alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1315. Rights and protections under Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act

#### (a) Worker adjustment and retraining notification rights

#### (1) In general

No employing office shall be closed or a mass layoff ordered within the meaning of section 3 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2102) until the end of a 60-day period after the employing office serves written notice of such prospective closing or layoff to representatives of covered employees or, if there are no representatives, to covered employees.

#### (2) Definitions

For purposes of this section, the term "covered employee" shall include employees of the Government Accountability Office and the term "employing office" shall include the Government Accountability Office.

#### (b) Remedy

The remedy for a violation of subsection (a) shall be such remedy as would be appropriate if awarded under paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) of section 5(a) of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2104(a)(1), (2), and (4)).

#### (c) Regulations to implement section

#### (1) In general

The Board shall, pursuant to section 1384 of this title, issue regulations to implement this section.

#### (2) Agency regulations

The regulations issued under paragraph (1) shall be the same as substantive regulations promulgated by the Secretary of Labor to implement the statutory provisions referred to in subsection (a) except insofar as the Board may determine, for good cause shown and stated together with the regulation, that a modification of such regulations would be more effective for the implementation of the rights and protections under this section.

#### (d) Effective date

#### (1) In general

Except as provided in paragraph (2), subsections (a) and (b) shall be effective 1 year after January 23, 1995.

#### (2) Government Accountability Office and Library of Congress

This section shall be effective with respect to the Government Accountability Office and the Library of Congress 1 year after transmission to the Congress of the study under section 1371 of this title.

(Pub. L. 104–1, title II, §205, Jan. 23, 1995, 109 Stat. 11; Pub. L. 108–271, §8(b), July 7, 2004, 118 Stat. 814; Pub. L. 115–141, div. I, title I, §153(a)(2)(B), Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 785.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 115–141 struck out "and the Library of Congress" after "the Government Accountability Office" in two places.

2004—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 108–271 substituted "Government Accountability Office" for "General Accounting Office" in two places.

Subsec. (d)(2). Pub. L. 108–271 substituted "Government Accountability Office" for "General Accounting Office" in heading and text.
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. 98-95 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, June 19, 1998)

NRC STAFF TO MEET WITH THE AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY

FOR TWO-DAY WORKSHOP ON LICENSING ISSUES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff and the American Nuclear Society (ANS) will

hold a two-day conference on licensing issues in Bethesda, Maryland July 20-21.

The conference will focus on: ways to improve communications between the nuclear

industry and the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation; licensing submittals and

expectations; licensing restart issues after prolonged outages; Notices of Enforcement

Discretion issued by NRC; project management workload and prioritization of licensing

decisions; the use of probabilistic risk assessment techniques in licensing decisions; public

interaction; standard technical specifications; and commitment management.

The meeting, to be held at the Bethesda Marriott Hotel, 5151 Pooks Road, Bethesda, is

open to the public, although ANS requires a $375 fee for its members and a $425 fee for nonmembers. Sessions will be held from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on July 20; and from 8:00 a.m. to

3:00 p.m. on July 21.

For information on registration for the conference, interested persons should contact

Dave Slaninka of ANS at (708) 579-8255; or Marsha Gamberoni of the NRC at (301) 415-3024.

##
114 STAT. 310 PUBLIC LAW 106–203—MAY 22, 2000

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2412:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 106–540 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: Vol. 146 (2000):

Mar. 28, considered and passed House.

May 4, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 106–203

106th Congress

An Act

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 1300

South Harrison Street in Fort Wayne, Indiana, as the ‘‘E. Ross Adair Federal

Building and United States Courthouse’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The Federal building and United States courthouse located

at 1300 South Harrison Street in Fort Wayne, Indiana, shall be

known and designated as the ‘‘E. Ross Adair Federal Building

and United States Courthouse’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the Federal building and

United States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

to be a reference to the ‘‘E. Ross Adair Federal Building and

United States Courthouse’’.

Approved May 22, 2000.

May 22, 2000

[H.R. 2412]
### §3293. Educational assistance and training

#### (a) Use of fund

The Secretary of Labor shall provide for grants to States to provide educational assistance and training for United States workers. The Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Education in making grants under this section.

#### (b) Allocation of funds

Within the purposes described in subsection (a), funds in the account used under this section shall be allocated among the States based on a formula, established jointly by the Secretaries of Labor and Education, that takes into consideration—

(1) the location of foreign workers admitted into the United States,

(2) the location of individuals in the United States requiring and desiring the educational assistance and training for which the funds can be applied, and

(3) the location of unemployed and underemployed United States workers.

#### (c) Disbursement to States

(1) Within the purposes and allocations established under this section, disbursements shall be made to the States, in accordance with grant applications submitted to and approved jointly by the Secretaries of Labor and Education, to be applied in a manner consistent with the guidelines established by such Secretaries in consultation with the States. In applying such grants, the States shall consider providing funding to joint labor-management trust funds and other such non-profit organizations which have demonstrated capability and experience in directly training and educating workers.

(2) Not more than 5 percent of the funds disbursed to any State under this section may be used for administrative expenses.

#### (d) Limitation on Federal overhead

The Secretaries shall provide that not more than 2 percent of the amount of funds disbursed to States under this section may be used by the Federal Government in the administration of this section.

#### (e) Annual report

The Secretary of Labor shall report annually to the Congress on the grants to States provided under this section.

#### (f) "State" defined

In this section, the term "State" has the meaning given such term in section 1101(a)(36) of title 8.

(Pub. L. 101–649, title VIII, §801, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 5087.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Immigration Act of 1990, and not as part of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act which comprises this subchapter.

Section was formerly classified to section 2920 of this title and to section 1506 of this title.
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-99-62 July 20, 1999

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

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC STAFF TO HOLD PERFORMANCE REVIEW MEETING AT INDIAN POINT 3

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with

representatives of the Indian Point 3 nuclear power plant on

Friday, July 23, to discuss the results of the agency’s latest

Plant Performance Review for the facility. The New York Power

Authority operates the plant, which is located in Buchanan, N.Y.

Results of the review are contained in NRC news release I99-44, which was issued on April 15. That press release can be

found on the agency’s web site at: www.nrc.gov/OPA/gmo/nrarcv/99-

44i.htm

The meeting will begin at 10 a.m. in the plant’s Theodore

Hill Jr. Training Center, at Broadway and Bleakley Avenue. The

meeting is open to the public for observation. At the

conclusion, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from

interested observers and to meet with state and local officials.

#
#### In the Matter of the Final Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of Thomas J. McGowan, as Executor, etc., of Michael O’Neil, Deceased.

Motion denied on condition that appellant perfect the appeal, place the case on the June calendar and be ready for argument when reached; otherwise, motion granted, with ten dollars costs. Present — Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

                           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 Ener1,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Ronald Stewart,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to 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 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.



Date: August 19, 2003


/s/ Ronald Stewart
------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer


<PAGE>
§ 59.23 Priorities for the sale of flood insurance under the regular program. Flood-prone, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and flood-related erosion prone communities are placed on a register of areas eligible for ratemaking studies and then selected from this register for ratemaking studies on the basis of the following considerations— ( a ) Recommendations of State officials;
( b ) Location of community and urgency of need for flood insurance;
( c ) Population of community and intensity of existing or proposed development of the flood plain, the mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and the flood-related erosion area;
( d ) Availability of information on the community with respect to its flood, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and flood-related erosion characteristics and previous losses;
( e ) Extent of State and local progress in flood plain, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) area and flood-related erosion area management, including adoption of flood plain management regulations consistent with related ongoing programs in the area.
[41 FR 46968, Oct. 26, 1976. Redesignated at 44 FR 31177, May 31, 1979]
§ 9.9 How does the Secretary receive and respond to comments? ( a ) The Secretary follows the procedures in § 9.10 if: ( 1 ) A state office or official is designated to act as a single point of contact between a state process and all federal agencies, and
( 2 ) That office or official transmits a state process recommendation for a program selected under § 9.6.
( b ) ( 1 ) The single point of contact is not obligated to transmit comments from state, areawide, regional or local officials and entities where there is no state process recommendation.
( 2 ) If a state process recommendation is transmitted by a single point of contact, all comments from state, areawide, regional, and local officials and entities that differ from it must also be transmitted.
( c ) If a state has not established a process, or is unable to submit a state process recommendation, state, areawide, regional and local officials and entities may submit comments either to the applicant or to the Department.
( d ) If a program or activity is not selected for a state process, state, areawide, regional and local officials and entities may submit comments either to the applicant or to the Department. In addition, if a state process recommendation for a nonselected program or activity is transmitted to the Department by a single point of contact, the Secretary follows the procedures of § 9.10 of this part.
( e ) The Secretary considers comments which do not constitute a state process recommendation submitted under these regulations and for which the Secretary is not required to apply the procedures of § 9.10 of this part, when such comments are provided by a single point of contact, by the applicant, or directly to the Department by a commenting party.
#### Robert I. Buchholz v. United States Fire Insurance Company.

Present — Peck, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 662.]
**UNITED STA**  **TES ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTION A**  **GENCY** NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD ANN ARBOR, MI 48105 - 2498 OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION July 2, 2015 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Files on CD for EPA - HQ - OAR - 201 4 - 0827 - DRAFT - 0377 FROM: Christine Brunner

Assessment and Standards Division Office of Transportation and Air Qualit y TO: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium - and Heav y - Duty

Engines and Vehicles - Phase 2 - Docket EPA - HQ - OAR - 201 4 - 0827 The enclosed CD contains the following files associated with docket item EPA - HQ - OAR - 201 - 0827 - DRAFT - 0377. upstream_automator_v9.py upstream_automator_v9MY.py Thumbs.db There are no restrictions on any of these files.
### subpart 2—youth workforce investment activities
§ 333.34 Elements of an allocation order. Allocation orders may be issued directly to the affected persons or by constructive notice through publication in the Federal Register. This section describes the elements that each order must include. ( a ) *Elements to be included in all allocation orders.* ( 1 ) A detailed description of the required allocation action(s), including its relationship to previously or subsequently received DX rated orders, DO rated orders, and unrated orders.
( 2 ) Specific start and end calendar dates for each required allocation action.
( b ) *Elements to be included in orders issued directly to affected persons.* ( 1 ) A statement that reads in substance: “This is an allocation order certified for national defense use. [Insert the name of the person receiving the order] is required to comply with this order, in accordance with the provisions of the Emergency Management Priorities and Allocations System regulations (44 CFR part 333), which is part of the Federal Priorities and Allocations System.”
( 2 ) The written signature on a manually placed order, or the digital signature or name on an electronically placed order, of the FEMA Administrator.
( c ) *Elements to be included in an allocation order that gives constructive notice through publication in the* Federal Register. ( 1 ) A statement that reads in substance: “This is an allocation order certified for national defense use. [Insert the name(s) of the person(s) to whom the order applies or a description of the class of persons to whom the order applies] is (are) required to comply with this order, in accordance with the provisions of the Emergency Management Priorities and Allocations System regulations (44 CFR part 333), which is part of the Federal Priorities and Allocations System.”
( 2 ) The order must be signed by the FEMA Administrator.
Exhibit 99.1


      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Robert  Spivak,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  that  (1)  the
Quarterly  Report of Grill Concepts,  Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended June 30, 2002 fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and (2)  information  contained in
such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial  condition
and results of operations of Grill Concepts, Inc.


                                              By:   /s/ Robert Spivak
                                                 ---------------------
                                              Name: Robert Spivak
                                              Title: Chief Executive Officer
                                              August 13, 2002

I, Daryl Ansel, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that (1) the Quarterly Report
of Grill  Concepts,  Inc. on Form 10-Q for the  quarterly  period ended June 30,
2002 fully  complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (2) information  contained in such Form 10-Q
fairly presents in all material respects the financial  condition and results of
operations of Grill Concepts, Inc.


                                                By:   /s/ Daryl Ansel
                                                Name: Daryl Ansel
                                                Title: Chief Financial Officer
                                                August 13, 2002
#### § 16.102 Application.

This regulation (§§ 16.101 through 16.170) applies to all programs or activities conducted by the agency, except for programs or activities conducted outside the United States that do not involve individuals with handicaps in the United States.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

RIV: 96-34 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Breck Henderson May 23, 1996

OFFICE: 817/860-8128

PAGER: (800) 443-7243 (065477)

NRC AUGMENTED INSPECTION TEAM CONTINUES WORK

DURING ANO UNIT 1 RESTART

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's augmented

inspection team will continue its fact-finding efforts at

Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1, a nuclear power plant near

Russellville, Arkansas, during restart of the plant. Entergy

Operations, Inc., the plant licensee, is planning to restart as

early as today.

NRC Regional Administrator L. Joe Callan said, "The NRC will

not object to restarting the plant because the root cause for

Sunday's trip and the root cause of the stuck safety relief valve

have been identified by the licensee and independently confirmed

by our inspectors. Our inspections have concluded that all the

safety questions raised by Sunday's automatic shutdown have been

adequately resolved to support plant restart."

The main feedwater pump malfunctioned as a result of a

failed speed sensing probe, and the main steam safety relief

valve failed to close due to a stem nut that was mispositioned.

The main feedwater pump has been repaired and the safety valve

has been locked shut until repairs can be completed. The plant

has 16 main steam safety valves and 14 are required for safe

operation.

The augmented inspection team has approximately one day's

efforts remaining to ensure that all the desired information is

collected for in-office review. Analysis of this information

will identify long-term lessons to be learned that may be

applicable to both ANO and other, similar plants.

Early Sunday morning, May 19, a main feedwater pump

malfunctioned, causing the reactor to shut down while operating

at 100 percent power. In a normal response, main steam safety

valves opened to release non-radioactive steam to the atmosphere.

However, one safety valve failed to close as designed and one of

the plant's steam generators boiled dry as a result.
In response to these events, the NRC sent a five-man

augmented inspection team to ANO on Wednesday, May 22. The team

continues examining the facts surrounding the event and is

expected to complete its work on Friday. The team will monitor

the plant startup along with NRC resident site inspectors.

A meeting that will be open for public observation will be

held next week at which the NRC will discuss the findings of the

augmented inspection team with Entergy, and a written report of

the inspection findings will be issued in about three weeks.

####
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

MARY ROSE LOCKETT,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

No. 96-2629

TOGO D. WEST, JR., Secretary of the

Army,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

Andre M. Davis, District Judge.

(CA-95-1337-AMD)

Submitted: April 30, 1998

Decided: May 26, 1998

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Mary Rose Lockett, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United

States Attorney, Donna Carol Sanger, OFFICE OF THE UNITED

STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Mary Rose Lockett appeals from the district court's order denying

her motion for reconsideration from the court's order granting summary judgment for the Defendant on Lockett's employment discrimination claims. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm.

This court reviews a district court's denial of a motion made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) for an abuse of discretion. See Werner v.

Carbo, 731 F.2d 204, 206 (4th Cir. 1984). The motion is not intended

to be used as a substitute for a timely and proper appeal. See

Ackermann v. United States, 340 U.S. 193, 198 (1950). To be eligible

for relief under Rule 60(b), the movant must make a showing of

"timeliness, a meritorious defense, and a lack of unfair prejudice to

the opposing party, and exceptional circumstances." Dowell v. State

Fire & Cas. Auto Ins. Co., 993 F.2d 46, 48 (4th Cir. 1993) (quoting

Werner v. Carbo, 731 F.2d 204, 206-07 (4th Cir. 1984)).

In her motion, Lockett claims that she did not understand the

scheduling deadlines set by the court and also restates her conclusory

allegations that Appellees discriminated against her in violation of

Title VII and the ADA. We find that the district court did not abuse

its discretion in refusing to grant the Rule 60(b) relief based upon

Lockett's claim that her failure to timely respond to the summary

judgment motion was excusable. Lockett did not obtain an extension

of time to respond. Further, her claim that she believed that each

extension granted to the Defendant to file a motion for summary judgment automatically extended the time in which she could respond to

the motion once it was filed is not sufficient to excuse noncompliance

with the court's scheduling order. See Nemaizer v. Baker, 793 F.2d

58, 62 (2d Cir. 1986); Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 633-34

(1962). Thus, because Lockett failed to make the required showing

for relief under Rule 60(b), we affirm the district court's order. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 2