alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Re: Word omission in Ivar Tombach 's portion of the UARG comments on chapter 4 of the 2nd Draft PM Policy Assessment Document Ivar Tombach to: Phil Lorang 09/20/2010 12:26 PM Cc: "Aaron M. Flynn", John Jansen, Marc Pitchford, Vicki Sandiford, Beth Hassett-Sipple

Phil: You are correct in that "not" " should appear in the first sentence in the first full paragraph on page 28 of my report, so the phrase should read "... light extinction does not appear to materially degrade ...." Thank you for pointing out the error.

Ivar Ivar Tombach, Ph.D., QEP 753 Grada Ave. Camarillo, CA 93010-1033 805 388-2341 805 445-9424 fax itombach@aol.com itombach@mac.com

On Sep 17, 2010, at 4:52 AM, lorang.phil@epamail.epa.gov wrote:

> > Dr. Tombach and Mr. Flynn, > > I believe I have spotted a "not" that was intended to be in a sentence > of the comments but was omitted. "Not" is a pretty important word, and > it would avoid confusion later if UARG could clarify this matter. > > In the attached copy of the comments, I have highlighted a sentence on > each of pages 28 and 30 of the attachment by Dr.Tombach titled "Comments > Concerning the Visibility-Related Portion of the > Second External Review Draft of the Policy Assessment for the Review of > the PM NAAQS." The sentence on page 30 is part of a conclusions > section, and addresses the same point as the sentence on page 28 in the > main part of the document, with very similar wording. The sentence on > page 30 has a "not" that does not appear in the sentence on page 28. > Given the substance of the material that comes before page 28 and the > way that the page 28 version starts with "Although" and the page 30 > version continues with "except", my interpretation is that the Dr. > Tombach's intention was to have the "not" in both sentences. That makes > the sentences consistent with each other and have a logical flow. > > Page 28 version: Although this analysis suggests that, at least at the > SEARCH JST site, the EPA’s simplified method of estimating hourly light > extinction does appear to materially degrade the quality of the > estimates relative to those made with actual on-site hourly PM2.5 > component concentration data, this exercise does not demonstrate any of > the following: ... > > Page 30 version: As described in this memo, I found that the simplified> method did not materially degrade the hourly estimates , p articularly > when they were compared on a percentile basis, except during episodes > when the relative mix of pollutants deviated greatly from the monthly > species fractions. > > > > (See attached file: Filing Copy -- Final UARG Comments on Chapter 4 > Second Draft PM PA.pdf) > > Phil Lorang, Group Leader > Air Quality Analysis Group, AQAD, OAQPS, EPA > 919-541-5463 > <Filing Copy -- Final UARG Comments on Chapter 4 Second Draft PM PA.pdf>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Page I of I 

AUG 2 0 2GlO 

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION 

PUBLICATION &. REOULAnON~ BRANCH As of: August 20, 2010 

PUBLIC 

SUBMISSION 

Received: Aug ust 09, 2010 

Status: Posted 

Posted: August 20, 2010 

Tracking No. 80b2cb7d 

Comments Due: August 16, :2010 

Submission Type: Web 

Docket: IRS-2010-0010 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathered 

Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act 

Comment On: IRS-2010-001O-0001 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as 

a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

Document: IRS-201O-0010-0194 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488 

Submitter Information 

Name: Stephen Carroll Smith 

Address: 

15651 E Imperial Hwy #100 

La Mirada, CA, 90638 

Email: healthways.chiropractic@verizon.net 

Phone: 562-902-0050 

Fax: (562) 902-8677 

General Comment 

Dear Reader 

I am writing to comment on the proposed If grandfathering" of some insurance policies to be 

exempt from some of the provisions of the new healthcare legislation. As A health care 

professional for the last 27 years, I have experienced the effect of increasing complexity with 

respect to the administration of health care. My staff spends an inordinate amount of time trying 

to figure out the special requirements of different insurance companies or plans. All of this takes 

time and money. It is distacting and frustrating. We need uniform standards that we can relJ' on 

for informed decision making. 

Everyone is asked to sacrifice. Don't let big insurers be the exception. Leave the legislation alone 

and let's see how it works. 

Stephen C Smith DC 

https:llfdms.erulemaking.netlfdms-web-agency1componentisubmitterlnfoCoverPage ?Call=... 8/20/2010
#### Otto Grimmer, Appellant, *v.*The Tenement House Department of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

Statutes — practical construction.

The practical construction of a statute by those for whom the law was enacted or by public officers whose duty it is to enforce it, acquiesced in by all for a long period of time, is of great importance • in its interpretation in a case of serious ambiguity.

(Submitted March 18, 1912;

decided April 2, 1912.)

Motion for re-argument,

(gee 204 N. Y. 370.)

*Per Curiam.*

The motion for a re-argument must be denied in accordance with well-established rules. Reference is made on this motion to additional provisions of the Building Code as opposed to the construction which we have adopted. We have been unable to consider that *550Code in its entirety, for while it was introduced in evidence on the trial, only a few sections were printed in the record and called to our attention, and we are unable to take judicial notice of its provisions.

The corporation counsel earnestly urges in substance that for many years the construction now urged by him of the various statutes and ordinances has been adopted and followed by the municipal authorities and has been generally acquiesced in and relied upon and that to overthrow this construction will result in confusion. There is no question that the practical construction of a statute by those for whom the law was enacted or by public officers whose duty it is to enforce it, acquiesced in by all for a long period of time, is of great importance in its interpretation in a case of serious ambiguity. *(Chicago*v. *Sheldon,*9 Wall. 50, 54; *City of New York*v. *N. Y. City Ry. Co.,*193 N. Y. 543.) But whatever competent and convincing facts'or evidence there maybe within this rule concerning the matters here involved, it is sufficient for the purposes of this motion to say that no such evidence was introduced or principle urged on the trial and argument of this case, and, therefore, upon this appeal we have been and now are unable to take into account any such consideration.

Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Hiscook and Collin, JJ., concur.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.
<PAGE>



                                                                   EXHIBIT 12.2

                             PACCAR Financial Corp.

                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

                        PURSUANT TO THE SUPPORT AGREEMENT

                         BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND PACCAR

                             (Thousands of Dollars)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                     Year Ended December 31

                            ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                1997         1996          1995          1994          1993
                                ----         ----          ----          ----          ----
<S>                         <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>    

FIXED CHARGES

  Interest expense          $   101,440   $    98,536   $    89,796   $    62,851   $    45,815
  Facility and equipment
      rental                        772           730           714           678           655
                            -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------

TOTAL FIXED CHARGES         $   102,212   $    99,266   $    90,510   $    63,529   $    46,470
                            ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

EARNINGS

  Income before taxes       $    50,697        52,180   $    46,730   $    42,147   $    30,449
  Depreciation                    7,618         9,579        10,605        10,168        10,701
                            -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
                                 58,315        61,759        57,335        52,315        41,150

FIXED CHARGES                   102,212        99,266        90,510        63,529        46,470
                            -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------

EARNINGS AS DEFINED         $   160,527   $   161,025   $   147,845   $   115,844   $    87,620
                            ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

RATIO OF EARNINGS
  TO FIXED CHARGES                 1.57x         1.62x        1.63x          1.82x         1.89x


</TABLE>
From: Kelly Darrah

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 7:58:52 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept the

recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the

new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive

services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women better access to

necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are

pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for

the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious

affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of

all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to thousands of

women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.28
                             FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
                      STOCK OPTION PLAN OF DEX MEDIA, INC.

                  Dex Media, Inc. (the "Company"), a corporation organized under
the laws of the State of Delaware, has previously adopted the Stock Option Plan
of Dex Media, Inc. (as amended from time to time, the "Plan").

                  In order to amend the Plan in certain respects, this First
Amendment to the Plan has been adopted by a resolution of the Board of Directors
of the Company on September 9, 2003, effective as set forth below. This First
Amendment to the Plan, together with the Plan, constitutes the entire Plan as
amended to date.

                  1.       Effective as of September 9, 2003, the first sentence
of Section 2.1 of the Plan is hereby amended by replacing the number "234,591"
with the number "469,182".

                                 * * * * * * * *

                  Executed on September 9, 2003.

                                               DEX MEDIA, INC.

                                               By:  /s/ George Burnett
                                                  -----------------------------
                                               George Burnett, CEO and President
#### Morris Newman, Respondent, v. George A. Reynolds, Appellant.

Order reversed and motion to change the place of trial from New York to Oneida county granted, with ten dollars costs of motion, and ten dollars costs of appeal and disbursements to abide event.
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Academic StandardsCurriculum DesignEducational TechnologyElementary Secondary EducationInterdisciplinary ApproachLesson PlansNational StandardsSecond Language InstructionSecond Language Learning

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
From: Rhonda Waller

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Sunday, August 07, 2011 12:05:18 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Rhonda Waller

1650 Cason Ln #1612

Murfreesboro, TN 37128
From: Leah Hunczak

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 4:42:23 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Leah Hunczak

3444 Park Ave. S

Minneapolis, MN 55407
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A0604. LAURA JONES v. ANDREA B. BRIM.

This case began as a dispossessory proceeding in magistrate court. After the

magistrate court issued a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the defendant, Laura

Jones, appealed to superior court. The superior court found in favor of the plaintiff,

and Jones appeals. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

“[A]ppeals from decisions of the superior courts reviewing decisions of lower

courts by certiorari or de novo proceedings shall be by application for discretionary

appeal.” Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874, 875 (581 SE2d 333) (2003); see also

OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1). Because Jones did not follow the proper procedure for

requesting appellate review, we lack jurisdiction. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby

DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

November 18, 2019

11/18/2019
Page 1 of 1

‘REC -J2039) -/0

LEGAL PROCESSING
“ SSING DIVISION As of: August 31, 2011

PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS Received: August 10, 2011

Status: Posted
PUBLIC SUBMISSION _ Posted: August 31, 2011

Tracking No. 80edd1d0
‘Comments Due: September 30, 2011
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0017
Requirement for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers to Provide Coverage of
Preventive Services under the PatientProtection and Affordable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0017-0038
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Coverage of Preventive Services
under Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Amendment

Document: IRS-2010-0017-0063
Comment on FR Doc # 2011-19684

Submitter Information

Name: Lisa Renea Miller
Address:
6606 Jefferson Court
New Tripoli, PA, 18066
Email: lisa.r.miller@thermofisher.com
Phone: 484-547-3184

General Comment

To Whom It May Concern:

Please do not force Americans to pay for contraceptives and pills that may cause abortion. This is
against my religious beliefs, as it's for a majority of other Americans as well. Contraceptives are
not a medical necessity and pregnancy is not a disease. Birth control is widely available and
publicly funded programs already provide it for women who cannot afford it.

Thank you.

http://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectId=0900... 8/31/2011
<PAGE>
                                                             EXHIBIT 25.1



                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


We, the undersigned directors and officers of PACCAR Financial Corp., a
Washington corporation, hereby severally constitute and appoint, C. M. Pigott,
M. A. Tembreull, T. R. Morton or any of them, singly, our true and lawful
attorneys-in-fact, with full power to them and each of them to sign for us, and
in our names in the capacities indicated below, a Form 10-K of this corporation
for fiscal year 1995 to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, together with any and all
amendments to said Form 10-K, hereby ratifying and confirming our signatures as
they may be signed by our said attorneys-in-fact to said Form 10-K and any and
all amendments thereto.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF each of the undersigned has executed this power of attorney
as of the 28th day of February 1996.




/S/ T. R. Morton        President               /S/ D. J. Hovind      Director  
--------------------    and Director            -------------------
T. R. Morton                                    D. J. Hovind    



/S/ R. E. Ranheim       Treasurer               /S/ M. C. Pigott      Director
--------------------                            -------------------
R. E. Ranheim                                   M. C. Pigott



/S/ M. T. Barkley       Controller              /S/ J. L. Shiplet     Director
--------------------                            -------------------
M. T. Barkley                                   J. L. Shiplet



/S/ C. M. Pigott        Chairman of             /S/ M. A. Tembreull   Director
--------------------    the Board               -------------------
C. M. Pigott            and Director            M. A. Tembreull

                                                        
/S/ G. D. Hatchel       Vice President          /S/ J. J. Wagonner    Director
--------------------    and Director            -------------------
G. D. Hatchel                                   J. J. Waggoner 


                                         -33-
From: newlandnic@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Women"s preventative care

Date: Friday, August 12, 2011 11:04:16 AM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept the

recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the

new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive

services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women better access

to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are

pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for

the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious

affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of

all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to thousands of

women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
Exhibit32.1

REV HOLDINGS LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

In connection with the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of REV Holdings LLC (the"Company") for the period ended March 31,2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald O. Perelman,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

|            |                                                                                                                      |
|------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1)   | The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 results ofoperations of the Company. |

/s/ Ronald O.Perelman              

Ronald O. PerelmanChief Executive OfficerMay 17,2004

----
MEMORANDUM

TO: Record

FROM: Brent Ruminski, ERG

DATE: 02 January 2014

SUBJECT: 2014 Produced Water Reuse Initiative Conference Materials – SGE01017

On October 29 th and 30 th , EPA attended the 2014 Produced Water Reuse Initiative: Examining the Optimal Water Treatment, Storag e, & Recycling Strategies For Minimizing the Cost of Reusing Produced Water For Completions in the Bakken, Niobrara, Piceance, and Uinta. The conference materials (SGE01017.A01 through SG E01017.A18) are provided as attachments.Memorandum

31 December 2012 Page 2 of 2

A TTACHMENTS