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

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5328 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to extend 

terminal lakes assistance. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 20, 2022 

Ms. CORTEZ MASTO introduced the following bill; which was read twice, 

considered, read the third time, and passed 

A BILL 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 

of 2002 to extend terminal lakes assistance. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TERMINAL LAKES ASSISTANCE. 

4 Section 2507(f) of the Farm Security and Rural In5 vestment Act of 2002 (16 U.S.C. 3839bb–6(f)) is amend6 ed by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2025’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
No: 23-078 December 12, 2023 

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200 

NRC to Issue Construction Permit 

for Kairos Hermes Test Reactor in Tennessee

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has directed the staff to issue a construction permit 

to Kairos Power for the company’s proposed Hermes non-power test reactor in Oak Ridge, 

Tennessee. The permit authorizes Kairos to build a 35-megawatt thermal reactor that would use 

molten salt to cool the reactor core. 

Following a mandatory hearing held on Oct. 19, the Commission authorized the agency’s 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to issue the permit, having found the staff’s review of the 

Kairos application adequate to make the necessary regulatory safety and environmental findings. 

The staff expects to issue the permit by the end of the month. 

Kairos submitted its application to build the Hermes reactor in 2021. The test reactor, 

which will not generate electricity, is intended to provide operational data to support the 

development of a larger version for commercial power. 

The NRC issued the final environmental impact statement for the site in August 2023 and 

the final safety evaluation for the permit in June 2023. 

Kairos will have to submit a separate application for an operating license before it could 

operate the Hermes reactor.
il

-·

. 

0 

<:> 

c:, 

... 

"' 

.

' 

.. 

0

0 0 

C> • ·c::,. ""·

Raccoons 

in Yosemite 

Raccoons are adaptable 

and intelligent animals, 

and use their dexterous and 

sensitive front paws to forage 

for food such as insects, 

frogs, crayfish, and plant 

matter. Like bears, they can 

easily learn to use human 

development as a food 

source. This causes many 

problems for raccoons and 

people alike. Raccoons in 

Yosemite have been known 

to go as far as to unzip tents 

or run off with backpacks to 

eat any food forgotten 

nside- another reason to 

store your food in a bearresistant food locker when 

camping! 

Food left out around human 

development can cause 

unusually high populations of 

raccoons to collect where 

people spend time. This is 

problematic because of the 

changes it causes to 

raccoons, but also for human 

safety. Not only do 

Yosemite's raccoons can 

carry diseases dangerous 

to people, but the presence 

of raccoons (and other 

smaller mammals, including 

squirrels) in turn attracts 

arger predators like 

mountain lions and coyotes. 

Store your food properly, 

never feed or approach 

any wildlife, and avoid 

leaving 

"microtrash" (scraps from 

cooking, etc.) behind! 

These steps can help to keep 

raccoons safe and you 

healthy.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-80900-CIV-SINGHAL/MCCABE

ALEXANDER BRANDON 

ESTRADA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

KILOLO KIJAKAZI,

1 Acting 

Commissioner of Social Security 

Administration

Defendant.

___________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS MATTER has come before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for 

summary judgment (DE [28] [31]), which were referred to Magistrate Judge Ryon M. 

McCabe for Report and Recommendation (DE [22]). Judge McCabe issued a Report and 

Recommendation on August 19, 2022 (DE [32]). The Court has reviewed the entire file 

and record and has made a de novo review of the issues. No objections to the magistrate 

judge’s Report and Recommendation having been filed, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (DE [32]) is 

AFFIRMED and ADOPTED.

2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (DE [28]) is DENIED.

1 Kilolo Kijakazi has been appointed Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. 

Consequently, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), Kilolo Kijakazi is substituted for Andrew 

Saul as Defendant in this case.

Case 9:20-cv-80900-AHS Document 33 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2022 Page 1 of 2
2

3. The Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (DE [31]) is GRANTED.

4. The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision is AFFIRMED.

5. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. Any other pending 

motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 8th day of 

September 2022.

Copies furnished counsel via CM/ECF

Case 9:20-cv-80900-AHS Document 33 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2022 Page 2 of 2
Case 0:00-cr-06218-NCR Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/11/2002 Page 1 of 2
Case 0:00-cr-06218-NCR Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/11/2002 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit
32.1




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 Quarterly report of Fellows Energy Ltd. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, George S. Young,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities and 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.




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Fellows Energy Ltd. and will be retained by Fellows Energy Ltd. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




Date:
      April 14, 2008
            By:
      /s/ GEORGE S. YOUNGName:
      George S. YoungTitle:
      Chief Executive Officer
#### DAKOTA NATIONAL BANK, Respondent, v. LEE et al, Appellants.

(1*90 N.*W. 881.)

(File No. 5206.

Opinion filed December 12, 1922.)

Appeal and Error — Briefs—Appeal Not. Timely Perfected Deemed Abandoned.

Where no briefs, stipulations., or other papers were timely filed by appellants after filing notice of appeal, the appellant being in default, the order appealed from will be affirmed.

Appeal from. Circuit Court, Yankton County; Hon. Robert B. Tripp, Judge.

Action by the Dakota National Bank against Edward J. Lee and another. From the order entered, defendants appeal.

Affirmed.

/. L. *Meighen,*of Scotland, for Appellants.

*French, Orvis & French,*of Yankton, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

On August n, 1922, notice of appeal was filed in this court in the above-entitled action. Since that date no briefs, stipulations, or other papers have been filed by appellants. Appellants being in default, the appeal will be deemed abandoned, and the order appealed from will be affirmed.

Note — Reported in, 190 N. W. 881. See American Key-Numbered Digest, Appeal and Error, Key-No. 773(4), 3 C. J. 1607.
bCT' 0^X^2600-^1^$ 

November 9,2009 

Re: Adirondack Regional Airport / Cape Air - EAS renewal 

The Tupper Lake Chamber of Commerce wholeheartedly endorses the Cape Air 

application for continuing Essential Air Service to the Adirondack Regional Airport for a 

variety of reasons, all of them good. The air service itself has been terrific. Cape Air has 

made Boston the gateway to the world fi-om the North Country. Starting in Saranac Lake 

with a stop at Logan International Airport in Boston there are now many destinations in 

both the US and in the Caribbean and throughout the world that are available to the 

Adirondack traveler. Chamber members we personally know have used routes to 

Baltimore, CharlottCi, Fort Myers, Las Vegas, Seatde and San Di^o among others. This 

very convenient method of travel alleviates the 3 hour road trips to either Albany or 

Syracuse to begin a flight that often requires additional connections before effectively 

accessing flights that reach anywhere in the woridi 

Equally important is the fact that Cape Air brings tourists to us here in the Adirondacks 

and enhances tourism opportunities for the entu-e North Country area. Cape Air is 

ah-eady well noted for its exemplary customer service and the customer satisfaction is 

imdoubtedly at an all-time high. The continuance of the Cape Air EAS contract is 

something we fiilly endorse and hope to see become a continuing reality. 

Sincerely, 

Marti Mozdzier 

Executive Director 

Tupper Lake Chaniber of Coimnerce 

121 Park Street, P. O. Box 987 

Tupper Lake, NY 12986 

518-359-3328 phone fax 518-359-2434
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alberto CRUZ-RANGEL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40966.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 24, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern Dis*302trict of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Philip G. Gallagher, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

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

*

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

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: 

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell. 

Estimated Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

(e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor+ u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

Determine origin of 

manufacture of 

lower fuselage tie 1.0 68 rods and nuts, and 

time of last 

replacement 

The known number of products in compliance: 

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $5,780 

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $ 

On-Condition Costs: G 

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., lnspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

testing, and close- replacement) up) 

9 
remove and replace 

lateral fuselage tie 30.0 $825 rods and attaching 

nuts 

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): 

Executive Order 12866: 

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action"? G 

YES* D NO [gl 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? G 

YES* D NO [gl 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexability Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer. G 

YES D NO [gl 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? G 

YES* D NO [gl 

*Explanation: 

10
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 19, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23263]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-7828-5]


Notice of Proposed Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs 
Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and 
Liability Act (CERCLA) as Amended, Bernstein Salvage Superfund Site, 
Oskaloosa, IA, Docket No. CERCLA-07-2004-0158

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed agreement for past response costs, Bernstein 
Salvage Site, Oskaloosa, Iowa.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a proposed agreement regarding the 
Bernstein Salvage Superfund Site located in Oskaloosa, Iowa, was signed 
by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on July 26, 
2004, and by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) on September 
15, 2004.

DATES: EPA will receive, for a period of thirty (30) days from the date 
of this publication, written comments relating to the proposed 
agreement.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Barbara L. Peterson, Senior 
Assistant Regional Counsel, United States Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region VII, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101 and 
should refer to: In the Matter of Bernstein Salvage Superfund Site, 
Oskaloosa, Iowa, Union Pacific Railroad (Settling Party), Docket No. 
CERCLA-07-2004-0158.
    The proposed agreement may be examined or obtained in person or by 
mail from Barbara L. Peterson, United States Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region VII, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101, (913) 
551-7277.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposed agreement concerns the 
Bernstein Salvage Superfund Site, located in Oskaloosa, Iowa, and is 
made and entered into by EPA and Union Pacific Railroad (Settling 
Party).
    In response to the release of hazardous substances at or from the 
Site, EPA undertook response actions at the Site pursuant to Section 
104 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9604. In performing these response actions, 
EPA incurred response costs at or in connection with the Site.
    Pursuant to Section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a), the 
Settling Party is a responsible party and is liable for response costs 
incurred or to be incurred at or in connection with the Site. This 
Agreement requires the Settling Party to pay to the Hazardous Substance 
Superfund the principal sum of $100,000 in reimbursement of Past 
Response Costs, plus an additional sum for interest and will resolve 
the Settling Party's civil liability for these costs. The proposed 
agreement also includes a covenant not to sue the Settling Party 
pursuant to Section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a).

    Dated: September 29, 2004.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region VII.
[FR Doc. 04-23263 Filed 10-18-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Eddy Gosschalk et al., Copartners Doing Business as Herman Gosschalk, Inc., Respondents, and Otto Gerdau Co., Appellant. In the Matter of the Arbitration between Otto Gerdau Co., Appellant, and Eddy Gosschalk et al., Copartners Doing Business as Herman Gosschalk, Inc., Respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

This appeal involves the arbitration of disputes arising out of a contract for the sale of a quantity of pepper.

The Special Term granted the respondents’ application to vacate the arbitration award for alleged misconduct of the arbitrators and denied the appellant’s cross motion for confirmation. The appellant, however, appeals from the order only insofar as it provides for vacatur of the award.

We think that the order should be reversed so far as appealed from and the award reinstated. The issues as to the alleged breach of contract and the amount of damages were properly for the determination of the arbitrators and the arbitration committee under the contract and rules of the American Spice Trade Association. These rules provide for the right to appeal any decision of the arbitrators to the Arbitration Committee of the Association. In our opinion any error of the arbitrators in refusing to hear the respondents’ witness and conducting an independent inquiry into market conditions was cured when the arbitration committee on appeal from the arbitrators’ decision took the respondents’ proof on the subject of market value.

While the statute provides for confirmation on a motion for an order to confirm an arbitration award unless the same is vacated, modified or corrected (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1461), we are not at liberty to direct confirmation in the circumstances of this case despite reversal of so much of the order as vacated the award. The whole order was appealable under the present statute (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1467). The appellant, however, has failed to appeal from the portion of the order denying confirmation. The notice of appeal expressly limits our review to so much of the order as vacated the award. Accordingly, this court may not direct confirmation of the award with the unappealed order of Special Term denying such relief outstanding.

The appeal, however, should not be dismissed, as the respondents contend. The reversal of the order vacating the award will have the effect of reinstatement, and the award may stand even though not confirmed.

The order should be reversed, so far as appealed from, with $20 costs and disbursements.

Glennon, J. P., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Order, so far as appealed from, unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion denied. Settle order on notice.
/AEXHIBIT
32





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 Amendment No. 1 to
the Annual Report of Track Group, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the
period ended September 30, 2019 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), Derek Cassell, Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer), and Peter K. Poli, Chief Financial
Officer (Principal Financial Officer), of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 results of
operations of the Company.








By:
/s/
Derek CassellDerek
CassellChief
Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer)By:
/s/
Peter K. PoliPeter
K. Poli,
Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal
Accounting Officer)








Dated:
January 28,
2020





This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to §906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the
Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Jeffrey L. Fluery

*Glenn E. Coe,*in support of the petition.

*John M. Massameno,*assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided April 23, 1986

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 6 Conn. App. 402, is denied.
#### Robert Gray ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHEROKEE COUNTY TEXAS; Bascom Bentley, The Honorable; Dwight Phifer, The Honorable; Hibernia Bank, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 05-40724.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided March 3, 2006.

Robert Gray Robinson, Bullard, TX, pro se.

Robert Scott Davis, Christi Johnson Kennedy, Flowers Davis, Tyler, TX, Cynthia L. Alexander, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Texas, Austin, TX, Gregory Aaron Fraser, Lindale, TX, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before KING, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiff-Appellant Robert Gray Robinson, proceeding pro se, purports to appeal several adverse rulings, the latest of which appears to be the April 20, 2005 Order of the Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Texas denying Robinson’s motion for a new trial, construed as a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). We affirm.

Our careful review of the record on appeal demonstrates that this case has a particularly long, convoluted, and — for the most part — meritless and frivolous history, including, without limitation, the addition and deletion of parties, both public and private, and several instances of removal and remand between state and federal courts. Also obvious from the record is the longstanding displeasure of the pro se plaintiff, apparently originating with a state law real estate foreclosure action, and growing exponentially from there.

At least as to those issues of this lengthy and tortured litigation that are implicated in today’s appeal, it is long since time to stop the twisting and turning and lay it to rest, once and for all. Now, therefore, for the reasons expressed in the several rulings of the district judge or the magistrate judge at issue here, each order, judgment, and ruling before us on appeal is, in every respect, affirmed.

In addition, Robinson is *cautioned*that, despite proceeding pro se and thus enjoying a bit more latitude from us than would retained or appointed counsel, no further pursuit of these matters will be tolerated. Any prolongation or continuation of any of the matters covered by our ruling on appeal today shall expose him to the full panoply of sanctions and penalties at our disposal for meritless, frivolous, or contumacious continuation of this litigation or *850any aspect thereof, in this or any other federal court of this circuit.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
1

To: Dockets EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0058 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790

From: Mary Johnson, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD

Date: August 26, 2010

Re: Minutes of Meeting Between EPA and Wisconsin – August 25, 2010

Meeting Participants

Wisconsin Participants:

DNR Secretary Matt Frank

DNR Deputy Secretary Al Shea 

Dept. of Ag, Trade and Consumer Protection Deputy Secretary Randy Romanski 

WI Paper Council President Jeff Landin 

We Energies Vice President of Environmental Kristine Krause 

We Energies Manager of Air Quality Terry Coughlin 

Alliant Energy Executive Vice President, General Counsel & Chief Administrative Officer Barbara Swan

Tanya Bork, Governor Doyle staff

Andrew Moyer, Governor Doyle staff

Tim Stum, Governor Doyle staff

Kathy Lip, Allient Energy

EPA participants:

Gina McCarthy

Don Zinger

Larry Elworth

Peter Tsirigotis

Cheryl Newton (R5)

Cate Hight

Meeting Summary

There was a conference call between EPA and Wisconsin on August 25, 2010, to discuss Wisconsin’s concerns 

regarding the recently proposed national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for industrial, commercial, 

and institutional boilers and process heaters located at major sources (the Boiler MACT) and for industrial, 

commercial, and institutional boilers located at area sources. EPA participants listened to Wisconsin’s concerns 

and asked clarifying questions.