alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# ANGA Comments on EPA Methane White Papers

Please find attached the comments of America’s Natu ral Gas Alliance on EPA’s Methane White Papers. Our letter is intended to cover all five of the white papers. Thank you, Jason Smith America’s Natural Gas Alliance Manager, Market Development (o) 202­715­1713 (c) 703­409­5169 701 Eighth Street NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20001 

### Smith <jsmith@anga.us> Jason Mon 6/16/2014 4:57 PM To: OilandGas.Whitepapers <OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.go v>; Cc: Erica Bowman <ebowman@anga.us>; Amy Farrell <afarre ll@anga.us>; Brian Kelly <bkelly@anga.us>; Sarah Ve nuto <svenuto@anga.us>; Emily O'Connell <EOConnell@anga. us>; 

###  1 attachment ANGA EPA Methane White Papers letter of support.pdf ; 

### Page **1 of**  **1 ANGA Comments on EPA Methane White Papers**  **- OilandGas.Whitepapers** 

**8/ 26/**  **2014 https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/**
<PAGE>   1

<TABLE>
                Exhibit 11.1 Statement Re: Computation Pro Forma Net Loss Per Share
<CAPTION>

                                                       Three Months                    Nine Months 
                                                   Ended September 30,            Ended September 30,
                                               ---------------------------     ---------------------------
                                                  1996             1995           1996            1995
                                               -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------
<S>                                            <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>   
Weighted average common shares outstanding      10,216,146         467,986       4,447,440         464,997

Effect of convertible preferred stock
  converted at date of issuance                         --       7,025,705       4,452,718       6,139,480

Effect of common equivalent shares issued
  by the Company during the twelve
  month period immediately preceding
  the Company's initial public offering
  in June 1996, as if they were
  outstanding for all periods presented
  prior to June 30, 1996 (using the
  treasury stock method)                                --         190,331          63,212         190,331
                                               -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------

Shares used in computing pro
  forma net loss per share                      10,216,146       7,684,022       8,963,370       6,794,808

Net loss                                       $(3,059,131)    $(1,831,199)    $(8,510,324)    $(5,152,096)

Pro forma net loss per share                   $     (0.30)    $     (0.24)    $     (0.95)    $     (0.76)
</TABLE>

                                     Page 14
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2011-NM-276-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1180 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1180

 To amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit 
 the Secretary of the Treasury from receiving common stock or certain 
  other voting stock under the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 25, 2009

Mr. Neugebauer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit 
 the Secretary of the Treasury from receiving common stock or certain 
  other voting stock under the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON THE RECEIPT OF COMMON STOCK AND THE EXERCISE 
              OF STOCK VOTING POWER.

    Title I of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 is 
amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 137. PROHIBITION ON THE RECEIPT OF COMMON STOCK AND THE EXERCISE 
              OF STOCK VOTING POWER.

    ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
title, in carrying out this title the Secretary shall not make any 
purchase for which the Secretary receives control-diluting stock.
    ``(b) Application.--Subsection (a) shall apply to purchases made by 
the Secretary under this title on or after the date of the enactment of 
this section.
    ``(c) Conversion of Certain Securities Received by the Secretary.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, the Secretary shall 
not convert any security received by the Secretary under this title, 
other than a warrant, into control-diluting stock.
    ``(d) Control-Diluting Stock Defined.--For purposes of this 
section, the term `control-diluting stock' means--
            ``(1) common stock of a financial institution;
            ``(2) any other voting stock of a financial institution, 
        other than voting stock that the Secretary agrees not to 
        exercise the voting power of such stock; or
            ``(3) a warrant giving the right to the Secretary to 
        receive stock described in paragraph (1) or (2).''.
                                 <all>
```
In re: 

45CSR14 - Permits for Construction and Major 

Modification of Major Stationary Sources for 

the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

of Air Quality 

Transcript of proceedings had at a public 

hearing in the above-styled matter taken at the West 

Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division 

of Air Quality, Conference Room, 601 57th Street, S.E. 

Charleston, West Virginia, commencing at 6:08 p.m., on the 

7th day of July, 2014, pursuant to notice. 

MISSY L. YOUNG, C.C.R. 

POST OFFICE BOX 13622 

CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA 25360 

304-539-6192 
Comments and testimony will be accepted until the close of this hearing and will be made part of the rulemaking 

rec.ord. Any relevant question regarding revisions to the 

rules will be included with your comments, and any such 

question will be addressed as part of the response to 

comments in the rulemaking record. 

The purpose of this public hearing is to satisfy 

state rulemaking requirements by accepting comments on 

proposed revisions to rule 45CSR14 - Permits for 

Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary 

Sources for the Prevention of significant Deterioration of 

Air Quality. This rule establishes a state construction 

permit program consistent with the federal Clean Air Act 

and implementing regulations titled "Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality." Revisions to the 

rule comport with current federal counterpart PSD 

provisions regarding significant impact and promulgation of 

45CSR14, the Division will submit the rule to the EPA as a 

revision to the State Implementation Plan pursuant to the 

I I MISSY L. YOUNG, C.C.R. 304- 539-6192 
(WHEREUPON, the hearing was 

concluded at 6:10 p.m.) 

MISSY L. YOUNG, C.C,R.304-539-6192 
I, the undersigned, Missy L. Young, a 

Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public within and for 

the State of West Virginia, duly commissioned and 

qualified, do hereby certify that the foregoing, was taken 

to the best of my skill and ability, a true and accurate 

transcript of all the proceedings had in the aforementioned 

matter. 

Given under my hand and official seal this 

14th day of July 2014. 

~e#f iedwurt Pporter 

Notary Public for the Stat of West Virginia 

My commission expires April 15, 2018. 

MISSY La YOUNG, C.C,R.304-539-6192
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-05-00539-CV

Board of Regents of the Texas State University System, Alan Dreeben,

Kent Adams, Don Flores, Jimmy Hayley, Dora Alcala, John Dudley,

Bernie Francis, Pollyanna Stephens, and Chancellor

Charles Matthews, Appellants

v.

Lamar Urbanovsky, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. GN502558, HONORABLE SUZANNE COVINGTON, JUDGE PRESIDING 

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellants have asked this Court to abate the appeal for forty-five days while the

parties attempt to finalize a settlement agreement. We will grant the request and will abate the

appeal until January 12, 2006. If by that time the parties have not finalized their settlement

agreement and filed a motion to dismiss with this Court, the parties are asked to file a report

informing this Court of the status of the negotiations and the appeal.

__________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear

Filed: December 2, 2005
*OPINION ISSUED OCTOBER 6, 2008*

#### LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA HOLDINGS VS. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES

(CC-08-0329)

Claimant appeared *pro se.*

Charles S. Dunn, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM:

This claim was submitted for decision based upon the allegations in the Notice of Claim and respondent's Answer.

Claimant seeks to recover $34,043.38 for the cost of laboratory services that were provided to individuals at William R. Sharpe Jr. Hospital in Weston. Since there was no formal contract in place between claimant and William R. Sharpe Jr. Hospital, the State Auditor’s Office did not approve the invoices for payment.

In its Answer, respondent admits the validity of the claim as well as the amount, and states that there were sufficient funds expired in that appropriate fiscal year from which the invoice could have been paid.

In view of the foregoing, the Court is of the opinion to and does make an award to claimant in the amount of $34,043.38.

Award of $34,043.38.
`Exhibit 10.125












                                                     November 16, 2000


Mr. Bogdan Dziurzynski
c/o MedImmune, Inc.
35 W. Watkins Mill Road
Gaithersburg, MD 20878


Dear Bob:

                  Reference is made to your Employment Agreement, dated as of November 1, 1998 (the "Employment Agreement"), with
MedImmune, Inc. (the "Company").

                  The Employment Agreement is hereby amended so that the Employment Period referred to in Section 2 thereof is
extended to November 1, 2002.  All other provisions of the Employment Agreement remain unchanged.

                                                     Very truly yours,

                                                     MEDIMMUNE, INC.


                                                     By: /s/ David M. Mott
                                                            David M. Mott
                                                            Chief Executive Officer

Accepted and agreed to by:



/s/ Bogdan Dziurzynski
Bogdan Dziurzynski

Date:     12/5/00`
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3
 
                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
 
The Board of Directors
Urohealth Systems, Inc.:
 
     We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 33-59918, 33-59916, 33-59920, 33-91900, 33-92684, 333-19487 and
333-26565) pertaining to the Davstar Industries Ltd. Stock Option Plan, 1992
Employee Stock Option Plan, the non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan, the
Davstar Industries, Ltd. 1994 Stock Incentive Plan, Dacomed 1989 Stock Option
Plan, 1996 Directors Non-Qualified Stock Incentive Plan, Employee Stock Purchase
Plan, Advanced Surgical 1992 Stock Plan and Employee Reserved Stock Agreements,
the X-Cardia 1996 Stock Option Plan and the Microsurge, Inc. Stock Option Plan
of Urohealth Systems, Inc. of our report dated October 10, 1995 on our audit of
the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows
of Dacomed Corporation for the fiscal year ended June 24, 1995 of which the
results are included in the results of operations of Urohealth Systems, Inc.
included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 1995.
 
                                               /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
 
Minneapolis, Minnesota
July 11, 1997
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our
reports included in this Form 10-K into Ross Systems, Inc. previously filed
Registration Statements File No. 333-39348, 33-42036, 33-48226, 33-56584,
33-72168, 33-89128, 333-36745, 333-44665, 333-71005, 33-89504, 333-19619,
333-06053, 333-44363, 333-47877, 333-58639, and 333-65065.



/s/ Arthur Andersen LLP


Atlanta, Georgia
October 13, 2000
exhibit10.htm


    EXHIBIT
10.1

    


    FIRST
AMENDMENT TO

    THE
WASHINGTON TRUST COMPANY

    NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

    AS
AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2008

    


    


    
      	
              A.  

            	
              WHEREAS,
      The Washington Trust Company (the “Company”) 

            
	 	 
	 	maintains
      The Washington Trust Company Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as
      amended and restated effective as of January 1, 2008 (the “Plan”),
    
	 	 
	 	for
      the benefit of its eligible employees; and
	 	 
	 	WHEREAS,
      the Company desires to amend the Plan; and
	 	 
	 	WHEREAS,
      the Company has delegated this right to amend the Plan to the Compensation
      and Human Resources Committee of the Company; and
	 	 
	 	WHEREAS,
      the Compensation and Human Resources Committee of the Company has
      authorized the following amendment to the Plan;
	 	 
	 	NOW,
      THEREFORE, the Company hereby amends the Plan as follows:
	 	 



    
      	
              1.  

            	
              Section
      7.2(h) is hereby amended by deleting the reference to “September 15, 2008”
      and substituting in lieu thereof “March 14, 2009.”

            
	 	 


    

    
      	
              B.  

            	
              The
      effective date of this Amendment is September 1,
  2008.

            
	 	 


    

    
      	
              C.  

            	
              In
      all other respects said Plan is hereby confirmed

            
	 	 
	 	IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by
      its duly authorized officer this 16th
      day of September, 2008.


    

     

    
      	
              THE
      WASHINGTON TRUST COMPANY OF WESTERLY

            
	
              /s/
      John C. Warren

            	 
      
	
              John
      C. Warren

            	 
      
	
              Chairman
      and Chief Executive Officer
Technical Support Document

for the

Washoe County District Board of Health

Section 030.2 18, Demonstration of Compliance

Section 030.230, Record Keeping

Section 030.235, Requirements for Source Sampling and Testing

Section 030,970A, Part 70 Permit Monitoring and Compliance

Prepared by: Cynthia G. Allen

Reviewed by: Andrew Steckel

July 2012
There are no superseded submittals ofthese rules upon which EPA has not acted.SIP-Approved Rules

There are no SIP-Approved versions ofthese rules.

Purpose of New Rules

Section 110(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to submit regulations that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health and the environment. These rules were developed as part ofthe local

agency’s program to control these pollutants. Washoe County submitted these rules to support the infrastructure SIP requirements ofsection 1 10(a)(2) ofthe CAA.

The purposes ofthe new rules are as follows:

• Section 030.2 18, Demonstration of Compliance, states that the Control Officer may require the operator of a source to provide any applicable data to demonstrate compliance with the conditions ofthe Permit to Operate.

• Section 030.230, Record Keeping, states that the Control Officer may require any holder of a Permit to Operate to keep adequate records concerning contaminant emissions for

any equipment or process for which the permit was issued.

• Section 030.235, Requirement For Source Sampling and Testing, requires the APCO to determine the exact quantity and effect of emissions produced by stationary sources. The

APCO may require source stack testing, or other types ofsource testing including, but not limited to, mass balance types of analysis, be made by the operator.

• Section 030.970A, Part 70 Permit Monitoring and Compliance, requires sources subject

to 40 CFR Part 70 permitting requirements to submit an annual statement of compliance covering certain specified items.

EPA Evaluation and Action

Generally, prohibitory SIP rules must be enlbrceable (see section 110(a) ofthe CAA) and must

not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(1) and 193). We have evaluated this SIP revision

to determine whether it would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement ofthe Act (CAA

110(1)).

-2-
030.235, and Section 030.970A.

References

1. Submitted Rules.

2. Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal ofImplementation Plans, U.S.

EPA, 40 CFR part 51.

3. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA (May

25, 1988) (The Bluebook).

4. Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA

Region 9 (August 21, 2001) (The Little Bluebook).

-3-
I’•[

I.
Document Headings

                    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

          - [Docket No. RP01-118-000]

Take notice that on November 28, 2000, El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1-A, Eighth Revised Sheet No. 29, to become effective January 1, 2001.

El Paso states that the tendered tariff sheet revises the fuel charges applicable to transportation service on El Paso's system.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commisssion in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at  http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-31418  Filed 12-8-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### DAVIS v. STATE.

No. 16560.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 14, 1934.

F. M. Robertson, of Haskell, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Judge. '

Conviction is for chicken theft, the punishment being one year in the penitentiary.

No bills of exception or statement of facts are found in the record.

We observe that the sentence pronounced against appellant directed that he be confined in the penitentiary for one year. One of the optional penalties fixed by statute for *218theft of a chicken is confinement in the penitentiary “for not more than two years,” no minimum term being fixed. We are at some loss under the circumstances to know how the Indeterminate Sentence Law (article 7T5, O. C. P., as- amended by Acts 1931, c. 267, § 1 [Vernon’s Ann. O. C. P.'art. 775]) should' be given effect. It is certain that the jury might fix the punishment at one day or even one hour in the penitentiary. It will perhaps answer for all practical purposes to reform the sentence to read that appellant should be confined in the penitentiary for not less than one hour nor more than one year.

As thus reformed, the judgment is affirmed.
#### Sarah A. JONES, Appellant, v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 9585.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Sept. 3, 1940.

Rupert B. Turnbull, of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

W. Fenimore Cooper, of Los Angeles, Cal., and Oregon Smith, of Ontario, Cal., for appellee.

Before WILBUR and MATHEWS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This cause coming before the court on failure of appellant to pay deposit required to print the transcript of record in accordance with provisions of’iRule 19 of this Court, and notice having been duly given of hearing on default on this date, and no response to notice having been received, and it appearing from the files that the time within which deposit should have been paid expired on August 10, 1940, and no request for extension having been made, ordered appeal dismissed for failure of appellant to comply with Rule 19 of this Court, that a judgment be filed and entered accordingly, and mandate issued forthwith.
Amendment to Employment Agreement



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 Amendment to Employment Agreement between 
 Slavie Federal Savings Bank and Philip E. Logan 
  
 In February 2005, the compensation committee of the board of directors increased Mr. Logan’s annual compensation, effective January 1, 2005, to $115,000 per year. In February 2005, the compensation committee of
the board of directors also determined that Mr. Logan was entitled to a bonus of $11,000 for service during 2004.
#### Felix B. BROEKER, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America.

No. 11718.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

July 22, 1940.

John P. Zimmerman, of Kansas City, Mo., for appellant.

Richard K. Phelps, Acting U. S. Atty., of Kansas City, Mo., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court dismissed for failure to comply with rules, without costs. Defendant ordered to surrender to custody, etc.