing prior to denying certification. A railroad shall provide the conductor candidate with any written documents or records, including written statements, related to failure to meet a requirement of this part which support its pending denial decision.
( b ) This section does not require further opportunity to comment if the railroad's denial is based solely on factors addressed by §§ 242.111, 242.115, or 242.403 and the opportunity to comment afforded by § 242.109 has been provided.
( c ) If a railroad denies a person certification or recertification, it shall notify the person of the adverse decision and explain, in writing, the basis for its denial decision. The basis for a railroad's denial decision shall address any explanation or rebuttal information that the conductor candidate may have provided in writing pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section. The document explaining the basis for the denial shall be served on the person within 10 days after the railroad's decision and shall give the date of the decision.
( d ) A railroad shall not deny the person's certification for failing to comply with a railroad operating rule or practice which constitutes a violation under § 242.403(e)(1) through (11) of this part if sufficient evidence exists to establish that an intervening cause prevented or materially impaired the conductor's ability to comply with that railroad operating rule or practice.
§ 229.77 Current collectors. ( a ) Pantographs shall be so arranged that they can be operated from the engineer's normal position in the cab. Pantographs that automatically rise when released shall have an automatic locking device to secure them in the down position.
( b ) Each pantograph operating on an overhead trolley wire shall have a device for locking and grounding it in the lowest position, that can be applied and released only from a position where the operator has a clear view of the pantograph and roof without mounting the roof.
From: crlindsay@comcast.net [mailto:crlindsay@comcast.net] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 12:34 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, 

Cathy Lindsay 

2025 NE 100TH St 

Seattle, WA 98125
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 848 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 848

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to eliminate the provision 
   that reduces primary insurance amounts for individuals receiving 
                  pensions from noncovered employment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 2001

  Mr. Sandlin (for himself, Mr. Allen, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Baldacci, Ms. 
Baldwin, Mr. Barcia, Mr. Carson of Oklahoma, Mr. Clement, Mr. Costello, 
Mr. Doyle, Mr. Filner, Mr. Frank, Mr. Frost, Ms. Hooley of Oregon, Mr. 
 McIntyre, Mr. Menendez, Mrs. Mink of Hawaii, Mr. Oberstar, Mr. Olver, 
Mr. Pallone, Mr. Paul, Mr. Quinn, Mr. Rahall, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Wu, and 
Mr. Brown of Ohio) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title II of the Social Security Act to eliminate the provision 
   that reduces primary insurance amounts for individuals receiving 
                  pensions from noncovered employment.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Social Security Benefits Restoration 
Act of 2001''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF PROVISION THAT REDUCES PRIMARY INSURANCE AMOUNTS 
              FOR INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING PENSIONS FROM NONCOVERED 
              EMPLOYMENT.

    (a) In General.--Section 215(a) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 415(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (7).
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Section 215(d) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 415(d)) is 
        amended by striking paragraph (3).
            (2) Section 215(f) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 415(f)) is 
        amended by striking paragraph (9).
            (3) Subsections (e)(2) and (f)(3) of section 202 of such 
        Act (42 U.S.C. 402(e)(2), (f)(3)) are each amended by striking 
        ``section 215(f)(5), 215(f)(6), or 215(f)(9)(B)'' each place it 
        appears and inserting ``paragraph (5) or (6) of section 
        215(f)''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to 
benefits payable for months after December 2001, and the Commissioner 
of Social Security shall recompute primary insurance amounts 
(notwithstanding section 215(f) of the Social Security Act) to the 
extent necessary to carry out such amendments.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, November 7, 1995 (141), Para 141.11 Sumpter, Oregon Land Conveyance]
[Page 1875]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.141.11  sumpter, oregon land conveyance

  Mr. COOLEY moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1581) to 
require the Secretary of Agriculture to convey certain lands under the 
jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture to the City of Sumpter, 
Oregon.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. SHAYS, recognized Mr. COOLEY and Mr. 
RICHARDSON, each for 20 minutes.
  After debate,
  The question being put, viva voce,
  Will the House suspend the rules and pass said bill?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. SHAYS, announced that two-thirds of the 
Members present had voted in the affirmative.
  So, two-thirds of the Members present having voted in favor thereof, 
the rules were suspended and said bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider the vote whereby the rules were suspended and 
said bill was passed was, by unanimous consent, laid on the table.
  Ordered, That the Clerk request the concurrence of the Senate in said 
bill.
```