alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 150.3 Nomination process. ( a ) The Nominating Officials nominating Firefighters and Civil Defense Officers shall submit their nominations for the President's Award or Distinguished Public Safety Service Award to the Executive Secretary, Joint Public Safety Awards Board, National Emergency Training Center, Emmitsburg, MD 21727. Copies of all nominations shall also be forwarded, depending on the category of the nominee, as follows: ( 1 ) *Firefighter:* FEMA, Attention: Superintendent, National Fire Academy, Emmitsburg, MD 21727
( 2 ) *Civil defense officer (or member of a recognized civil defense or emergency preparedness organization):* FEMA, Attention: Superintendent, Emergency Management Institute, Emmitsburg, MD 21727
( b ) The Nominating Officials nominating law enforcement, corrections or court officers shall submit their nominations for the President's Award or Distinguished Public Safety Service Awards to: Assistant Attorney General for Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530.
( c ) All nominations shall be submitted in writing in accordance with the requirements prescribed in this section and § 150.4 at the earliest practicable date after the performance of the act or acts for which the nomination is made. Nominations for each year shall be made before November 15; any received thereafter will be considered as having been made for the following year. However, for the year 1983, nominations may be made by February 28, 1985.
( d ) Nominations for the President's Award or the Distinguished Public Safety Service Award should include the name of the candidate, his/her position, title and address, and public agency served, the locale where the candidate performs his/her duties, the name, address and telephone number of the nominating official, a summary describing the outstanding contribution, distinguished service or extraordinary valor, and the dates relating thereto. The description should be sufficiently concise and specific to justify the request for recognition of the public safety officer through the presentation of either of the awards. Copies of any published factual accounts of the nominee's accomplishment should also be attached when available.
( e ) An annual invitation shall be issued by the Joint Board for nominations for the President's Award and, on behalf of the Attorney General and the Administrator of FEMA, for the Distinguished Public Safety Service Award. The invitation shall be issued by letter or by notice in apporpriate publications of interest to the public safety community. However, nominating officials need not wait for such invitation but may nominate at the most appropriate time in accordance with the other provisions of this part.
[49 FR 39845, Oct. 11, 1984, as amended at 50 FR 3350, Jan. 24, 1985; 74 FR 15344, Apr. 3, 2009]
### [§280. Repealed. Pub. L. 99–514, title VIII, §803(b)(2)(A), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2355]

Section, added Pub. L. 94–455, title II, §210(a), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1544; amended Pub. L. 95–600, title VII, §701(m)(2), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2907; Pub. L. 97–354, §5(a)(25), Oct. 19, 1982, 96 Stat. 1694, related to certain expenditures incurred in the production of films, books, records, or similar property.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

If any interest costs incurred after Dec. 31, 1986, are attributable to costs incurred before Jan. 1, 1987, the repeal of this section is applicable to such interest costs only to the extent such interest costs are attributable to costs which were required to be capitalized under section 263 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and which would have been taken into account in applying section 189 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (as in effect before its repeal by section 803 of Pub. L. 99–514) or, if applicable, section 266 of such Code, see section 7831(d)(2) of Pub. L. 101–239, set out as an Effective Date note under section 263A of this title.

Repeal applicable to costs incurred after Dec. 31, 1986, in taxable years ending after such date, except as otherwise provided, see section 803(d) of Pub. L. 99–514, set out as an Effective Date note under section 263A of this title.
### §96. Kansas

Kansas constitutes one judicial district.

Court shall be held at Kansas City, Lawrence, Leavenworth, Salina, Topeka, Hutchinson, Wichita, Dodge City, and Fort Scott.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 880; Aug. 27, 1949, ch. 516, 63 Stat. 666; Pub. L. 99–554, title I, §141, Oct. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 3096.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §157 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §82, 36 Stat. 1112; Sept. 6, 1916, ch. 447, 39 Stat. 725; June 7, 1924, ch. 319, 43 Stat. 607; June 13, 1938, ch. 349, 52 Stat. 673).

Provisions as to the appointment and residence of deputy marshals and deputy clerks and maintenance of offices by them were omitted. See sections 541 [see 561], 542 [see 561], and 751 of this title.

A provision making inoperative the terms of the last paragraph of this section, whenever, upon the recommendation of the Attorney General, court accommodations should be provided in Federal buildings, was omitted as unnecessary. When such buildings become available the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts will, under section 604 of this title, provide court accommodations therein.

The provision respecting court accommodations at Hutchinson was omitted as covered by section 142 of this title.

Changes in arrangement and phraseology were made.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1986—Pub. L. 99–554 provided for holding court at Lawrence.

1949—Act Aug. 27, 1949, abolished the three divisions which constituted the judicial district, and added Dodge City as an additional place for holding court.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–554 effective 30 days after Oct. 27, 1986, see section 302(a) of Pub. L. 99–554, set out as a note under section 581 of this title.
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateStandards DevelopmentNRC Standards Forum

# 2023 Standards Forum

The Forum aims at facilitating strategic discussions on codes and standards needs and priorities across standards development organizations, and organizations that rely on the development of those standards. Also, to facilitate discussions on how to collaborate in accelerating the development of codes and standards and the NRC's endorsement of these codes and standards in its regulations and regulatory guides. The Forum is an interactive meeting, sponsored by the NRC, that engages stakeholders, such as standards development organizations (e.g. ACI, ANS, ASCE, ASME, ASTM, IEEE, etc.), industry representatives, research organizations, academia, the general public, and NRC staff.

### Standards Forum Agenda

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 15, 2023
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 99-228

October 28, 1999

NRC PROPOSES AMENDING REGULATIONS

CLARIFYING ANTITRUST REVIEW REQUIREMENTS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to amend its regulations to clarify that

it will no longer conduct antitrust reviews of license transfer applications submitted by the

owners of operating nuclear power plants, eliminating a review that is duplicated by other

federal and state agencies.

The Atomic Energy Act and NRC regulations provide that no nuclear power plant

operating license may be transferred directly or indirectly, without Commission consent. NRC

has historically conducted antitrust reviews in connection with certain kinds of nuclear power

plant license transfers.

As part of a review of a license transfer application submitted by two owners of the Wolf

Creek nuclear power plant in Kansas, the Commission examined its rules of practice and

concluded that its statutory mandate does not require an antitrust review in these

circumstances. As a result, NRC is amending its regulations to more clearly reflect its antitrust

review authority by explicitly limiting the types of applications that must include antitrust

information to applications for a construction permit, initial operating license, transfer of a

construction permit before issuance of an initial operating license, or combined construction

permit/operating license.

As a result of the change, parties submitting a license transfer application to NRC for an

operating nuclear power plant will not be required to include antitrust information, eliminating a

review that is now duplicated by other agencies, including, as appropriate, the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, Department of Justice, and the

Federal Trade Commission, as well as state public utility commissions. NRC will continue to

conduct reviews of nuclear power plant license transfer applications to ensure, among other

matters, that prospective owners meet financial qualifications and decommissioning funding

assurance requirements.

Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed rule within

60 days of publication in an upcoming edition of the Federal Register. They should be

addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555,

Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. Comments may also be submitted via the

NRC's interactive rulemaking web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
##
HomeAbout NRCAbout the NRC & Your Community

# NRC Community Spotlight

2017 "A Week at the NRC" is an NRC & Your Community project that supports local students who are part of the nation's future STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) workforce. Qualified area high school students visited NRC headquarters for a week of tours and presentations. Students qualified by earning one of the Montgomery County Science Fair's NRC Awards, participating in a 2017 summer high school internship at the NRC, or receiving a recommendation from their STEM teachers.

Please visit our NRC YouTube channel to view a photo/video essay highlighting the students during 2017 "A Week at the NRC."

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, November 09, 2018

#### Related Information

            - About the NRC & Your Community

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, November 09, 2018
Exhibit 32.4

Statement

Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the
undersigned officer of Paperweight Development Corp. (the Company), hereby certifies that to his knowledge:



| | (1) | the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                               |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | ----------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                      |  | PAPERWEIGHT DEVELOPMENT CORP.
|                      |  |                              
|Dated: March 17, 2006 |  |                               |  |                        
|                      | 
|                      |  | /s/ Dale E. Parker           
|                      |  | Name:                         |  | Dale E. Parker         
|                      |  | Title:                        |  | Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
SCI 001715

CONFIDENTIAL

Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-155 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 1
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 99-257

December 2, 1999

Pilot Program Evaluation Panel to Meet in Rockville, Maryland, December 8-9

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Pilot Program Evaluation Panel (PPEP) will hold

its fourth meeting December 8-9 in Rockville, Maryland, to prepare a final report on the new

inspection, assessment and enforcement processes now being conducted as a pilot program at

13 nuclear reactors.

The meeting, which is open to the public, will be held in Conference Room T-2B3 of the

agency's Two White Flint North Building at 11545 Rockville Pike from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

each day. To ensure flexibility, the panel will not follow any specific agenda.

Members will discuss and resolve differences of views, if any, on the pilot program,

which began May 30. It then will issue a written report before the end of the year representing

the views of the panel members. The report, which will be publicly available, will be used by the

NRC to consider whether any changes in the new oversight program should be made before it

is fully implemented next year.

The panel includes NRC staff from headquarters and regional offices, together with

representatives of the Nuclear Energy Institute, participating nuclear power plant licensees, the

Union of Concerned Scientists, and the Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety. The NRC

established the panel to independently evaluate and review its new oversight process.

Transcripts of the three previous Pilot Program Evaluation Panel's meetings and reports

are available through the NRC's Public Document Room and on the NRC's homepage at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/overview.html .

Those seeking information on opportunities to present oral statements or on schedule

changes should contact Frank Gillespie at (301) 415-1004, or Mohan Thadani at (301)

415-1476.

# #
### §280E. Expenditures in connection with the illegal sale of drugs

No deduction or credit shall be allowed for any amount paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business if such trade or business (or the activities which comprise such trade or business) consists of trafficking in controlled substances (within the meaning of schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act) which is prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.

(Added Pub. L. 97–248, title III, §351(a), Sept. 3, 1982, 96 Stat. 640.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Controlled Substances Act, referred to in text, is title II of Pub. L. 91–513, Oct. 27, 1970, 84 Stat. 1242, which is classified principally to subchapter I (§801 et seq.) of chapter 13 of Title 21, Food and Drugs. Schedules I and II are set out in section 812 of Title 21. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 801 of Title 21 and Tables.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 97–248, title III, §351(c), Sept. 3, 1982, 96 Stat. 640, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [enacting this section] shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after the date of the enactment of this Act [Sept. 3, 1982] in taxable years ending after such date."
WILLIAMS

Don Townsend

Vice President / Engineering

U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Ave., SW

Washington, DC 20585

Attn: Mr. Ronald P Lewis

RE: Request for information reguarding possible standby and off mode

energy use for unvented heaters

Dear Mr. Lewis,

I am responding to your letter sent to Mr. Warren Shoulders on

March23rd. Here are our answers to the six questions asked in your

letter.

1. Yes, Williams manufactures unvented fossil-fueled heaters. Pilot

lights consume approximately 1000 BTU.

2. No, we are not aware of an unvented fossil-fueled heater that has

electrical standby and off mode energy use.

3. No

4. No, we are not aware of any such studies.

5. Measuring the usage rates is not perceived to be a problem.

Changing the existing standby mode for a fossil-fuel standby mode is

possible, but will require engineering, testing, tooling and may

increase the cost of the unit which is already cost sensitive.

Additionally, the cost of using standby electrical consumption would

need to be compared to the fossil-fuel standby use to see which is the

better in the long run. Lastly, let's not forget the utility of the product

that does not require electricity as these products are used where
electricity is not available. We would be glad to assist DOE in the

standards writing process as we do with CSA and UL.

6. Yes, the standard (62301) is straight forward on how to measure

the standby and off mode electrical consumption.

I trust I have answered you questions satisfactorily, but if you have

additional questions or if I can be of aSSistance, please do not hesitate

to contact me.

Best Regards,

~€rWviJj (~1j) Donald L Townsend
PHOENIX MANUfACTURING, INC.

·Camm/rred to CustomerSuccess··

3655 East Roeser Rd.

Phoenix, Arizona 85040

TO: O,~ ~Y~:l~Q)J\\:- O~ GrtQ.r~Cj

\000 \n®~nu...~·)0W

Wo..~'"\'(\[?:}tOV\) OC ;;l(YO~SEF.- ) r
EXHIBIT
        32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO
 18
        U.S.C.
        SECTION 1350
 AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Chancellor Group, Inc. (the "Company")
        on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley W.
        Fischer, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
        to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: (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.
 By:
                /s/
                  Bradley W. FischerBradley W. Fischer
                  President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer
  August
          14, 2007
###### Editorial Note on Part 134

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 134.1210 Standard of review.

The standard of review is whether the final SBA loan review decision was based on clear error of fact or law. The appellant has the burden of proof.
### §7304. Penalty for fraudulently claiming drawback

Whenever any person fraudulently claims or seeks to obtain an allowance of drawback on goods, wares, or merchandise on which no internal tax shall have been paid, or fraudulently claims any greater allowance of drawback than the tax actually paid, he shall forfeit triple the amount wrongfully or fraudulently claimed or sought to be obtained, or the sum of $500, at the election of the Secretary.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 869; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1976—Pub. L. 94–455 struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary".
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 201 2 - 0946 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 201 2 - CE - 0 37 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

KEY WEST DIVISION

Case Number: 20-10062-CIV-MARTINEZ-REID

ERIC LEE KINCAID,

Plaintiff,

vs.

TRAVIS D. LOCKWOOD, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE was referred to the Honorable Lisette M. Reid, United States Magistrate 

Judge, for a Report and Recommendation, (“R&R”) on all dispositive matters, [ECF No. 2]. After 

initial screening, Magistrate Judge Reid filed a R&R, [ECF No. 8], recommending Plaintiff’s pro 

se § 1983 case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim. The R&R also 

recommended that Plaintiff be granted leave to cure the deficiencies by a date certain. Plaintiff 

timely filed an Amended Complaint, [ECF No. 11], which is now before the Court. Magistrate 

Judge Reid conducted an additional screening of the Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(e)(2) and again found that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim, [ECF No. 12]. Accordingly, 

Magistrate Judge Reid issued an R&R recommending that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint be 

dismissed with prejudice and the case be closed. Id. The Court has reviewed the entire record and 

notes that no objections have been filed. Nonetheless, after a de novo review of the record, the 

Court agrees with the totality of Magistrate Judge Reid’s R&R and finds that Plaintiff has indeed 

failed to state a claim for relief for the second time. 

Accordingly, after careful consideration, it is hereby:

Case 4:20-cv-10062-JEM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/27/2021 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

ADJUDGED that United States Magistrate Judge Reid’s Report and Recommendation, 

[ECF No. 12], is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. 

Accordingly, it is 

ADJUDGED that:

1. Plaintiff’s pro se § 1983 Amended Complaint, [ECF No. 11], is DISMISSED with 

prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

2. This case is CLOSED, and all pending motions shall be DENIED AS MOOT.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 27th day of January, 2021.

____________________________________

JOSE E. MARTINEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies provided to:

Magistrate Judge Reid

All Counsel of Record

Eric Lee Kincaid, pro se

Case 4:20-cv-10062-JEM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/27/2021 Page 2 of 2