alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: chrislim@uw.edu

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:37:59 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,

Christopher Lim

Seattle, WA 98115
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2333-094]
 On September 29, 2022, Rumford Falls Hydro LLC (RFH) filed an application for a new major license for the 44.5-megawatt Rumford Falls Hydroelectric Project (Rumford Falls Project; FERC No. 2333). The application was supplemented on March 30 and June 9, 2023. The Rumford Falls Project is located on the Androscoggin River in the Town of Rumford, Oxford County, Maine. No Federal or Tribal lands occur within or adjacent to the project boundary. In accordance with the Commission's regulations, on June 26, 2023, Commission staff issued a notice that the project was ready for environmental analysis (REA Notice). Based on the information in the record, including comments filed on the REA Notice, staff does not anticipate that licensing the project would constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Therefore, staff intends to prepare a draft and final Environmental Assessment (EA) on the application to relicense the Rumford Falls Project. The EA will be issued and circulated for review by all interested parties. All comments filed on the EA will be analyzed by staff and considered in the Commission's final licensing decision. The application will be processed according to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as appropriate. Milestone
Target dateCommission issues draft EA
January 2024.Comments on draft EA
March 2024.Commission issues final EA
August 2024.
                            11
                         The Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) regulations under 40 CFR 1501.10(b)(1) require that EAs be completed within 1 year of the Federal action agency's decision to prepare an EA. This notice establishes the Commission's intent to prepare a draft and final EA for the Rumford Falls Project. Therefore, in accordance with CEQ's regulations, the final EA must be issued within 1 year of the issuance date of this notice.
 Any questions regarding this notice may be directed to Ryan Hansen at (202) 502-8074 or 
                    *ryan.hansen@ferc.gov.* Dated: September 12, 2023. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2023-20113 Filed 9-15-23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Page | of 1

“REC. -|20 59 1-/0

AL PROCESSING DIVISION As of: August 31, 2011
Beater & REGULATIONS Received: August 11, 2011
BR ARCEL Status: Posted
PUBLIC SUBMISSION Posted: August 31, 2011
Tracking No. 80ede0d1
(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: I[RS-2010-0017-0075
Comment on FR Doc # 2011-19684

Untnown | Submitter Information

General Comment

This rule is blatantly discriminatory against any who have religious or conscience objections to
contraception or abortion. It forces citizens who participate in health insurance plans to cover with
their premiums the cost of other participants abortions and contraceptives. That is a moral wrong.

In addition, they should not be covered anyway because they are not health care. Abortions (and
morning after pills can be called nothing else) are not healthy for the embryo. And they are not
particularly healthy in the long term for the woman who takes them, and the same is true of
contraceptives--there are long-term negative side-effects. How can pills that make people sick be
called health care?

http://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectId=0900... 8/31/2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<CIK>                                      0001036506
<NAME>                   Stoneville Insurance Company

<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           958,867
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          951,765
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            951,765
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               1,303,457
<CASH>                                       1,395,927
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             556,986
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,722,835
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              1,326,604
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            663,411
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                  6,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       503,384
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,297,292
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,722,835
<PREMIUMS>                                   1,004,757
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             56,895
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   0
<OTHER-INCOME>                               1,016,840
<BENEFITS>                                     766,466
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    291,013
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           996,250
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,763
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,658
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,105
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,105
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
<RESERVE-OPEN>                               1,255,624
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            678,466
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                               88,000
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             286,342
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               409,144
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                              1,326,604
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                       (88,000)



</TABLE>
From: boatrightcrew@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:48:25 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,

Allen Blake Boatright

Salt Lake City, UT 84107
No. 430, Misc.

#### McDowell *v.*United States.

Petitioner *pro se.*

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg*and *Sidney M. Glaser*for the United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
| **Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss) (Tables)**               | 6 Months Ended                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
||
| **Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Net of Tax [Abstract]** |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
| Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss)                            | (Millions of dollars)    June 30, 2012 June 30, 2011Foreign currency translation$61 $480Derivative financial instruments(6) (6)Total Accumulated other comprehensive income/(loss)$55 $474     |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**us-gaap_AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeLossNetOfTaxAbstract**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Tabular disclosure of the components of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**us-gaap_ScheduleOfAccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeLossTableTextBlock**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**nonnum:textBlockItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-07-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           2,796
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,760
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     17,164
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,235
<PP&E>                                           3,552
<DEPRECIATION>                                     427
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  40,226
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,884
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            56
<OTHER-SE>                                      23,046
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    40,226
<SALES>                                         20,322
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,322
<CGS>                                           13,722
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,722
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,962
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 157
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    545
<INCOME-TAX>                                       212
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                333
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       333
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
From: kbradleys@prodigy.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:40:04 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,

Kathleen Bradley

Torrance, CA 90501
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<MULTIPLIER> 1,000


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                        320,704
<SECURITIES>                                  159,135
<RECEIVABLES>                                 217,159
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              768,400
<PP&E>                                        455,919
<DEPRECIATION>                                 81,430
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              1,845,305
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         491,180
<BONDS>                                     1,171,238
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          370
<OTHER-SE>                                     37,121
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                1,845,305
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              707,981
<CGS>                                         508,878
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (180)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             60,274
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (129,819)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (129,819)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                (129,819)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (2.44)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (2.44)



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of New Century Financial Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Robert K. Cole, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    Robert K. ColeRobert K. Cole Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer November 14, 2003




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to New Century and will be retained by New Century and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



The foregoing certification is being furnished with New Centurys Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2003 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and it is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of New Century,
whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
#### Wilbur S. Peck and others, Respondents, v. Isaac P. Powers, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Follett, J.;

Kennedy, J., not sitting.
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended May 31, 2006 (the “Report”) ofImmucor, Inc. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof, I certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

(1)    The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

 
| July 31, 2006 |   | /s/ Edward L. Gallup    |
|---------------|--------|-------------------------|
|          |   | Edward L. Gallup        |
|          |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----