alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1140. Interference with protected rights

It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline, or discriminate against a participant or beneficiary for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan, this subchapter, section 1201 of this title, or the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act [29 U.S.C. 301 et seq.], or for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which such participant may become entitled under the plan, this subchapter, or the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act. It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge, fine, suspend, expel, or discriminate against any person because he has given information or has testified or is about to testify in any inquiry or proceeding relating to this chapter or the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act. In the case of a multiemployer plan, it shall be unlawful for the plan sponsor or any other person to discriminate against any contributing employer for exercising rights under this chapter or for giving information or testifying in any inquiry or proceeding relating to this chapter before Congress. The provisions of section 1132 of this title shall be applicable in the enforcement of this section.

(Pub. L. 93–406, title I, §510, Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 895; Pub. L. 109–280, title II, §205, Aug. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 889.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 85–836, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 997, which was classified generally to chapter 10 (§301 et seq.) of this title, and was repealed by Pub. L. 93–406, title I, §111(a)(1), Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 851 (Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974), effective Jan. 1, 1975. Such section 111(a)(1) also provided that the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act should continue to apply to any conduct and events which occurred before Jan. 1, 1975 (see section 1031 of this title). For complete classification of the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act to the Code prior to such repeal, see Tables.

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 93–406, known as the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Titles I, III, and IV of such Act are classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1001 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–280 inserted before last sentence "In the case of a multiemployer plan, it shall be unlawful for the plan sponsor or any other person to discriminate against any contributing employer for exercising rights under this chapter or for giving information or testifying in any inquiry or proceeding relating to this chapter before Congress."

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

#### Regulations

Secretary authorized, effective Sept. 2, 1974, to promulgate regulations wherever provisions of this subchapter call for the promulgation of regulations, see section 1031 of this title.
### §633. Federal-State relationship

#### (a) Federal action superseding State action

Nothing in this chapter shall affect the jurisdiction of any agency of any State performing like functions with regard to discriminatory employment practices on account of age except that upon commencement of action under this chapter such action shall supersede any State action.

#### (b) Limitation of Federal action upon commencement of State proceedings

In the case of an alleged unlawful practice occurring in a State which has a law prohibiting discrimination in employment because of age and establishing or authorizing a State authority to grant or seek relief from such discriminatory practice, no suit may be brought under section 626 of this title before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced under the State law, unless such proceedings have been earlier terminated: Provided, That such sixty-day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State law. If any requirement for the commencement of such proceedings is imposed by a State authority other than a requirement of the filing of a written and signed statement of the facts upon which the proceeding is based, the proceeding shall be deemed to have been commenced for the purposes of this subsection at the time such statement is sent by registered mail to the appropriate State authority.

(Pub. L. 90–202, §14, Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 607.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Functions vested by this section in Secretary of Labor or Civil Service Commission transferred to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Reorg. Plan No. 1 of 1978, §2, 43 F.R. 19807, 92 Stat. 3781, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, effective Jan. 1, 1979, as provided by section 1–101 of Ex. Ord. No. 12106, Dec. 28, 1978, 44 F.R. 1053.
| Exhibit 10.18 |
|---------------|

**ExpressJet Holdings, Inc.Non-Employee Director Compensation**

            The Company provides the following compensation, asapplicable, to directors who are not employees of the Company:

**Annual Retainers**

The highest applicable annual retainer amount of the amounts set forth below:
| Director                           |              | $40,000 per year |
|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|
| Committee Chair (other than Audit) |                                                                          | $50,000 per year |
| Audit Committee Chair              |                                                                          | $55,000 per year |
| Chairman of the Board              |                                                                          | $60,000 per year |

****

**Meeting Fees**
| Each board meeting physically attended (Chair)                                   |                    | $3,000 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------|--------|
| Each board meeting physically attended (non-Chair)      |     | $2,000 |
| Each committee meeting physically attended                                       |                    | $2,000 |
| Each board or committee meeting, telephonic participation                        |                    | $1,000 |
| Reimbursement of appropriate out-of-pocket expenses                              |                    |        |

****

**Stock Grants**
|           | •  | $35,000 fair market value of restricted shares upon initial election to Board             |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                        | •  | $35,000 Black-Scholes value of stock options upon initial election to Board               |
|                                                        | •  | $35,000 fair market value of restricted shares following each annual stockholders meeting |
|                                                        | •  | $35,000 Black-Scholes value of stock options following each annual stockholders meeting   |

**Flight Benefits**

            Benefits described in the Form of Amended and Restated LetterAgreement relating to certain flight benefits between the Company and our non-employee directors for whom we are able to securesuch benefits (previously filed).

----
Exhibit 23

McGladrey & Pullen
Certified Public Accountants

          CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-32386 and No. 333-116163 on Form S-8 of Timberland Bancorp, Inc. of our
reports dated December 14, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial
statements and internal control over financial reporting of Timberland
Bancorp, Inc. which appear in this Form 10-K for the year ended September 30,
2009.

/s/McGladrey & Pullen, LLP

Seattle, Washington
December 14, 2009


<PAGE>
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

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

I-97-36 April 9, 1997

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan

NRC RESCHEDULES PAIR OF MEETINGS ON FINDINGS

OF NINE MILE POINT UNIT 1 CORE SHROUD INSPECTION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has rescheduled two

meetings planned to discuss the agency's evaluation of a core

shroud inspection performed at the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 nuclear

power plant.

One of the meetings was to have taken place on Thursday,

April 10, at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, between

agency technical staff and plant representatives to review the

recently completed inspection's findings. The other had been

scheduled for 7 p.m. on Monday, April 14, in the Town of Scriba

Municipal Building to give the public an opportunity to learn

about the inspection results and offer input.

Instead, in response to public interest, the meetings will

now be combined into one session which will begin at 5 p.m. on

Monday, April 14, in the Joint News Center at 10 Airport Drive in

Fulton, N.Y. The center is adjacent to the Oswego County

Airport, off County Route 176.

The technical segment of that meeting will be open for

public observation only. Those portions in which proprietary

information is discussed will be closed. At the conclusion of

the technical discussions, time will be provided for questions

and comments from the public.

#
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Ener1, Inc., a Florida corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Charles Gassenheimer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his knowledge:





(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.




/s/ Charles GassenheimerCharles GassenheimerChief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board(Principal Executive Officer and Duly Authorized Officer)





May 10, 2011





[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Ener1, Inc. and will be retained by Ener1, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-97-56 June 11, 1997

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $2,750 FINE AGAINST

INDIANAPOLIS DEPARTMENT OF CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT FOR RADIATION

SAFETY PROGRAM VIOLATIONS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a

$2,750 fine against Indianapolis Department of Capital Asset

Management, Indianapolis, Indiana, for radiation safety program

violations.

An NRC inspection in March found numerous radiation safety

program violations associated with the Department's use of

nuclear gauges. The Department has several portable gauges

containing small amounts of radioactive material that are used

for measuring moisture and density of construction material at

temporary job sites.

The violations included: use of a gauge by an unauthorized

person; failure to perform required leak tests; lack of shipping

documentation during a transport; transfer of a gauge to an

unauthorized recipient; failure to maintain adequate gauge

transfer records; failure to perform required inventories;

storage of gauges in an unauthorized location; and failure to

update the NRC license to reflect the Department's name change.

Since the inspection, the Department requires written

authorization by the radiation safety officer of designated

nuclear gauge users and stores the gauges in a secured,

authorized facility.

In a letter to the agency, NRC's Regional Administrator, A.

Bill Beach said:

"The root cause of the violations appears to be a

fundamental lack of oversight by the radiation safety officer and

by management particularly in light of [the Department's]

contractual arrangements of permitting other firms to perform

tests using [the Department's] licensed material. In addition,

the fact that these violations were identified by NRC further

confirms the apparent deficiencies in the control of the

program."

Indianapolis Department of Capital Asset Management has

until June 29 to pay the fine or to protest it. If the fine is

protested and subsequently imposed by the NRC staff, the
Department may request a hearing.

####
§ 108.800 Financings in the form of equity interests. You may not, inadvertently or otherwise: ( a ) Become a general partner in any unincorporated business; or
( b ) Become jointly or severally liable for any obligations of an unincorporated business.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE MATTER OF M.O., JR., A

JUVENILE. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 13

- 00148

- CV

Appeal from the

65 th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 1100958 )

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below.

It appearing to this Court that Appellant is indigent for purposes of appeal, this Co urt

makes no other order with respect thereto. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

Walnut Creek Field Office

1450 Maria Lane, Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5378

RIV 9731

May 23, 1997

CONTACT: Mark Hammond

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Office: (510) 975-0254

Pager: (800) 916-4952

NRC REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR TO HOLD

NEWS CONFERENCE AT WATERFORD

Ellis W. Merschoff, Regional Administrator of the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission's Region IV, will hold a news conference on

Thursday, May 29, at the Waterford Steam Electric Station’s James

M. Cain Energy Education Center.

The news conference will be at 1 p.m. in the auditorium of

the Energy Education Center, on Highway 3127 near the plant site,

Taft, Louisiana.

Mr. Merschoff will discuss recent issues at Waterford and

other matters of regulatory concern. The news conference is one

in a series that NRC Regional Administrators hold quarterly

throughout the nation in an effort to keep the media and public

informed about agency business.

The news conference will follow a meeting between officials

of the NRC and Entergy Operations Inc., which operates the plant.

The meeting will be the first in a series between NRC and plant

officials geared towards improved performance at Waterford. It is

scheduled for 10 a.m. in the auditorium and is open to the public

for observation.
### §1816. Repealed. Pub. L. 99–603, title I, §101(b)(1)(C), Nov. 6, 1986, 100 Stat. 3372

Section, Pub. L. 97–470, title I, §106, Jan. 14, 1983, 96 Stat. 2589, prohibited employment of illegal aliens.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal applicable to employment, recruitment, referral, or utilization of services of an individual occurring on or after first day of seventh month beginning after Nov. 6, 1986, see section 101(b)(2) of Pub. L. 99–603, as amended, set out as an Effective Date of 1986 Amendment note under section 1802 of this title.
### §2005. Enforcement provisions

#### (a) Civil penalties

#### (1) In general

Subject to paragraph (2), any employer who violates any provision of this chapter may be assessed a civil penalty of not more than $10,000.

#### (2) Determination of amount

In determining the amount of any penalty under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall take into account the previous record of the person in terms of compliance with this chapter and the gravity of the violation.

#### (3) Collection

Any civil penalty assessed under this subsection shall be collected in the same manner as is required by subsections (b) through (e) of section 1853 of this title with respect to civil penalties assessed under subsection (a) of such section.

#### (b) Injunctive actions by Secretary

The Secretary may bring an action under this section to restrain violations of this chapter. The Solicitor of Labor may appear for and represent the Secretary in any litigation brought under this chapter. In any action brought under this section, the district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction, for cause shown, to issue temporary or permanent restraining orders and injunctions to require compliance with this chapter, including such legal or equitable relief incident thereto as may be appropriate, including, but not limited to, employment, reinstatement, promotion, and the payment of lost wages and benefits.

#### (c) Private civil actions

#### (1) Liability

An employer who violates this chapter shall be liable to the employee or prospective employee affected by such violation. Such employer shall be liable for such legal or equitable relief as may be appropriate, including, but not limited to, employment, reinstatement, promotion, and the payment of lost wages and benefits.

#### (2) Court

An action to recover the liability prescribed in paragraph (1) may be maintained against the employer in any Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction by an employee or prospective employee for or on behalf of such employee, prospective employee, and other employees or prospective employees similarly situated. No such action may be commenced more than 3 years after the date of the alleged violation.

#### (3) Costs

The court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party (other than the United States) reasonable costs, including attorney's fees.

#### (d) Waiver of rights prohibited

The rights and procedures provided by this chapter may not be waived by contract or otherwise, unless such waiver is part of a written settlement agreed to and signed by the parties to the pending action or complaint under this chapter.

(Pub. L. 100–347, §6, June 27, 1988, 102 Stat. 647.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective 6 months after June 27, 1988, except that rules and regulations shall be issued not later than 90 days after June 27, 1988, see section 11 of Pub. L. 100–347, set out as a note under section 2001 of this title.
#### Merchants National Bank v. Santa Maria Sugar Company.

Motion for leave to go to Court of Appeals granted. Order signed. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, 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. 98-25 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, February 12, 1998)

NRC NOTIFIES B&W OF ACTIONS NEEDED FOR PENNSYLVANIA BURIAL SITE

BEFORE WORK RESUMES ON ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has notified B&W Environmental Services,

Inc., that the company must submit a license amendment request before NRC will resume

work on a draft environmental impact statement for the planned decommissioning of the

Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) Shallow Land Disposal Area in Parks Township, Pennsylvania.

NRC said in a letter to B&W that it does not plan to conduct further analysis on the draft

statement until B&W submits the document asking NRC to authorize decommissioning.

Once it receives the license amendment request, NRC will issue an announcement and

will give the public an opportunity to request a hearing. In addition, NRC will hold appropriate

public meetings with local officials and community members to discuss matters concerning the

site.

The Parks Township site was used from 1961 until 1970 for disposal of wastes from a

nuclear fuel fabrication facility in nearby Apollo, Pennsylvania. (Such disposal was permitted by

Federal regulations in effect at the time.) Radioactive materials buried in trenches on site

include natural uranium, enriched and depleted uranium, and lesser quantities of thorium,

americium and plutonium.

B&W previously proposed a decommissioning approach that involved stabilizing the

wastes on site by installing an engineered cover and hydrologic barrier systems surrounding the

trenches in which radioactive materials are currently buried.

In September the NRC published for public comment its draft environmental statement

on this proposal. It reached a preliminary conclusion that modified stabilization in place, an

NRC-developed alternative, would protect public health and the environment at less cost than

other alternatives.

The NRC withdrew its draft statement in September. In the letter sent to the company

today concerning the need for a license amendment request, the NRC staff said its draft

environmental report was withdrawn because the alternative identified by the NRC staff was not
2

presented in the same format and level of detail as the other alternatives; because identification

of this alternative was inconsistent with NRC policy that preferred alternatives must be clearly

environmentally superior, not merely economically superior; and because the staff needed to

review how the agency’s new license termination criteria regulation, issued in July, applies to

sites such as B&W Parks Township, where licensees are considering restricted release of the

site.

###
#### Elizabeth N. Berger et al. v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company and Pennsylvania-Reading Seashore Lines.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied) with $10 costs. Present — Peck, P. J., Grlennon, Dore, Yan Voorhis and Shientag, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 956.]
### §260. Liquidated damages

In any action commenced prior to or on or after May 14, 1947 to recover unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, or liquidated damages, under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.], if the employer shows to the satisfaction of the court that the act or omission giving rise to such action was in good faith and that he had reasonable grounds for believing that his act or omission was not a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, the court may, in its sound discretion, award no liquidated damages or award any amount thereof not to exceed the amount specified in section 216 of this title.

(May 14, 1947, ch. 52, §11, 61 Stat. 89; Pub. L. 93–259, §6(d)(2)(B), Apr. 8, 1974, 88 Stat. 62.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, referred to in text, is act June 25, 1938, ch. 676, 52 Stat. 1060, as amended, which is classified generally to chapter 8 (§201 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 201 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

1974—Pub. L. 93–259 substituted "section 216 of this title" for "section 216(b) of this title".

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

#### Effective Date of 1974 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 93–259 effective May 1, 1974, see section 29(a) of Pub. L. 93–259, set out as a note under section 202 of this title.