alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Draft Proposal E-3

This concept has been developed by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) as a possible code
change proposal to the Commercial provisions of the 2012 International Existing Buildings Code (IEBC).

Interested parties are asked to submit any and all comments on DOE's initial concepts and draft code
change proposals. For instructions on submitting comments, visit:

www.energycodes.gov/deve lopment/iebc_concepts



## Addition Energy Requirements (E-3)

Objective: Require additions considered on their own to meet the provisions of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).

Suggested Code Change Proposal

Revise Section [B] 402.1 as follows:

[B] 402.1 General. Additions to any building or structure shall comply with the requirements of the International Building Code for new construction. Alterations to the existing building or structure shall be made to ensure that the existing building or structure together with the addition are no less conforming to the provisions of the International Building Code that the existi ng building was prior to the addition. An existing building together with its additions shall comply with the height and area provisions of Chapter 5 of the International Building Code.

Exception: Additions shall meet the provisions of the IECC without consideration of the existing building.

Reason: As written, the code could be interpreted to mean that where an existing building is some level of energy efficiency below the International Building Code, which references the 2012 IECC, then the addition need satisfy only that same level of energy efficiency as opposed to having to meet the 2012 IECC on its own. The exception clarifies that regardless of the condition of or work done or not done in the existing building, the addition must meet the 2012

IECC.

Cost Impact: There is no cost impact other than ensuring that maybe something that might not have been considered would now through clarification be considered.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                         5
<MULTIPLIER>                                      1 
<CURRENCY>U.S. DOLLARS
       
   <S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                  OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1 
<CASH>                                            1,194,139 
<SECURITIES>                                              0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                        97,122
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0 
<INVENTORY>                                               0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1,296,136
<PP&E>                                              307,234 
<DEPRECIATION>                                       98,991 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    2,522,624 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               169,505
<BONDS>                                                   0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0 
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                          6,489,723
<OTHER-SE>                                        4,136,604
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      2,522,624
<SALES>                                             841,045
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    841,045
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2,857,226
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    2,091 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1,939,436
<INCOME-TAX>                                          1,766
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1,941,202
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1,941,202
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.17
        

</TABLE>
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Exploring the Taft Education Center

William Howard Taft National Historic Site
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 18-11991

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:04-cr-00143-ODE-AJB-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

EDNECDIA (TINA) JOHNSON,

a.k.a. Tina Smith,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

________________________

(February 7, 2019)

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, GRANT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The government has filed a motion to dismiss Johnson’s appeal, arguing that 

we lack jurisdiction to consider it because (1) her time to appeal the restitution 

amount has long since passed and (2) her appeal is precluded by the limited appeal 

Case: 18-11991 Date Filed: 02/07/2019 Page: 1 of 3 
2

waiver in her plea agreement. However, the failure to file a timely notice of appeal 

does not deprive us of jurisdiction. United States v. Lopez, 562 F.3d 1309, 1313

(11th Cir. 2009). In any event, Johnson timely appealed from the district court’s 

2018 order denying her pro se motion to adjust her restitution. 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). 

Nevertheless, in her brief on appeal, Johnson largely raises issues 

challenging the district court’s initial award of restitution in 2004, not the district 

court’s order denying her pro se motion in 2018, and so her arguments challenging 

the 2018 order have been abandoned. United States v. Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273, 

1283 n.8 (11th Cir. 2003). As for the arguments that she does raise on appeal, 

which focus on the district court’s 2004 award of restitution, we are required to 

dismiss them as untimely pursuant to the government’s request. Lopez, 562 F.3d at 

1312-14. 

To the extent that Johnson’s arguments on appeal can be construed to 

challenge the district court’s denial of her pro se motion, we dismiss Johnson’s 

appeal pursuant to her valid appeal waiver.1

 We have held that a valid appeal 

waiver may bar a challenge to restitution, United States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 

 1 Contrary to the government’s assertions, a valid appeal waiver does not deprive us of 

jurisdiction but does require that we dismiss an appeal prior to reaching its merits. See, e.g., 

United States v. Howles, 166 F.3d 1166, 1169 (11th Cir. 1999) (declining to reach the merits of 

an appeal due to a valid appeal waiver).

Case: 18-11991 Date Filed: 02/07/2019 Page: 2 of 3 
3

1064, 1068 (11th Cir. 2008), and we have also previously determined that 

Johnson’s appeal waiver is valid and enforceable, making it the law of the case, In 

re Lambrix, 776 F.3d 789, 793 (11th Cir. 2015) (per curiam). Johnson’s limited 

appeal waiver does not contain an exception relevant to her appeal. We therefore

enforce Johnson’s limited appeal waiver with regard to any timely issues raised by 

Johnson.

Accordingly, the Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal in part as 

untimely and in part pursuant to the appeal waiver in Appellant’s plea agreement is 

GRANTED. 

Case: 18-11991 Date Filed: 02/07/2019 Page: 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-26-1999
<PERIOD-START>                  DEC-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    SEP-26-1999
<CASH>                          249,215
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   893,545
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     476,634
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                2,495,909
<PP&E>                          13,623,892
<DEPRECIATION>                  5,422,313
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  11,621,292
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           5,227,446
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     2
<COMMON>                        160
<OTHER-SE>                      4,027,355
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    11,621,292
<SALES>                         28,582,040
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                28,957,162
<CGS>                           7,981,154
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   7,981,154
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                20,356,423
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              376,985
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 242,600
<INCOME-TAX>                    6,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             160,604
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    123,104
<EPS-BASIC>                   .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                   .03



</TABLE>
[No. 7012.

Decided February 28, 1908.]

#### Claude Briggs *et al., Appellants,*v. P. A. Bounds, Respondent.1

Frauds, Statute of — Brokers—Employment—Oral Contract— Sufficiency. Under Laws 1905, p. 110, requiring a contract with, a broker for commissions on the sale of real estate, or a memorandum thereof, to be in writing, an oral contract of employment for the sale of land at a stated compensation is void as within the statute of frauds.

Same — Performance—Effect. Where a statute requires a contract for the employment of a broker, or a memorandum thereof, to *580be in writing, full performance of an oral contract will not take the same out of the operation of the statute or authorize a recovery upon a *quantum meruit.*

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Yakima county, Rigg, J., entered March 29, 1907, upon sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, dismissing an action to recover a commission on the sale of real property.

Affirmed.

*Snyder & Luse,*for appellants.

1

Reported in 94 Pac. 101.

Root, J.

This was an action brought by appellants to recover from respondent a commission for finding a purchaser for certain real estate. From a judgment of dismissal, this appeal is prosecuted.

The complaint alleges that defendant entered into an oral contract with plaintiffs, whereby the latter agreed that they would use their best endeavors to find a purchaser for defendant’s property at a mentioned price, and that he agreed to pay them for said services the sum of $800. To this complaint a demurrer was interposed by defendant and sustained by the trial court. Plaintiff electing to stand upon their complaint, the action was dismissed, and this appeal taken.

The trial court evidently sustained the demurrer by reason of chap. 58, Laws 1905, page 110, which amended Bal. Code, § 4576 (P. C. § 5343), and so far as applicable to this case reads as follows:

> “In the following cases, specified in. this section, any agreement, contract and promise shall be void, unless such agreement, contract, or promise, or some note or memorandum thereof, be in writing, and signed by the party to be charged therewith, or by some person thereunto by him lawfully authorized, that is to say: . . . (5) An agreement authorizing or employing an agent or broker to sell or purchase real estate for compensation or a commission.”

The effect o.f this statute upon oral contracts of the character here involved is set forth in the case of *Keith*w. *Smith,**58146 Wash. 131, 89 Pac. 473. The decision in that case is conclusive of this, and upon the authority thereof the judgment of the trial court is hereby affirmed.

Hadley, C. J., Fullerton, Mount, Crow, and Dunbar, JJ., concur.
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.1309 When will a Judge dismiss an appeal? The presiding Judge must dismiss the appeal if: ( a ) The appeal is untimely filed under § 134.1303;
( b ) The appeal does not, on its face, allege facts that if proven to be true, warrant reversal or modification of the determination; or
( c ) The matter has been decided or is the subject of adjudication before a court of competent jurisdiction over such matters; however, once an appeal has been filed, initiation of litigation of the matter in a court of competent jurisdiction will not preclude the Judge from rendering a final decision on the matter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         926,326
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       3,157,778
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      11,243,627
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        11,240,056
<LOANS>                                     25,784,233
<ALLOWANCE>                                    188,869
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              43,688,625
<DEPOSITS>                                  34,270,664
<SHORT-TERM>                                   900,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            122,202
<LONG-TERM>                                  3,069,525
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,703
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,322,531
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              43,688,625
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,091,614
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               88,896
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               560,904
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,741,414
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,617,847
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,716,597
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,024,817
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  156,341
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                899,142
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 37,282
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      24,611
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    24,611
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.75
<LOANS-NON>                                     47,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               149,795
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  117,267
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              188,869
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           188,869
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 399

**Question 399:** The NRC Form 5 (Item No. 8) provides for entry of multiple NRC license numbers. Some licensees may hold multiple licenses and provide common monitoring (e.g., a single set of dosimeters) for personnel working under any or all of the licenses. In such cases, it is proposed that only a single NRC Form 5 would be generated for each individual, listing all licenses under which they were monitored under 20.1502. Is this acceptable to satisfy regulatory requirements?

**Answer:** Yes, in general. For one nuclear power station, it is acceptable for the licensee to provide a single NRC Form 5 for an individual who works at one or more units at the station. However, a nuclear utility that has two or more power stations should not use a single NRC Form 5 for an individual who works at two or more different stations; a separate form should be used for each station at which the individual works. 

(References: 10 CFR 20.2106, 10 CFR 20.2206, Regulatory Guide 8.7)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, November 27, 2017
§ 19.110 Remedial and affirmative action and self-evaluation. ( a ) *Remedial action.* If the designated agency official finds that a recipient has discriminated against persons on the basis of sex in an education program or activity, such recipient shall take such remedial action as the designated agency official deems necessary to overcome the effects of such discrimination.
( b ) *Affirmative action.* In the absence of a finding of discrimination on the basis of sex in an education program or activity, a recipient may take affirmative action consistent with law to overcome the effects of conditions that resulted in limited participation therein by persons of a particular sex. Nothing in these Title IX regulations shall be interpreted to alter any affirmative action obligations that a recipient may have under Executive Order 11246, 3 CFR, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 339; as amended by Executive Order 11375, 3 CFR, 1966-1970 Comp., p. 684; as amended by Executive Order 11478, 3 CFR, 1966-1970 Comp., p. 803; as amended by Executive Order 12086, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 230; as amended by Executive Order 12107, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 264.
( c ) *Self-evaluation.* Each recipient education institution shall, within one year of September 29, 2000: ( 1 ) Evaluate, in terms of the requirements of these Title IX regulations, its current policies and practices and the effects thereof concerning admission of students, treatment of students, and employment of both academic and non-academic personnel working in connection with the recipient's education program or activity;
( 2 ) Modify any of these policies and practices that do not or may not meet the requirements of these Title IX regulations; and
( 3 ) Take appropriate remedial steps to eliminate the effects of any discrimination that resulted or may have resulted from adherence to these policies and practices.
( d ) *Availability of self-evaluation and related materials.* Recipients shall maintain on file for at least three years following completion of the evaluation required under paragraph (c) of this section, and shall provide to the designated agency official upon request, a description of any modifications made pursuant to paragraph (c)(2) of this section and of any remedial steps taken pursuant to paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61213-61223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23119]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 05-12]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. J. Hurd, DSCA/OPS-ADMIN, (703) 
604-6575.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittal 05-12 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, Sensitivity of Technology, and Section 620C(d).

    Dated: October 8, 2004.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 61214]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.000


[[Page 61215]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.001


[[Page 61216]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.002


[[Page 61217]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.003


[[Page 61218]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.004


[[Page 61219]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.005


[[Page 61220]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.006


[[Page 61221]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.007


[[Page 61222]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.008


[[Page 61223]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC04.009

[FR Doc. 04-23119 Filed 10-14-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
#### § 333.65 Compliance conflicts.

If compliance with any provision of the Defense Production Act and other applicable statutes, this part, or an official action would prevent a person from filling a rated order or from complying with another provision of the Defense Production Act, this part, or an official action, the person must immediately notify FEMA for resolution of the conflict.
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 34

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

06/19

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 19 Jun 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.92 N 77.01 W Meters AGL
|   | (1) | such Quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2010 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 such Quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Magna-Lab, Inc. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|          |   |                                                           |
|---------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|
| July 14, 2010 |   | /s/ Kenneth C. Riscica                                         |
|          |   | Name: Kenneth C. Riscica                                       |
|          |   | Title: Treasurer & Secretary (principal financial officer) |