alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
VACCINATION HELPS 

PROTECT YOUR 

CHILD’S HEALTH 

WELL-CHILD CHECKUPS 

ARE ESSENTIAL

As your family gets back to 

routines, it’s important for your 

child to catch up on checkups 

and recommended vaccines to 

help protect their health now 

and in the future.

CATCH UP ON 

CHECKUPS 

AND ROUTINE

VACCINES

• Routine vaccinations during childhood help 

prevent 14 diseases

• Among children born from 1994-2018, 

vaccinations will prevent an estimated 936,000 

early deaths, 8 million hospitalizations, and 

419 million illnesses

• The doctor tracks your child’s growth 

and development

• You can ask the doctor questions about 

your child’s health 

• Your child gets recommended vaccinations 

Help protect your child’s health by keeping them on track 

with recommended vaccinations.

Have questions about vaccines? Talk to your child’s doctor.

www.cdc.gov/vaccines/routine

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends children stay on track with 

routine vaccinations to help protect them from serious diseases like measles and whooping cough.
No. 11-6687.

#### Lester Simmons, Petitioner v. Kenneth S. Tucker, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

565 U.S. 1018, 132 S. Ct. 571,

181 L. Ed. 2d 404,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7930.

November 7, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.

*405Same case below, 12 So. 3d 753.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3579 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3579

  To direct the Postmaster General to conduct a study on retrofitting 
mail collection boxes with narrow mail slots to prevent theft of mail, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 27, 2019

 Ms. Meng (for herself, Mr. Rose of New York, Mr. Espaillat, Mr. Sean 
  Patrick Maloney of New York, Mr. Payne, and Miss Rice of New York) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the Postmaster General to conduct a study on retrofitting 
mail collection boxes with narrow mail slots to prevent theft of mail, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Keep Mail Safe Act''.

SEC. 2. USPS REPORT ON RETROFITTING MAIL COLLECTION BOXES WITH NARROW 
              MAIL SLOTS.

    Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Postmaster General shall submit a report on retrofitting mail 
collection boxes to the Committees on Appropriations and Oversight and 
Reform of the House of Representatives and the Committees on 
Appropriations and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the 
Senate. Such report shall include the following:
            (1) A strategic plan, to be used by the United States 
        Postal Service, to retrofit all mail collection boxes with 
        narrow mail slots to prevent theft of the mail.
            (2) The total estimated cost of carrying out such plan, the 
        estimated length of time necessary to carry out such plan, and 
        any other resources necessary to carry out such plan.
            (3) With respect to any mail collection boxes that have 
        been retrofitted on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
        information on the location of such boxes, the security 
        enhancements made to such boxes, and the reasons for 
        retrofitting such boxes.
                                 <all>
```
12 September 2011 *************************** 

NSN: 8915-01-525-3543 (RAD) * MONOGRAPH NO: M10Z

***************************

Item: Raisins (Type IX, Variety A, Fortification a, Class (1)) 

Document: CID A-A-20299 Fruits, Infused and Dried and PKG & QAP

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 120 Component Classification: Secondary

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80°F 

Item Characteristics

Appearance: Medium brown color. Intact pieces. 

Odor: Mild, sweet, sugary characteristic of raisins. 

Flavor: Mild, sweet, sugary characteristic of raisins. 

Texture: Soft and chewy. 

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Clumped together and darkened. Granules of crystallized sugar may appear on surface. 

Odor: Oxidized, burnt or scorched. 

Flavor: Oxidized, burnt or scorched. 

Texture: Excessively hardened.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

NA

Special Notes

Any crystallized sugar on the surface of the raisin may appear to be mold at first glance and should be 

given a closer inspection.
No. 11-286.

#### Samson Primm, Petitioner v. Ohio.

565 U.S. 978, 132 S. Ct. 516,

181 L. Ed. 2d 349,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7765.

October 31, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Cuyahoga County, denied.
1

Mears, Gilbert

From: J Cleo Zell <jcz1999@yahoo.com>

Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 10:28 AM

To: Mears, Gilbert

Subject: Close the TRI (Toxic Release Inventory) Loophole for the Oil and Gas Industry

Follow Up Flag: Flag for follow up

Flag Status: Flagged

Good morning Mr. Mears, 

 

Please close the Toxic Release Inventory loophole for the Oil and Gas industry. We need to act now as people (not just 

consumers and companies) and take responsibility for our home and planet and health. The Oil and Gas industry (and 

many other industries) needs to be held accountable for all that they do both to our community and personal health and 

the land and climate that we need. We as the people affected, should have access to the chemicals entering the soil and 

air that we depend on to live. 

 

Health should be just as much a priority as economic benefits. 

 

The EPA should help make integrity a main part of economics again. 

 

Please close the TRI loophole. 

 

Thank you, 

J. Cleo Zell
EXHIBIT 32

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


<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32


                            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 of Sun River  Energy,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  January 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report").  I,
Wesley Whiting,  President of the company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 USC Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to the best of my knowledge and belief.

        (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  results  of
                operations of the Company.


                                         /s/ Wesley Whiting
                                         --------------------------------
                                         Wesley Whiting, President
Date: March 20, 2007
No. 10-10132.

#### Deciderio Marban-Calderon, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 831, 132 S. Ct. 129,

181 L. Ed. 2d 50,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5793.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 631 F.3d 210.
Oor-o^x- ^[\-0\\ ^ 

Angel Flight 

en 

January 13.2012 

Mr. Dennis DeVany, Chief 

Essential Air Services Program 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Dear Mr. DeVany, 

It gives me great pleasure to write this unsolicited letter on behalf of Cape Air who is applying for 

the EAS contract for Bar Harbor, Maine (KBHB). Angel Flight Northeast is a not for profit 

charitable organization that provides free air transportation through volunteer pilots to children 

and adults needing to travel to access critically needed medical care whose resources would not 

otherwise permit them to do so. 

In May 1997 I met with Mr. Dan Wolf the founder of Cape Air, and asked if the airline could 

provide us with space available free seats on their flights when either pilot availability or weather 

precluded us from flying our patients. Without a moment of hesitation Dan embraced the 

opportunity to help us and the community. Dan agreed to provide unlimited free flights whenever 

needed for our patients and their caregivers. 

Since that time we have requested 1600 flights. Cape Air has been generous enough to fly 1426 

flights, flying 1568 patients and family members to life saving medical care. 

Their dedication to offer their resources as an airline to people in need of accessing medical care 

has been unprecedented and has been and continues to be an enormous resource to us. 

As of this date we have handled 13,999 requests for flights from Maine residents alone. 

Please let me know you have any questions or if I can be of fiirther assistance, 

All the Best, 

Larry Camerlin, Founder & President 

Angel Flight Northeast 

Lawrence Municipal Airport V 492 Sutlon Street, North Andover, MA 01845 > Phone; 978.794.6868 + Fax: 978.794.8779 

V, w V,' , \ \ <; t 1. f I. M , II I \ i •• •• i;< ,
No. 10-10565.

#### Jesus Perez Saldana, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

565 U.S. 1074, 132 S. Ct. 802,

181 L. Ed. 2d 513,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8359.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 565 U.S. 840, 132 S. Ct. 151, 181 L. Ed. 2d 68, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 6118.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3286 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3286

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to phaseout the Mass Transit 
                                Account.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 13, 2019

  Mr. Rice of South Carolina 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 phaseout the Mass Transit 
                                Account.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Highway Restoration Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. PHASEOUT OF MASS TRANSIT ACCOUNT.

    (a) In General.--Section 9503(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(6) Phaseout.--In the case of fiscal years beginning 
        after September 30, 2019, each rate determined under paragraph 
        (2) shall be the applicable percentage of such rate. For 
        purposes of the preceding sentence, the applicable percentage 
        shall be determined under the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          The applicable
              ``In the case of fiscal year:                  percentage
                                                                is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020....................................................      80 percent
2021....................................................      60 percent
2022....................................................      40 percent
2023....................................................      20 percent
2024 and each fiscal year thereafter....................   0 percent.''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 9503(e)(5)(A) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended is amended by striking ``paragraph 
(2)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (6)''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2019.
                                 <all>
```
Gwen Keyes Fleming 

Regional Administrator 

USEP A Region 4 

Atlanta Federal Center 

61 Forsyth Street, SW 

Atlanta, GA 30303-8960 

Dear Ms. Fleming: 

February 7, 2011 

I am pleased to submit the Supplement to the Redesignation Demonstration and Maintenance 

Plan for Rocky Mount, North Carolina 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area. The purpose of this 

Supplement package is to increase the amount of safety margin allocated to the motor vehicle emission 

budgets (MVEBs) to account for changes in the emissions model and vehicle miles traveled projection 

model. Enclosed is one hard copy of the complete package containing the pages changed due to the 

MVEBs revision and an exact duplicate electronic copy on compact disk. 

The opportunity to request a public hearing, in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102, and the public 

comment period were noticed in the local newspapers on Wednesday, December 8, 2010. The public 

comment period was open from Wednesday, December 8, 2010 through 1\tlonday, January I 0, 2011. 

There were no written requests for a public hearing and no comments received. 

I respectfully request that you commence the federal approval process for the Supplement to the 

Redesignation Demonstration and Maintenance Plan for Rocky Mount, North Carolina 8-hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area. If you should have any questions, please contact Laura Boothe of my staff at 

(919) 733-1488 or laura.boothe@ncdenr.gov. 

SCH/lab 

Attachment 

cc: Michael Abraczinskas 

Laura Boothe 

Dick Schutt 

Lynorae Benjamin 

Sincerely, 

Sheila C. Holman
From: Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US To: Michael.Pelan@lafarge - na.com Cc: Nizich.Sharon@epamail.epa.gov , Steven Silverman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 06/08/2012 03:57 PM Subject: Re: Revised PM limit De ar Mike: Actually we did both. The 2010 final rule used a corrected UPL equation (note that PCA had commented that they believed out equation was flawed - so we corrected the equation in response to the CA comment. In addition, we removed CISWI kiln form the PM data base. I would rather not start sending out the reconsideration floor data base at this present time - but there is already a docket item supporting the May 17, 2010 reconsideration notice that shows how the data base changed when CiSWI kilns were removed. See the attachments. (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.1.xlsx) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.2.xls) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.3.xls) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.4.xls) (See attach ed file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.5.xls) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.6.xls) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.7.xls) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.8.xls) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.9.xls) (See at tached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.10.xls) (See attached file: EPA - HQ - OAR - 2002 - 0051 - 3580.pdf) Keith W. Barnett USEPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MMG 919 - 541 - 5605

From: Michael.Pelan@lafarge - na.com To: Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 06/08/2012 11:38 AM Subject: Revised PM limit Keith: I realize that we are still a few days away from seeing the pro posed NESHAP reconsideration rulemaking. However, I wanted to ask you a question or two regarding the expected revision to the PM standard.Based on the information EPA has shared with the industry, the revised existing source PM limit (believed to be 0.0 7 lb/ton clinker) will be based on a 3 - hr stack testing basis with PM CEMS used as a parametric monitoring requirement. Given this to be accurate, I was wondering how EPA went from a May 6, 2009 proposed limit of 0.085 lb/ton clinker based on 3 - hr stack t esting data, to the revised limit of 0.07 lb/ton clinker based on 3 - hr stack testing data? Did EPA use different PM data in its floor calculation or revise the methodology (i.e., UPL formula) for calculating the revised existing source limit? I am expecti ng that we will have a very limited comment period on this rulemaking. Therefore, would it be possible to get a copy of the PM analysis asap (I'm assuming that it is not yet posted to the docket)? Thanks, Michael L. Pelan Director, Environmental Complia nce and Air Programs, US Lafarge North America michael.pelan@lafarge - na.com office: 816 941 - 1822 mobile: 913 558 - 4468
≥95% (31 awardees)

75% - 94% (18 awardees)

50% - 74% (5 awardees)

25% - 49% (1 awardee)

<25% (0 awardee)

No IIS (1 awardee)

No data (0 awardees)

Percentage of children aged < 6 years participating in an immunization 

information system -- United States, five cities§, and D.C., 2015

National Participation: 92% (excluding Territories)

Source: CY2015 IISAR

§ Chicago, IL; Houston, TX; New York City, NY; Philadelphia, PA; San Antonio, TX.
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $5.31 CWT 0.965 $5.1242

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.2908 LB 3.5 $8.0178

Class I Price $13.1420

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $6.12 CWT 0.965 $5.9058

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.2255 LB 3.5 $7.7893

Class I Price $13.6951

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT ($0.5531)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.0476)

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.0238)

Price change per quart ($0.0119)

Price change per pint ($0.0059)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.0043)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.0036)

Price change per half pint ($0.0030)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon ($0.05)

Price adjustment per half gallon ($0.02)

Price adjustment per quart ($0.01)

Price adjustment per pint ($0.01)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.00)

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.00)

Price adjustment per half pint ($0.00)

**No price adjustment is required if the price change per-gallon, in either direction,

is not equal to or greater than +/-$0.0100 (See paragraph (f)(1) of the clause). 

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positives or increases. 

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: June 5, 2016
EX 4.3



 Exhibit 4.3 
 China Finance Online Co. Limited’s 2009 Annual General Meeting 
 as a
publicly traded company 
 was held in Beijing at 10:00 am (Beijing time) on June 30, 2009 

Meeting address: 9th Floor of Tower C, Corporate Square, No. 35 Financial Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100140, China 

At this annual general meeting of shareholders (the “Meeting”) of China Finance Online Co. Limited (the “Company”), five proposals
were submitted. 
 The results of this Meeting are as follows: 
 1. Mr. Hugo Shong and Mr. Ling Wang were re-elected as directors of the Company. 
 2.
The shareholders approved the re-appointment of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu CPA Ltd. as independent auditors of the Company for a term ending on the date of the next annual general meeting of shareholders to be held in 2010 and authorized the board of
directors to determine their remuneration. 
 3. The shareholders approved the audited consolidated financial statements of the Company for the
fiscal year ended on or as of December 31, 2008 together with the Reports of the Directors and the Auditors thereon as required by Hong Kong law. 
 4. The shareholders authorized the board of directors during the next year to issue ordinary shares or preference shares upon such terms and conditions as the board of directors, in its discretion, shall
determine. 
 5. The shareholders approved the increase in the number of ordinary shares available for issuance under the 2004 Stock Incentive
Plan by 3,000,000 ordinary shares, representing 2.73% of the outstanding ordinary shares of the Company as of December 31, 2008.
APPENDIX B

URBAN BUS SURVEY

B-1

Urban Bus Survey - Alternate Fuel Experience

Transit Agency:_____________________________________Date_________

Interviewer________________________________________

As a transit agency on the alternative fuel path, we would like to ask you a few

questions regarding the use of alternate fuels in your fleet.

1 What type of fuels are you using?

Diesel LNG Propane CNG Gasoline Hybrid Other:________

2. What is the relative cost of the alternative fuel buses, compared to diesel buses

(you can state the actual cost of the buses)?

3 Have you installed a fueling station? How much did it cost?

4. What other modifications were made to your facility in order to use the alternative

fuel (changes due to space requirements or handling lighter than air fuels)? At what

cost?

5. Which staff did you need to train and what type of training was required? At what

cost or how much time (training may have been provided by the fuel provider)?

6. What has your overall experience been with the alternative fueled vehicles

compared to diesel fuel?

Routine maintenance:

Breakdowns/Reliability:

Durability (how long the engine lasts before overhaul), longevity of bus:

Fuel use and storage:
B-2

Manufacturer Support:

Urban Bus Survey - Alternate Fuel Experience

Transit Agency:_____________________________________

7. What are the costs compared to diesel?

Routine maintenance (annual hours/bus or $/year/bus):

Costs related to reliability (increased spare ratio?):

Repowering or remanufacturing engines (engine components labor):

Fuel costs (per mile):

Have you received any waivers from SCAQMD to purchase diesel fuel buses? What

was the reason? Have any requests for waivers been denied? (details).

8. Is there a specific reason why you chose the specific alternate fuel over others?

Is there anything else you would like to share regarding the experience with alternate

fuel?
No. 11-6661.

#### In re Michael Lee Swain, Petitioner.

565 U.S. 975, 132 S. Ct. 539,

181 L. Ed. 2d 390,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7626.

October 31, 2011.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
No. 11-7132.

#### Eddie Baker, Petitioner v. Wisconsin.

565 U.S. 1072, 132 S. Ct. 794,

181 L. Ed. 2d 507,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8442.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District I, denied.
No. 11-6080.

#### Michael Scott, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 928, 132 S. Ct. 364,

181 L. Ed. 2d 231,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6836.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 662 F.3d 492.