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

[109th Congress Public Law 33]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ033.109]

[[Page 119 STAT. 376]]

Public Law 109-33
109th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  614 West Old County Road in Belhaven, North Carolina, as the ``Floyd 
      Lupton Post Office''. <<NOTE: July 12, 2005 -  [H.R. 2326]>> 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 614 West 
Old County Road in Belhaven, North Carolina, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Floyd Lupton Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Floyd Lupton Post Office''.

    Approved July 12, 2005.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 2326:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 151 (2005):
            June 13, considered and passed House.
            June 29, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 125-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/07/2022 Page 1 of 1
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeals of -- ) 

) 

JE Dunn Construction Company ) 

) 

) 

Under Contract No. W9126G-12-C-0050 ) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA Nos. 59836, 59837, 59838 

59839,59840,59841 

59842,60006,60007 

Reginald M. Jones, Esq. 

Alexa A. Santora, Esq. 

Fox Rothschild LLP 

Washington, DC 

Thomas H. Gourlay, Jr., Esq. 

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney 

Dawn-Carole Harris, Esq. 

Engineer Trial Attorney 

U.S. Army Engineer District, Fort Worth 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

Foil owing a successful mediation assisted by the Board, the dispute has been settled. 

The appeals are dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 21 September 2016 

REBAPAGE 

Administrative 

ciL~ Judge 

~ 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 59836, 59837, 59838, 59839, 59840, 

59841, 59842, 60006, 60007, Appeals of JE Dunn Construction Company, rendered in 

conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

2 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
**4. USDA Protocol** 

**– Evaluation of Bite Protection from Repellent** 
**- Treated Clothing for the United** 

**States Military** a. EPA Science and Ethics Review b. USDA Volume 1: Protocol, consent form, recruitment materials, IRB approval letter c. USDA Volume 2: Records of I RB review d. USDA Volume 3 : Statistical Methods: Supplemental Information e. Western I RB SOPs and Policies f. Western I RB Meeting Minutes g. Charge Questions
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 223

**Question 223:** Are radiographers exempt from posting at a temporary field site, under 10 CFR 20.1903 (a), since they perform radiography in each area less than 8 hours, attend the material to prevent exposure of individuals in excess of the limits (i.e., have clear sight over the designated area and are in constant attendance), and control the area (i.e., tell individuals to leave if they come too close to the source)?

**Answer:** The revised Part 20 requirements do not change this exemption. Radiographers continue to be exempt under 20.1903 (a); however, industrial radiographers are required under 10 CFR 34.42 to conspicuously post areas where radiography is being performed.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1903, 34.42)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, November 24, 2017
EXHIBIT 23.1



CONSENT OF KOSTIN, RUFFKESS & COMPANY, LLC



We consent to the incorporation by reference in this annual report (Form 10-KSB) of Flight Safety Technologies, Inc. of our report dated July 7, 2004, except as to Note 12 as to which the date is August 12, 2004, included in the 2004 Annual Report to the Shareholders of Flight Safety Technologies, Inc.





|/s/ Kostin, Ruffkess & Company, LLC                                    
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                       
|Kostin, Ruffkess & Company, LLC
Farmington, Connecticut
August 23, 2004
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 60670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22803]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-55,679]


Thor-Tex, Inc.; Albermarle, NC; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on September 24, 2004 in response to a 
worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at 
Thor-Tex, Inc., Albermarle, North Carolina.
    The petition regarding the investigation has been deemed invalid. 
In order to establish a valid worker group, there must be at least 
three workers employed at some point during the period under 
investigation. Workers of the group subject to this investigation did 
not meet this threshold of employment. Consequently the investigation 
has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of September 2004.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 04-22803 Filed 10-8-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-U
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. 96-57 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, April 12, 1996)

NRC MAKES CHANGES TO LICENSING,

INSPECTION AND ANNUAL FEES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is changing the licensing,

inspection and annual fees it charges applicants and licensees.

The changes were mandated by the Omnibus Budget

Reconciliation Act of 1990 which requires the NRC to recover

approximately 100 percent of its budget authority --less

appropriations from the Nuclear Waste Fund--for fiscal years 1991

through 1998 by assessing license and annual fees.

The Commission's budget authority for fiscal year 1996 is

$473.3 million, of which about $11 million has been appropriated

from the Nuclear Waste Fund, leaving approximately $462.3 million

to be recovered from fees. This is about $41.3 million less than

the total amount to be recovered for fiscal year 1995 and $50.7

million less than in fiscal year 1994.

As a result, the annual fees for all licensees will be

reduced:

--for power reactor licensees to $2,746,000 in fiscal year

1996 from $2,936,000 in fiscal year 1995;

--for nonpower reactors (research and test) reactor

licensees to $52,800 from $56,500;

--for high-enriched fuel facility licensees to $2,403,000

from $2,569,000;

--for low-enriched uranium fuel fabrication facility

licensees who manufacture fuel for nuclear power plants to

$1,179,000 from $1,261,000;

--for radiographers to $13,000 from $13,900; and

--for broad scope medical licensees to $21,700 from $23,200.

The Commission's amendments also include revisions to hourly

rates charged for the reactor, nuclear materials and nuclear

waste programs and make clear that fees will be assessed for

licenses authorizing the export or import of radioactive waste.

Annual fees of less than $100,000 for material licensees will be

billed on the anniversary date of the licensee.
The amendments to Parts 170 and 171 of the Commission's

regulations will become effective June 11.

#
No: II‐23-024 August 23, 2023 

Contact: Dave Gasperson, 404-997-4417 

NRC Proposes $87,500 Fine to BWXT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed an $87,500 civil penalty to BWXT 

Nuclear Operations Group Inc. for two violations of regulatory requirements related to safety 

controls at its fuel fabrication facility in Lynchburg, Virginia. 

The violations were discovered after a January 19 event when a storage tank at BWXT’s 

Uranium Recovery Facility overflowed, spilling uranium solution onto the floor and into a 

ventilation system. Two safety controls designed to prevent such a spill failed, increasing the risk of 

an accidental criticality. The event did not endanger the plant workers, the public, or the 

environment. 

The NRC identified the proposed violations in March during an inspection that revealed an 

apparent breakdown of safety controls designed to prevent an accidental criticality at BWXT’s 

facility. 

The NRC held a predecisional enforcement conference with BWXT on June 21, and the 

company provided its perspective, including the results from its root cause evaluation and corrective 

actions. The company’s investigation into the spill tracked the underlying reasons for the violations 

back to 2012.

The NRC reviewed BWXT’s response and determined that while previous incidents did not 

result in an accidental criticality, BWXT missed opportunities to identify the issues for more than 

10 years. However, the NRC did credit actions BWXT has taken to strengthen safety controls in 

imposing the proposed fine. 

The company has 30 days to pay the proposed penalty or contest the penalty in writing.
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. 97-001 FOR IMMEDIATE

RELEASE

(Friday, January 3, 1997)

NOTE TO EDITORS -- ACRS MEETING RESCHEDULED

Two subcommittees of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's

Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a joint

technical meeting January 9, in Rockville, Maryland beginning at

12:30 p.m., rather than 1:00 p.m. as previously announced. The

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

the NRC's Two White Flint North Building at 11545 Rockville Pike.

####
§ 128.306 How does a concern maintain its VOSB or SDVOSB certification? ( a ) Any Participant seeking to remain certified must recertify its eligibility every 3 years. There is no limitation on the number of times a business may recertify. Participants may recertify within 120 calendar days prior to the termination of their eligibility period. If the concern fails to recertify, SBA may decertify the firm at the end of their eligibility period.
( b ) The Participant must maintain its eligibility during its participation in the program and must inform SBA of any changes that may affect its eligibility within 30 calendar days in accordance with § 128.307.
( c ) The Participant must respond to any program examination initiated by SBA to remain a certified VOSB or SDVOSB.
( d ) At the discretion of the Administrator (or designee), a Participant's eligibility period may be extended by a period of up to one year.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsNear-wall modelling of compressible turbulent flowsWork was carried out to extend the near-wall models formulated for the incompressible Reynolds stress equations to compressible flows. The idea of splitting the compressible dissipation function into a solenoidal part that is not sensitive to changes of compressibility indicators and a compressible part that is directly affected by these changes is adopted. This means that all models involving the dissipation rate could be expressed in terms of the solenoidal dissipation rate and an equation governing its transport could be formulated to close the set of compressible Reynolds stress equations. The near-wall modelling of the dissipation rate equation is investigated and its behavior near a wall is studied in detail using k-epsilon closure. It is found that all existing modelled equations give the wrong behavior for the dissipation rate near a wall. Improvements are suggested and the resultant behavior is found to be in good agreement with near-wall data. Furthermore, the present modified k-epsilon closure is used too calculate a flat plate boundary layer and the results are compared with four existing k-epsilon closures. These comparisons show that all closures tested give essentially the same flow properties, except in a region very close to the wall. In this region, the present k-epsilon closure calculations are in better agreement with measurements and direct simulation data; in particular, the behavior of the dissipation rate.Document ID19900018342Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsSo, Ronald M. C.*(Arizona State Univ. Tempe, AZ, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1990Subject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:186961NASA-CR-186961Accession Number90N27658Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG1-1080Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900018342.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 23 (Wednesday, February 4, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5272]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2312]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 1271

[Docket No. 97N-484R]


Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products; 
Establishment Registration and Listing; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Interim final rule; correction

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting an 
interim final rule that published in the Federal Register on January 
27, 2004 (69 FR 3823). The interim final rule excepted human dura mater 
and human heart valve allografts, currently subject to application or 
notification requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
Act from the scope of the definition of ``human cells, tissues, or 
cellular or tissue-based products (HCT/P's)'' subject to the 
registration and listing requirements contained in 21 CFR Part 1271. 
That definition became effective on January 21, 2004. The interim final 
rule published with some errors. This document corrects those errors.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula S. McKeever, Center for 
Biologics Evaluation and Research (HFM-17), Food and Drug 
Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, 301-827-
6210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the FR Doc. 04-1733, appearing on page 
3824 in the Federal Register of Tuesday, January 27, 2004, the 
following corrections are made:
    1. On page 3824, in the DATES section, by removing the sentence 
``The compliance date is March 29, 2004.''
    2. On page 3824, under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION in the I. 
Background section, the phrase ``FDA understands that many 
establishments may have reasonably expected FDA to delay the effective 
date of this provision again, since the donor suitability and GTP rules 
are not yet finalized'' is revised to read:
    ``FDA understands that many establishments may have reasonably 
expected FDA to delay the effective date of this provision again, since 
the donor suitability and GTP rules are not yet finalized. Accordingly, 
FDA expects that affected firms will be in compliance with these 
requirements by March 29, 2004, and not on January 21, 2004, the 
effective date of the definition regulation.''

    Dated: January 29, 2004.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. 04-2312 Filed 1-30-04; 3:49 pm]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
### SUBCHAPTER VI—SAFEGUARDS FOR LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
#### William H. Schofield, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Dayve De Boris De Waltoff, Respondent, v. Mechanics Bank of Brooklyn and Another, Defendants. Dora A. De Waltoff, Appellant.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The record proof is that a judgment was recovered and execution issued and returned unsatisfied on November 24, 1913. The adjudication in bankruptcy was made on January 1, 1914. *Kiendl*v. *Dubroff*(136 App. Div. 8) is decisive of this appeal. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Stapleton, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
#### § 123.22 Severability.

Any provision of this part held to be invalid or unenforceable as applied to any person, entity, or circumstance shall be construed so as to continue to give the maximum effect to such provision as permitted by law, including as applied to persons or entities not similarly situated or to dissimilar circumstances, unless such holding is that the provision of this part is invalid and unenforceable in all circumstances, in which event the provision shall be severable from the remainder of this part and shall not affect the remainder thereof.

[89 FR 34102, Apr. 30, 2024]
**Exhibit 23**

** **

****

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENTREGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

 

The Board of Directors and Stockholders

Waccamaw Bankshares, Inc.

Whiteville, North Carolina

 

 

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the Registration Statements (Nos. 333-107299, 333-126235, and 333-153327) on Form S-8 of Waccamaw Bankshares, Inc.and Subsidiary (the “Company”) of our report dated February 29, 2012, with respect to the consolidated financial statements,which report appears in the Company’s 2010 Annual Repo**r**t on Form 10-K.

 

/s/ Elliott Davis, PLLC

 

Galax, Virginia

February 29, 2012

 

 

** **
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-19-00232-CR

The State of Texas, Appellant

v.

Cesar A. Enamorado, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. C-1-CR-17-219112, THE HONORABLE JOHN LIPSCOMBE, JUDGE PRESIDING

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

The State of Texas, which filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s order 

granting a pretrial motion to suppress evidence, has now filed a motion to dismiss its appeal. We 

grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a). 

__________________________________________

Gisela D. Triana, Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Triana

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: May 8, 2019

Do Not Publish
### [§1111. Repealed. Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1901(a)(134), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1786]

Section, added Pub. L. 87–403, §1(a), Feb. 2, 1962, 76 Stat. 4, related to distribution of stock pursuant to order enforcing antitrust laws.
### Part D—Vocational Rehabilitation Services Client Information
EXHIBIT 10

Case 1:20-cv-22009-MGC Document 1-11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 1 of 3
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL

CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NO: 2020-007685-CA-01

SECTION: CA44

JUDGE: William Thomas

COOPERATIEVE RABOBANK U.A,. NEW YORK BRANCH et al

Plaintiff(s)

vs.

EISNERAMPER LLP

Defendant(s)

____________________________/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ADMISSION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE

PURSUANT TO FLORIDA RULE OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.510

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Andrew Solomon’s Verified Motion for

Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.510. 

The Court has carefully considered the Motion, and being otherwise fully advised in the

premises, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

1. Said Motion be and is hereby GRANTED.

Andrew Solomon of the law firm of Solomon & Cramer LLP is permitted to appear

pro hac vice in this Court as co-counsel to Scott Jay Feder, P.A., and attorney of

record for Plaintiffs in the instant case.

2.

Case No: 2020-007685-CA-01 Page 1 of 2

Filing # 107102073 E-Filed 05/05/2020 09:42:53 PM Case 1:20-cv-22009-MGC Document 1-11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 2 of 3
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers at Miami-Dade County, Florida on this 5th day of May,

2020.

2020-007685-CA-01 05-05-2020 9:32 PM

Hon. William Thomas

CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE

Electronically Signed

No Further Judicial Action Required on THIS MOTION

CLERK TO RECLOSE CASE IF POST JUDGMENT

Electronically Served:

Andrew Solomon, asolomon@solomoncramer.com

Cbl Section 44 Case Mgr, cbl44@jud11.flcourts.org

Scott Jay Feder, assistantscottjfeder@hotmail.com

Scott Jay Feder, scottj8@aol.com

Physically Served:

Case No: 2020-007685-CA-01 Page 2 of 2

Case 1:20-cv-22009-MGC Document 1-11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 3 of 3
HomeAbout NRCOrganization & Functions

# The Commission

The NRC is headed by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for five-year terms. One of them is designated by the President to be the Chair and official spokesperson of the Commission.

Former NRC Commissioners

## Functions

The Chair is the principal executive officer of and the official spokesman for the NRC. As principal executive officer, the Chair is responsible for conducting the administrative, organizational, long-range planning, budgetary, and certain personnel functions of the agency. The Chair has ultimate authority for all NRC functions pertaining to an emergency involving an NRC license. The Chair's actions are governed by the general policies of the Commission.

The Commission as a collegial body formulates policies, develops regulations governing nuclear reactor and nuclear material safety, issues orders to licensees, and adjudicates legal matters.

## Contacts

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, November 06, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - The Commission
          - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
          - Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
          - Commission Appellate Adjudication
          - Congressional Affairs
          - General Counsel
          - International Programs
          - Public Affairs
          - Secretary
          - Chief Financial Officer
          - Executive Director for Operations (EDO)
          - Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
          - Nuclear Regulatory Research
          - Nuclear Reactor Regulation
          - Enforcement
          - Investigations
          - Nuclear Security and Incident Response
          - Region I
          - Region II
          - Region III
          - Region IV
          - Chief Information Officer
          - Administration
          - Chief Human Capital Officer
          - Small Business and Civil Rights

#### 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

#### Related Information

            - NRC Organization Chart
            - Direction-Setting and Policymaking Activities
            - Commission Documents

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, November 06, 2023