alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 533 

AN ACT 

To require a guidance clarity statement on certain agency 

guidance, 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, 
2 

†S 533 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Guidance Clarity Act 

3 of 2021’’. 

4 SEC. 2. GUIDANCE CLARITY STATEMENT REQUIRED. 

5 (a) REQUIREMENT.—Each agency, as defined in sec6 tion 551 of title 5, United States Code, shall include a 

7 guidance clarity statement as described in subsection (b) 

8 on any guidance issued by that agency under section 

9 553(b)(3)(A) of title 5, United States Code, on and after 

10 the date that is 30 days after the date on which the Direc11 tor of the Office of Management and Budget issues the 

12 guidance required under subsection (c). 

13 (b) GUIDANCE CLARITY STATEMENT.—A guidance 

14 clarity statement required under subsection (a) shall— 

15 (1) be displayed prominently on the first page 

16 of the document; and 

17 (2) include the following: ‘‘The contents of this 

18 document do not have the force and effect of law 

19 and do not, of themselves, bind the public or the 

20 agency. This document is intended only to provide 

21 clarity to the public regarding existing requirements 

22 under the law or agency policies.’’. 

23 (c) OMB GUIDANCE.—Not later than 90 days after 

24 the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Of-
3 

†S 533 ES

1 fice of Management and Budget shall issue guidance to 

2 implement this Act. 

Passed the Senate September 14, 2022. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 533 

AN ACT 

To require a guidance clarity statement on certain 

agency guidance, and for other purposes.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 6, 2011

h0829 

# Order

September 6, 2011

142881 & (9)(14)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142881 COA: 302094 Oakland CC: 1998-161463-FC PERSCELL DOYLE DAVID, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the March 11, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G). The motion for appointment of

counsel and the motion to remand for an evidentiary he aring are DENIED.
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. 96-146 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, October 18, 1996)

NRC ESTABLISHES SPECIAL PROJECTS OFFICE TO OVERSEE INSPECTION

AND LICENSING ACTIVITIES AT MILLSTONE AND HADDAM NECK PLANTS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has established a Special

Projects Office within the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

to oversee inspection and licensing activities at the Millstone

sites operated by Northeast Utilities in Connecticut.

The Special Projects Office will also have responsibility

for regulatory activities at Haddam Neck, unless Northeast

Utilities decides to permanently shut down the plant.

Since December 1995, a number of senior managers and staff

members have been assigned to a variety of special task forces

and inspections related to Millstone and Haddam Neck. To

consolidate that effort and to ensure consistent NRC oversight

and inspection of other operating facilities, the Special

Projects Office will provide a specific management focus on NRC

activities at Millstone and Haddam Neck beginning November 3.

About 30 staff members will be assigned to the office, which is

expected to operate for 18 to 24 months.

Heading the new office will be Dr. William D. Travers, who

currently directs the NRC's Spent Fuel Project Office in the

Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards at

headquarters. Between 1984 and 1988, he served as director of

the Three Mile Island Cleanup Office and was stationed at the TMI

site.

Under Dr. Travers' direction, the Special Projects Office

will be responsible for (1) licensing and inspection activities

at Northeast Utilities' Connecticut plants; (2) oversight of the

Independent Corrective Action Verification Program NRC is

requiring for Millstone; (3) oversight of the utility's

corrective actions related to safety issues involving employee

concerns; and (4) inspections necessary to implement NRC

oversight of the plants' restart activities.

Assisting Dr. Travers will be:
-- Phillip McKee, of NRC headquarters, who will serve as

deputy director for licensing. He will be responsible for

licensing activities and oversight of the licensee's corrective

actions related to safety issues involving employee concerns.

-- Eugene Imbro, also of NRC headquarters, who will be

responsible for the regulatory oversight of all aspects of the

Independent Corrective Action Verification Program.

-- Wayne Lanning, who currently heads the Millstone

Oversight Team at NRC's Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa.

He will remain in Region I where he will serve as deputy director

for inspection and will be responsible for on-site inspection

activities.

The NRC has previously used special projects offices to

oversee regulatory activities at the Comanche Peak nuclear power

plant in Texas and all of the Tennessee Valley Authority's

nuclear plants in the 1980s.

####
Exhibit 10.8
 Execution Version
 
 Amendment Borrower Servicer BB&T ING Lenders KEF Managing Agents Administrative Agent
  Credit Agreement
   Amendment Section 3
  provided however
  ELEVENTH




---



##### 



FIFTH
 Representations and Warranties
   Conditions Precedent Effective Date
 Reference to and Effect on the Transaction Documents
    Execution in Counterparts
 2




---



##### 



Governing Law
 Headings
 Fees and Expenses
  3




---



##### 



GLADSTONE BUSINESS LOAN, LLCBy:Name:Title: GLADSTONE MANAGEMENT CORPORATIONBy:Name:Title: Signature Page to Amendment No. 1




---



##### 



KEY EQUIPMENT FINANCE INC., as Administrative Agent and a Managing AgentBy:Name:Title: KEYBANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as a LenderBy:Name:Title: Signature Page to Amendment No. 1




---



##### 



BRANCH BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, as a Lender and a Managing AgentBy:Name:Title: Signature Page to Amendment No. 1




---



##### 



ING CAPITAL LLC, as a Lender and a Managing AgentBy:Name:Title: Signature Page to Amendment No. 1




---



##### 



Schedule I
 1.
    
    Amended and Restated Fee Letter by and among the Borrower, the Servicer, the Managing Agents
and the Administrative Agent
 2.
    
    Consent Fee Letter by and among the Borrower, the Servicer and BB&T
 3.
    
    Consent Fee Letter by and among the Borrower, the Servicer and ING
 4.
    
    Consent Fee Letter by and among the Borrower, the Servicer and KEF
 5.
    
    Reaffirmation of Performance Guaranty by the Performance Guarantor in favor of the Borrower
and the Administrative Agent
 Schedule I
119 STAT. 370 PUBLIC LAW 109–27—JULY 12, 2005

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1072:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 151 (2005):

Apr. 20, considered and passed House.

June 29, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–27

109th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 151 West

End Street in Goliad, Texas, as the ‘‘Judge Emilio Vargas Post Office Building’’.

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

151 West End Street in Goliad, Texas, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Judge Emilio Vargas Post Office Building’’.

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 ‘‘Judge

Emilio Vargas Post Office Building’’.

Approved July 12, 2005.

July 12, 2005

[H.R. 1072]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsSynthesis of imide/arylene ether copolymers for adhesives and composite matricesA series of imide/arylene ether copolymers were prepared from the reaction of an amorphous arylene ether oligomer and a semi-crystalline imide oligomer. These copolymers were thermally characterized and mechanical properties were measured. One block copolymer was endcapped and the molecular weight was controlled to provide a material that displayed good compression moldability and attractive adhesion and composite properties.Document ID19910011993Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsJensen, B. J.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA., United States)*Hergenrother, P. M.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA., United States)*Bass, R. G.*(Virginia Commonwealth Univ. Richmond., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1991Subject CategoryNonmetallic MaterialsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:104067NASA-TM-104067Accession Number91N21306Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-63-50-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910011993.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
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
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 EntreMed, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James S.
Burns, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge, that:  (1)
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 for the dates and periods
covered by the Report. This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief Executive
Officer of the Company (or equivalent) with the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and may not be used by any person or for any reason other than as specifically
required by law. /s/ James S. BurnsMay 5, 2005
    James S. BurnsPresident and CEO
* This panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### August 6, 2010 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. JOSE LOPEZ, a/k/a David Cerpa,a/k/a Gordo, a/k/a Eduardo RuizAcunis, Defendant-Appellant. No. 09-3366 (D.C. No. 2:07-CR-20122-KHV-2) (D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

BeforeKELLY , MURPHY , and HARTZ , Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the court on the government’s motion to enforce the appeal waiver contained in defendant Jose Lopez’s plea agreement. The defendant pleaded guilty to possessing methamphetamine with intent to distribute it. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the defendant waived his right to appeal his-2- conviction or his sentence, provided his sentence was within the advisory sentencing guideline range determined by the district court to apply. The defendant’s sentence was below the statutory maximum and within the advisory guideline range determined by the court. Nevertheless, the defendant filed a notice of appeal. The government filed a motion to enforce the plea agreement pursuant to United States v. Hahn , 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam). In response, the defendant, through counsel, requests the court to permit him to appeal his sentence, but he advances no arguments why the appeal waiver is unenforceable, and he concedes that “the Plea Agreement does not allow this appeal.” Response at 2. We have reviewed the motion, the record and the defendant’s response, and we agree that the defendant’s proposed appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, that he knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights, and that enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. See id ., 359 F.3d at 1325 (describing the factors this court considers when determining whether to enforce a waiver of appellate rights). Accordingly, we GRANT the motion to enforce the appeal waiver and DISMISS the appeal.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT PER CURIAM
###### Editorial Note on Part 134

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 134.614 What deadlines apply to my application for an award and where do I send it?

After you have prevailed in an administrative proceeding or in a discrete issue therein, you must serve, and file with OHA, your written application for an award, and its attachments, no later than 30 days after the decision in the administrative proceeding becomes final under § 134.227. The deadline for filing an application for an award may not be extended. If SBA or another party requests review of the decision in the underlying administrative proceeding, your request for an award for fees and expenses may still be filed, but it will not be considered by the ALJ until a final decision is rendered.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5172 

To designate the Department of Energy Integrated Engineering Research 

Center Federal Building located at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, as the ‘‘Helen Edwards Engineering Research 

Center’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 1, 2022 

Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Ms. DUCKWORTH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

A BILL 

To designate the Department of Energy Integrated Engineering Research Center Federal Building located at the 

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, as the ‘‘Helen Edwards Engineering Research Center’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. HELEN EDWARDS ENGINEERING RESEARCH 

4 CENTER. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Department of Energy Inte6 grated Engineering Research Center Federal Building lo7 cated at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 5172 IS

1 Batavia, Illinois, shall be known and designated as the 

2 ‘‘Helen Edwards Engineering Research Center’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the Federal Building referred to in subsection 

6 (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Helen 

7 Edwards Engineering Research Center’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rohan Wilson TEAGNE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6006.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 16, 2002.

Decided May 22, 2002.

Rohan Wilson Teagne, Appellant Pro Se. Bruce A. Pagel, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Rohan Wilson Teagne seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001), and denying his motion for *90reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *United States v. Teagne,*Nos. CR-98-33; CA-01-530-7 (W.D.Va. July 16, 2001; Oct. 16, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 130

**Question 130:** 10 CFR 20.1603 (a), Footnote 2, exempts a nuclear power plant from the requirements of §20.1603 unless a non-self-shielded irradiator is used at the reactor. 
> 
(a) If the source used for the calibration of high-radiation instruments is non-self-shielded, and the absorbed dose at 1 meter distance could exceed 500 rads in 1 hour, is the source an irradiator? 

(b) Do the provisions of §20.1603 (a) apply?

**Answer:**
> 
(a) No. An "irradiator," as the term is used in 10 CFR 20.1603, uses gamma radiation to irradiate products to change their characteristics in some way (55 FR 50008, 12/4/90, Licenses and Radiation Safety Requirements for Large Irradiators, proposed 10 CFR Part 36). A radioactive source used for calibrating radiation survey instruments is not an "irradiator." 

(b) No. However, the provisions of 10 CFR 20.1602 would apply.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1603)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 01, 2017
### §1592. Repealed. Pub. L. 105–220, title I, §199(b)(2), Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1059

Section, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §183, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1357, related to statutory references to Comprehensive Employment and Training Act.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective July 1, 2000, see section 199(c)(2)(B) of Pub. L. 105–220, set out as a note under section 1501 of this title.
Exhibit 32.2



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 Annual Report of Shore Financial Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven M. Belote, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge, that:



(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.



/s/ Steven M. BeloteSteven M. BeloteChief Financial Officer




Date: March 24, 2004



This certificate accompanies this Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and will not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
## SERVED: March 21,2016 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC.

DOCKET NO. FAA-2014-0322 (Civil Penalty Action)

ORDER REASSIGNING PROCEEDING -- { ' ·-- t

Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin has transferred to the Food and Drug Administration. Accordingly, this proceeding is hereby reassigned from Judge Goodwin to Administrative LawJudge Douglas M. Rawald. ·Any dates set for hearing or prehearing conference are suspended until further notice. All other orders remain in full force and effect absent further order. SO ORDERED.

Attachment-Service List

# ·--·

SERVICE LIST - BY 

### U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur WrightBuilding-Suite2W1 000 1

Todd Emerson, Respondent's Counsel SkyWest Airlines, Inc. 444 S. River Road St. George, UT 84790 TEL: 435-634-3530 FAX: 435-634-3505 ONE COPY

Jeffrey M. Harper, Complainant 's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 1601Lind Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98057 TEL: 425-227-2161 FAX: 425-227-1007 The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2014-0322 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S,W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WI000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Cossentino, Appellant.

Motion for assignment of counsel and for other relief denied. The court has obtained from the county clerk’s office the original minutes of the trial. After examining such minutes, the court finds that no substantial error was made in the court below and that there is no merit to the appeal. Present — Lewis, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

December 28, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 134554 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 134554 

 COA: 267338 

Emmet CC: 05-002399-FH 

BRADFORD CARL ROSS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 14, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d1217 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

December 28, 2007 

 Clerk