alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Docket: HHS-OS-2010-0012 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Dependent Coverage of Children to 

Age 26, etc. 

Comment On: HHS-OS-2010-0012-0001 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Dependent Coverage of Children to 

Age 26, etc. 

Document: HHS-OS-2010-0012-0006 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-11391 

Submitter Information 

General Comment 

We are a regional health plan, licensed to operate in an area that is less than statewide. As a 

regional health plan, we require all members (subscribers, spouses, domestic partners, children 

and other dependents, except those covered under a medical support order) to live or work within 

our licensed service area. (We do not require dependents to live with the subscribers, however, 

they must live within the service area.) We would like to confirm that we will be permitted to 

continue applying this live/work rule to all members (including dependents) for plan years after 

September 23, 2010. Because our provider network only covers our licensed service area, any 

members enrolled in the health plan who do not live or work within the service area or who live in 

another state would not have timely access to non-emergency health care services. 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION 

As of: August 12, 2010 

Received: June 08, 2010 

Status: Posted 

Posted: June 09, 2010 

Tracking No. 80afe70d 

Comments Due: August 11, 2010

Submission Type: Unknown

Page 1 of 1

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/ContentViewer?objectId=0900006480afe7... 8/12/2010
#### EDWARD DeSANTIS et al., PLAINTIFFS, v. NATIONAL BISCUIT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

Decided July 29, 1933.

For the rule, *Cox & Walburg.*

Opposed, *Giordano, Golden <& Hurley.*

Lawrence, C. C. J.

This was an accident case, tried before the court and a jury, at the Monmouth' Circuit, involving injuries to the boy plaintiff, at the time about ten years of age, when struck and knocked down, while riding a bicycle, at a street intersection in Long Branch, by a delivery truck owned by the defendant company and driven by an employe, who was also made a party defendant. The evidence at the trial justified the jury in finding the issue of negligence against the defendants, together with a like result as to the alleged contributory negligence of the boy. An award of $13,000 was made to him and of $1,080 to his father.

Under the rule to show cause taken out in behalf of defendants, the only question argued was the excessive character of the verdict in favor of the boy, on the ground that his injuries were not such as to support it, thus indicating partiality or prejudice or a sympathetic attitude on the part of the jury. No question was raised as to the award to the father.

The boy’s injuries consisted of a fracture of the left jaw, which required three operations before it healed, some evidence of an abnormal protrusion of the lower lip, due to such injury, although not entirely clear in this respect; an injury *692to the right clavicle which was pulled away from the socket, and resulted in a deformity still present at the time of the trial; four broken ribs and contusions and lacerations about the body and head; and a suggested concussion, with shock and a consequent neurosis. The boy was laid up for a very considerable length of time, and apparently experienced a great deal of pain. At the trial he appeared rather dull and not entirely responsive. The award, however, does appear to be excessive, considering such cases as *Buckley*v. Goldberg, 9 *N. J. Mis. R.*1076; 157 *Atl. Rep.*245; *Rodriquez*v. Ricker, 9 *N. J. Mis. R.*1115; 156 *Atl. Rep.*916; *Masci*v. Young, 9 *N. J. Mis. R.*1137; 157 *Atl. Rep.*82; *Butryn*v. *Public*Service, 9 *N. J. Mis. R.*1145; 157 *Atl. Rep.*87; *Kalogerakas*v. *Public*Service, 10 *N. J. Mis. R.*175; 158 *Atl. Rep.*408; *Green*v. *Sun Oil*Co., 10 *N. J. Mis. R.*233; 158 *Atl. Rep.*735; *Riebel*v. Liddle, 10 *N. J. Mis. R.*437; *Marshall*v. *Hipp,*10 *Id.*622; 160 *Atl. Rep.*82.

In the circumstances, if consent be given to a reduction of the verdict for the hoy plaintiff to $10,000, the rule to show cause will be discharged, otherwise it will be made absolute as to damage only. Since no question was raised as to the award to the father, the rule will he discharged as to him.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Cause No. DA - 22 - 0358 DAVID LOCKHART AND DOREEN LOCKHART , Appellant s/Cross - Appellees , vs. WESTVIEW MOBILE HOME PARK, LLC , Appellee/Cross - Appellant . **ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION**  **OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF** 
The Court, having reviewed the Appellee/Cross - Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief , and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee/Cross -Appellant is granted a 30 day extension of time to file its response brief, this period is up to and including Decem ber 28, 2022.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 30 2022

11/30/2022
Case Number: DA 22-0358
-----Original Message----- 

From: Mikhail Atallah [mailto:mja@cs.purdue.edu] 

Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 1:19 AM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: 2010 Investment Advice Proposed Rule 

I am writing to strongly support the proposed rule -- much of the 

current advice is tainted by a conflict of interest: The advisor's own 

financial interests are typically not aligned with those of the Plan 

participant who receives the advice. This is obvious for advisors 

remunerated by commission, who have an incentive to steer the advicerecipient towards higher-expense products that remunerate them, rather 

than towards the lower-expense products that are better for the Plan 

participant (such as low-cost index funds). But it is also true of 

advisors who are not on commission yet benefit indirectly by steering 

the Plan participants towards products offered by their own employer or 

by an entity affiliated with their employer (e.g., the advisor who gets 

a better performance review and higher end-of-year bonus if they steer 

a higher dollar volume towards certain mutual funds or annuity 

products). The proposed rule would go a long way towards eliminating 

these conflicts of interest, and towards increasing the quality of the 

advice given to Plan participants. 

Sincerely, 

Mikhail Atallah 

3400 Elkhart Street 

West Lafayette, IN 47906
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 Annual Report of Alpharma Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)	The 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



Dated:  May 5, 2005

/s/ Ingrid Wiik
Ingrid Wiik
Chief Executive Officer

Dated:  May 5, 2005

/s/ Matthew T. Farrell
Matthew T. Farrell 
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT
23.02




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM









To the
Board of Directors




Colonial
Commercial Corp.




We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
(No.  333-37025) on Form S-8 of Colonial Commercial Corp. of our
report dated March 22, 2007, except for the effects of the restatements, dated
August 13, 2007, discussed in the fourth paragraph of our report, which contains
an emphasis of a matter paragraph for the adoption of SFAS 123(R), with respect
to the consolidated balance sheet of Colonial Commercial Corp. as of December
31, 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2006, which report appears
in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Colonial Commercial
Corp.














/s/Weiser
LLP




Weiser
LLP









March 31,
2008
From: Mark, Jeremy

To: aaron_l_szabo@omb.eop.gov

Subject: Part of E.O. 12866 Review: Interagency Discussion about TSDs for the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule for the 2008

 Ozone NAAQS [2060-AS05]

Date: Thursday, October 15, 2015 6:33:00 PM

Attachments: EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928 AQ Modeling TSD.docx

EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928 AQ Modeling TSD Appendix A.docx

EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928 AQ Modeling TSD Appendix B.docx

EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928 EGU NOx Mitigation Strategies

 TSD.docx

EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928 Ozone Transport Policy Analysis

 TSD.docx

EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928 Ozone Transport Policy Analysis TSD

 Appendix E.xlsx

EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928 Status of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs

 TSD.docx

Aaron,

I have attached four Technical Support Documents for the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule for the 2008

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards proposal (EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update

2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20150928). Included are the:

1) Air Quality Modeling TSD (along with two attached appendices)

2) EGU NOX Mitigation Strategies TSD

3) Ozone Transport Policy TSD (along with 1 attached appendix)

4) Status of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs TSD

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Jeremy Mark

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Clean Air Markets Division

Phone (202) 343-9087  Fax (202) 343-2359
Comment submitted by: Marijana Mover, Champaign, Illinois, United States 

KEEP YOUR CORRUPT SLIMY PAWS OFF OF OUR 401K. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET AWAY WITH 

STEALING OUR HARD 

EARNED/HARD SAVED RETIREMENT MONEY YOU FILTHY SLIMY COMMUNIST SCUMBAGS! THE HEARINGS 

STARTED IN OCT. 2008 

WITH PELOSI CALLING TeresaGhilarducci TO TESTIFY AS TO HOW SHE HELPED ARGENTINA ACCOMPLISH 

THIS. THE SCUMBAG 

DEMS PLANNED THIS BEFORE OBAMA TOOK OFFICE AND SPENT US INTO UNSUSTAINABLE DEBT. KEEP 

YOUR SLIMY PAWS OFF 

OF OUR RETIREMEW MONEY.
**EXHIBIT 23.1** **CONSENT    OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     The Board of Directors    CT Communications, Inc.:     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration    statements (Nos.    33-59641,33-59645,333-15537,333-38895,333-65818,333-119873    and    333-65846)    of CT Communications, Inc. of our report dated March 30, 2006,    with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of CT    Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31,    2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of    income, comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity and cash    flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended    December 31, 2005, and related financial statement    schedule, and our report dated March 30, 2006 with respect to    management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal    control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005    and the effectiveness of internal control over financial    reporting as of December 31, 2005, which reports appear in    the December 31, 2005 Annual Report on    Form 10-K    of CT Communications, Inc.     Our report dated March 30, 2006, on management’s    assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over    financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control    over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, expresses    our opinion that the Company did not maintain effective internal    control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005    because of the effect of material weaknesses on the achievement    of the objectives of the control criteria and contains an    explanatory paragraph that states that management identified a    material weakness in internal control over financial reporting    related to management’s review of the consolidated balance    sheet for determining current versus non-current classification    of assets and liabilities, and a material weakness in internal    control over financial reporting related to accounting for    equity-method investments. /s/  KPMG    LLP     Charlotte, North Carolina    March 30, 2006
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 497 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 24, 2002.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 4628) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for 
intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States 
Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence 
Agency Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes. The first 
reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 
consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the 
bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill 
for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute recommended by the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order against the 
committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to 
the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except 
those printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII and except pro forma amendments for the 
purpose of debate. Each amendment so printed may be offered only by the Member 
who caused it to be printed or his designee and shall be considered as read. At 
the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment 
adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment 
in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
§ 604.48 Appeal from Chief Counsel decision. ( a ) Each party adversely affected by the Chief Counsel's office decision may file an appeal with the Administrator within 21 days of the date of the Chief Counsel's issued his or her decision. Each party may file a reply to an appeal within 21 days after it is served on the party. Filing and service of appeals and replies shall be by personal delivery consistent with §§ 604.30 and 604.31.
( b ) If an appeal is filed, the Administrator reviews the entire record and issues a final agency decision based on the record that either accepts, rejects, or modifies the Chief Counsel's decision within 30 days of the due date of the reply. If no appeal is filed, the Administrator may take review of the case on his or her own motion. If the Administrator finds that the respondent is not in compliance with this part, the final agency order shall include a statement of corrective action, if appropriate, and identify remedies.
( c ) If no appeal is filed, and the Administrator does not take review of the decision by the office on the Administrator's own motion, the Chief Counsel's decision shall take effect as the final agency decision and order on the twenty-first day after the actual date the Chief Counsel's decision was issued.
( d ) The failure to file an appeal is deemed a waiver of any rights to seek judicial review of the Chief Counsel's decision that becomes a final agency decision by operation of paragraph (c) of this section.
# Focus remains on enduring defeat of ISIS, military official says 

/ Published Jan. 23, 2020
WASHINGTON, 

                Air Force Maj. Gen. Alex Grynkewich, deputy commander, Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve, provides an on-background Operation Inherent Resolve operational update at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., Jan. 22, 2020. (DoD photo by Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class James K. Lee)            

                Enduring defeat of ISIS            

SHARE IMAGE:

Download Image

Image Details

Photo By: MC2 James Lee

VIRIN: 200122-D-WA993-219
HomeAbout NRC

# Contact Us

Note: Before corresponding with us, please see our Privacy Policy regarding Public Disclosure of Submitted Information.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, February 22, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - The Commission
          - Organization & Functions
          - Artificial Intelligence
          - Governing Legislation
          - Plans, Budgets, & Performance
          - Locations
          - History
          - Values
          - Commission Direction-Setting and Policymaking Activities
          - Radiation Protection
          - Fire Protection
          - Safety Culture
          - How We Regulate
          - Emergency Preparedness & Response
          - Counterfeit, Fraudulent, and Suspect Items
          - Congressional Affairs
          - International Programs
          - State & Tribal Programs
          - Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs
          - Privacy Program
          - EEO/Civil Rights Program
          - About the NRC & Your Community
          - Contact Us
          - Career Opportunities
          - Contracting Opportunities
          - Grant Opportunities
          - Generic Schedules
          - NRC at a Glance

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - Job Openings
                - ADVANCE Act
                - Palisades Restart
                - Artificial Intelligence
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, February 22, 2023
Exhibit
      32.2  ****
 **CERTIFICATION
            OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
 **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 Brigham Exploration Company (the
        "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with
        the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
        Eugene
        B. Shepherd, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify,
        pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
        the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (1)
              The
                  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
                  15(d) of
                  the SecuritiesExchange
                  Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
                  and
  (2)
              The
                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                  respects, the financialcondition
                  and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 Dated:
                  August 19, 2005
              /s/
                  EUGENE B. SHEPHERD, JR.Eugene B.
                Shepherd,
                Jr.Executive
                Vice
                President andChief
                Financial Officer
  
 This
        certification shall not be deemed to be "filed" for the purpose of Section
        18 of
        the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated
        by
        reference into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act
        of
        1933, as amended, unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated
        therein by reference.
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
        authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
        in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
        by Section 906, has been provided to Brigham Exploration Company and will
        be
        retained by Brigham Exploration Company and furnished to the Securities and
        Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 25.105 Applicability. ( a ) This part applies to a Federal agency's Federal financial assistance as defined in § 25.400. This part applies to all applicants for and recipients of Federal financial assistance unless exempted by Federal statute or § 25.110.
( b ) Subrecipients are required to obtain a UEI in accordance with subpart C. This part does not apply to subrecipients of subrecipients (second-tier subrecipients) or contractors under Federal awards.
( c ) This part does not apply to an individual who applies for or receives Federal financial assistance as a natural person (unrelated to any business or nonprofit organization an individual owns or operates).
( d ) Because this part applies to loan guarantees and other guaranteed programs, recipients of the guarantee from the Federal agency (for example, lenders of guaranteed loans) are required to complete entity validations and acquire a UEI. Additionally, at the Federal agency's discretion, non-individual beneficiary borrowers (for example, small businesses or corporations) may be required by the Federal agency to obtain a UEI or register in *SAM.gov.*
#### § 509.1 Purpose.

This part collects and displays the control numbers assigned to information collection requirements of NHTSA by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). NHTSA intends that this part comply with the requirements of 44 U.S.C. 3507(f), which mandates that agencies display a current control number assigned by the Director of the OMB for each agency information collection requirement.

[48 FR 51310, Nov. 8, 1983]