alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

#   Statement by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on Supporting our Indian Partners

By Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin IIIDOD NEWS

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More
#### In the Matter of Phillip Fries, Appellant, v Joann Price-Yablin, Respondent.

[632 NYS2d 998]

Motion insofar as it seeks permission to appeal as a poor person granted and in all other respects denied. Memorandum: Appellant is required to file an original record consisting of all papers enumerated in CPLR 5526, which has either been stipulated to by the opposing party or settled by order of the Family Court Judge before whom the proceedings were had (22 NYCRR 1000.5). Present— Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Balio, JJ.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Carl Vinson Strike Group Arrives in Guam 

By  Lt. j.g. Danielle MoserCarl Vinson Strike Group Public Affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
Inventory Expert Service 

A division of the American Chemical Society Phone: 800·631-1884,614-447-3870 

Fax:614-447-3747 

E-mail: answers@cas.org 

Web: www.cas.org/products/clienti 

INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT 

Please print the above Cl\. Index Nama on the appropriate page of your PHN. 

0 If this box is checked, CAS has made corraction(s) marked in red to 

your IES order, Please make the same correction(s) to your PMN before 

submitting· it to the EPl\., 

ATTACHMENT ONE: PMN Substance One (CONFIDENTIAL) 

CAS 2540 Olentangy River Road P.O. Box 3343 Columbus, Ohio 43210-0334 USA
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

As independent registeredpublic accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our report datedJune 9, 2006 relating to the consolidated financial statements and management'sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting andthe effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of AmericanScience and Engineering, Inc. for the year ended March 31, 2006 included inthis Form 10-K, into the previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8(Nos. 333-05797, 333-09257, 333-13259, 333-27927, 333-69717, 333-91801,333-53842, 333-102338, 333-117843, 333-117844 and 333-129851) and Form S-3(Nos. 033-61903, 333-09151 and 333-89836).

/s/ Vitale, Caturano &Company, Ltd.

VITALE,CATURANO & COMPANY, LTD.

June 9, 2006Boston, Massachusetts

----
No. 91-6196.

#### Esieke *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
## Gener al Service Flu o resc ent Lam p an d Incandescent Refle c to r Lam p Energ y Mar c h1 0 -11, 2 008 C o n s ervati o n S t andard ANOPR Pub lic M e etin g



# Energ yCo nservation Standards for General S e rvice Fluorescent Lamps and Incandescent Reflector Lamps ANOPR Public Meeting Closing
Buildi ng Te c hnolo g ie s Prog ra m Office o fEn er g yEfficien c y an d Ren ew a ble En erg y U.S. De pa rtme nt of Ene r gy
March 10-1 1 , 2008

Closin g 

## The Energ y Polic y and C onserv a tion Act (EPCA) direc t s DOE to consider sev en fa c t ors w h en se tting energ y conserv a tion sta ndards Factor An a l ys i s 1. Economic i m pa ct o n co nsu m er s and manu fac t urers Li fe-c y c le cos t anal y s is Manu fact urer i m pac t s ana l y s i s 2. Li fet i me ope rat i ng cos tsa v i ngs Li fe-c y c le cos t anal y s is 3. Tota l p r ojec ted energ ysa v i ngs Natio n al i m pac t anal y s is 4. Impac t on u t i l i t y o r perf orma nc e Screening ana l y s is Engineeri ng an al y s is 5. Impac t o fan y le ssening o f compe t i t ion Manu fact urer i m pac t s ana l y s i s 6. Need f o r na t i on al energ y conser va t i on Natio n al i m pac t anal y s is
7. Otherfacto r s th e Secretar y considers rele v a nt En v i r o n m en tal assessment U t il ityim p a ct an a l y s i s Emplo y m e n ti m pact a n al y s is 2

## Gener al Service Flu o resc ent Lam p an d Incandescent Refle c to r Lam p Energ y Mar c h1 0 -11, 2 008 C o n s ervati o n S t andard ANOPR Pub lic M e etin g

Closin g 

## Howto Sub m it Comments...

 Public Meeting – o ral comments will be captured in the t r anscript an d become pa rt of the public record.



##  Written com m ent s – A NOPR com m ent pe riod ope n until April 12, 2 008 Reference docket #: EE-2006-ST D-0130 and/o rRI N#: 1904-AA92

Email: fluorescent_and_incande sc ent_ l a m ps.rulemaking@ee.doe.gov Mail: Mrs. Brenda Edwards U.S. Departmen t o fE nerg y Build ing Technolog ies Program 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Mailstop EE-2J Wash ington, DC 20585-0121
Courier: Mrs. Brenda Edwards U.S. Departmen t o fE nerg y Build ing Technolog ies Program 950 L ' Enfant Plaza, 6t h Floor Wash ington, DC 20024 Telephone: (202) 586- 2945 3
No. 82-5575.

#### Kell *v.*United States.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Wayne R. Hellman, certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Advanced Lighting Technologies, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report, based on suchevaluation: and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter on the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: May 10, 2006   /s/ Wayne R. Hellman     Wayne R. Hellman  Chief Executive Officer
EERE Information Center Search Help More Search Options

Printable Version 

## Final Rule Technical Support Document: Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products, and Commercial Clothes Washers This report provides the technical analysis and results in support of the information presented in the final rule for residential dishwashers, dehumidifiers, and cooking products, and commercial clothes washers.

Some of the following documents are available as Adobe Acrobat PDFs. Download Adobe Reader

. Title Page ( PDF 24 KB ) Table of Contents ( PDF 32 KB )



### Chapters Chapter 1. Introduction ( PDF 116 KB ) Chapter 2. Analytical Framework ( PDF 208 KB ) Chapter 3. Market and Technology Assessment ( PDF 1.2 MB ) Chapter 4. Screening Analysis ( PDF 92 KB ) Chapter 5. Engineering Analysis ( PDF 580 KB ) Chapter 6. Energy and Water Use Determination ( PDF 332 KB ) Chapter 7. Markups for Equipment Price Determination ( PDF 220 KB ) Chapter 8. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis ( PDF 1.6 MB ) Chapter 9. Trial Standard Levels ( PDF 56 KB ) Chapter 10. Shipments Analysis ( PDF 768 KB ) Chapter 11. National Impact Analysis ( PDF 872 KB ) Chapter 12. Life-Cycle Cost Sub-Group Analysis ( PDF 428 KB ) Chapter 13. Manufacturer Impact Analysis ( PDF 948 KB ) Chapter 14. Utility Impact Analysis ( PDF 608 KB ) Chapter 15. Employment Impact Analysis ( PDF 96 KB ) Chapter 16. Environmental Impact Analysis ( PDF 492 KB ) Chapter 17. Regulatory Impact Analysis 

### Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards: Final Rule Technical ... http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/...

1 of 2 5/6/2009 1:44 PM( PDF 232 KB ) Appendix 5A AHAM Data Submittal ( PDF 336 KB ) Appendix 6A Cooktops and Ovens: Determination of Energy-Using Components ( PDF 124 KB ) Appendix 8A User Instructions for LCC and PBP Spreadsheets ( PDF 56 KB ) Appendix 8B Uncertainty and Variability ( PDF 48 KB ) Appendix 8C Lifetime Distributions ( PDF 76 KB ) Appendix 8D Household Discount Rate Distributions ( PDF 236 KB ) Appendix 10A Relative Price Elasticity of Demand for Appliances ( PDF 288 KB ) Appendix 11A User Instructions for Shipments and NIA Spreadsheets ( PDF 44 KB ) Appendix 11B National Equipment and Operating Costs ( PDF 372 KB ) Appendix 13A Manufacturer Impact Analysis Interview Guides ( PDF 192 KB ) Appendix 13B Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM) ( PDF 60 KB ) Appendix 14A Interpolation of Utility and Environmental Results from NEMS-BT Output ( PDF 48 KB ) Appendix 17A Regulatory Impact Analysis Supporting Material ( PDF 208 KB )



### Contact Information Stephen Witkowski, P.E. Project Manager (202) 586-7463

Printable Version

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

Content Last Updated: 04/30/2009 

### Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards: Final Rule Technical ... http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/...

2 of 2 5/6/2009 1:44 PM
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, Respondent, and Wayne Oglesby, Appellant.

[646 NYS2d 63]

Peters, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Ingraham, J.), entered October 16, 1994 in Chenango County, which granted petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR 7503 to stay arbitration between the parties.

On August 10, 1989, a vehicle operated by Michael Schroder and owned by C & D Van Horn, Inc. struck respondent’s vehicle after a car operated by Terry Owens crossed into Schroder’s path. Petitioner is respondent’s personal automobile insurance carrier.

In November 1990, respondent initiated an action against Owens, Schroder and C & D Van Horn. The jury returned a verdict of $100,000 against Owens with no liability against the other defendants. Since the Owens vehicle was insured with a liability limit of only $10,000, on July 2, 1992 respondent made a claim against petitioner for underinsured motorist coverage. Petitioner denied the claim upon the ground that respondent failed to give petitioner notice of the lawsuit until after the trial was completed. Respondent thereafter made a demand for arbitration, as a result of which petitioner brought this proceeding to stay arbitration. Supreme Court granted petitioner’s application and this appeal by respondent followed.

We affirm. Endorsement 1751 of the subject policy, when read in conjunction with endorsement 1737, unambiguously required that notice of underinsurance claims be made by written notice within "90 days or as soon as practicable” and that petitioner be provided with immediate notice of the institution of legal action. This means that "[a]n insured must give notice to his insurance company within the time limit provided in the policy or within a reasonable time under all the circumstances” *(Matter of Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. [Sullivan],*199 AD2d 719, 720; *see, Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Edgerson,*195 *772AD2d 560, 561). Here, Supreme Court found that respondent was aware of the policy limitations of the Owens vehicle prior to trial and could have provided the requisite notice before any possibility of prejudice to petitioner’s rights arose. Instead, notice was not received until nearly three years after the accident and respondent offers no reasonable excuse for the delay. Similar to the argument considered in *Matter of Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. (Sullivan) (supra),*we are unpersuaded by respondent’s contention that his obligation to notify petitioner of the potential underinsurance claim was not activated until the jury’s verdict was rendered holding only one tortfeasor liable. We further find respondent’s reliance upon *Matter of Federal Ins. Co. v Watnick*(80 NY2d 539) misplaced since such decision addresses the time when the insured’s obligation to pay a claim arises and not when the notice of claim must be given.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
  
 1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Crowley Maritime Corporation;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 /s/ Thomas B. Crowley, Jr.Thomas B. Crowley, Jr.Chairman of the Board,
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
No. 82-1040.

#### North River Insurance Co. *v.*Whitman, Sheriff, Bienville Parish, Louisiana.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 90-6134.

#### Smith *v.*Puckett, Superintendent, Mississippi State Penitentiary.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 81 

IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT WHILE PROTECTING SMALL BUSINESS AND 

INDUSTRY FROM UNNECESSARY COSTS FROM GREENHOUSE GAS PERMITTING 

WHEREAS, on January 2, 201 1, the first U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

regulations addressing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act took effect nationwide; and 

WHEREAS, to avoid a harsh result on small businesses and industry, EPA "tailored" the 

federal greenhouse gas program to limit the impact of the new permitting requirements to large 

industrial sources, thereby shielding millions of small businesses from GHG permitting 

requirements and avoiding more than $54 billion in additional costs for those small businesses 

nationally; and 

WHEREAS, North Carolina businesses should have the benefit of the federal GHG 

thresholds that limit the impact of new greenhouse gas permitting requirements to the largest 

industrial sources; and 

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission adopted a 

tailoring rule designed to protect North Carolina's small businesses by raising the permitting 

threshold under the state air quality program to require permits only for large greenhouse gas 

sources that are required to have a permit under the federal rule; and 

WHEREAS, the Rules Review Commission approved this proposed state tailoring rule, 

but approximately 18 citizens subsequently filed letters objecting to that rule; and 

WHEREAS, under laws adopted by the General Assembly, the filing of these letters of 

objection had the effect of prohibiting the implementation of the state tailoring rule until the 

General Assembly has had an opportunity to evaluate the merits of that rule; and 

WHEREAS, North Carolina General Statute § 150B-21.3(c) empowers the Governor to 

adopt an executive order providing for the immediate implementation of a rule to which 

objections have been filed when the Governor determines that immediate implementation of the 

rule is necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare; and 
p

g 

y 

y 

slow economic recovery and harm the public welfare. 

NOW, THEREFORE, by the power vested in me as Governor by the Constitution and 

laws of the State of North Carolina, particularly N.C. Gen. Stat. 5 150B-21.3(c), IT IS 

ORDERED: 

15A NCAC 02D -0544 as amended by the Environmental Management Commission on 

November 18,20 10, and approved by the Rules Review Commission on December 16,20 10, 

shall become effective this date and shall remain in effect unless the rules are disapproved by act 

of the General Assembly in accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. $ 150B-21.3(bl) or a court order 

makes modification or rescission of this Executive Order appropriate or necessary. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and affixed the Great Seal 

of the State of North Carolina at the Capitol in the City of Raleigh, this twenty-eighth day of 

January in the year of our Lord two thousand and eleven, and of the Independence of the United 

States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth. 

~e&~aves Perdue 

Governor 

ATTEST: 

Secretary of State
#### In the Matter of Alvin Thomas, Appellant, v Roger I. Blackwell et al., Constituting the Erie County Board of Elections, et al., Respondents.

[632 NYS2d 989]

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: On appeal from an order dismissing his petition to declare a designating petition invalid, petitioner argues that Supreme Court erred in precluding him from raising objections to the designating petition for the first time at the hearing on his petition. We conclude that, under the facts of this case, petitioner was properly precluded from attempting to prove defects not listed in the specifications of objections before the Board of Elections or in the order to show cause *(see, Matter of Suarez v Sadowski,*48 NY2d 620; *Matter of Levitt v Mahoney,*133 AD2d 516; *Matter of Belak v Rossi,*96 AD2d 1011, *lv denied*60 NY2d 552). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Election Law.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Fallon and Wesley, JJ. (Filed Aug. 23, 1995.)