alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EERE Information Center Search Help More Search Options

Printable Version 

## Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines Final Rule Technical Support Document This report provides the technical analysis and results in support of the information presented in the final rule for refrigerated beverage vending machines.

The following documents are available as Adobe Acrobat PDFs. Download Adobe Reader

. Title Page ( PDF 14 KB ) Abbreviations and Acronyms ( PDF 16 KB )



### Chapters Chapter 1: Introduction ( PDF 72 KB ) Chapter 2: Analytical Framework ( PDF 160 KB ) Chapter 3: Market and Technology Assessment ( PDF 380 KB ) Chapter 4: Screening Analysis ( PDF 52 KB ) Chapter 5: Engineering Analysis ( PDF 392 KB ) Chapter 6: Markups for Equipment Price Determination ( PDF 100 KB ) Chapter 7: Energy Use Characterization ( PDF 516 KB ) Chapter 8: Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis ( PDF 332 KB ) Chapter 9: Trial Standard Levels ( PDF 88 KB ) Chapter 10: Shipments Analysis ( PDF 132 KB ) Chapter 11: National Impact Analysis ( PDF 220 KB ) Chapter 12: Life-Cycle Cost Sub-Group Analysis ( PDF 72 KB ) Chapter 13: Manufacturer Impact Analysis ( PDF 920 KB ) Chapter 14: Utility Impact Analysis ( PDF 324 KB ) Chapter 15: Net National Employment Impact Analysis ( PDF 44 KB ) Chapter 16: Environmental Impact Analysis ( PDF 172 KB ) Chapter 17: Regulatory Impact Analysis ( PDF 64 KB )



### Appendices Appendix A: Instructions for Using the Engineering Analysis Spreadsheet ( PDF 228 KB ) Appendix B: Engineering Data ( PDF 72 KB ) Appendix C: Detailed Data for Equipment Price Markups ( PDF 40 KB ) Appendix D: Typical Meteorological Year (TMY2) Assignments ( PDF 1.1 MB ) Appendix E: User Instruction for Life-Cycle Cost Spreadsheet ( PDF 48 KB ) Appendix F: Detailed Life-Cycle Cost Output ( PDF 2.5 MB ) Appendix G: User Instructions for NIA Spreadsheets ( PDF 68 KB ) Appendix H: Detailed National Energy Savings and National Net Present Value Output ( PDF 408 KB ) Appendix I: Estimation of Marginal Heat Rates and Site to Source Conversion Factors ( PDF 160 KB ) Appendix J: Manufacturer Impact Analysis Interview Guide and Government Regulatory Input Model ( PDF 336 KB ) Appendix K: Estimation of Utility and Environmental Results from NEMS-BT Output ( PDF 116 KB )



### Contact Information Charles Llenza Project Manager (202) 586-2192

Printable Version

Building Technologies Program Home| EERE Home| U.S. Department of Energy Webmaster | Web Site Policies| Security & Privacy| USA.gov

Content Last Updated: 08/18/2009 

## Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards: Refrigerated Beverag... http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial...

1 of 1 8/31/2009 2:13 PM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET FOR JUNE 30, 1998 AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000946945
<NAME> UROCOR, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                      13,879,476
<SECURITIES>                                 6,088,621
<RECEIVABLES>                               21,791,042
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,224,820
<INVENTORY>                                    443,736
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            42,204,734
<PP&E>                                      14,844,070
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,175,526
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              56,014,620
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,942,732
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       104,145
<OTHER-SE>                                  51,890,175
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                56,014,620
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            21,877,841
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,468,454
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            10,946,134
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,561,978
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              46,975
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,534,683
<INCOME-TAX>                                   583,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            951,683
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   951,683
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
#### Leon PATTERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-488.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 31, 1972.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Vincent STEVENS, Appellant, v. Edith STEVENS, Appellee.

No. 71-75.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 3, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             Nov-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  Nov-30-1998
<CASH>                        259,141
<SECURITIES>                  000
<RECEIVABLES>                 92,786
<ALLOWANCES>                  000
<INVENTORY>                   000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              56,096
<PP&E>                        21,762,707
<DEPRECIATION>                9,334,668
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                13,550,740
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         731,125
<BONDS>                       2,352,981
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         000
<PREFERRED>                   000
<COMMON>                      000
<OTHER-SE>                    8,456,103
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  13,550,740
<SALES>                       2,849,302
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              2,879,469
<CGS>                         000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 1,035,588
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              979,038
<LOSS-PROVISION>              000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            355,490
<INCOME-PRETAX>               509,353
<INCOME-TAX>                  000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           509,353
<DISCONTINUED>                000
<EXTRAORDINARY>               000
<CHANGES>                     000
<NET-INCOME>                  509,353
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 8.95
<EPS-DILUTED>                 8.95
        

</TABLE>
Calendar No. 351

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1206

A BILL

To redesignate the Federal building located at 380

‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.Trapelo Road in Waltham, Massachusetts, as the

JANUARY 28 (legislative day, JANUARY 25), 1994

Reported without amendment
II

Calendar No. 351

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1206

To redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road in Waltham,

Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 1 (legislative day, JUNE 30), 1993

Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. DOLE, and Mr. NUNN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

JANUARY 28 (legislative day, JANUARY 25), 1994

Reported by Mr. BAUCUS, without amendment

A BILL

To redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo

Road in Waltham, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Frederick C.

Murphy Federal Center’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road

5 in Waltham, Massachusetts, and known as the Waltham
2

•S 1206 RS

1 Federal Center, shall be known and designated as the

2 ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.

3 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

4 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

5 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

6 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

7 a reference to the ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.
#### John Albert BRAXTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-1158.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 5, 1974.

John Albert Braxton, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and HEN-DRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of this appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
                    The Schedule contains summary financial 
                    information extracted from the financial
                    statements for P-B Equitec Real Estate
                    and is qualified in its entirety by reference
                    to such financial statements
</LEGEND>

<RESTATED>          

<CIK>               0000757191
<NAME>              P-B Equitec Real Estate
<MULTIPLIER>        1

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1998

<PERIOD-START>                  Jan-1-1998

<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1998

<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-Mos

<CASH>                          1,896,000

<SECURITIES>                    0

<RECEIVABLES>                   1,019,000

<ALLOWANCES>                    (500,000)

<INVENTORY>                     0

<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0

<PP&E>                          52,851,000

<DEPRECIATION>                  (23,587,000)

<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  31,679,000

<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           2,041,000

<BONDS>                         26,650,000

<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0

<PREFERRED>                     0

<COMMON>                        0

<OTHER-SE>                      2,988,000

<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    31,679,000

<SALES>                         7,662,000

<TOTAL-REVENUES>                7,662,000

<CGS>                           0

<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0

<OTHER-EXPENSES>                6,398,000

<LOSS-PROVISION>                0

<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              2,465,000

<INCOME-PRETAX>                 0

<INCOME-TAX>                    0

<INCOME-CONTINUING>             0

<DISCONTINUED>                  0

<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0

<CHANGES>                       0

<NET-INCOME>                    (1,201,000)

<EPS-PRIMARY>                   (17.28)

<EPS-DILUTED>                   0

</TABLE>
#### Mary L. de GIVE, Appellant, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MERRITT ISLAND, a national bank, Appellee.

No. 70-482.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 31, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Brevard County; E. Thom. Rumberger, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 1 8

- 50895

TEXAS RETAILERS ASSOCIATION,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court
f

or the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:18

- CV

- 659

Before JOLLY, JONES, and DENNIS , Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: *

In light of the Supreme Court ’ s pending review of the case Food

Marketing Inst

. v. Argus Leader Media, No. 18

- 481, 2019 WL 166877 (U.S.

Jan. 11, 2019), we V ACATE the preliminary injunction issued by the district

court and R EMAND with instructions that the court stay its hand from further

activity until the Supreme Court ’ s decision is rendered. 1

VACATED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS

.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

1 If the court, following the Supreme Court ’ s decision, reopens this case, it must explain why any disclosure ordered by courts in a sister circuit to which, as here, jurisdiction first attached, is not “ authorized by law ” pursuant to the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1905. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 11, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-50895 Document: 00514830431 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/11/2019
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D22-2133

_____________________________

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Petitioner,

v.

TORRANCE C. PARAMORE,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Certiorari—Original Jurisdiction.

September 21, 2022

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED.

RAY, MAKAR, and NORDBY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Adam B. Wilson, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.
#### In re ESTATE OF Robert C. JACKSON, Deceased.

No. 70-620.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 1, 1971.

Appeal from County Judge’s Court, Brevard County; Virgil B. Conkling, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Roy L. McCUTCHEON, Appellant, v. Elizabeth McCUTCHEON, Appellee.

No. 71-96.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 5, 1971.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Orange County; Roger A. Barker, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 73 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 73

 Congratulating Emporia State University for 150 years of outstanding 
   service to the State of Kansas, the United States, and the world.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 15, 2013

Mr. Huelskamp submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
              the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Congratulating Emporia State University for 150 years of outstanding 
   service to the State of Kansas, the United States, and the world.

Whereas Kansas State Normal School was founded by the Kansas Legislature in 1863 
        for ``the instruction of persons, both male and female, in the art of 
        teaching, and in all the various branches that pertain to good common 
        school education, and in the mechanic arts, and in the arts of husbandry 
        and agricultural chemistry, and in the fundamental laws of the United 
        States of America, and in what regards the rights and duties of 
        citizens'';
Whereas Emporia State University has played a significant role in providing 
        higher education to the citizens of Kansas since its founding and 
        throughout its history;
Whereas Kansas State Normal School became Kansas State Teachers College in 1923, 
        Emporia Kansas State College in 1974, and Emporia State University in 
        1977;
Whereas over 75,000 alumni have served in the arts, banking, business, 
        education, engineering, finance, government, health care, information 
        management, library science, military affairs, science and technology, 
        and other occupations;
Whereas Emporia State University empowers and engages excellent intellectual 
        opportunities for the people of Kansas, the United States, and the world 
        through its nationally recognized programs;
Whereas Emporia State University brings State, regional, national, and 
        international prominence to the State of Kansas through its outstanding 
        academic, cultural, and athletic events;
Whereas Emporia State University will celebrate its sesquicentennial throughout 
        2013 under the theme, ``Changing Lives Since 1863''; and
Whereas Emporia State University will commence to celebrate its 150th 
        anniversary on Founders Day, February 15, 2013: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates Emporia 
State University for 150 years of outstanding service to the State of 
Kansas, the United States, and the world.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 22, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41258 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FRANCISCO JAVIER HERNANDEZ-NEGRETE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-150-ALL

-------------------- Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Francisco Javier Hernandez-Negrete (“Hernandez”) appeals following his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence of imprisonment on one count of being found in the United States, without permission, following removal after having been convicted of an aggravated felony. For the first time on appeal, Hernandez argues that the sentencing provisions in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional because they do not require the fact of a prior felony orNo. 04-41258 -2- aggravated felony conviction to be charged in the indictment and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. He contends that his sentence is invalid, and he argues that it should not exceed the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Hernandez acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,434,870
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               975,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 24,701,248
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       1,071,313
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           994,634
<LOANS>                                     72,441,110
<ALLOWANCE>                                    964,601
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             108,346,403
<DEPOSITS>                                  99,562,494
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,050,288
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            995,668
<LONG-TERM>                                  2,495,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,390
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,237,563
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             108,346,403
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              3,412,495
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              829,972
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                62,590
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             4,305,057
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           2,208,207
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,356,582
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,948,475
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  120,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,486,510
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                529,202
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     353,079
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   353,079
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.66
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.69
<LOANS-NON>                                    500,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   440,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               842,328
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   28,557
<RECOVERIES>                                    30,830
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              964,601
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           964,601
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### Barbara Ann BARR v. STATE of Louisiana, Through the Louisiana DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS.

No. 61604.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 17, 1978.

In re: Paul D. Spurlock, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit. Parish of Jackson. 355 So.2d 52.

Denied.
# C_2022198EN.01004502.xml

| 16.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 198/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 198/45

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 March 2022 — TA v Parliament

(Case T-314/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Reports procedure - Staff report 2019 - Fixing of objectives - Internal rules on staff reports - Manifest error of assessment)

(2022/C 198/65)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: TA (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: C. González Argüelles and R. Schiano, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of her staff report for the period 1 January to 31 December 2019, as amended by the decision of 29 March 2021 dismissing the claim in part.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders TA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders TA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 289, 19.7.2021.

---
#### J. R. GENTRY, Appellant, v. Ida Bell SHERMAN, Appellee.

No. 72-791.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 13, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.