alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
S. 566 

One Hundred Seventeenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty two 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 42 Main 

Street in Slatersville, Rhode Island, as the ‘‘Specialist Matthew R. Turcotte Post 

Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SPECIALIST MATTHEW R. TURCOTTE POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 42 Main Street in Slatersville, Rhode Island, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Specialist Matthew R. 

Turcotte Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Specialist Matthew R. Turcotte Post Office’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

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

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 99-262

December 13, 1999

NRC CLARIFIES TREATMENT OF INFORMATION ON

NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OUTAGES AND RESTART SCHEDULES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has clarified its guidance regarding withholding

immediate release of nuclear power plant outage information or restart schedules in written

documents or in answer to queries.

NRC regulations do not require licensees to provide outage information to the agency

because it is not related to safety and release of this information could result in adverse economic

impact in a deregulated market. Historically, licensees have provided such information

informally as a courtesy to facilitate NRC’s planning of inspections and monitoring of plant

restart activities. But many now consider this proprietary information because its disclosure can

significantly affect the price the licensee has to pay for replacement power in a deregulated

market.

In light of the impact of deregulation, NRC reviewed its policy regarding release of

outage information. The agency concluded that outage information, if provided in writing with a

request that it be considered confidential business information, or proprietary, would likely be

withheld from public disclosure under the terms of Commission regulations (Part 2.790 of Title

10 of the Code of Federal Regulations) and the U.S. Trade Secrets Act.

Accordingly, unless NRC knows that specific outage information is in the public

domain, (either through docketed correspondence or public announcements by a licensee), or a

licensee has stated that specific outage information may be released, the NRC staff will follow

guidance in NRC’s Management Directive 3.1, (Freedom of Information Act requests), when

requests for plant outage information are received. This guidance prohibits NRC staff from

releasing information that may be confidential or proprietary without first providing a licensee

an opportunity to formally request it be withheld.

When a request for plant outage information is received, NRC will inform the requestor

that such information cannot be released immediately, unless the appropriate licensee does not

object. If a licensee objects to the release of outage information, the NRC will notify it that the

agency plans to release the information within 15 days, unless the licensee submits a written
request that the information be withheld. The 15-day period is designed to provide licensees

with sufficient time to determine whether release of outage information might have harmful

competitive impact. If NRC receives a formal request that the outage information be withheld,

the requestor will be informed. The licensee request will be evaluated by the NRC staff, which

will notify the requestor of its decision.

##
#### William Engle, Doing Business as New York Business Exchange, Respondent, v. Jacob Goldstein, Appellant.

-Motion for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division denied, with $10 costs. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ.
#### Harold A. Rouse et al., Respondents, v. Max Lipschitz et al., Appellants.

No opinion. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Sneed, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ.
Exhibit 31.2
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
I, Dane R. Saglio, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of EntreMed, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
b) [omitted pursuant to the guidance of Release No. 33-8283 (June 5, 2003)]
c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.
Date: May 5, 2004 /s/ Dane R. SaglioDane R. SaglioChief Financial Officer
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5290 

To require an evaluation of the implementation of the STOP Act of 2018, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 15, 2022 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself, Mr. PORTMAN, and Mrs. CAPITO) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To require an evaluation of the implementation of the STOP 

Act of 2018, 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 ‘‘STOP Act 2.0’’. 

5 SEC. 2. EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF STOP ACT 

6 OF 2018. 

7 Not later than one year after the date of the enact8 ment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 

9 States shall submit to Congress a report evaluating the 

10 implementation of the provisions of and amendments 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 5290 IS

1 made by the STOP Act of 2018 (subtitle A of title VIII 

2 of Public Law 115–271; 132 Stat. 4073) that includes— 

3 (1) an identification of potential areas of risk 

4 with respect to the entry of illicit fentanyl, other 

5 synthetic opioids, and other narcotics and 

6 psychoactive substances into the United States by 

7 mail, including any openings that drug traffickers 

8 have found in the system established under the 

9 STOP Act of 2018; and 

10 (2) an assessment of— 

11 (A) the use of the authority provided under 

12 subclause (II) of section 343(a)(3)(K)(vi) of the 

13 Trade Act of 2002 (19 U.S.C. 

14 1415(a)(3)(K)(vi)), as amended by section 8003 

15 of the STOP Act of 2018, to exclude countries 

16 from the requirement under subclause (I) of 

17 that section that advance information be pro18 vided for 100 percent of international mail ship19 ments; and 

20 (B) whether the use of that authority 

21 should be decreased. 

22 SEC. 3. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP REGARDING POST23 AL DATA. 

24 The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Admin25 istrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration may 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 5290 IS

1 enter into a public-private partnership with private parcel 

2 services to develop technology and processes for identi3 fying information that could be used to identify the origin 

4 of fentanyl, other synthetic opioids, and other narcotics 

5 and psychoactive substances, and precursors to such sub6 stances, including information on the origin of parcels and 

7 shipping information. 

8 SEC. 4. INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION. 

9 The Secretary of State, in coordination with the Sec10 retary of Homeland Security and the Administrator of the 

11 Drug Enforcement Administration, are authorized to 

12 share and receive information, consistent with existing 

13 law, on best practices regarding the detection of illicit 

14 fentanyl, other synthetic opioids, and other narcotics and 

15 psychoactive substances, and precursors to such sub16 stances, including such substances moving through the 

17 mail. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
No. 13,173.

#### McKiddie *v.*Donnell, Assignee.

(14 P. [2d] 1118)

Decided September 19, 1932.

Mr. Charles E. Friend, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. L. E. Talkington, for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed en banc on application for supersedeas without written opinion.
HomeAbout NRCPlans, Budgets, & Performance

# Project Aim

Current and projected changes to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s workload prompted the NRC to launch Project Aim in June 2014. The NRC's Executive Director for Operations and the Chief Financial Officer are working together to improve the agency's ability to plan and execute its mission. Part of this effort is to find ways to better adapt to a dynamic environment. The Project Aim team looked to internal and external stakeholders for input on forecasting the workload and operating environment in 2020. Based on these perspectives, a review of published literature and an analysis of the NRC's current state, the team and NRC senior leadership identified key strategies. The goal is to transform the agency over the next five years to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and agility of the NRC.

In late January 2015, NRC staff sent a proposal to the Commission. The staff recommended several changes that would allow the NRC to function more efficiently: 
        - Right-sizing the agency to retain skill sets needed to accomplish its mission.
        - Streamlining agency processes to use resources more wisely.
        - Improving timeliness in regulatory decision-making and responding quickly to changing conditions.
        - Promoting unity of purpose with clearer agencywide priorities.

The Commission approved many of the staff's recommendations.  Many changes are already underway. We are tracking these changes as 19 specific tasks. The Project Aim initiative is meant to carry out changes in an open, collaborate, and transparent manner.

For more information about Project Aim, see the following:
        - Project Aim Report
        - Project Aim Project Descriptions
        - Public Meetings on Project Aim
        - Monthly Status Updates and Project Documents

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, May 9, 2022

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Strategic Planning
          - NRC Executive Fleet Vehicle Report
          - Evidence Building and Evaluation
          - Project Aim
          - Artificial Intelligence
          - Becoming a Modern, Risk-Informed Regulator

#### 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 Monday, May 9, 2022
#### Alfred F. Laitenberger, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent.

(Claim No. 27919.)

—Judgment affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. All concur. (The judgment dismisses a claim for property damage to claimant’s automobile and for damages for loss of services of, and medical attendance for, claimant’s wife.) Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Love, Vaughan and Kimball, JJ. [190 Mise. 633.]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-QSB
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 MAR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   AUG-31-1996
<CASH>                                         1,107,000
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  307,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    491,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,307,000
<PP&E>                                         801,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 324,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,799,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,689,000
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       13,330,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     (12,258,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,799,000
<SALES>                                        400,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               650,000
<CGS>                                          259,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  814,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (13,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (410,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (410,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.09)
        


</TABLE>
§ 114.110 What is SBA's policy with respect to indemnifying and providing legal representation to SBA employees? ( a ) If an SBA employee engages in conduct, within the scope of his or her employment, which gives rise to a claim, and the SBA Administrator or designee determines that any of the following actions relating to the claim are in SBA's interest, SBA may: ( 1 ) Indemnify the employee after a verdict, judgment, or other monetary award is rendered personally against the employee in any civil suit in state or federal court or any arbitration proceeding;
( 2 ) Settle or compromise the claim; and/or
( 3 ) Pay for, or request that the Department of Justice provide, legal representation to the employee once personally named in such a suit.
( b ) If you are an SBA employee, you may ask SBA to settle or compromise your claim, provide you with legal representation, or provide you with indemnification for a verdict, judgment or award entered against you in a suit. To do so, you must submit a timely, written request to the General Counsel, with appropriate documentation, including copies of any pleadings, verdict, judgment, award, or settlement proposal. The General Counsel will decide all requests for representation or settlement, and will forward to the Administrator, with the accompanying documentation and a recommendation, any requests for indemnification.
( c ) Any payments by SBA under this section will be contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23

                     [LETTERHEAD OF PUGH & COMPANY, P.C.]


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors and Shareholders
United Tennessee Bankshares, Inc.
Newport, Tennessee

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No.
333-41571 and 333-82803) on Form S-8 of United Tennessee Bankshares, Inc. of
our report dated March 20, 2000, relating to the consolidated statements of
financial condition of United Tennessee Bankshares, Inc. and subsidiary as of
December 31, 1999 and 1998, and the related consolidated statements of income,
comprehensive income, changes in shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1999, which report
appears in the December 31, 1999 annual report on Form 10-KSB of United
Tennessee Bankshares, Inc. and subsidiary.


                                            /s/ Pugh & Company, P.C.
                                            Certified Public Accountants
                                            Knoxville, Tennessee
                                            March 24, 2000
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Intervals Between Physical Examinations for Respirator User

## HPPOS-219 PDR-9111220025

See the letter from M. C. Thadani to H. W. Keiser (Senior Vice President-Nuclear, Pennsylvania Power and Light Company) dated May 30, 1989.

This letter states that physical examinations for respirator users are prescribed every 12 months by 10 CFR 20.103 (c) (2). However, a physical examination conducted every 9-15 months, provided that three consecutive exams do not exceed 39 months, is consistent with NRC staff interpretations of interval requirements. This health physics position also applies to "new" 10 CFR 20.1703 (a) (3) (v).

A written request was made for exemption from the requirement of 10 CFR 20.103 (c) (2) regarding the 12 month time interval for physical examinations to assure an individual is physically able to use respiratory protective equipment. Specifically, Pennsylvania Power and Light Company requested an exemption to permit physical examinations every 9-15 months, providing that the total time of the three consecutive physical examinations does not exceed 39 months.

It was determined that the request was consistent with the NRC staff's position on implementation of the time interval requirements of 10 CFR 20.103 (c) (2), and therefore, an exemption was not needed.

**Regulatory references:** 10 CFR 20.103, 10 CFR 20.1703

**Subject codes:** 1.1, 8.10

**Applicability:** All

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, October 18, 2017
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of--

Turner Construction Company 

Under Contract No. N40080-16-C-0156 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 62071 

Robert J. Symon, Esq. 

Amy E. Garber, Esq. 

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP 

Washington, DC 

Craig D. Jensen, Esq. 

Navy Chief Trial Attorney 

Ellen M. Evans, Esq. 

Julie C. Ruggieri, Esq. 

Trial Attorneys 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

This appeal was docketed on May 17, 2019. On July 16, 2019, prior to the filing 

of a complaint, appellant filed a motion to dismiss this appeal without prejudice. The 

government does not object to appellant's request. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed 

from the Board's docket without prejudice. 

Dated: August 22, 2019 

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 No. 62071, Appeal of Turner 

Construction Company, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

PA ULLA K. GATES-LEWIS 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals