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

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1394

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal the medicare

outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 4, 2000

Mr. ENSIGN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal

the medicare outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medicare Access to

5 Rehabilitation Services Act of 2001’’.

6 SEC. 2. OUTPATIENT THERAPY CAP REPEAL.

7 Section 1833 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

8 1395l) is amended by striking subsection (g).

Æ
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.01 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
EXHIBIT 32


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


      I, Charles F. Finn,  President and Chief Executive  Officer and Michael C.
Anderson, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, of Wayne Savings
Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. section 1350, that:.

      (1)   The  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the  Company  for the quarter
            ended  June  30,  2005  (the  "Report")   fully  complies  with  the
            requirements  of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange
            Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

      (2)   The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.




August 3, 2005                             /s/ Charles F. Finn
---------------------                      -----------------------------------
Date                                       Charles F. Finn, President
                                           And Chief Executive Officer



August 3, 2005                             /s/ Michael C. Anderson
---------------------                      -----------------------------------
Date                                       Michael C. Anderson, Executive Vice
                                           President and Chief Financial Officer
**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 Annual Report on Form 40-F of Rogers CommunicationsInc., a corporation organized under the laws of British Columbia (the“Company”) for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of theundersigned officers 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 requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
     2.) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.        Dated: May 19, 2004 /s/ Edward S. Rogers   Edward S. Rogers   President and Chief Executive Officer           Dated:  May 19, 2004 /s/ Alan D. Horn   Alan D. Horn   Vice President, Finance and ChiefFinancial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2



Section 1350 Certification by the Chief Financial Officer



I, William Snyder, the chief financial officer of Peak International Limited (the Company), certify for the
purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to the best of my knowledge,



(i) the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and



(ii)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 16, 2004 |  | /s/ William Snyder     
|                      |  | William Snyder         
|                      |  | Chief Financial Officer
*Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the

limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 15, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40897 

consolidated with

No. 05-41087

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

FELIPE LOPEZ-RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(1:05-CR-160-ALL)

(1:02-CR-62-ALL)

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This court previously affirmed the conviction and sentence of

Appellant, Felipe Lopez-Rodriguez. United States v. LopezRodriguez, 203 F. App’x 600 (5th Cir. 2006). On March 30, 2007, the

Supreme Court vacated our judgment in this case and remanded the

case to this court for further consideration in light of Lopez v.
Gonzales, 127 S.Ct. 625 (2006).

Following the Supreme Court’s remand we received supplemental

letter briefs from both parties with respect to the impact of

Lopez. The government concedes and we agree that, under Lopez, the

district court erred in imposing an eight-level enhancement for

Appellant’s prior controlled substance conviction. In light of this

error, the issue on appeal is whether we should vacate the sentence

and remand for resentencing or whether the appeal is now moot.

The parties agree that Lopez-Rodriguez has completed the

confinement portion of his sentence but remains subject to the

terms of his supervised release. Also, the government asserts,

without challenge, that Lopez-Rodriguez has been deported. This

Court recently found a similar case moot when the appellant had

already been released from prison and deported. See United States

v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, __ F.3d __, No. 05-41400, 2007 WL 926832 (5th

Cir. Mar. 29, 2007). Because the defendant in Rosenbaum-Alanis was

barred from entering the United States, and therefore could not be

resentenced, the Court could not grant the relief requested. Id. at

*2.

We find Rosenbaum-Alanis controlling, and because LopezRodriguez is barred from entering the United States, we cannot

grant his request to be resentenced.

The appeal is moot and therefore DISMISSED.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1397 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1397

  To ensure availability of the mail to transmit shipments of day-old 
                                poultry.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 4, 2001

 Mr. Grassley (for himself and Mr. Feingold) introduced the following 
      bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                          Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To ensure availability of the mail to transmit shipments of day-old 
                                poultry.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 39.

    Section 5402(d) of title 39, United States Code, is amended by--
            (1) inserting ``(1)'' after ``(d)''; and
            (2) inserting at the end the following:
    ``(2)(A) In the exercise of its authority under paragraph (1), the 
Postal Service may require any air carrier to accept as mail shipments 
of day-old poultry and such other live animals as postal regulations 
allow to be transmitted as mail matter. The authority of the Postal 
Service under this subparagraph shall not apply in the case of any air 
carrier who commonly and regularly refuses to accept any live animals 
as cargo.
    ``(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Postal 
Service is authorized to assess, as postage to be paid by the mailers 
of any shipments covered by subparagraph (A), a reasonable surcharge 
that the Postal Service determines in its discretion to be adequate to 
compensate air carriers for any necessary additional expense incurred 
in handling such shipments.
    ``(C) The authority of the Postal Service under subparagraph (B) 
shall apply during the period beginning on the date of enactment of 
this paragraph, and ending September 30, 2005.''.
                                 <all>
```
From: Mary Cashiola

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: preventive health services as part of future benefits packages in health care reform

Date: Saturday, August 27, 2011 3:07:12 PM

The current definition of religious employer does not provide true conscience

protection for those committed to preserving life. Healthcare plans should not be

forced to violate the moral and religious convictions of providers or employees in order

to participate in the health care system. Requiring such an unacceptable demand

threatens both universal access to health care and religious freedom of conscience.

Respectfully,

Mary Cashiola

5050 Ambassador Way

Houston, TX 77056
MEMORANDUM 

TO: Record 

 

FROM: Brent Ruminski, ERG 

 

 

DATE: 02 January 2014 

SUBJECT: 2014 Produced Water Reuse Initiative Conference Materials – SGE01017

On October 29th and 30th, EPA attended the 2014 Produced Water Reuse Initiative: 

Examining the Optimal Water Treatment, Storage, & 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 SGE01017.A18) are provided as attachments.
Memorandum 

31 December 2012 

Page 2 of 2 

ATTACHMENTS
From: lmtollett@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:41:52 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Leslie Tollett

Talladega, AL 35160
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OFTHE EXCHANGE ACT AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report ofIntrusion Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year endingDecember 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, G. Ward Paxton, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(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 fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| March 29, 2006 | /s/ G. Ward Paxton      |   |
|----------------|-------------------------|--------|
|           | G. Ward Paxton          |
|           | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
From: bwauson@me.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:02:06 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Brenda Wauson

Meyersville, TX 77974
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 27, 2010 

0120 

Order 

 

January 27, 2010 

139755 

HUDIE LANGSTON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 139755 

 COA: 291873 

WCAC: 08-000235 

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 10, 2009 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

 HATHAWAY, J., would remand this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration 

as on leave granted.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 23

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our reports dated January 21, 1999, included (or incorporated by
reference) in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
1998, into Ameritech Corporation's previously filed Registration Statement File
Nos. 33-34006,33-49036, 33-51771, 33-51773, 33-00897, 33-02591, 333-29569,
333-29591, 333-37407 and 333-43179.

                                                       /s/Arthur Andersen LLP

                                                         ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Chicago, Illinois
March 29, 1999
JOHN ELIAS BALDACCI 

GOVERNOR 

December 11, 2009 

Curtis Spalding 

Regional Administrator 

United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 

One Congress St., Suite 1100-ORA 

Boston, MA 02114-2023 

Dear Administrator Spalding: 

The State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP) respectfully 

submits the enclosed application for delegation to implement and enforce Maine's 

Chapter 125 Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaners Regulation in lieu of the National 

Emissions for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for area source Perchloroethylene 

Dry Cleaning Facilities . We submit the application pursuant to the provisions in the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, part 63, subpart E, on behalf of the State of 

Maine that will implement and enforce Chapter 125. 

We request delegation to substitute Chapter 125 for those provisions of the NESHAPs for 

Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart M) for non-major 

sources only. We are submitting this application of behalf of the State of Maine. Maine 

Statute 38 M.R.S .A., Section 585-B provides the authority for the Department to directly 

implement and enforce Chapter 125 . 

On April 24, 2006, EPA approved Maine's Chapter 125 regulation for area source dry 

cleaners as a substitute for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning facilities at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart M. EPA 

subsequently amended the Dry Cleaner NESHAPS, which changes Maine DEP has 

incorporated into Chapter 125 . 

DAVIO P . LITTELL 

COMMISSIONER 

AUGUSTA 

17 STATE HOUSE STATION BANGOR PORTLAND PRESQUE ISLE 

AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0017 106 HOGAN ROAD, SUITE 6 312 CANCO ROAD 1235 CENTRAL DRIVE, SKYWAY PARK 

(207) 287-7688 FAX: (207) 287-7826 BANGOR, MAINE 04401 PORTLAND, MAINE 04103 PRESQUE ISLE, MAINE 04679-2094 

RAY BLDG., HOSPITAL ST . (207) 941-4570 FAX: (207) 941-4584 (207) 822-6300 FAX: (207) 822-6303 (207) 764-0477 FAX: (207) 760-3143 

STATE OF MAINE 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

web site : www.maine .gov/dep 
For your review, the equivalency demonstration table and supporting narrative are 

enclosed . The equivalency demonstration table generally follows the format identified in 

the U.S . EPA's 40 CFR 63, Subpart E Guidance Document. 

Again, we appreciate the support provided by you and your staff. If you have any 

questions, please contact Andrea Lani of my staff at 207-287-2437. 

Sincerely, 

~~ 1'- Q&'k.- 

James P. Brooks 

Director, Bureau of Air Quality 

Enclosures 

Cc: Steven Rapp, US EPA, New England Region 

Susan Lancey, US EPA, New England Region 

Mary Beth Smuts, US EPA, New England Region
From: ettalange@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:58:57 AM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Etta Lange

Iselin, NJ 08830