alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §§1511 to 1519. Repealed. Pub. L. 105–220, title I, §199(b)(2), Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1059

Section 1511, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §101, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1327; Pub. L. 99–496, §2, Oct. 16, 1986, 100 Stat. 1261; Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §111, Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1026, related to establishment of service delivery areas.

Section 1512, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §102, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1328; Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §112, Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1026, related to private industry councils.

Section 1513, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §103, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1330; Pub. L. 97–404, §1(a), Dec. 31, 1982, 96 Stat. 2026, related to functions of private industry councils.

Section 1514, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §104, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1331; Pub. L. 100–628, title VII, §714(a), Nov. 7, 1988, 102 Stat. 3255; Pub. L. 102–235, §4, Dec. 12, 1991, 105 Stat. 1807; Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §113, Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1027, related to job training plan.

Section 1515, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §105, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1332; Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §114, Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1030, related to review and approval of plan.

Section 1516, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §106, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1333; Pub. L. 97–404, §1(b), Dec. 31, 1982, 96 Stat. 2026; Pub. L. 99–496, §15(b), Oct. 16, 1986, 100 Stat. 1266; Pub. L. 100–418, title VI, §6304(a), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1538; Pub. L. 100–628, title VII, §§713(b), 714(b), Nov. 7, 1988, 102 Stat. 3255, 3256; Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §115(a), Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1030; Pub. L. 104–193, title I, §110(n)(2), Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2174, related to performance standards.

Section 1517, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §107, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1335; Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §116, Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1034, related to selection of service providers.

Section 1518, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §108, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1336; Pub. L. 97–404, §1(c), Dec. 31, 1982, 96 Stat. 2026; Pub. L. 99–496, §15(c), Oct. 16, 1986, 100 Stat. 1266; Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §117, Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1035, related to limitation on certain costs.

Section 1519, Pub. L. 97–300, title I, §109, as added Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §118, Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1036, related to recapture and reallotment of unobligated funds.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective July 1, 2000, see section 199(c)(2)(B) of Pub. L. 105–220, set out as a note under section 1501 of this title.
###### Editorial Note on Part 10

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### §§ 10.115-10.119 [Reserved]
#### §§ 206.152-206.160 [Reserved]
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. 98-176 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Monday, September 28, 1998)

NRC PROPOSES REVISIONS TO ITS REGULATIONS

FOR MAKING CHANGES TO LICENSED FACILITIES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to revise several sections of its

rules that define the conditions under which nuclear power plants and spent fuel

storage facility licensees may make changes in their facilities or conduct tests and

experiments without prior NRC approval.

Current NRC regulations (Parts 50, 52 and 72 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal

Regulations) permit such licensees to make these changes and to conduct such tests if

they do not present what the regulations call an “unreviewed safety question” or require

a change in the technical specifications of the facility’s license. The rule change now

under consideration came about as the result of an NRC staff review of existing

regulatory processes, directed by the Commission because of concerns about so-called

“50.59" changes at some plants. The staff concluded from this review that, although

existing regulations have generally given licensees needed flexibility, problems have

arisen from differing rule interpretations by the NRC staff and the nuclear industry.

In drafting the proposed rule, the NRC staff has considered public comments

received last year after draft regulatory guidance was published on this subject. As a

result, the amendments would clarify specifically which changes, tests or experiments

require evaluation, and revise the criteria that determine when NRC approval is needed

before such changes can be made. The proposed rule would also add definitions for

terms that have been subject to differing interpretations.

The proposed rule will be published in an upcoming issue of the Federal Register

for public comment and will be available on the NRC Homepage at:

www.nrc.gov/NRC/rule.html.

Comments should be filed within 60 days after publication. They should be sent

to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001.

ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. Comments may also be filed

electronically as described in the Federal Register notice.

##
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 120.705 What is a Specialized Intermediary?

At the end of an Intermediary's first year of participation in the program, SBA will determine whether it qualifies as a Specialized Intermediary. An Intermediary qualifies as a Specialized Intermediary if it maintains a portfolio of Microloans averaging $10,000 or less. Specialized Intermediaries qualify for more favorable interest rates on SBA loans. If, after the first year, an Intermediary qualifies as a Specialized Intermediary, the special interest rate is applied retroactively to SBA loans made to the Intermediary. After the first year SBA will determine an Intermediary's qualifications as a Specialized Intermediary annually, based on its lending practices during the term of its participation in the program. Specialized Intermediaries also qualify for a greater amount of technical assistance grant funding.

[61 FR 3235, Jan. 31, 1996, as amended at 66 FR 47878, Sept. 14, 2001]
Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 1 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 2 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 3 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 4 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 5 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 6 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 7 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 8 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 9 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 10 of 11

Case 4:20-cv-10075-XXXX   Document 1   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2020   Page 11 of 11
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Fact Sheet 2008-3037

May 2008 Printed on recycled paper

California Water Science Center

Sacramento

RESEARCH TO MORE EFFECTIVELY MANAGE Los Angeles Basin

CRITICAL GROUND-WATER BASINS

As the regional management agency for two of the most heavily used 

ground-water basins in California, the Water Replenishment District 

of Southern California (WRD) plays a vital role in sheparding the 

water resources of southern Los Angeles County. WRD is using the 

results of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) studies to help more 

effectively manage the Central and West Coast basins in the most 

efficient, cost-effective way.

In partnership with WRD, the USGS is using the latest research tools 

to study the geohydrology and geochemistry of the two basins. 

USGS scientists are:

 • Drilling and collecting detailed data from over 40 multiple-well 

 monitoring sites,

 • Conducting regional geohydrologic and geochemical analyses,

Developing and applying a computer simulation model of 

regional ground-water flow.

USGS science is providing a more detailed understanding of groundwater flow and quality. This research has enabled WRD to more 

effectively manage the basins. It has helped the District improve the 

efficiency of its spreading ponds and barrier injection wells, which 

replenish the aquifers and control seawater intrusion into the 

ground-water system.

USGS scientists 

prepare a 

drilling core for 

further analysis

In ponds near Pico Rivera in Los Angeles,

water is infiltrated into the ground to replenish 

aquifers when water levels decline due to pumping. The water in the ponds may be local surface 

water, imported water from either the Colorado 

River, northern California, or reclaimed water.

“USGS research has led to a much 

greater understanding of the groundwater basins than we have ever had 

before. With better 

understanding comes 

better management.” 

Ted Johnson, 

Chief Hydrogeologist,

Water Replenishment District

of Southern California

For more information about the 

USGS Cooperative Water Program, contact:

 Donna Schiffer, Acting Director, 

U.S. Geological Survey, 

California Water Science Center

916/278-3000 schiffer@usgs.gov

http://water.usgs.gov/coop
§ 333.18 Limitations on placing rated orders. ( a ) *General limitations on placing rated orders.* A person may not place a DO or DX rated order pursuant to this part unless the person is in receipt of a rated order, has been explicitly authorized to do so by FEMA or a Delegate Agency or is otherwise permitted to do so by this part.
( b ) *Specific limitations on placing rated orders.* Rated orders may not be used to obtain: ( 1 ) Delivery on a date earlier than needed;
( 2 ) A greater quantity of the item than needed, except to obtain a minimum procurable quantity. Separate rated orders may not be placed solely for the purpose of obtaining minimum procurable quantities on each order if the minimum procurable quantity would be sufficient to cover more than one rated order;
( 3 ) Items in advance of the receipt of a rated order, except as specifically authorized by FEMA (see § 333.21(c) for information on obtaining authorization for a priority rating in advance of a rated order); or
( 4 ) Any of the following items unless specific priority rating authority has been obtained from FEMA, a Delegate Agency, or the Department of Commerce: ( i ) Items for plant improvement, expansion, or construction, unless they will be physically incorporated into a construction project covered by a rated order; or
( ii ) Production or construction equipment or items to be used for the manufacture of production equipment (for information on requesting priority rating authority, see § 333.21).
( 5 ) Any items related to the development of chemical or biological warfare capabilities or the production of chemical or biological weapons, unless such development or production has been authorized by the President or the Secretary of Defense.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406

Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

I-99-106 December 29, 1999

Contact: Diane Screnci (610/337-5330) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC, UTILITY TO DISCUSS YANKEE ROWE DECOMMISSIONING WORK

Ongoing decommissioning activities at the Yankee Rowe nuclear power plant will be

discussed by plant officials and Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff on Wednesday, January 5.

Yankee Atomic Electric Co. is the owner of the Rowe, Mass., reactor, which was permanently

shut down in October 1991.

The meeting is scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. in the Public Meeting Room at the

NRC’s Region I office, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. It will be open to the public for

observation.

Specifically, Yankee Atomic officials and NRC staff will discuss the company’s plans

for the coming year, including decontamination and dismantling work at the site and a project

that calls for the storage of spent nuclear fuel in dry cask units.

#
#### Nathan M. Guinsburg, Respondent, v. William J. Riley and Frank K. Barnes, First Names Fictitious, etc., Trading as Riley & Barnes, Impleaded with Ludwig Littauer, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
### part 6—enforcement
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov

Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 00-069 April 19, 2000

NRC ADVISORY JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE

TO MEET IN ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND, ON MAY 4

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

(ACRS) and Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) Joint Subcommittee has scheduled a

meeting on May 4 in Rockville, Maryland.

The joint subcommittee will discuss the development of risk-informed regulation in the NRC’s

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, including risk-informing fuel cycle programs,

integrated safety assessments, byproduct material risk analysis, dry cask storage risk analysis, the

results of a public workshop on the use of risk information in regulating the use of nuclear materials

and related matters. It will then formulate proposed positions and actions for deliberation by the full

committees of the ACRS and ACNW.

The meeting, which will be open to the public, will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s

Two White Flint North Building, at 11545 Rockville Pike, from 8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of

business.

Those who seek additional information on the meeting or schedule changes should contact

either John Sorensen, at 301-415-7372, or Mike Markley, at 301-415-6885.

Other aspects of the meeting are described in the April 18 edition of the Federal Register.

ACRS meeting notices, transcripts and letter reports are available on the internet, at

http://www.nrc.gov/ACRSACNW.

###
#### In the Matter of John Case et al., Doing Business under the Name of Case & Smith Lumber Company, Judgment Creditors, Respondents, v. Paul V. Panzarella, Judgment Debtor, Appellant. Anderson Brick & Supply Co., Inc., Intervener, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Martin, P. J., taking no part.
### Part B—Training and Demonstration Projects
### §158a. Temporary possession of gifts of money or securities to Library of Congress; investment

In the case of a gift of money or securities offered to the Library of Congress, if, because of conditions attached by the donor or similar considerations, expedited action is necessary, the Librarian of Congress may take temporary possession of the gift, subject to approval under section 156 of this title. The gift shall be receipted for and invested, reinvested, or retained as provided in section 157 of this title, except that—

(1) a gift of securities may not be invested or reinvested; and

(2) any investment or reinvestment of a gift of money shall be made in an interest bearing obligation of the United States or an obligation guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United States.

If the gift is not so approved within the 12-month period after the Librarian so takes possession, the principal of the gift shall be returned to the donor and any income earned during that period shall be available for use with respect to the Library of Congress as provided by law.

(Mar. 3, 1925, ch. 423, §2 (par.), as added Pub. L. 102–246, §3, Feb. 18, 1992, 106 Stat. 31.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section is comprised of fourth par. of section 2 of act Mar. 3, 1925, as added by Pub. L. 102–246. First, second, and third pars. of section 2 are classified to sections 156, 157, and 158 of this title, respectively.
Exhibit 10.10


 


 


 


March 24, 2021 


 


R. Michael Dudley

1241 Adams Street, Apt. 603


Boston, MA 02124


 


Dear Michael,


 


On the date of this letter agreement, you and TransCode Therapeutics,
Inc. (the “Company”) entered into an Employment Agreement. This letter is to confirm our mutual understanding that these agreements
become effective upon the Company’s receipt of gross proceeds of $5 million or more from issuances of equity or convertible debt
or from partnering arrangements.


 


Please sign in the space provided below signifying your understanding
of and accord with the effectiveness of the Employment Agreement as set forth in the prior paragraph, then return one signed original
of this letter agreement to the Company. You should retain a copy of this letter agreement as executed with your copy of your Employment
Agreement.


 


Should you have any questions, please contact me. 


 


Sincerely,


 


	/s/ Thomas A. Fitzgerald	 




 


Thomas A. Fitzgerald


CFO 


 





	Read and accepted:	 	/s/ R. Michael Dudley	 	Date: March 24, 2021
	 	 	R. Michael Dudley	 	 



 


TRA N SCODE THERA PEUTI CS, IN C.• 6 LIBERTY S QUA RE #2382• BOS TON , MA 02109
§ 111.59 Preliminary proceedings. ( a ) *Opportunity to participate.* The processing Center will advise the broker of his opportunity to participate in preliminary proceedings with an opportunity to avoid formal proceedings against his license or permit.
( b ) *Notice of preliminary proceedings.* The processing Center will serve upon the broker, in the manner set forth in § 111.63, written notice that: ( 1 ) Transmits a copy of the proposed statement of charges;
( 2 ) Informs the broker that formal proceedings are available to him;
( 3 ) Informs the broker that sections 554 and 558, Title 5, United States Code, will be applicable if formal proceedings are necessary;
( 4 ) Invites the broker to show cause why formal proceedings should not be instituted;
( 5 ) Informs the broker that he may make submissions and demonstrations of the character contemplated by the cited statutory provisions;
( 6 ) Invites any negotiation for settlement of the complaint or charge that the broker deems it desirable to enter into;
( 7 ) Advises the broker of his right to be represented by counsel;
( 8 ) Specifies the place where the broker may respond in writing; and
( 9 ) Advises the broker that the response must be received within 30 calendar days of the date of the notice.
[T.D. 00-17, 65 FR 13891, Mar. 15, 2000, as amended by CBP Dec. 22-21, 87 FR 63319, Oct. 18, 2022]
**Exhibit** **31.2**
 
 Certification
Pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)
 As
Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
 Sarbanes
- Oxley Act of 2002
 
 I,
Richard K Brock, certify that:
 
 1.  I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of PLM Equipment Growth &
Income Fund VII (the Registrant).
 
 2.  Based on
my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report.
 
 3.  Based on
my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.
 
 4.  The
Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:
 
 a)  designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;
 
 b)  evaluated
the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
 
 c)  disclosed
in this quarterly report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
 
 5.  The
Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the
Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 a)  all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely 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 other employees who
have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal controls over financial
reporting.
 
 
 
 
 Date: May
10, 2005  By:  /s/
Richard K Brock
 Richard K
Brock
 Chief
Financial Officer
 (Principal Financial
Officer)
§ 206.47 Cost-share adjustments. ( a ) We pay seventy-five percent (75%) of the eligible cost of permanent restorative work under section 406 of the Stafford Act and for emergency work under section 403 and section 407 of the Stafford Act, unless the Federal share is increased under this section.
( b ) We recommend an increase in the Federal cost share from seventy-five percent (75%) to not more than ninety percent (90%) of the eligible cost of permanent work under section 406 and of emergency work under section 403 and section 407 whenever a disaster is so extraordinary that actual Federal obligations under the Stafford Act, excluding FEMA administrative cost, meet or exceed a qualifying threshold of: ( 1 ) Beginning in 1999 and effective for disasters declared on or after May 21, 1999, $75 per capita of State population;
( 2 ) Effective for disasters declared after January 1, 2000, and through December 31, 2000, $85 per capita of State population;
( 3 ) Effective for disasters declared after January 1, 2001, $100 per capita of State population; and,
( 4 ) Effective for disasters declared after January 1, 2002 and for later years, $100 per capita of State population, adjusted annually for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published annually by the Department of Labor.
( c ) When we determine whether to recommend a cost-share adjustment we consider the impact of major disaster declarations in the State during the preceding twelve-month period.
( d ) If warranted by the needs of the disaster, we recommend up to one hundred percent (100%) Federal funding for emergency work under section 403 and section 407, including direct Federal assistance, for a limited period in the initial days of the disaster irrespective of the per capita impact.
[64 FR 19498, Apr. 21, 1999]