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

Docket No. FAA-2012-0856 Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-093-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

replacement 747 422.7 $35,929.

50 $5,710 $41,639.50 165 $6,870,517.50

replacement 767

72.0 $6,120.0

0

$1,197 $7,317.00 399 $2,919,483.0

0

replacement 777

16.0 $1,360.0

0

$1,038 $2,398.00 130 $311,740.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $10,101,741

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

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

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

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

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

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* NO 

*Explanation:
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 85 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 2266, 

3 the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall make the 

4 following correction: Amend the long title so as to read: 

5 ‘‘Making additional supplemental appropriations 
2 

•HCON 85 EH 

1 for disaster relief requirements for the fiscal year ending 

2 September 30, 2018, and for other purposes.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 12, 

2017. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 85 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Providing for a correction in the enrollment of H.R. 

2266.
Exhibit 21(a)

                        Subsidiaries of the Registrant.*

                                                     Jurisdiction of
Name of Company                                       Organization
-------------------------------------------------    ---------------

The Southern Company                                     Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust I                Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust II               Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust IV               Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust V                Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust VI               Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust VII              Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust VIII             Delaware
         Southern Company Capital Trust IX               Delaware
         Southern Company Holdings, Inc.                 Delaware
Alabama Power Company                                    Alabama
         Alabama Power Capital Trust IV                  Delaware
         Alabama Power Capital Trust V                   Delaware
         Alabama Power Capital Trust VI                  Delaware
         Alabama Power Capital Trust VII                 Delaware
         Alabama Power Capital Trust VIII                Delaware
         Alabama Property Company                        Alabama
         Southern Electric Generating Company            Alabama
Georgia Power Company                                    Georgia
         Georgia Power Capital Trust IV                  Delaware
         Georgia Power Capital Trust V                   Delaware
         Georgia Power Capital Trust VI                  Delaware
         Georgia Power Capital Trust VII                 Delaware
         Georgia Power Capital Trust VIII                Delaware
         Piedmont-Forrest Corporation                    Georgia
         Southern Electric Generating Company            Alabama
Gulf Power Company                                       Maine
         Gulf Power Capital Trust I                      Delaware
         Gulf Power Capital Trust II                     Delaware
         Gulf Power Capital Trust III                    Delaware
         Gulf Power Capital Trust IV                     Delaware
Mississippi Power Company                                Mississippi
         Mississippi Power Capital Trust II              Delaware
         Mississippi Power Capital Trust III             Delaware
Savannah Electric and Power Company                      Georgia
         Savannah Electric Capital Trust I               Delaware
         Savannah Electric Capital Trust II              Delaware
Southern Power Company                                   Delaware
         Southern Company - Florida LLC                  Delaware

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

*This information is as of December 31, 2002. In addition, this list omits
certain subsidiaries pursuant to paragraph (b)(21)(ii) of Regulation S-K, Item
601.
**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 onForm 10-Q ofSpanish Broadcasting System, Inc. (the “Company”) forthe quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Raúl Alarcón, Jr.,Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and           (2) The information contained in the Report fairly    presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and    results of operations of the Company.     /s/ Raúl Alarcón, Jr.       Name: Raúl Alarcón, Jr. Title:    Chairman of the Board of     Directors, President and Chief     Executive OfficerDate: May 10, 2006
Hi Mary,

Here are my follow‐up questions:

Comment A7 – Wanted to confirm that EPA is taking comment on extending the Interim Enforcement Response

Policy beyond 2010 and 2011?  

Comment A120, pg 26  – This sentence still needs to be clarified.  I think ‘rule’ needs to be inserted prior to the

comma.

Chad

From: Manners.Mary@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Manners.Mary@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 4:24 PM 

To: Whiteman, Chad 

Cc: Farber.Glenn@epamail.epa.gov; Jutras.Nathaniel@epamail.epa.gov; Stewart.Lori@epamail.epa.gov; 

Ghanta.Venu@epamail.epa.gov; Bunker.Byron@epamail.epa.gov 

Subject: Fw: EO 12866/13563 Comments on RFS Renewable Identification Number (RIN) Quality Assurance 

Program [RIN 2060-AR72] 

Importance: High

 

Chad, 

RE: EO 12866/13563 Comments on RFS Renewable Identification Number (RIN) Quality 

Assurance Program [RIN 2060-AR72] 

Whiteman, Chad 

to: 

Mary Manners 

01/29/2013 05:35 PM 

Cc: 

Glenn Farber, Nathaniel Jutras, Lori Stewart, Venu Ghanta, Byron Bunker 

Hide Details 

From: "Whiteman, Chad" <Chad_S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov> Sort List... 

To: Mary Manners/AA/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: Glenn Farber/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Nathaniel Jutras/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lori 

Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Venu Ghanta/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Byron 

Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA 

History: This message has been forwarded. 

Page 1 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\MManners\Local Settings\Temp\notes87944B\~web7244... 1/30/2013
Attached are clean and RLSO versions of the NPRM reflecting the comments we discussed today. We believe 

this version addresses all of the issues raised in interagency review. 

Thanks, 

Mary 

Page 2 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\MManners\Local Settings\Temp\notes87944B\~web7244... 1/30/2013
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Page S10975]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           RECESS UNTIL FRIDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2008, AT 10 A.M.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate stands in recess until 10 a.m. on Friday, December 19, 2008.
  Thereupon, the Senate, at 11 and 50 seconds a.m., recessed until 
Friday, December 19, 2008, at 10 a.m.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 448 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 448

 Recognizing the roles and contributions of the teachers of the United 
  States in building and enhancing the civic, cultural, and economic 
                    well-being of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 28, 2016

 Ms. Collins (for herself, Mr. Brown, Mr. Kirk, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Blunt, 
Mrs. Capito, Mr. Moran, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Daines, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Coons, 
 Mr. Booker, Mr. Schumer, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Carper, Mrs. 
    Shaheen, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Warren, Mr. Donnelly, Ms. Hirono, Mr. 
   Menendez, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Hatch) submitted the 
        following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Recognizing the roles and contributions of the teachers of the United 
  States in building and enhancing the civic, cultural, and economic 
                    well-being of the United States.

Whereas education and knowledge form the foundation of the current and future 
        strength of the United States;
Whereas teachers and other education staff have earned and deserve the respect 
        of their students and communities for the selfless dedication of the 
        teachers and staff to community service and the futures of the children 
        of the United States;
Whereas the purposes of National Teacher Appreciation Week, held from May 2, 
        2016, through May 6, 2016, are to raise public awareness of the 
        unquantifiable contributions of teachers and to promote greater respect 
        and understanding for the teaching profession; and
Whereas students, schools, communities, and a number of organizations 
        representing educators are hosting teacher appreciation events in 
        recognition of National Teacher Appreciation Week: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) thanks the teachers of the United States; and
            (2) promotes the profession of teaching by encouraging 
        students, parents, school administrators, and public officials 
        to participate in teacher appreciation events during National 
        Teacher Appreciation Week.
                                 <all>
```
Occupational Safety And Health Review Commission
Commissioners’ Monthly Docket Report at Close of Business on May 31, 2023
 
DOCKET
NUMBER
RESPONDENT'S
NAME
DOCKETED

TYPE*

BRIEFING
NOTICE DATE
BRIEFING STATUS
COMMISSIONER NOT PARTICIPATING
1
18-0701
Midvale Paper Box Company, Inc.
10/21/21
DFR
11/09/21
Closed

2
20-0653
Eastern Gas Transmission and Storage, Inc.
10/28/21
DFR
11/05/21
Closed

3
19-0622
Anthony Marano Co.
02/10/22
DFR
02/16/22
Closed

4
20-0541
Harvey Builders d/b/a Harvey Cleary Builders
03/03/22
DFR
03/11/22
Closed

5
21-0432
Ariana Murrell-Rosario d/b/a Liberty Tax Service
07/01/22
DFR
07/13/22
Closed

6
20-1212
Roy Rock, LLC
07/14/22
DFR
07/15/22
Closed

7
20-0232
U.S. Ceiling Corp.
09/29/22
DFR
10/05/22
Closed

8
21-0794
U.S. Postal Service – Canovanas Post Office
11/16/22
DFR
11/18/22
Closed

9
20-0032
UHS of Fuller, Inc.,
UHS of Delaware, Inc.
03/02/23
DFR
03/20/23
Open

10
21-0295
Poinsett Hutterian Brethren, Inc.
03/16/23
DFR
03/27/23
Open

11
20-1437
K.M. Davis Contracting Co., Inc.
03/23/23
DFR
03/31/23
Open

12
17-0053
Joon, LLC d/b/a Ajin USA
03/23/23
DFR
03/29/23
Open

13
20-0559
MasTec Services, Inc.
04/04/23
DFR
04/06/23
Open

14
19-1667
A Crane Rental LLC
04/27/23
DFR
04/27/23
Open

 *DFR – Direction For Review
  REM – Appellate Remand
  INT REV – Interlocutory Review
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 1110

NAPIER SANDFORD FULLER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. REBECCA W. HOLT, in her official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; RICHARD A. BADDOUR, in his official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; JAMES C. STANFORD, in his official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; JAMES T. BRYAN II I, in his official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; SAMANTHA HYATT CABE, in her official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; CATHERINE C. STEVENS, in her official ca pacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts , Defendants

– Appellees

.

No. 19
- 1306

NAPIER SANDFORD FULLER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. REBECCA W. HOLT, in her official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; RICHARD A. BADDOUR, in his official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; JAMES C. STANFORD, in his o fficial capacity as employee of the North Carolina2 Administrative Office of the Courts; JAMES T. BRYAN, III, in his official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; SAMANTHA HYATT CABE, in her official capacity as em ployee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts; CATHERINE C. STEVENS, in her official capacity as employee of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts,
Defendants

- Appellees.

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Wilmington

. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 7:18

- cv
- 00059

- FL )

Submitted : June 20, 2019 Decided: June 24, 2019

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and RICHARDSON , Circui t Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Napier Sandford Fuller, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Woodruff Sawchak, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: Napier Sandford Fuller appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint that alleg ed violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act , 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101 to 12213 (West 2013 & Supp. 2018) , and the Rehabilitation Act , 29 U.S.C.A. §§
701

- 796 l (West 2018) , and its subsequent orders denying his motion to reconsider under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) and motion for a temporary restraining order. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error . Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Fuller v. Holt , No. 7:18

- cv
- 00059

- FL (E.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2018, Jan. 2,
2019 , Feb. 25, 2019) . We grant Fuller’s motion to withdraw and replace his informal
brief and deny his motion fo r summary disposition and request for injunctive relief . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
#### William Humphreys *v.*John R. Buie.

From Richmond.

Where the ftcts in a special verdict are not sufficient to dispose of all the issues submitted to the jury, no judgment can be given thereon,but a “ *venire facias de novo'’*should be awarded.

This action was commenced the 20th of April, 1824, by warrant from a Justice, to recover the amount of a former Justice’s judgment, arid was brought by appeal to the Superior Court of Richmond, where it was tried at Spring term, 1827.

The pleas were “general issue, statute of limitations, former suit and retraxit therein.” And the Jury, by a special verdict, found the judgment and that a former suit thereupon was at March 1825, ‘'dismissed.” The Court below, upon this verdict, rendered judgment for the Plaintiff, from which the Defendant appealed to this Court.

Haxx, Judge.

I think the special verdict ought to have been set aside in the Superior Court, because the jury have not found all the facts arising on the issues submitted to them, nor have they found facts on which #ie Court can award judgment for either party, neither finding^f the jury or the judgment of the Court, show what disposition was made of the statute of limitations, which the Defendant pleaded. The act of 1820, (lieu, c. 1053) makes three years a bar to a judgment obtained before a Justice.

A “ *venire facias de novo”*should be awarded by the Superior Court, and the suit must be remanded for that purpose.

Per Curiam. Judgment reversed and *venire de novo*ordered.
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 11




                            STROUDS, INC.
                  COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
  
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                          13 WEEKS ENDED            39 WEEKS ENDED
                                     ------------------------  ------------------------
                                     November 29, November 30, November 29, November 30,
                                        1997         1996         1997         1996
(in thousands, except share data)    -----------  -----------  -----------  -----------
---------------------------------
<S>                                   <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>
Weighted average number of common 
   shares outstanding                    8,557        8,523        8,548        8,518

Common Stock equivalents:
Shares applicable to Stock Options
   based on average market for period      101          --             3          -- 
                                      ---------    ---------    ---------    ---------
Weighted average number of common
   and common equivalent shares
   outstanding                           8,658        8,523        8,551        8,518 
                                      =========    =========    =========    =========



Net loss                              $   (536)    $ (1,578)    $ (4,665)    $ (2,593)
                                      =========    =========    =========    =========

Net loss per common and common 
   equivalent shares                  $  (0.06)    $  (0.18)    $  (0.55)    $  (0.30)
                                      =========    =========    =========    =========


<?Table>

Fully diluted net loss per share is not presented since the amounts do not
differ significantly from the primary net loss per share presented.



</TABLE>
#### Leonardo Perez, Appellant, v Smile In My Cab Corp. et al., Respondents.

[774 NYS2d 732]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.), dated March 6, 2003, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955 [1992]). The affirmation of the plaintiffs physician submitted in opposition to the defendant’s motion failed to establish that any of the identified limitations were of a significant nature *(see Trotter v Hart,*285 AD2d 772 [2001]; *Williams v Ciaramella,*250 AD2d 763 [1998]; *Cabri v Myung-Soo Park,*260 AD2d 525 [1999]; *Waldman v Dong Kook Chang,*175 AD2d 204 [1991]; *Medina v Zalmen Reis & Assoc.,*239 AD2d 394 [1997]), and was otherwise inadequate to raise a triable issue of fact.

Accordingly, the defendants were entitled to summary judg*652ment in their favor dismissing the complaint. Santucci, J.P., Smith, Luciano and Adams, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-27-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-29-1997
<CASH>                                      40,822,339
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,075,384
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,343,599
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            58,848,091
<PP&E>                                      14,986,070
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             351,243,485
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       17,844,887
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                171,869,437
<COMMON>                                         5,581
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               351,243,485
<SALES>                                     21,587,922
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            21,587,922
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          (36,868,441) 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,791,458
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             36,519,373
<INCOME-TAX>                                14,607,749
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (1,612,723)        
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                20,298,901
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>