alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION
IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105-3901 

# AUG 10 2012 Ms. Jeanne Swarthout Northland Pioneer College P. 0. Box
6 10 Holbrook, Arizona 86025-0610 Dear Ms. Swarthout: Thank you for your interest
in Arizona’s plan to address regional haze in protected national parks and wilderness areas as required under the Clean Air Act (CAA). We are responding

to your letter dated July 23, 2012, requesting
an extension
of the public comment period and additional hearings. We agree to extend the deadline for public comment and increase the number of public hearings
to provide additional opportunity for review and comment
on the regional haze plan for three power plants in Arizona (Apache Generating Station, Cholla Power Plant and Coronado Generating Station.) We will conduct two additional public hearings. On August 14, 2012, we will hold an additional hearing in Holbrook, Arizona
at Holbrook High School, George Gardner Performing Arts Center, 455 N.

8 th Ave. from 6-8 PM. Note that EPA has changed the location from Northland Pioneer College
in order to accommodate more people. On August 15, 2012, we will hold

a hearing
in Benson, Arizona,

at Cochise College (Rooms 113 and 115) from 6-8 PM. These two hearings are in addition
to the public hearing held in Phoenix on July 31, 2012. We have extended the public comment period by two weeks, for a total of 60 days ending on September 18, 2012, but are unable to provide the 90 days that you requested. We are on an expedited schedule
to review and respond
to all public comments and to prepare

a final determination

by the consent decree deadline of November
15, 2012. We did request an extension
of this deadline from the other parties to the consent decree, but were unsuccessful. We look forward
to working with you and other interested parties to address regional haze affecting national parks and wilderness areas. If you have further questions, please contact Colleen McKaughan, Associate Director,

at 520-498-0118. Sincerely, Jordan Director, Air Division

Prin ted on Recycled I’aper
No. 62712.

#### Louis Marx & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 323938-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial, it was stipulated that if the certificate of exportation had been filed prior to the liquidation of the entry or the expiration of the collector’s review period provided for in section 515, the merchandise would have been liquidated free of duty under paragraph 1615, as amended, *supra.*In view of the stipulation and following Abstract 57104, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: larry.wilkes@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:10:37 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,

Larry Wilkes

Westcliffe, CO 81252
From: donaldkwood@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:24:30 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,

Donald K Wood

Western Springs, IL 60558
January 22, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JAMIE ALBERTO IBARRA, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00337-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
H. Res. 215

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 8, 2007.

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. 700) to amend the Federal Water Pollution 

Control Act to extend the pilot program for alternative water 

source projects. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the 

bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of 

rule XXI. 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 Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure. After general debate 

the bill shall be considered for amendment under the fiveminute rule. The bill shall be considered as read. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to the bill 

shall be in order except those printed in the portion of the 

Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 
2

•HRES 215 EH 

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. 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.
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 of Propell Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the Company), on Amendment No. 1 to Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Edward Bernstein, President and Chief Executive Officer  of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 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/ Edward Bernstein President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) May 31, 2011
From: kdroane@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:40:23 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,

Kevin Roane

Bedford, VA 24523
No. 66497.

#### Old Importers, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 61/10873 and 61/12691 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of glass balls similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Joseph Markovits, Inc.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 151, C.D. 2216), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: donita@columbus.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:23:30 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,

Donita Parizek

Dublin, OH 43016
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****HIV among youth.**
 
2011 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017
 
SuDoc Number:HE 20.7320/3:Y 8/
Item Number:0494-K-12 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000981095
 
September 27, 2018
No. 69814.

protests 64/5566, etc. (New York).

#### A. C. Gilbert Co. and Milton Snedeker Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items in question consist of HO equipment similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *Polk’s Model Craft Hobbies, Inc., et al.*(47 CCPA 137, C.A.D. 746), the merchandise was held dutiable as follows: The items marked “A” at the appropriate rate, depending upon the date of entry, under the provision in paragraph 397, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802), or by the Sixth Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 54108), for manufactures in chief value of base metal; the items marked “B” at 22% percent under the provision in said paragraph 397, as modified by T.D. 51802, for articles in chief value of plastic, which most resemble in use manufactures of base metal, by similitude under paragraph 1559, as amended; the items marked “C” at 13% percent under the provision in paragraph 353, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs *885and Trade (T.D. 52739), for metal articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device; and the items marked “D” at 15 percent under the provision in said paragraph 353, as modified by T.D. 51802, for metal articles suitable for producing, rectifying, modifying, controlling, or distributing electrical energy.
September 7, 1960

No. 64486.

Suit 5039.

#### United States *v.*Excel Shipping Corp.

C.D. 2153. (Anrieal dismissed June 29,1960.)
|    |                                                                                       |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Forbes Energy Services Ltd.; and |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |

|                      |
|----------------------|
|                      |  |
|                 | /s/ John E. Crisp |
|                 | John E. Crisp |
|                 | Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer) |
|                 |   |
| Date: April 27, 2017 |   |
From: billyc@gvtc.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44 Absolute Objection!!!

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:53:55 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,

Cecilia Cunningham

Jacksonville, FL 32223
Before the Second Division,

April 8, 1965

No. 69230.

#### Knit-Wits *v.*United States,

protest 63/21717 (Los Angeles).

*387Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of rayon labels similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Bruce Duncan Co., Inc., a/c Standard Commodities Import & Export Corp.*v. *United States*(51 Cust. Ct. 27, C.D. 2409), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Federal Register: June 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 105)]
[Notices]               
[Page 30899-30900]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02jn10-149]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

 
Fourth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 223: Airport Surface 
Wireless Communications

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

[[Page 30900]]

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 223: Airport Surface Wireless 
Communications meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 223: Airport Surface Wireless 
Communications.

DATES: The meeting will be held June 15-16, 2010 from 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., 
Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., 
Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036; telephone (202) 833-9339; fax (202) 
833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice 
is hereby given for a RTCA Special Committee 223: Airport Surface 
Wireless Communications meeting. The agenda will include:

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Tuesday Morning--Plenary

 Opening Session (Welcome, Introductions, Administrative 
Remarks, Approve/Review Meeting 3 Summary, RTCA Paper No. 084-
10/SC223-007)
     Special Committee Leadership
     Designated Federal Official (DFO): Mr. Brent Phillips
     Co-Chair: Mr. Aloke Roy, Honeywell International
     Co-Chair: Mr. Ward Hall, ITT Corporation
 Agenda Overview
 AeroMACS Profile Working Group Status
 AeroMACS User Services & Applications Ad-Hoc Working Group 
Status
 3rd Plenary action item status
 Assignment of MOPS working group leader
 AeroMACS test and evaluation interim results

Tuesday Afternoon--Profiles WG Breakout Session

 Document Structure
 Technical work on AeroMACS Profile

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Wednesday Morning--User Services & Applications (USAS) Breakout Session

 User services and applications definition

Wednesday Afternoon--Reconvene Plenary

 Profiles WG Status Report and Plenary Guidance
 USAS WG Status Report and Plenary Guidance
 Establish Agenda, Date and Place for the next plenary meeting
 Review of Meeting summary report
 Adjourn--Expected by 3 p.m. on June 16th
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may 
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 25, 2010.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2010-13142 Filed 6-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```