alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 4300.44 Are there any major restrictions on my grazing permit that I might otherwise think are allowed? Yes. You must not: ( a ) Enclose roads, trails and highways as to disturb public travel there;
( b ) Interfere with existing communication lines or other improvements;
( c ) Prevent legal hunting, fishing or trapping on the land;
( d ) Prevent access by persons, such as miners and mineral prospectors, entitled to lawfully enter; or
( e ) Graze reindeer without complying with applicable State and Federal laws on livestock quarantine and sanitation.
#### In the Matter of the Application of L. Metcalfe Walling for Admission to Practice as an Attorney. (From the State of Rhode Island.)

— Application granted. Present — Lewis, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
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. 96-138 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, October 10, 1996)

NRC'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE

TO MEET OCTOBER 22-23 IN ROCKVILLE, MD

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on

Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will meet October 22-23 in Rockville,

Maryland.

The meeting, which is open to the public, will begin at 8:30

a.m. each day in Room T-2B3 of the Two White Flint North

building, at 11545 Rockville Pike.

During the two-day session, the committee will review an NRC

staff draft technical position that will provide criteria for

screening on-site burials of radioactive waste permitted by

former NRC requirements to determine if further remediation is

required. NRC staff also will brief the committee on the

direction-setting issue papers produced as part of the agency's

strategic assessment of regulatory activities. The committee

also will receive its annual training on government ethics

requirements, proposed reports, and consider topics for future

consideration.

(ACNW schedules are subject to change. Anyone planning to

attend should confirm the schedule the day before the meeting by

calling (301) 415-5024.)

Although its meetings are open, they are not part of the

NRC's public hearing process. The ACNW was established in 1988

to advise the Commission on all aspects of nuclear waste

management. While anyone may attend the meeting, the committee

will consider only oral or written statements arranged in advance

and limited to specific matters set forth in a Notice of Meeting

published in the December 6, 1995 edition of the Federal

Register.

####

(NOTE TO EDITORS: The use of self-contained tape recorders in the

meeting room is permitted during the open portions of the meeting when a

transcript is being kept. The use of still, motion picture and television

cameras - the physical installationand presence of which will not interfere

with the course of the meeting - will be permitted both before and after the

meeting, during any recess, and, at the direction of the committee chairman,

while the meeting is in session.)
### §1113. Limitation of actions

No action may be commenced under this subchapter with respect to a fiduciary's breach of any responsibility, duty, or obligation under this part, or with respect to a violation of this part, after the earlier of—

(1) six years after (A) the date of the last action which constituted a part of the breach or violation, or (B) in the case of an omission the latest date on which the fiduciary could have cured the breach or violation, or

(2) three years after the earliest date on which the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the breach or violation;

except that in the case of fraud or concealment, such action may be commenced not later than six years after the date of discovery of such breach or violation.

(Pub. L. 93–406, title I, §413, Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 889; Pub. L. 100–203, title IX, §9342(b), Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–371; Pub. L. 101–239, title VII, §§7881(j)(4), 7894(e)(5), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2443, 2450.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1989—Pub. L. 101–239, §7894(e)(5), struck out "(a)" before "No action".

Par. (2). Pub. L. 101–239, §7881(j)(4), struck out comma after "violation".

1987—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 100–203 struck out "(A)" after "date" and struck out "or (B) on which a report from which he could reasonably be expected to have obtained knowledge of such breach or violation was filed with the Secretary under this subchapter".

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

#### Effective Date of 1989 Amendment

Amendment by section 7881(j)(4) of Pub. L. 101–239 effective, except as otherwise provided, as if included in the provision of the Pension Protection Act, Pub. L. 100–203, §§9302–9346, to which such amendment relates, see section 7882 of Pub. L. 101–239, set out as a note under section 401 of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

Amendment by section 7894(e)(5) of Pub. L. 101–239 effective, except as otherwise provided, as if originally included in the provision of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, Pub. L. 93–406, to which such amendment relates, see section 7894(i) of Pub. L. 101–239, set out as a note under section 1002 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1987 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–203 applicable with respect to reports required to be filed after Dec. 31, 1987, see section 9342(d)(1) of Pub. L. 100–203, set out as a note under section 1132 of this title.
Editorial Note on Part 4
Editorial Note: For additional information, see related documents published at 47 FR 57369, Dec. 23, 1982; 48 FR 17101, Apr. 21, 1983; and 48 FR 29096, June 24, 1983.

§ 4.10 How does the Administrator make efforts to accommodate intergovernmental concerns? ( a ) If a state process provides a state process recommendation to FEMA through its single point of contact, the Administrator either: ( 1 ) Accepts the recommendation;
( 2 ) Reaches a mutually agreeable solution with the state process; or
( 3 ) Provides the single point of contact with such written explanation of the decision, as the Administrator in his or her discretion deems appropriate. The Administrator may also supplement the written explanation by providing the explanation to the single point of contact by telephone, other telecommunication, or other means.
( b ) In any explanation under paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the Administrator informs the single point of contact that: ( 1 ) FEMA will not implement its decision for at least ten days after the single point of contact receives the explanation; or
( 2 ) The Administrator has reviewed the decision and determined that, because of unusual circumstances, the waiting period of at least ten days is not feasible.
( c ) For purposes of computing the waiting period under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a single point of contact is presumed to have received written notification 5 days after the date of mailing of such notification.
#### § 65.15 List of communities submitting new technical data.

This section provides a cumulative list of communities where modifications of the base flood elevation determinations have been made because of submission of new scientific or technical data. Due to the need for expediting the modifications, the revised map is already in effect and the appeal period commences on or about the effective date of the modified map. An interim rule, followed by a final rule, will list the revised map effective date, local repository and the name and address of the Chief Executive Officer of the community. The map(s) is (are) effective for both flood plain management and insurance purposes.

[51 FR 30317, Aug. 25, 1986. Redesignated at 53 FR 16279, May 6, 1988, and further redesignated at 54 FR 33551, Aug. 15, 1989. Redesignated at 59 FR 53599, Oct. 25, 1994]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For references to FR pages showing lists of eligible communities, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Region II

61 Forsyth Street, S. W.

Suite 23T85

Atlanta, GA 30303

No: II-97-37 FOR IMMEDIATE

RELEASE

Contact: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 (Wednesday, May 7,

1997)

Roger Hannah (404) 562-4417

NRC STAFF ISSUES ASSESSMENT OF PERFORMANCE AT ST. LUCIE

Overall Performance Good But Declines In Two Areas

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued a

Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) report for the

St. Lucie nuclear power plant, operated by Florida Power & Light

Company near Ft. Pierce, which evaluates overall performance as

good but shows decline in two of four functional areas assessed.

In a report issued May 5, the NRC said four functional areas

of performance at St. Lucie were assessed during a period from

January 7, 1996 through March 29, 1997 as being in one of three

categories. The NRC considers Category 1 as superior, Category 2

as good and Category 3 as acceptable.

The report says St. Lucie performance in the functional areas

of Operations and Maintenance remained in Category 2 (good), as in

the plant's last assessment, but declined from Category 1

(superior) to Category 2 in the functional areas of Engineering and

Plant Support.

The NRC attributed the decline from superior to good in

Engineering to weaknesses in plant modification preparations,

computer software quality verification and validation, and in

identification and correction of some long-standing design control

deficiencies. In the area of Plant Support, the NRC said radiation

protection program implementation was good, but there was a

significant decline in the plant's radiological emergency

preparedness program early in the assessment period. The agency

said the plant security program was generally effective, but some

problems were observed with access control.

NRC officials said plant management actions taken to address

weaknesses were considered reasonable and called for continued

management attention to sustain lasting improvements.
NRC officials will discuss details of the report in a meeting

with company officials at the St. Lucie plant at 1:30 p.m. on

Monday, May 19. The meeting will be open to observation by the

public, and NRC officials will be available at its conclusion to

answer questions from interested observers.

#
----

Notice inviting applications for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons in block Q14 of the Dutch continental shelf

(2005/C 331/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The Minister for Economic Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands hereby gives notice that an application has been received for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons in block Q14 as indicated on the map appended as Annex 3 to the Mining Regulation (Mijnbouwregeling) (Government Gazette (Staatscourant) 2002, No 245).

With reference to Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons and the publication required by Article 15 of the Mining Act (Mijnbouwwet) (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees (Staatsblad) 2002, No 542), the Minister for Economic Affairs hereby invites interested parties to submit an application for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons in block Q14.

The Minister for Economic Affairs is the competent authority for the granting of authorisations. The criteria, conditions and requirements referred to in Articles 5(1), 5(2) and 6(2) of the Directive are set out in the Mining Act (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees 2002, No 542).

Applications may be submitted during the 13 weeks following the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union and should be sent to the Minister for Economic Affairs, for the attention of the Director of Energy Production, Prinses Beatrixlaan 5, The Hague, Netherlands, and marked ‘personal’. Applications submitted after the expiry of this period will not be considered.

A decision on the applications will be taken not later than 12 months after the period has expired.

Further information can be obtained from the following telephone number (31-70) 379 66 94.

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-1558-DR]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of West Virginia (FEMA-1558-DR), dated September 20, 2004, and related determinations.

# DATES:

Effective October 8, 2004.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of West Virginia is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 20, 2004:

Boone County for Public Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)

Michael D. Brown,

Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of Homeland Security.

[FR Doc. 04-23327 Filed 10-18-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### §§ 136.141-136.148 [Reserved]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Edward M. MacKenna, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Present— Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Yan Yoorhis and Shientag, JJ.
### **CHAPTER 13—JOINT COMMITTEE ON CONGRESSIONAL OPERATIONS**
#### The People of the State of New York v. Warren S. Lutz.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted unless appellant complies with terms stated in order. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin; Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
#### William W. Wheatley, Treasurer, et al., appellees, v. Chamberlain Banking House et al., appellants.

Filed October 20, 1904.

No. 13,607.

Appeal from the district court for Johnson county: John S. Stull, Judge.

*Reversed.*

*H. F. Rose, W. B. Comstock*and *Ed M.*Tracy, for appellants.

*Jay C. Moore*and *Hugh La Master, contra.*

Letton, C.

The issues and facts in this case are substantially the same as those in the case of the *National Bank of Commerce of Kansas City v. Chamberlain, ante,*p. 169, and the proper disposition of this case is controlled by the decision in that. The judgment of the district court upon the issues in this proceeding should be reversed.

Ames and Oldham, CC., concur.

*571By the Court:

For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the district court is reversed and the cause remanded to the lower court for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion in *National Bank of Commerce of Kansas City v. Chamberlain.*

Reversed.
### §1908. Registry

#### (a) In general

To assist the Center in providing services to individuals who are deaf-blind, the Center may establish and maintain registries of such individuals in each of the regional field offices of the network of the Center.

#### (b) Voluntary provision of information

No individual who is deaf-blind may be required to provide information to the Center for any purpose with respect to a registry established under subsection (a).

#### (c) Nondisclosure

The Center (including the network of the Center) may not disclose information contained in a registry established under subsection (a) to any individual or organization that is not affiliated with the Center, unless the individual to whom the information relates provides specific written authorization for the Center to disclose the information.

#### (d) Privacy rights

The requirements of section 552a of title 5 (commonly known as the "Privacy Act of 1974") shall apply to personally identifiable information contained in the registries established by the Center under subsection (a), in the same manner and to the same extent as such requirements apply to a record of an agency.

#### (e) Removal of information

On the request of an individual, the Center shall remove all information relating to the individual from any registry established under subsection (a).

(Pub. L. 98–221, title II, §209, as added Pub. L. 105–220, title IV, §412(c), Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1241.)
EXHIBIT 4.2


 


THIRD AMENDMENT TO 


GOLD RESERVE KSOP PLAN


 


Pursuant to the powers
of amendment reserved in Section 13.01 of the Gold Reserve KSOP Plan (the “Plan”), effective as of May 18, 2021, the
Plan is hereby amended as set forth below. Capitalized terms used in this Amendment without definition shall have the meanings set forth
in the Plan.


 


1.            
Section A.2.a. of the Adoption Agreement is hereby restated
as follows:


 


2. Plan name:


 


		a.	Gold
Reserve Corporation 401(k) Savings Plan



 


2.            
Section H.2.a. of the Adoption Agreement is hereby restated
as follows:


 


2. Participant Self-Direction


 


		a.	Specify the extent to which the Plan permits Participation self-direction and indicate
the Plan’s intent to comply with ERISA section 404(c) (Section 9.02):



 


		i.	 ̈ All
Accounts and 404(c) applies



		ii.	 ̈ All
Accounts but 404(c) does not apply



		iii.	x Some
Accounts and 404(c) applies



		iv.	 ̈ Some
Accounts but 404(c) does not apply



		v.	 ̈ None



 


3.            
Section H.2.b. of the Adoption Agreement is hereby restated
as follows:


 


2. Participant Self-Direction


 


		a.	If Some Accounts is selected, a Participant may self-direct the following Accounts:



 


i.       
x Elective
Deferral Account


ii.     
x Matching
Contribution Account


iii.   
x Voluntary
Contribution Account


iv.    
x Profit
Sharing Contribution Account


v.      
x Qualified
Non-Elective Contribution Account


vi.    
x Rollover
Contribution Account


vii.  
x Transfer
Account


viii. x
Other: A Participant may self-direct the discretionary Profit
Sharing Contribution and the safe harbor Qualified Non-Elective Contribution made to the Plan with respect to the Plan Year ending December
31, 2020, only following the initial investment by the Trustees in employer securities.


 


4.            
Except as otherwise explicitly set forth herein, all provisions
of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.




    	 



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the undersigned has executed this amendment on behalf of the Plan Sponsor on this 18th day of May, 2021.


 


GOLD RESERVE CORPORATION


 


By: /s/ Rockne J. Timm


 


Title: President and Director
### §2654. Regulations

The Secretary of Labor shall prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out subchapter I and this subchapter not later than 120 days after February 5, 1993.

(Pub. L. 103–3, title IV, §404, Feb. 5, 1993, 107 Stat. 26.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective 6 months after Feb. 5, 1993, see section 405(b)(1) of Pub. L. 103–3, set out as a note under section 2601 of this title.
#### § 70.8 Premium refund after Letter of Map Amendment.

A Standard Flood Insurance Policyholder whose property has become the subject of a Letter of Map Amendment under this part may cancel the policy within the current policy year and receive a premium refund under the conditions set forth in § 62.5 of this subchapter.

[41 FR 46991, Oct. 26, 1976. Redesignated at 44 FR 31177, May 31, 1979]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO: 1:20-cv-22995

SILVA HARAPETI, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

CBS TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., et al.

Defendants.

________________________________________/

NOTICE OF MEDIATION CONFERENCE

The Plaintiff Silva Harapeti, by and through her undersigned counsel, hereby notifies the 

Court of the parties’ agreement to a mediator and a date, time, and location. The parties have 

designated Susan Eisenberg, Esq. as the mediator in this case. The parties have agreed to hold 

mediation on April 7, 2022 commencing at 10:00 A.M. remotely via Zoom Videoconference.

Dated: March 22, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Peter M. Hoogerwoerd

Peter M. Hoogerwoerd, Esq. 

Florida Bar No.:188239

Email: pmh@rgpattorneys.com

Case 1:20-cv-22995-KMW Document 148 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/22/2022 Page 1 of 1
#### Margaret O’Dowd and Another, Appellants, v. R. H. Casey, Inc., Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
#### Samuel Friedman, Plaintiff, v. Henry Kleinman et al., Defendants. Jasper Bruce, Appellant, v. Henry Kleinman, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

Under the unusual circumstances here involved the granting of the motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. The general rule that an action in the Municipal Court for property damages should be consolidated with an action in the Supreme Court for personal injuries, where it grows out of a common accident or the collision of two cars on a highway, is not inflexible. Here the accident apparently happened on private property, under circumstances that exclude any negligence on the part of the plaintiff in the Municipal Court action. The Supreme Court action involves a claim of negligence on the part of one person to the injury of another person or guest of the same name. The plaintiff in the Municipal Court action should not be projected into that type of controversy under the circumstances disclosed herein where his right to a trial of his property damage claim can be speedily had and where a consolidation would result in a denial of what, under the foregoing circumstances, is a substantial right. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 96; *Tepper*v. *Moss,*234 App. Div. 885.) Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ., concur.
### §2245. Certificate of trial judge admissible in evidence

On the hearing of an application for a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the legality of the detention of a person pursuant to a judgment the certificate of the judge who presided at the trial resulting in the judgment, setting forth the facts occurring at the trial, shall be admissible in evidence. Copies of the certificate shall be filed with the court in which the application is pending and in the court in which the trial took place.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 966.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

This section makes no substantive change in existing law. It is derived from H.R. 4232 introduced in the first session of the Seventy-ninth Congress by Chairman Sumners of the House Committee on the Judiciary. It clarifies existing law and promotes uniform procedure.