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

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5111 

To require Transmission Organizations to accept bids from aggregators of 

certain retail customers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 16, 2022 

Mr. DURBIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To require Transmission Organizations to accept bids from 

aggregators of certain retail customers, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘Responsive Energy De5 mand Unlocks Clean Energy Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AGGREGATOR BIDDING INTO ORGANIZED POWER 

7 MARKETS. 

8 (a) DEFINITIONS OF STATE REGULATORY AUTHOR9 ITY AND TRANSMISSION ORGANIZATION.—In this section, 

10 the terms ‘‘State regulatory authority’’ and ‘‘Transmission 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 5111 IS

1 Organization’’ have the meanings given those terms in sec2 tion 3 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796). 

3 (b) REQUIREMENT.—Notwithstanding any prohibi4 tion established by a State regulatory authority with re5 spect to who may bid into an organized power market, 

6 each Transmission Organization shall accept any bid from 

7 an aggregator of retail customers that aggregated the de8 mand response of the customers of any utility that distrib9 uted more than 4,000,000 megawatt-hours in the previous 

10 fiscal year. 

11 (c) RULEMAKING.—Not later than 180 days after the 

12 date of enactment of this Act, the Federal Energy Regu13 latory Commission shall issue a rule to carry out the re14 quirements of subsection (b). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM CYCLO3PSS
CORPORATION'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   AUG-31-1998
<CASH>                                         $149,961
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  75,880
<ALLOWANCES>                                   61,938
<INVENTORY>                                    158,630
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               446,409
<PP&E>                                         211,701
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,335,594
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          197,073
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          356
<PREFERRED>                                    18
<COMMON>                                       16,652
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,111,760
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,335,594
<SALES>                                        265,273
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               265,273
<CGS>                                          182,591
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  954,681
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,624
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (689,408)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,077
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (688,861)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (688,861)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.04)
        


</TABLE>
#### § 109.440 Requirements imposed under other laws and orders.

Loans made by the ILP Intermediary under this program must comply with all applicable laws, including §§ 120.170 (Flood insurance), 120.172 (Flood-plain and wetlands management), 120.173 (Earthquake hazards), and the civil rights laws (see parts 112, 113, 117, and 136 of this chapter) prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, marital status, disability or age.

[76 FR 18015, Apr. 1, 2011, as amended at 85 FR 75834, Nov. 27, 2020]
### §628. Appropriations and accounting

There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter. The Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall provide accounting, disbursing, auditing, and other fiscal services for the Federal Judicial Center.

(Added Pub. L. 90–219, title I, §101, Dec. 20, 1967, 81 Stat. 667.)
For countless generations, baskets have been an important tool for the O’odham 

(pronounced AW-aw-tum). Baskets have been used to carry water and firewood, 

prepare food, and store items. Traditional ceremonies, dances, and stories reflect 

the sacred world and use special baskets. Baskets are 

more than beautiful, strong, and useful; they are 

amazing!

Start the maze where basket weavers begin making 

baskets – in the center.

Draw a design on your basket.

A-maze-ing Baskets
#### § 8344.1 Permit requirements.

Permits are required for certain types of ORV use and shall be issued in accordance with the special recreation permit procedures under part 2930 of this chapter.

[44 FR 34836, June 15, 1979, as amended at 67 FR 61745, Oct. 1, 2002]
#### § 130.610 General terms.

Upon approval of the initial or renewal application, SBA will enter into a cooperative agreement with the recipient organization, setting forth the programmatic and fiscal responsibilities of the recipient organization and SBA, the scope of the project to be funded, and the budget of the program year covered by the cooperative agreement.

[60 FR 31056, June 13, 1995, as amended at 88 FR 76647, Nov. 7, 2023]
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateAdjudications (Hearings)10 CFR Part 2: Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings and Issuance of Orders

# Corrections to January 14, 2004 Final Rule (5/11/04)

## Overview

On May 11, 2004, the NRC published corrections to the final rule published on January 14, 2004. The corrections consisted of a change to the title of Appendix D to Part 2, an omission of an entry in the table constituting Appendix D, and an error in the formatting of the table.

## Applicability

The corrections were effective on February 13, 2004 (the same effective date as the final rule published on January 14, 2004).

## Final Rule - Corrections

*Federal Register* Notice - Correction, 69 FR 25997 (5/11/2004)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, June 09, 2020
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                  5
<LEGEND>
                           This schedule contains summary financial  information
                           extracted from UniDyn,  Corp. June 30, 2000 financial
                           statements  and  is  qualified  in  its  entirety  by
                           reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                0000894542
<NAME>               UniDyn, Corp.
<CURRENCY>           US



<S>                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>    DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>         JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>      1.00

<CASH>                            323,814
<SECURITIES>                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                     764,093
<ALLOWANCES>                      0
<INVENTORY>                       396,382
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  1,534,539
<PP&E>                            822,132
<DEPRECIATION>                    70,388
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    7,625,837
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             231,633
<BONDS>                           1,017,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             0
<PREFERRED>                       0
<COMMON>                          35,237
<OTHER-SE>                        6,991,896
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      7,625,837
<SALES>                           1,522,031
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  1,522,031
<CGS>                             718,732
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     1,566,948
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                69,927
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (763,649)
<INCOME-TAX>                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (763,649)
<DISCONTINUED>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   0
<CHANGES>                         0
<NET-INCOME>                      (763,649)
<EPS-BASIC>                       (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                     (.02)



</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

287 

CAF 10-01090 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND GREEN, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF KAYLIN C., KRISTEN C., 

AND KORINA C. 

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

WYOMING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ORDER

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT; 

 

AMANDA W., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

ERICKSON WEBB SCOLTON & HAJDU, LAKEWOOD (LYLE T. HAJDU OF COUNSEL),

FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

ERIC T. DADD, COUNTY ATTORNEY, WARSAW (JAMIE B. WELCH OF COUNSEL), FOR

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

TERESA KOWALCZYK, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, WARSAW, FOR KAYLIN C.,

KRISTEN C., AND KORINA C. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Wyoming County (Michael

F. Griffith, J.), entered April 26, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to

Family Court Act article 10. The order terminated respondent’s

parental rights and granted petitioner custody and guardianship of the

subject children. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Entered: March 25, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court
#### § 3933.10 Leases or licenses subject to assignment or sublease.

Any lease may be assigned or subleased and any exploration license may be assigned in whole or in part to any person, association, or corporation that meets the qualification requirements in subpart 3902 of this chapter. The BLM may approve or disapprove assignments and subleases. A licensee proposing to transfer or assign a license must first offer, in writing, to all other participating parties in the license, the opportunity to acquire the license (the right of first refusal).
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 14

**Question 14:** Are Design Basis Accident criteria (doses) changed by the revised Part 20? 

**Answer:** No, only those conforming changes included in the Federal Register notice will be effective when the revised Part 20 is implemented. Old dose criteria used for Design Basis Accident will retain their original definitions unless they are specifically changed in a licensing action.

(References: 10 CFR 50 Appendix A, 10 CFR Part 100)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, November 07, 2017
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Transportation of Limited Quantities of Radioactive Materials on Passenger Carrying Aircraft

## HPPOS-241 PDR-9111220085

See the letter from V. L. Miller to All Agreement States dated August 8, 1991, and the enclosed letter from P. T. McDonnell (Federal Aviation Commission) to C. Kammerer dated March 19, 1991.

These two letters state that DOT regulations allow the practice of carrying small check or calibration sources or other small quantities of radioactive materials onto passenger carrying aircraft.

With the exception of incident reporting requirements, radioactive materials prepared for shipment under the provisions of 49 CFR 173.421 or 49 CFR 173.422 are not subject to the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR: 49 CFR Parts 100-199) when transported by air. Limited quantities of radioactive materials (49 CFR 173.421) or exempted instruments or articles (49 CFR 173.422) may be transported in carry-on or checked baggage on a passenger aircraft. A passenger carrying the radioactive material may hand-carry the documentation required by 49 CFR 173.421-1 (a).

Radioactive materials prepared in accordance with 49 CFR 173.421 or 49 CFR 173.422, may be carried on a passenger aircraft regardless of the end use of the material. The provision in 49 CFR 175.700 (c) that limits the carriage of radioactive material in carry-on luggage to materials intended for use in, or incident to, research, medical diagnosis or treatment, would not apply.

It must be noted that under the provisions of 49 CFR 171.11 (a), shippers are given the option of preparing shipments of hazardous materials in accordance with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Technical Instructions for The Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air. 49 CFR 175.30 (a) permits air carriers to accept shipments offered in compliance with the ICAO Technical Instructions.

The requirements for excepted packages of radioactive materials are found in Part 2;7.9 of the ICAO Technical Instructions. The provisions of Part 2;7.9 except limited quantities, instruments, and manufactured articles from regulatory requirements in a manner similar to 49 CFR 173.421-1 (b).

**Regulatory references:** 49 CFR 171, 49 CFR 173, 49 CFR 175

**Subject codes:** 12.8, 12.17

**Applicability:** All

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, October 18, 2017
EXHIBIT 10

Case 1:20-cv-21254-BB Document 47-11 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2021 Page 1 of 2
From: Billy Aberle

To: TradingAndMarkets; TMOIGLOG

Subject: Broker/Dealer Registration

Date: Friday, August 16, 2019 10:57:56 AM

Hello - is this the right email to contact if I questions regarding whether myself or my company needs to register as a

broker/dealer, and if so, which would be the one to move forward with? If so, I will provide more details on my

situation in hopes to receive some guidance on what net steps to take.

Thanks,

Billy

Case 1:20-cv-21254-BB Document 47-11 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2021 Page 2 of 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Reymundo GARCIA-ORONA, also known as Raymundo Garcia-Orona, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-50427.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 24, 2006.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Judy Fulmer Madewell, Federal Public Defender’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Reymundo Garcia-Orona raises arguments that are foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateRulemaking

# Contact Us About Rulemaking

If you need to report a safety concern, please do not use this page. Instead, please see Report a Safety or Security Concern.

For answers to many frequently asked questions see our Rulemaking pages. If after reviewing these pages you wish to provide us with a general comment or question, mail your comments to the Chief, Regulatory Analysis and Rulemaking Support Branch, Division of Rulemaking, Environmental, and Financial Support, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001 or call toll free 800-368-5642.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 10, 2021

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - The NRC Rulemaking Process
          - Regulatory Analysis
          - NRC Rules and Petitions
          - NRC Regulations by Subject Matter
          - Public Involvement in Rulemaking
          - Procedural Requirements
          - Regulatory Flexibility Act Compliance
          - Historical Rulemaking Documents
          - Contact Us About Rulemaking
          - Subscribe to Rulemaking Updates
          - Retrospective Review of Administrative Requirements (RROAR)

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 10, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-CV-22753-WILLIAMS

AMPARO GOMEZ MOLDES,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ANDREW SAUL, 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Defendant.

_________________________________/

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on (DE 25) Magistrate Judge John J. O’

Sullivan’s Report and Recommendation (“Report”). In the Report, Judge O’Sullivan 

recommends that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (DE 21) be denied, and that 

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (DE 22) be granted. The Parties did not file 

objections to the Report and the time to do so has now passed. Based upon an 

independent review of the Report and the full record in this case, the Court ORDERS 

AND ADJUDGES that:

1. Judge O’Sullivan’s Report (DE 25) is ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED.

2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (DE 21) is DENIED. 

3. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (DE 22) is GRANTED.

4. The decision of the Administrative Law Judge is AFFIRMED. 

5. This action is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this 

case. 

Case 1:20-cv-22753-KMW Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2021 Page 1 of 2
2

DONE AND ORDERED in chambers in Miami, Florida this 5th day of November, 

2021.

Case 1:20-cv-22753-KMW Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2021 Page 2 of 2
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to the footer section




National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Contact Us
  Return to Previous Page
 Thing to Do
Hike to a Bird's Eye View
Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks Eagle View In the Giant Forest, take a hike out of Crescent Meadow to a spectacular spot: Eagle View. Some say it's even better than views from Moro Rock! Take the High Sierra Trail from the Crescent Meadow parking area. The trail starts in a shady sequoia grove at the edge of a meadow. It then ascends 3/4 mile to the viewpoint, with an elevation gain of 280 feet. From the rocky cliffs, enjoy a view of the Sequoia-Kings Canyon Wilderness and the high Sierra. After you're done enjoying this bird's eye view of the park, you may return the way you came or you can continue hiking on the High Sierra Trail. This trail continues for many miles, so you can choose how far to hike and then turn around. Along this trail, you might see marmots, mule deer, birds, and other wildlife.
 Pets Allowed
No Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) website
 Activity Fee
No
 Location
Giant Forest, Sequoia National Park
 Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks Tags sequoia & kings canyon national parks
 
 Tags sequoia & kings canyon national parks
 Last updated: May 1, 2024


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
(September 24, 1943.)

#### In the Matter of the Claim of Thomas Feely, Respondent, against Eagle Plastics Corporation et al., Respondents, and (American) Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company of Illinois, Appellant. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

*937All concur.
(No. 851

Claimant awarded $1,800.00.)

#### James G. Broadhurst, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed May 1, 1925.*

Governmental *function*— when *State not liable.*The State in conducting the Illinois State Prisons exercises a governmental function, and is not liable for injuries sustained by its employees therein while in the performanee of their duty.

Fquity and (,ood *conscience*— award *may be made.*The court may award compensation to an injured employee of the State, as a matter of equity and good conscience.

John L. Walker, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General ; Frank B. Eagleton, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Chief Justice Clarity

delivered the opinion of the court:

This claimant was employed as a guard at the Illinois New State’s Prison on the 10th of November, 1924. About ten *174o ’clock of that day he was in the yard of said institution performing his usual ordered and customary ' duties having charge of inmates who were doing construction work; that an inmate by the name of Robert Johnson beat and assaulted the plaintiff on the head causing dangerous and painful injury. It appears to the court that the plaintiff was injured through this assault receiving a laceration over the top of the head about four inches long and another laceration on the side of the head three inches long and that his back was wrenched and bruised; that by the result of such injuries the claimant was disabled for a considerable period and that he will have a scar on the top of his head and that his face will be marred and scarred for life and that he has a ringing in his head, is dizzy and unable to properly perform his usual and customary duties.

As it has been held by this court on many prior cases, there is no legal liability against the State of Illinois but as a matter of equity and good conscience it is considered that employes of the State engaged in these hazardous occupations should receive at least the same consideration in case of injury as if they were employed by a private corporation or individual.

Therefore it is considered by the court that the claimant be allowed the sum of $1,800.00.