alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- 1

- Alexander Van der Bellen Managing Director and

Associate General Counsel

Delta Air Lines, Inc.

1212 New York Avenue NW Washington, DC 20005

202.842.4184

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

August 31, 2010

via email and regulations.gov

Mr. Paul Gretch Director, Office of International Aviation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Indefinite Renewal of Blanket Route Integration Authority (DOT-OST-2005-22228)

Dear Mr. Gretch:

In response to the Department’s invitation, Delta Air Lines, Inc. hereby advises that it wishes to renew for an indefinite term its certificate for blanket route integration authority. The certificate was issued by Order 2006-1-1, January 3, 2006. On May 1, 2009, Delta previously sought renewal of its blanket integration authority (along with numerous other authorities), and has invoked t he automatic extension provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 USC 558 (c), as implemented by 14 CFR Part 377.

Respectfully submitted,

Alexander Van der Bellen

cc: Esta Rosenberg Thuy CooperCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A copy of the foregoing document has been served this 31 st day of August, 2010, upon the following persons via email:

anbird@fedex.com
anita.mosner@hklaw.com benjamin.slocum@usairways.com
bill@mietuslaw.com bob.kneisley@wnco.com BTHunt@pncl.com byerlyjr@state.gov
carl.nelson@aa.com
dan.weiss@coair.com dhainbach@ggh-airlaw.com dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil
hkamen@coair.com howard_kass@usairways.com jeffrey.manley@united.com john.allen@faa.gov jrichardson@johnlrichardson.com steve.morrissey@united.com jyoung@yklaw.com kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com
matwood@sherblackwell.com
mroller@rollerbauer.com
mrosia@crowell.com rpommer@atlasair.com rsilverberg@sgbdc.com
slachter@lachter-clements.com
art.thomas@horizonair.com ben.graves@evergreenairlines.com
Brian.Gillman@mesa-air.com robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com jennifer.trock@pillsburylaw.com barbara.russell@virginamerica.com
bruce.rabinovitz@wilmerhale.com cdonley@ssd.com dkirstein@yklaw.com dvaughan@kelleydrye.com ebailey@wileyrein.com efaberman@wileyrein.com gmurphy@crowell.com gwhite@lac.lynden.com jhill@dowlohnes.com John.Fredericksen@suncountry.com john.palo@evergreenairlines.com judy@lynden.com kenneth.quinn@pillsburylaw.com lhalloway@crowell.com
mcmillin@woa.com mlbenge@zsrlaw.com
msinick@ssd.com mwiegele@nac.aero pmurphy@lopmurphy.com ranjit.seth@evergreenairlines.com
rbkeiner@crowell.com robert.land@jetblue.com scott.peterson@expressjet.com
sllunsford@fedex.com temerson@skywest.com
info@airlineinfo.com pdoell@naca.cc rpriddy@naca.cc
TZoeller@naca.cc
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1996
<CASH>                                        16293783
<SECURITIES>                                    128099
<RECEIVABLES>                                 32122008
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1133000
<INVENTORY>                                   59637802
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             110588468
<PP&E>                                        93683328
<DEPRECIATION>                                45172084
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               199435119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         23535358
<BONDS>                                      105235468
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       2802767
<OTHER-SE>                                    60684295
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 199435119
<SALES>                                      321134537
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             323290607
<CGS>                                        229477193
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                230961874
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               2315902
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             8783798
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                7707365
<INCOME-TAX>                                   3076000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            4631365
<DISCONTINUED>                               (6167044)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (1535679)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.3





                          PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS






We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statements  on Form S-3  (Nos.  333-62295,  333-62295-01  and  333-62295-02)  of
Pennsylvania  Electric Company of our report dated February 25, 2004 relating to
the  consolidated  financial  statements,  which appears in the Annual Report to
Stockholders,  which is incorporated in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also
consent to the  incorporation by reference of our report dated February 25, 2004
relating to the financial statement schedules, which appear in this Form 10-K.






PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Cleveland, Ohio
March 11, 2004

                                      108
----- Forwarded by Zachary Pekar/RTP/USEPA/US on 10/15/2012 02:00 PM -----

From: "Antonella Zanobetti" <AZANOBET@hsph.harvard.edu>

To: Zachary Pekar/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Bryan Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Pradeep Rajan/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 12/22/2011 10:21 AM

Subject: Re: Request for adjusted (weighted) city-specific effect estimates for use in the ozone NAAQS risk 

assessment (and clarification on the nature of the study areas used)

Hi Zach,

yes, I first run the meta-analysis and obtained the same results as in the paper for the 0-3 

distributed lag.

the I created the city specific shrunken estimates.

hope this answer your question

have a great holiday

Antonella

>>> Zachary Pekar <Pekar.Zachary@epamail.epa.gov> 12/21/2011 1:49 PM >>>

Antonella,

These look great and THANKS again!

But, I did want to confirm that they represent city-specific estimates

derived in the 1st of the 2-stage procedure used to generate the

national-scale mortality estimates reported in your article "Mortality

Displacement in the Association of Ozone with Mortality" - 2008 (i.e.,

the national estimates presented in Table 1 for the 0-3 day lag). My

reason for verifying this is that (as I mentioned in the original

e-mail), we have to be able to assert that these essentially represent

published data. By basing them on the same statistical analysis used in

generating national-estimates published in the above article, we are

meeting that requirement.

Thanks!

zach

Zachary Pekar, MSPH, PhD

Human Health Risk Assessment

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

tele: (919) 541-3704

e-mail: pekar.zachary@epa.gov
Exhibit 31.1

Certification Pursuant To

Rule 13A-14(a) or 15D-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,

As Adopted Pursuant To

Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Michael Wellesley-Wesley, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Chyron Corporation;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



b) reserved - not effective;



c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and





5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.









Date: March 31, 2006







|/s/ Michael Wellesley-Wesley
|----------------------------
|Michael Wellesley-Wesley    
|President and               
|Chief Executive Officer
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, October 25, 1995 (134), Para 134.13 Budget Reconciliation, FY 1996]
[Page 1595]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.134.13  budget reconciliation, fy 1996

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. LaHOOD, pursuant to the order of the 
House of October 24, 1995, 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. 2491) to provide for reconciliation 
pursuant to section 105 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for 
fiscal year 1996.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. LaHOOD, by unanimous consent, designated 
Mr. BOEHNER as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole; and after some 
time spent therein,
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. WELDON of Florida, assumed the Chair.
  When Mr. BOEHNER, Chairman, pursuant to the special order of October 
24, 1995, reported that the Committee, having had under consideration 
said bill, had come to no resolution thereon.
```
Specimen certificate of common unit



 Exhibit 4.1 
  

															
	

	 	 THIS CERTIFICATE IS TRANSFERABLE IN
 CHICAGO, IL AND NEW YORK, NY
  
 


	    	

	 	  
  
  
 



	 	  
 Certificate Evidencing Common Units
Representing Limited Partner Interests
 STAR GAS PARTNERS, L.P.
 


 representing limited partner interests in the Partnership (the “Common Units”) transferable on
the books of the Partnership, in person or by duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed and accompanied by a properly executed application for transfer of the Common Units represented by this Certificate. The
rights, preferences and limitations of the Common Units are set forth in, and this Certificate and the Common Units represented hereby are issued and shall in all respects be subject to the terms and provisions of, the Agreement of United
Partnership of STAR GAS PARTNERS, L.P., as amended, supplemented or restated from time to time (the “Partnership Agreement”). Copies of the Partnership Agreement are on file at, and will be furnished without charge on delivery of
written request to the Partnership at, the principal office of the Partnership located at 2187 Atlantic Street, Stamford, Ct. 06902 Capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the meaning given them in the Partnership
Agreement.
 The Holder, by accepting this Certificate, is deemed to have (i) requested admission as, and agreed to
become, a Limited Partner and to have agreed to comply with and be bound by and to have executed the Partnership Agreement, (ii) represented and warranted that the Holder has all right, power and authority and, if an individual, the capacity
necessary to enter into the Partnership Agreement, (iii) granted the powers of attorney provided for in the Partnership Agreement and (iv) made the waivers and given the consents and approvals contained in the Partnership Agreement.
 This Certificate shall not be valid for any purpose unless it has been countersigned and registered by the Transfer Agent and
Registrar.
  
 Dated:

	 	 	    	 	  	 	    	 	 	 
	 	Countersigned and Registered	    	 	  	 STAR GAS CORPORATION,
 as General Partner
	    	 	 	 
	 	 LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
 Transfer Agent and Registrar
	    	 	  	 	    	 	 	 
	 	 By:
  
  

	    	By:	  	 



	    	 By:
  
	 	 




	 	Authorized Signature	    	 	  	Secretary      	    	 	 	President
#### § 299.305 Drainage.

Each drainage or other water carrying facility under or immediately adjacent to the roadbed shall be maintained and kept free of obstruction, to accommodate expected water flow for the area concerned.
### ECONOMIC AND REGULATORY EVALUA **TION**

Regulatory Evaluation Form , Revision 2 .0 Page 1 of 1 2/2/2012 

### AD Title: Combustion Liner Inspections Docket No. FAA

- 2009
- 0162 Directorate Identifier: 2004
- NE
- 19
- AD **Costs:** Action (e.g., Inspection, replacement) Costs per **Product** (e.g., engine, propeller)

Work

h ours Labor cost ( @ $80/hour) Part s Cost Total Costs ( labor + parts) Number of

**U.S. Registered**  **Products** Total Cost

for U

. S
. Fleet
I nspections 2 .00 $ 160.00 $0 $ 160.00 18 $ 2,880 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0



### To tal Cost s of compliance for U

. S
. fleet: $ 2,880



### Costs covered under warranty $ **Special considerations for Econom**  **ic Analysis :**  

### Executive Order 12866: Could the AD be cons idered a “significant regulatory action”? YES explain below NO **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES explain below NO **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES explain below NO
**Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES explain below NO 

### Explanation:
Exhibit 32.1


                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 Mammatech Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended May 31, 2007, (the "Report"), I,
Henry S. Pennypacker, the Chief Executive 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 requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.


Date:  July 2, 2007
                                   /s/ Henry S. Pennypacker
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Henry S. Pennypacker, Chief Executive Officer








                                       13
#### John Q. Riddle et al. *v.*Gilman Cheadle.

In an action on an injunction bond, the plaintiff can not recover for attor- ' neys’ fees in the original case, except those paid for services rendered in efforts to dissolve or modify the provisional injunction, or otherwise occasioned by its allowance or subsistence.

Motion for leave to file a petition in error to reverse the. judgment of the District Court of Eulton county.

' This was an action upon an injunction bond, and the-only question is whether the plaintiff in the action was entitled to recover for attorney’s fees paid by him in the case in which the injunction was allowed. That case was an action by Riddle against Cheadle, to enjoin the latter from completing a building then in process of erection by him,, upon what Riddle claimed to be a public or common alley,, and to recover damages occasioned by its partial erection» Riddle obtained a provisional injunction, restraining Cheadle from proceeding with the building until the final hearing, •and upon its allowance executed the bond in suit, which is. in the usual form conditioned for the'payment of all damages caused by the allowance of the injunction, in case it should be decided finally that the same should not have been granted. Cheadle employed counsel and defended the action, but no motion or effort was made during the pendency of the suit to dissolve the injunction, and no additional services of counsel were rendered necessary, or were procured or paid for by Cheadle, on account of the allowance or pendency of the injunction. At the final *279hearing the injunction was dissolved, and Riddle’s petition dismissed.

On these facts the Common Pleas held that Oheadle was not entitled to recover, in his action on the bond, the attorney’s fees paid in the injunction case, and gave judgment accordingly. The.District Court reversed this judgment ; and it is claimed that the judgment of reversal is erroneous.

*Kent, Newton § Pugsley,*for the motion.

*Rodney Foos,*contra: 2 Am. Law Reg., N. S. 546; 45 N. H. 524; *Corcoran*v. *Judson,*24 N. Y. 106; *Ryan*v. *Anderson,*25 Ill. 372; *Noble*v. *Arnold,*23 Ohio St. 264.

By.the Court.

We think it plain that the District Court erred. The case is within the principle of the decision in *Noble*v. *Arnold,*23 Ohio St. 264, from which we are not disposed to depart. No additional attorney’s fees were rendered necessary by the allowance of the injunction. All such fees paid would have been paid if the injunction had never been allowed. They can not, therefore, be said, in the language of the bond, to have been “ occasioned by the injunction.”

*Motion granted and judgment reversed.*
§ 219.107 Consequences of refusal. ( a ) A regulated employee who refuses to provide a breath or body fluid specimen or specimens when required to by the railroad under a provision of this part must be withdrawn from regulated service for a period of nine (9) months. Per the requirements of part 40 of this title, a regulated employee who provides an adulterated or substituted specimen is deemed to have refused to provide the required specimen and must be withdrawn from regulated service in accordance with this section.
( b ) *Notice.* Before or upon withdrawing a regulated employee from regulated service under this section, a railroad must provide written notice to the employee of the reason for this action, and the procedures described in § 219.104(c) apply. A railroad may provide a regulated employee with an initial verbal notice so long as it provides a follow-up written notice as soon as possible.
( c ) The withdrawal required by this section applies only to an employee's performance of regulated service for any railroad with notice of such withdrawal. During the period of withdrawal, a railroad with notice of such withdrawal must not authorize or permit the employee to perform any regulated service for the railroad.
( d ) The requirement of withdrawal for nine (9) months does not limit any discretion on the part of the railroad to impose additional sanctions for the same or related conduct.
( e ) Upon the expiration of the nine month period described in this section, a railroad may permit an employee to return to regulated service only under the conditions specified in § 219.104(d), and the regulated employee must be subject to return-to-duty and follow-up tests, as provided by that section.
[81 FR 37930, June 10, 2016]
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, August 2, 1995 (107), Para 107.29 Leave of Absence]
[Page 1247]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.107.29  leave of absence

  By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to Mrs. THURMAN, 
for today and balance of the week.
  And then,
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Regulatory Commission

# AGENCY:

Postal Regulatory Commission. 

# ACTION:

Notice of briefing. 

# SUMMARY:

Representatives of U.S. regulators and the private sector will present a briefing on Wednesday, August 1, 2007, beginning at 11:30 a.m., in the Postal Regulatory Commission's main conference room. The briefing will address issues raised by the sale of financial services by international postal operators. 

# DATES:

August 1, 2007. 

# ADDRESSES:

Postal Regulatory Commission, 901 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20268-0001. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, Postal Regulatory Commission, 202-789-6820 and                         *stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.*

Garry J. Sikora, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 07-3761 Filed 7-31-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710-FW-M
From: pjejmw@mchsi.com [mailto:pjejmw@mchsi.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 12:26 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, 

Paula Enstrom 

764 11th St. 

Charleston, IL 61920