alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                               
|---------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)       
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                 
|View History:                                                  
|                                                               
|Iowa Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                               
|                                                               
|Iowa Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0     
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 1      | 1      | 5      | 5      | 5      | 4      | 21     | 23     | 28    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 32     | 39     | 41     | 50     | 56     | 2      | W      |        | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 15     | 23     | 27     | 29     | 39     | 42     | 37    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 31     | 25     | 10     | 8      |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 90 (Monday, May 11, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 25883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12391]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388]


Pennsylvania Power and Light Company; Notice of Issuance of 
Amendment to Facility Operating License

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Commission) has issued 
Amendment No. 176 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-14 and 
Amendment No. 149 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-22 issued to 
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (PP&L, the licensee), which 
revised the Technical Specifications (TSs) for operation of the 
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Luzerne 
County, Pennsylvania. The amendment is effective as of the date of 
issuance.
    The amendment modified the TSs by changing the Rod Block Monitor 
(RBM) flow biased trip setpoints and also the RBM channel calibration 
frequency and allowed outage times.
    The application for the amendment complies with the standards and 
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), 
and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made 
appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules 
and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license 
amendment.
    Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility 
Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing in connection with this 
action was published in the Federal Register on April 11, 1997 (62 FR 
17885). No request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene was 
filed following this notice.
    The Commission has prepared an Environmental Assessment related to 
the action and has determined not to prepare an environmental impact 
statement. Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission has 
concluded that the issuance of the amendment will not have a 
significant effect on the quality of the human environment (63 FR 
24197).
    For further details with respect to the action see (1) the 
application for amendment dated November 27, 1996, and supplemented by 
letter dated February 12, 1997, (2) Amendment No.176 to License No. 
NPF-14, (3) Amendment No. 149 to License No. NPF-22, (4) the 
Commission's related Safety Evaluation, and (5) the Commission's 
Environmental Assessment. All of these items are available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public 
document room located at the Osterhout Free Library, Reference 
Department, 71 South Franklin Street, Wilkes Barre, PA 18701.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of May 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Victor Nerses,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-12391 Filed 5-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
139P17

#### State v. Mohammed Nasser Jilani

Defs *Pro Se*Motion for Writ of Prohibition

Denied
Exhibit 24.3

LIMITED POWER OF ATTORNEY

Know all by these presents, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints each of Catherine Hill and Cynthia Scheuer, signing singly, the undersigned's true and lawful attorney-in-fact to: 

(1)  execute for and on behalf of the undersigned, in the undersigned's capacity as an officer and/or director of Mechanical Technology, Inc. (the "Company"), Forms 3, 4, and 5 in accordance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules thereunder; 

(2)  do and perform any and all acts for and on behalf of the undersigned which may be necessary or desirable to complete and execute any such Form 3, 4, or 5, complete and execute any amendment or amendments thereto, and timely file such form with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission and any stock exchange or similar authority; and 

(3) take any other action of any type whatsoever in connection with the foregoing which, in the opinion of such attorney-in-fact, may be of benefit to, in the best interest of, or legally required by, the undersigned, it being understood that the documents executed by such attorney-in-fact on behalf of the undersigned pursuant to this Power of Attorney shall be in such form and shall contain such terms and conditions as such attorney-in-fact may approve in such attorney-in-fact's discretion. 

The undersigned hereby grants to each such attorney-in-fact full power and authority to do and perform any and every act and thing whatsoever requisite, necessary, or proper to be done in the exercise of any of the rights and powers herein granted, as fully to all intents and purposes as the undersigned might or could do if personally present, with full power of substitution or revocation, hereby ratifying and confirming all that such attorney-in-fact, or such attorney-in-fact's substitute or substitutes, shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of this power of attorney and the rights and powers herein granted.  The undersigned acknowledges that the foregoing attorneys-in-fact, in serving in such capacity at the request of the undersigned, are not assuming, nor is the Company assuming, any of the undersigned's responsibilities to comply with Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

This Power of Attorney shall remain in full force and effect until the undersigned is no longer required to file Forms 3, 4, and 5 with respect to the undersigned's holdings of and transactions in securities issued by the Company, unless earlier revoked by the undersigned in a signed writing delivered to the foregoing attorneys-in-fact. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this Power of Attorney to be executed as of this 1st day of April , 2003. 

s/Denis P. Chaves
#### Edward H. SATERSTAD, Petitioner v. Joshua D. LOCK, Goldberg, Katzman & Shipman, P.C., Kathy Murray, Skip Gochenour, Courtney L. Kishel and James, Smith, Dietterick & Connelly, LLP, Respondents

No. 375 MAL 2017

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

December 4, 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 4th day of December, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal and Application for Leave to File Reply Brief are DENIED.
| (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §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. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|             |                    |
|------------------|-------------------------|
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
| January 19, 2010 | /s/ David R. Smith      |
|             | David R. Smith          |
|             | Chairman of the Board   |
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
| January 19, 2010 | /s/ Frank D. Benick     |
|             | Frank D. Benick         |
|             | Chief Financial Officer |
|                                                                                    
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                
|View History:                                                                       
|                                                                                    
|No chart available.                                                                 
|No chart available.                                                                 
|                                                                                    
|                                                                                    
|Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      |        | 0      |        |        |        |       
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 0      |        | 0      | 0      |        | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
282P16-3

#### Jeremy Bruns and Jenny Bruns v. Rhonda Bryant, Dalton Bryant, Sr., Dalton Bryant, Jr., Pat McCrory, as Governor of North Carolina, Frank Perry, as Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Public Safety, Anthony Tata, as Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Transportation, Veronica McClain, USAA, and State of North Carolina

1. Pits’ Pro *Se*Notice of Appeal Based Upon a Constitutional Question (COA16-699)

2. Pits’ *Pm Se*PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-3X

3. Def’s (Dalton Bryant, Jr.) Motion to Dismiss Appeal

4. Pits’ Motion to Reject, Dismiss, and Strike Response to Notice of Appeal and PDR.

1. Dismissed *ex mero motu*

2. Denied

3. Dismissed as moot

4. Denied
No. 12-6262.

#### Reddy *v.*Gilbert Medical Transcription Service, Inc., et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
1 

### Laura Landes

From: Madhulika Nataraja

Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 2:28 PM

To: Laura Landes

Subject: FW: Storage Tank Regulation

Follow Up Flag: Follow up

Flag Status: Flagged

From: Brannin, Graham [mailto:GBrannin@cityoftulsa.org]

Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 10:16 AM

To: SFI Stakeholder Meeting

Subject: Storage Tank Regulation

I need some specific information about what the EPA is considering regarding drinking water tank storage regulations. I

can’t comment without that information.

Thanks,

Graham Brannin | Planning & Intergovernmental Administrator

City of Tulsa

Water Quality Assurance Section

175 E 2nd St, Suite 890, Tulsa, OK 74103

T: 918.596.9806

F: 918.699.3532

E : gbrannin@cityoftulsa.org

www.cityoftulsa.org
#### Leshae A. ASHLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3410

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 8, 2017.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Ramiro Manalich, Judge.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1039 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1039

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 Indian employment credit and the depreciation rules for property used 
              predominantly within an Indian reservation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 11, 2011

  Mr. Sullivan (for himself, Mr. Boren, Mr. Cole, Mr. Lucas, and Mr. 
  Lankford) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 Indian employment credit and the depreciation rules for property used 
              predominantly within an Indian reservation.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF INDIAN EMPLOYMENT CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Section 45A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
is amended by striking subsection (f).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2011.

SEC. 2. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF DEPRECIATION RULES FOR PROPERTY ON 
              INDIAN RESERVATIONS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (j) of section 168 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking paragraph (8).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2011.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

 

 

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63**

**Of Title 18 of the United States Code**

 

 

 

I, George C. Moore, the Chief Financial Officer of MaytagCorporation, certify that (i) the Form 10-Q for the period ended April 2, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the foregoing report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Maytag Corporation. 

 

 

 

****/s/ George C.Moore

****George C. Moore, Chief Financial Officer 

 

April 22, 2005

Date 

 

- 28 -
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, C.E. Andrews, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filedin respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-1 (the“Exchange Act periodic reports”);     2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution, servicing and other information required to beprovided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Actperiodic reports;     4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required under this reportunder Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, theservicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement andadministration agreement, as applicable, in all material respects; and     5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backedsecurities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicingcriteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit tothis report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by Deutsche Bank TrustCompany Americas, as indenture trustee.Date: March 23, 2007   /s/ C.E. Andrews   C.E. Andrews  Chief Financial Officer  SLM Funding LLC
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 29, 

2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

____________ 

NO. 14-11-00871-CV

____________

ACTCHEM, INC. and DR. JOHN HANCOCK, Appellants

V.

VALERO REFINING-TEXAS, L.P., VALERO REFINING COMPANYTENNESSEE, L.L.C., VALERO REFINING-NEW ORLEANS, L.L.C., and 

VALERO REFINING COMPANY-NEW JERSEY, Appellees

On Appeal from the 127th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2010-52532

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

This is an accelerated appeal from an interlocutory order denying appellants’ 

special appearance signed September 13, 2011. On November 18, 2011, appellants filed 

an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is 

granted.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Brown, Boyce, and McCally.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-DRAFT-0307[1]

From: Suchecki, Joe [JSuchecki@ngelaw.com]

Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 9:36 AM

To: Tanya Parise

Subject: RE: Existing RICE NESHAP - Cost of Aftertreatment

Tanya,

Sorry it has taken a little while to get back to you.

After reviewing the background documents on the costs of aftertreatment, we would 

agree with the comment that the costs that were used are on the low side. In particular, 

the costs for addition of a DPF are very low - one would not expect the costs of adding 

a DPF to be less than adding a DOC. 

Here are a couple of comments that I received from EMA members.

The costs for installation/construction appear to be low. The background document 

assumes a construction/field cost of 5%. We believe it is more in the range of 10-15%. 

Also, the installation costs of a DOC or DPF on an existing engine should be higher 

than the cost of including those technologies on a new engine. You have to retrofit 

and incorporate the control technology onto an engine that was not designed with that 

in mind, so costs are likely to be higher than to purchase an engine where the 

aftertreatment is designed into the engine configuration.

Regarding DPF costs, using the regression equation for retrofitting a 3000 hp 

engine comes to around $23,700. One member provided information to indicate that a 

DPF installed on a 3000 hp engine would be around $90,000 - $100,000 (complete 

cost to the customer).

Again, one would not expect a DPF to cost less than a OC, so we would agree that the 

numbers are low and something is way off on those capital cost estimates.

Joe

 

Joe Suchecki 

Director, Public Affairs 

Engine Manufacturers Association 

Two North LaSalle Street, Suite 1700

Chicago, IL 60602

Tel: 312-827-8734 

Fax: 312-827-8737 

jsuchecki@emamail.org 

www.enginemanufacturers.org 

Confidentiality Notice: This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information. If you have 

received it in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately delete it and any attachments without 

copying or further transmitting the same. 

All attachments are MS Office XP and are MIME encoded. If you have any software compatibility issues, please 

contact EMA at (312) 827-8700 immediately. 

Page 1
EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-DRAFT-0307[1]

From: Tanya Parise [mailto:parise.tanya@ecrweb.com] 

Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 1:30 PM 

To: Suchecki, Joe; WINKLEMAN_BRADY_L@cat.com 

Subject: Existing RICE NESHAP - Cost of Aftertreatment

Joe and Brady,

I’m hoping one or both of you can help us answer this question. We got some comments on the 

proposed existing RICE NESHAP indicating that catalysts and associated equipment would be more 

expensive for larger diesel engines than what EPA estimated for proposal. Would you agree or 

disagree ? Does EMA or Caterpillar have any information on the costs of applying DOC and DPF to 

larger stationary diesel engines, say 3,000 HP and above? 

Thanks again for your help on this rulemaking,

Tanya

Tanya Parise

EC/R Incorporated

501 Eastowne Drive, Suite 250

Chapel Hill, NC 27514

(919) 484-0417

Page 2