alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Memo to the Docket

Docket – EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0026

We had a meeting with PacifiCorp on October 31, 2013 with Cathy Woolhums, Bill Lawson, 

Chad Teply, and Mike Jenkins representing PacifiCorp. 

Representing EPA were Carl Daly, Laurel Dygowski, Aaron Worstell, Monica Morales, Steve 

Odendahl and Paul Logan.

The following are the questions EPA posed to PacifiCorp and a summary response.

We have reviewed PacifiCorp’s August 26, 2013 comments and have the following clarifying 

questions.

1) For Naughton Unit 3, PacifiCorp has a comment on page 72 pertaining to the conversion 

of natural gas. Does this comment indicate that PacifiCorp wants EPA to finalize as part 

of its FIP the requirement for PacifiCorp to convert the unit to natural gas with a NOx 

emission limit of 0.08 lb/MMBtu, which would be in lieu of finalizing our proposed 

approval of an emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu (which was based on SCR)?

Answer: Yes.

2) In addition, EPA would need to include emission limits for SO2 and PM in its FIP. An 

emission limit for SO2 is required to show that the visibility benefits of natural gas 

conversion are superior to those from SCR. A PM emission limit is required under 

BART. If EPA included a PM emission limit of 0.008 (30-day rolling average) (this limit 

is derived from the State’s permit) in its FIP for Naughton Unit 3, and if EPA included an 

emission limit of 0.0006 lb/MMBtu (30-day rolling average) (this limit is derived from 

the State’s permit) for SO2 in its FIP, would PacifiCorp have an objection to either limit? 

Answer: PacifiCorp would not object to either limit being included.

3) For Naughton Unit 1 and 2 and Dave Johnston Unit 3, PacifiCorp indicates in its 

comments on page 37, that it plans on shutting down the units in 2029 and 2027, 

respectively. Should we interpret PacifiCorp’s comment to say that it is requesting that 

EPA include these shut-down dates as federally enforceable requirements in our FIP in 

lieu of a potential FIP requirement for SCR?

Answer: Yes, PacifiCorp would want those dates included in lieu of a requirement for SCR.

4) Would PacifiCorp still plan on shutting down Naughton Units 1 and 2 in 2029 and Dave 

Johnston Unit 3 in 2027 if EPA did not propose to require SCR on these units for BART?
Answer: It would depend on PacifiCorp’s economic analysis and EPA’s final action.

5) Also for Naughton Unit 1 and 2 and Dave Johnston Unit 3, PacifiCorp mentions in its 

comments on page 2 that they would either shut-down these units or convert them to 

natural gas. Can you please clarify this statement?

Answer: It would depend on PacifiCorp’s economic analysis and EPA’s final action.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEnhancing space transportation: The NASA program to develop electric propulsionThe NASA Office of Aeronautics, Exploration, and Technology (OAET) supports a research and technology (R and T) program in electric propulsion to provide the basis for increased performance and life of electric thruster systems which can have a major impact on space system performance, including orbital transfer, stationkeeping, and planetary exploration. The program is oriented toward providing high-performance options that will be applicable to a broad range of near-term and far-term missions and vehicles. The program, which is being conducted through the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and Lewis Research Center (LeRC) includes research on resistojet, arcjets, ion engines, magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) thrusters, and electrodeless thrusters. Planning is also under way for nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) as part of the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI).Document ID19910009868Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsBennett, Gary L.*(NASA Headquarters Washington, DC United States)*Watkins, Marcus A.*(NASA Headquarters Washington, DC United States)*Byers, David C.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH., United States)*Barnett, John W.*(Jet Propulsion Lab. California Inst. of Tech., Pasadena., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 1990Subject CategorySpacecraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:4244NASA-TM-4244Accession Number91N19181Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910009868.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
#### David Cromwell, *Treasurer, etc., Respondent, v.*John Henry Hull and others, *Appellants.*

— Appeals from three orders. Orders affirmed, with costs and disbursements. Opinion by

Dykman, J.
#### § 599.507 Disclosure of evidence.

The alleged violator may, upon request, receive a free copy of all the written evidence in the case file, except material that would disclose or could lead to the disclosure of the identity of a confidential source. Following a timely request for a hearing, other evidence or material, if any, of whatever source or nature, may be examined at the Hearing Officer's offices or such other places and locations that the Hearing Officer may, in writing, direct, if there are adequate safeguards to prevent loss or tampering.
From: Neil Bockian [mailto:NBockian@adler.edu] 

Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 12:42 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Parity

Comments Regarding Regulatory Guidance USCG-2007-27022 

page 19157, II B specific areas 1 and 4

 

I am a psychologist who provides neurofeedback treatment to individuals with Attention Deficit 

Hyperactivity Disorder and Anxiety Disorders. Neurofeedback is an empirically validated and 

widely recognized effective non-medication treatment for ADHD, as well as other conditions. 

There are over 50 studies evaluating the effectiveness of neurofeedback in the treatment of 

ADHD, substance use disorders and Autism. A recent review of this literature concluded 

"Neurofeedback meets the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry criteria for 

Clinical Guidelines for treatment of ADHD." This means that neurofeedback meets the same 

criteria as medication for treating ADHD, of which 60% of prescriptions are in fact prescribed 

"off label," and that neurofeedback "should always be considered as an intervention for this 

disorder by the clinician." 

 

This service has been denied by Georgia Medicaid, Aetna, United Behavioral Health, Blue Cross, 

Cigna, and Amerigroup. 

 

This is limitation of an effective and validated treatment for a mental health problem. The 

reasons given by the insurance companies for this denial fell into two categories: 1) our 

company does not cover biofeedback for mental health problems or 2) there is not yet 

sufficient evidence for the efficacy of neurofeedback. As such, they are using evidence-based 

criteria that are far more restrictive for mental health services than the criteria which are used 

for medical/surgical services. There are many routine medical and surgical procedures which 

have far fewer controlled studies about their efficacy than does neurofeedback. These medical 

and surgical procedures are generally not limited because of concerns about how many 

controlled studies have been performed about them. 

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

require that employers and plans pay for the same range and scope of services for behavioral 

treatments as they do for medical surgical benefits and that a plan cannot be more restrictive 

in their managed care criteria and reviews for mental health and substance abuse disorders 

when compared to medical surgery. Today plans are being more restrictive in how they review 

evidenced-based mental health and Substance Abuse Treatments when compared to medical 

surgical treatments. This violates both the intent and letter of the parity statute and we hope 

that the regulations will clarify that this can't continue. 

Sincerely, 

Neil Bockian, Ph.D. 

Core Faculty, Adler School of Professional Psychology 

President, Behavioral Health Associates
Exhibit 23.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-174019, 333-163910, 333-159832, 333-115498, 333-104347, 333-85854 and 333-134062 on Form S-8 of our reports dated November 30, 2011 , relating to (1) the consolidated financial statements of Coherent, Inc. and subsidiaries (collectively, the "Company") and (2) the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended October 1, 2011 .





/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


San Jose, California


November 30, 2011
Editorial Note on Part 385
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 385 appear at 66 FR 49872, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 385.327 May a new entrant request an administrative review of a determination of a failed safety audit? ( a ) If a new entrant receives a notice under § 385.319(c) that its new entrant registration will be revoked, it may request FMCSA to conduct an administrative review if it believes FMCSA has committed an error in determining that its basic safety management controls are inadequate. The request must: ( 1 ) Be made to the Field Administrator of the appropriate FMCSA Service Center.
( 2 ) Explain the error the new entrant believes FMCSA committed in its determination.
( 3 ) Include a list of all factual and procedural issues in dispute and any information or documents that support the new entrant's argument.
( b ) FMCSA may request that the new entrant submit additional data and attend a conference to discuss the issues(s) in dispute. If the new entrant does not attend the conference or does not submit the requested data, FMCSA may dismiss the new entrant's request for review.
( c ) A new entrant must submit a request for an administrative review within one of the following time periods: ( 1 ) If it does not submit evidence of corrective action under § 385.319(c), within 90 days after the date it is notified that its basic safety management controls are inadequate.
( 2 ) If it submits evidence of corrective action under § 385.319(c), within 90 days after the date it is notified that its corrective action is insufficient and its basic safety management controls remain inadequate.
( d ) If a new entrant wants to assure that FMCSA will be able to issue a final written decision before the prohibitions outlined in § 385.325(c) take effect, the new entrant must submit its request no later than 15 days from the date of the notice that its basic safety management controls are inadequate. Failure to submit the request within this 15-day period may result in revocation of new entrant registration and issuance of an out-of-service order before completion of administrative review.
( e ) FMCSA will complete its review and notify the new entrant in writing of its decision within: ( 1 ) 45 days after receiving a request for review from a new entrant that is subject to § 385.319(c)(1).
( 2 ) 30 days after receiving a request for review from a new entrant that is subject to § 385.319(c)(2).
( f ) The Field Administrator's decision constitutes the final Agency action.
( g ) Notwithstanding this subpart, a new entrant is subject to the suspension and revocation provisions of 49 U.S.C. 13905 for violations of DOT regulations governing motor carrier operations.
[73 FR 76490, Dec. 16, 2008]
#### § 523.1 Scope.

This part establishes categories of vehicles that are subject to title V of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, 15 U.S.C. 2001 *et seq.*

(Sec. 301, Pub. L. 94-163, 80 Stat. 901 (15 U.S.C. 2001))

[42 FR 38362, July 28, 1977]
Night Time Flight Policy

The below policies are in addition to FAA 333 Exemption and COA requirements, with the exception of flying at night.

1. All flights will occur in FAA Class G airspace at no more than 150 feet AGL and no further than 100ft horizontal distance from the 

launch location and pilot in control.

2. The flight path will be more vertical in nature (straight up and down), supporting single location panoramic photography. 

3. The aircraft will only be operated over a property that has been preauthorized by properties manager.

(ex: homeowner or city manager)

4. Community Police Department and City Manager will be notified of flight prior to its occurrence. 

5. Launch and landing safe zone perimeter will be established with lighted “no entry” signs.

6. All operations will utilize a PIC and VO with the PIC and VO able to communicate verbally at all times.

7. All operations will occur at VLOS from the PIC and VO.

8. The sUAS will not be flown faster than 10mph or as limited by FAA regulations.

9. The PIC and VO will have a pre-flight meeting at the site of the operation just prior to the flight to assess weather, area of operation, 

topography, flight time, route, hazard mitigation and overall operational and safety parameters. Also during this meeting, the preflight aircraft checklist (see Appendix B) will be implemented.

10. PIC is responsible for maintaining an established safe emergency landing plan if at any time during the operation conditions become 

unfavorable due to unforeseen hazards, safety concerns, or weather. 

11. Prior to every flight, a highly visible lighted launch banner will be placed at the site of the ground station to allow an outside 

observer to determine the location of the UAS’s origin and command point.
#### Griffith Jones, Plaintiff, v. Henry W. Chamberlain and others, Defendants.

Motion for new trial denied and judgment in favor of the plaintiff ordered on the verdict. Opinion by

Haight, J.;

Smith, P. J., and Barker, J., concur; Bradley, J., not sitting.
```

[House Report 109-367]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

109th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     109-367

======================================================================

 
 WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO THE 
  SAME DAY CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED BY THE RULES 
                               COMMITTEE

                                _______
                                

  January 31, 2006.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

   Mrs. Capito, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 654]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 654, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a 
two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is 
reported from the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions 
reported from the Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver 
to any special rule reported on the legislative day of February 
1, 2006, providing for consideration or disposition of a bill 
to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism, 
and for other purposes.

                                  

```
§ 373.103 For-hire, non-exempt expense bills. ( a ) *Property.* ( 1 ) Every for-hire, non-exempt motor carrier of property shall issue a freight or expense bill for each shipment transported containing the following information: ( i ) Names of consignor and consignee (except on a reconsigned shipment, not the name of the original consignor).
( ii ) Date of shipment.
( iii ) Origin and destination points (except on a reconsigned shipment, not the original shipping point unless the final consignee pays the charges from that point).
( iv ) Number of packages.
( v ) Description of freight.
( vi ) Weight, volume, or measurement of freight (if applicable to the rating of the freight).
( vii ) Exact rate(s) assessed.
( viii ) Total charges due, including the nature and amount of any charges for special service and the points at which such service was rendered.
( ix ) Route of movement and name of each carrier participating in the transportation.
( x ) Transfer point(s) through which shipment moved.
( xi ) Address where remittance must be made or address of bill issuer's principal place of business.
( 2 ) The shipper or receiver owing the charges shall be given the freight or expense bill and the carrier shall keep a copy as prescribed at 49 CFR part 379. If the bill is electronically transmitted (when agreed to by the carrier and payor), a receipted copy shall be given to the payor upon payment.
( b ) *Charter transportation of passenger service.* ( 1 ) Every for-hire, non-exempt motor carrier providing charter transportation of passenger service shall issue an expense bill containing the following information: ( i ) Serial number, consisting of one of a series of consecutive numbers assigned in advance and imprinted on the bill.
( ii ) Name of carrier.
( iii ) Names of payor and organization, if any, for which transportation is performed.
( iv ) Date(s) transportation was performed.
( v ) Origin, destination, and general routing of trip.
( vi ) Identification and seating capacity of each vehicle used.
( vii ) Number of persons transported.
( viii ) Mileage upon which charges are based, including any deadhead mileage, separately noted.
( ix ) Applicable rates per mile, hour, day, or other unit.
( x ) Itemized charges for transportation, including special services and fees.
( xi ) Total charges assessed and collected.
( 2 ) The carrier shall keep a copy of all expense bills issued for the period prescribed at 49 CFR part 379. If any expense bill is spoiled, voided, or unused for any reason, a copy or written record of its disposition shall be retained for a like period.
[83 FR 22873, May 17, 2018; 83 FR 26374, June 7, 2018]
§ 38.101 Lighting. ( a ) Any stepwell or doorway with a lift, ramp or bridge plate shall have, when the door is open, at least 2 footcandles of illumination measured on the step tread, ramp, bridge plate, or lift platform.
( b ) The doorways of cars not operating at lighted station platforms shall have outside lights which, when the door is open, provide at least 1 footcandle of illumination on the station platform surface for a distance of 3 feet perpendicular to all points on the bottom step tread edge. Such lights shall be shielded to protect the eyes of entering and exiting passengers.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 285 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 285

 Commending President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan for his leadership 
         and friendship and welcoming him to the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 8, 2001

    Mr. Pitts (for himself and Mr. Bonior) submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International 
                               Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Commending President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan for his leadership 
         and friendship and welcoming him to the United States.

Whereas President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan has taken important steps in 
        cooperating with the United States in combatting terrorism;
Whereas the war against terrorism underscores the importance of increasing the 
        historic bilateral relationship between the United States and Pakistan;
Whereas President Musharraf has pursued the return of Pakistan to democracy and 
        civil society;
Whereas President Musharraf has shown great fortitude in confronting extremists 
        in Pakistan; and
Whereas the Pakistani-American community in the United States and people-to-
        people diplomacy between the citizens of the United States and Pakistan 
        play an important role in building bridges between the two nations: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives commends President 
Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan for his leadership and friendship and 
welcomes him to the United States.
                                 <all>
```
SAT Report

PMN Number: P-12-0116

SAT Date: 1/6/2012

Print Date: 8/4/2014

Related cases:

Concern levels:

Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments

Level of Concern: 2-3 3

 Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments

1 21

Exposure Based Review:

Health: No

Ecotox: Yes

Routes of exposure: Health: Dermal Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water

Fate: ;

Keywords:

 Keywords: LUNG; CORR-E,S,MM,L; ACUTE; DEVEL; AQUATOX

Summary of Assessment:

 Fate:

Fate Summary: P-12-0116

FATE: Estimations for typical 

Solid with MP = 306 C (E)

log Kow = 5.00 (E) 

S = Disp. / 0.154 mg/L at 25 C (ICB/E)

VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E)

BP > 400 C (E)

H = 1.35E-7 (E)

log Koc = 5.00 (E)

log Fish BCF = 1.85 (E)

log Fish BAF = 3.05 (E) 
POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk - mo

Sorption to soils/sediments = strong - v.strong

PBT Potential: P1B2

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl - slow

 Health:

 Health Summary: Absorption is poor from the skin, moderate from the GI 

tract, and good from the lung (analog). Concern for effects on the lung; corrosion to 

eye, skin, mucous membranes and lung based on properties of the compounds and 

several 8Es for analogues Also concern for acute toxicity 

 for an analog reported a rabbit dermal minimal lethal dose between 398 and 631 

mg/kg) and developmental toxicity based on substituted benzenesulfonic acids.

 Ecotox:

Test Organism Test 

Type

Test End 

Point

Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 0.310 0.42

daphnid 48-h LC50 0.250 0.95

green algal 96-h EC50 50.0 8 (Yield) 3.9 

(Biomass)

Loading rate

fish _ chronic value 0.050

daphnid _ chronic 

value

0.040

algal _ chronic 

value

20.0 1.8

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50 _

Sewage Sludge _ Chronic 

Value

_

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs alkyl-benzene sulfonate 

(LAS-type) anionic in linear alkyl hydrophobe (worst case); SAR chemical 

class = anionic-sulfonate-LAS MW 382; pH7; effective concentrations based 

on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <180.0 mg/L as 

CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments

Assessment Factor 10

Concentration of Concern 

(ppb)

4

SARs alkyl-benzene sulfonate 

(LAS-type) anionic 

in linear alkyl 

hydrophobe
SAR Class alkyl-benzene sulfonate 

(LAS-type) anionic 

Ecotox Category 

Ecotox Factors Comments: 

 SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916