alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EERE Information Center

Programs and Offices

Search Help More Search Options

Printable Version

Commercial Clothes Washers Supplemental Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking Technical Support Document

Here you will find the technical analysis and results in support of the information

presented in the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking for commercial clothes

washers.

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

Reader.

Title Page (PDF 36 KB)

Table of Contents (PDF 36 KB)

Chapters

Chapter 1. Introduction (PDF 112 KB)

Chapter 2. Analytical Framework (PDF 504 KB)

Chapter 3. Market and Technology Assessment (PDF 1.2 MB)

Chapter 4. Screening Analysis (PDF 64 KB)

Chapter 5. Engineering Analysis (PDF 272 KB)

Chapter 6. Energy and Water Use Determination (PDF 116 KB)

Chapter 7. Markups for Equipment Price Determination (PDF 204 KB)

Chapter 8. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis (PDF 824 KB)

Chapter 9. Trial Standard Levels (PDF 64 KB)

Chapter 10. Shipments Analysis (PDF 348 KB)

Chapter 11. National Impact Analysis (PDF 488 KB)

Chapter 12. Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis (PDF 304 KB)

Chapter 13. Manufacturer Impact Analysis (PDF 924 KB)

Chapter 14. Utility Impact Analysis (PDF 132 KB)

Chapter 15. Employment Impact Analysis (PDF 96 KB)

Chapter 16. Environmental Impact Analysis (PDF 400 KB)

Chapter 17. Regulatory Impact Analysis (PDF 256 KB)

Appendices

Appendix 5A AHAM Data Submittal (PDF 72 KB)

Appendix 8A User Instructions for LCC and PBP Spreadsheets (PDF 52 KB)

Appendix 8B Uncertainty and Variability (PDF 56 KB)

Appendix 8C Lifetime Distributions (PDF 76 KB)

Appendix 10A Relative Price Elasticity of Demand for Appliances (PDF 120 KB)

Appendix 11A User Instructions for Shipments and NIA Spreadsheets (PDF 44

KB)

Appendix 11B National Equipment and Operating Costs (PDF 116 KB)

Appendix 13A The Low-Volume Manufacturer (PDF 132 KB)

Appendix 13B Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM) (PDF 116 KB)

Appendix 13C Federal Production Tax Credit (PDF 192 KB)

Appendix 14A Interpolation of Utility and Environmental Results from

NEMS-BT Output (PDF 48 KB)

Appendix 17A Regulatory Impact Analysis Supporting Material (PDF 284 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: 11/09/2009

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

1 of 1 11/10/2009 9:00 AM

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 66.2
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6562-6563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02388]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic 
Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, 
pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the 
discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial 
property such as patentable material, and personal information 
concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and 
Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): RFA-PS-22-001, Implementing Pre-
exposure Prophylaxis for HIV Prevention in Syringe Service Programs; 
RFA-PS-22-002, Implementation Research on Telehealth Strategies to 
Support Retention in Care and Treatment among Antiretroviral Therapy 
(ART) Patients and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Clients; and RFA-PS-
22-004, Understanding HIV/STD Risk and Enhancing PrEP Implementation 
Messaging in a Diverse Community-Based Sample of Gay, Bisexual, and 
Other Men Who Have Sex with Men in a Transformational Era.
    Date: March 30, 2022.
    Time: 10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., EDT.
    Place: Teleconference.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    For Further Information Contact: Gregory Anderson, M.S., M.P.H., 
Scientific Review Officer, CDC, National Center for HIV, Viral 
Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, Mailstop US8-
1, Atlanta, Georgia

[[Page 6563]]

30329, (404) 718-8833, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a4e3e5cac0c1d6d7cbcae4c7c0c78ac3cbd2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9adddbf4feffe8e9f5f4daf9fef9b4fdf5ec">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the 
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices 
pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Kalwant Smagh,
Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief 
Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2022-02388 Filed 2-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Eugene H. HENRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5255

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 2, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1217 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to prohibit the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs from transmitting certain information to the Department of Justice for use by the national instant criminal background check system. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 23, 2021 

Mr. BOST (for himself and Ms. CHENEY) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to prohibit the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from transmitting certain information to the Department of Justice for use by the 

national instant criminal background check system. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans 2nd Amend5 ment Protection Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1217 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON SECRETARY OF VETERANS AF2 FAIRS TRANSMITTAL OF CERTAIN INFORMA3 TION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR 

4 USE BY THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL 

5 BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 55 of title 38, United 

7 States Code, is amended by inserting after section 5501A 

8 the following new section: 

9 ‘‘§ 5501B. Prohibition on transmittal of certain infor10 mation to the Department of Justice for 

11 use by the national instant criminal back12 ground check system 

13 ‘‘The Secretary may not transmit to any entity in the 

14 Department of Justice, for use by the national instant 

15 criminal background check system established under sec16 tion 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, 

17 personally identifiable information of a beneficiary, solely 

18 on the basis of a determination by the Secretary to pay 

19 benefits to a fiduciary for the use and benefit of the bene20 ficiary under section 5502 of this title, without the order 

21 or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial author22 ity of competent jurisdiction that such beneficiary is a 

23 danger to themselves or others.’’. 

24 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

25 at the beginning of chapter 55 of such title is amended 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1217 IH

1 by inserting after the item relating to section 5501A the 

2 following new item: 

‘‘5501B. Prohibition on transmittal of certain information to the Department 

of Justice for use by the national instant criminal background 

check system.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
# Sailor Assigned to Kings Bay Unit Dies of COVID-Related Complications

### 4 Feb 2021

A Sailor assigned to USS Tennessee (SSBN 734) (Blue crew) died  as a result of COVID-related complications Feb. 4.

The Sailor was admitted to the Naval Air Station Jacksonville Hospital Saturday, Jan. 30, and transferred to University of Florida Hospital Shands Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in Jacksonville Sunday, Jan. 31, where the Sailor subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. The Sailor was in the ICU at the time of death.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the family, shipmates and friends of the Sailor during this extremely difficult time.

The name of the Sailor is being withheld until 24 hours after next-of-kin notification.
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 11-50435 Summary Calendar

JUAN MANUEL MARTINEZ-GARCIA, Petitioner - Appellant

v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; WARDEN, REE V E S C O U N T Y D E TENTION CENTER III; BUREAU OF PRISONS; GEO GROUP, Respondents - Appellees

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas U SDC No. 4:11-CV-2
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Proceeding pro se a nd in forma p auperis , Juan Manuel Martinez-Garcia, former federal prisoner # 9 8884-179, contests the denial of his 28 U .S.C. § 2241 petition, challenging his exclusion from rehabilitation pro g rams and halfway houses. Because Martinez

- G a r c ia has been released from Bureau of Prisons

c u s t o d y , his appeal is m oot. E.g. , Calderon v. Moore , 518 U.S. 149, 150 (1996) U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D March 26, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 11-50435 Document: 00512186984 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/26/2013No. 11-50435

(appeal moot w hen intervening event prevents court from granting any effectual relief). DISMISSED.

2 Case: 11-50435 Document: 00512186984 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/26/2013
#### Gray and Others *vs.*Badgett.

Where one partner is garnisheed, and admits that he is individually indebted to the judgment debtor, he cannot avoid a judgment, by claiming that the judgment debtor is indebted to the firm of which he is a partner. This is equivalent to offsetting a joint and several debt against a several one.

This was a proceeding by garnishment, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in -, before the Hon. John J. Ceendenin, one of the circuit judges. Gray, Durrive & Co. having obtained judgment against Hudspeth & Sutton, sued out their writ of garnishment against Badgett, setting forth, in the usual form, their judgment. In answer to the allegations and interrogations filed, Badgett denied any indebtedness to Hudspeth & Sutton, or either of them, or possession’ of either credits, moneys, or effects, but admitted previous mutual dealings between himself and Hudspeth, individually; and that, upon such mutual dealings, there was a balance due Hudspeth; at the same time, claiming to retain and offset such balance against a debt due by Hudspeth to the firm of McLain & Badgett, of which the garnishee *17was a partner. Upon this state of case, the motion of the plaintiffs for judgment was overruled, the garnishee discharged, and judgment rendered in his favor for costs.

*Trapnall*& Cocke, for plaintiffs in error.

The object of the statute was, to enable the creditors, by means of a writ of garnishment, to subject, to the satisfaction of his judgment, effects that could not be reached by executions. Rules of construction are applied to remedial statutes for the purpose of giving effect to the remedy. 1 Black. *Com.*82. *Whitney et. al. vs. Emett et. al.,*1 *Baldwin's C. C. Rep.*316. The separate property of each joint debtor is subject to the joint execution against all; and it follows, from the obvious reason of the rule, that the separate debts can be subjected by a writ of garnishment.

If Hudspeth were to bring assumpsit to recover the balance admitted by Badgett to be due to him, the debt due to McLain & Badgett could not be pleaded as a set-off, and would be no legal impediment in the way of a judgment. See *Walker vs.*Bradley, 2 *Ark.*593.

*Fowler,*contra.

At July term, 1842:

*By the Court,*

Dickinson, J.

The question of set-off was fully discussed in the case of *Tramell vs. Harrell,*decided at the present term of this Court, and there held, that a joint demand cannot be set off against a separate one, nor e *converso.*If the doctrine there held be true, and that it is we have no doubt, Badgett could not offset the individual debt due Hudspeth, against the joint claim of McLain & Badgett. Judgment reversed.

A petition for reconsideration was filed by defendant in error, but overruled, at January term, 1843.
Current as of December 2017

Learn more at www.nationalguard.mil

Point of Contact: NGB Public Affairs at (703) 601-6767

Highlights

• Provides command and control for all

assigned state military assets deployed

in support of civil authorities or

an incident

• Facilitates information flow between

deployed units and the JFHQ-State

• Deployable with a CST, CERF-P,

HRF, quick reaction force, medical,

aviation and ground transportation

units

• Works closely with the incident commander to insure resources are

effectively, safely and legally employed

• JTF commander is the senior military

commander on the scene and

appointed by The Adjutant General

• Commander must know the

capabilities of the forces within the state

and is responsible for the safe and

efficient employment of military forces

Providing requested support to states during

crisis

Mission: The National Guard (NG) JTF-State provides command 

and control for all assigned state military assets deployed in 

support of civil authorities or a specific incident. It also facilitates 

the flow of information between the Joint Force HeadquartersState (JFHQ-State) and deployed units.

Overview: When NG forces are deployed to support requests from civil 

authorities, a JTF-State may be created under the JFHQ-State to 

maintain command and control of those forces.The JTF-State 

commander works closely with the incident commander in an effort to 

maintain situational awareness of local, state, and federal actions, 

ensuring the adequacy and effectiveness of response, support, and 

safety activities. As the senior military commander on the scene, the 

JTF-State commander is also responsible for the safe and efficient

employment of all assigned military forces. If additional forces are 

required, the JTF-State commander can request that the JFHQ-State 

activate and deploy additional units.

For response to a major incident, the JTF-State commander may have 

a variety of forces deployed, including a Homeland Response Force

(HRF), a Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team (WMDCST); a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and high-yield 

Explosive Enhanced Response Force Package (CERF-P); a reaction 

force, medical units, and various aviation and ground transportation 

units.

The JTF-State commanders may, with the consent of the governor and 

approval of the secretary of defense, be called into both federal and state 

service as a dual-status commander so that they may command both 

regular and NG forces, thus facilitating a unity of effort for all military 

forces at the incident site.

Joint Task Force-State

 (JTF-State)
Exhibit 32.2

                  BESTNET COMMUNICATIONS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of BestNet
Communications Corp. (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2004,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Michael A. Kramarz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.


/s/  Michael A. Kramarz
----------------------------------
     Michael A. Kramarz
     Chief Financial Officer

December 14, 2004
Opinion issued January 24, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-18-01144-CR

———————————

IN RE LONNIE HENRY RECTOR, JR., Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Lonnie Henry Rector, Jr., incarcerated and proceeding pro se, has 

filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the respondent district judge 

to transmit to the Court of Criminal Appeals his motion for nunc pro tunc filed in 

the underlying proceeding, pursuant to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure 

Article 11.07, Section 3(c).

1 However, because relator’s petition involves a final 

 

1 The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Lonnie Henry Rector, Jr., Cause No. 

714415, in the 262nd Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable 
2

post-conviction felony proceeding, we lack jurisdiction because the Texas Court of 

Criminal Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction over Article 11.07 final post-conviction 

felony proceedings. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, §§ 3(a), 5 (West 

2015); Padieu v. Court of Appeals of Tex., Fifth Dist., 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2013) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). “Article 11.07 contains no role 

for the courts of appeals,” and “to complain about an action or inaction of the 

convicting court, the applicant may seek mandamus relief from the Court of 

Criminal Appeals.” In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 718 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st 

Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding).

Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s petition for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Landau.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

 

Lori Chambers Gray presiding. The named respondent, the Honorable Denise 

Bradley, is no longer on the bench. This Court affirmed relator’s felony conviction

and life sentence for aggravated robbery. See Rector v. State, No. 01-96-00698-CR, 

1997 WL 665503, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 16, 1997, no pet.) 

(not designated for publication). This Court also dismissed for want of jurisdiction 

relator’s similar mandamus petition addressed to the district clerk. See In re Rector, 

No. 01-18-01102-CR, 2018 WL 6694792 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 20, 

2018, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
wha abes

é Pa
Ve Teste Cy

¢

DEPARTMENTS OF THE ARMY AND THE AIR FORCE

‘ NATIONAL QUARD BUREAU
WASHINGTON, D.C, 20310-2500

NGB“ADE-OM (420) . 28 WL 92

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION

SUBJECT: All State Log Number ( ; 1920323 ) Indoor Range
Clean-up at State Owned Armories a

1. Reference:

a. Reference meeting, 3 April 1992, subject same as
above, between NGB-ARC, NGB“ADE-OM, NGB~ARL, NGB~ARO,
NGB-AVN-S and NGB-JA.

b. AR 130-400, 1 Maroh 1977, Army National Guard
Logistics Policies For Support,

¢. NGR (AR) 385~15, 30 March 1990, Safety. <

a. NGR (AR) 420-10,, 15 February 1990, Real Property.
Orerations, Maichenance and OMARNG Minox Construction Army

National Guard.

e. Federal/State Agreement for Armory Project on State
Property. ,

2. After review of pertinent regulations and agreements .
referenced in paragraph 1 above, it has been determined that
clean-up of the Army indoor ranges at State owned armories is
a responsibility of the State, Any contaminated hazardous
waste resulting from this clean-up is eligible for funding
through NGB-ARE.

FOR THE CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU:

At, 2
‘OHN R. D'ARAUJO,

Brigadier General, GS
Deputy Director, Army National

Guard
‘ . FUL
DISTRIBUTION: — DISTRIBUTIONS ACTION BY fi YA)
Each UseFON ces, DOTH_MID__ SRAA__«, HQNJANG___
ach ROTO DOVA DLOG— MPM TAG-CSM___ HQSTARC
“Each aAcss ESO, NUMA__ TAG-JA. RQSOAD__
AD rof”_ PD. TC cre

CAO. rH0_f- potof us¥¥o J
SAO-SM___ TTC SAAO__ VA

CIO/PAG__ ID__~_ SMO__ 7” VL,
close SPNO__ VI. assa__/
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,094
<ALLOWANCES>                                       166
<INVENTORY>                                      9,003
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,273
<PP&E>                                          47,383
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,297
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  75,542
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,035
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            50
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,783
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    75,542
<SALES>                                         18,496
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,496
<CGS>                                           14,898
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,898
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,719
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 896
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (17)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        49
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (66)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (107)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (173)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)
        


</TABLE>
Richard R. MOORE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-102

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 24, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Zendarius Ziqae WHITE v. STATE

CR-15-1493

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.