alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Roberto Hernandez RODRIGUEZ, aka Roberto Rodriguez, et al., Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-10503.

D.C. No. CR-00-00489-HG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 2002 *.

Decided May 24, 2002.

*624Before FERNANDEZ, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Roberto Hernandez Rodriguez appeals from his sentence imposed following his conviction for re-entry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2).

Rodriguez contends that, in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), his sentence should not have exceeded the maximum two-year sentence pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Rodriguez acknowledges that this argument is foreclosed by *United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda,*234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000), *cert. denied,*532 U.S. 966, 121 S.Ct. 1503, 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001), and states that he raises the contention merely to preserve it in the event of ensuing favorable Supreme Court precedent. Thus, we do not consider it further.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Glenn/Colusa County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Willows, California. Agenda items to be covered include: (1) Introductions, (2) Approval of Minutes, (3) Public Comment, (4) Welcome New Members, (5) Web site Update, (6) General Discussion, (7) Next Agenda.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on October 25, 2004, from 1:30 p.m. and end at approximately 4:30 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Mendocino National Forest Supervisor's Office, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988. Individuals wishing to speak or propose agenda items must send their names and proposals to Jim Giachino, DFO, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Bobbin Gaddini, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino National Forest, Grindstone Ranger District, P.O. Box 164, Elk Creek, CA 95939. (530) 968-5329; EMAIL                         *ggaddini@fs.fed.us.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting is open to the public. Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Committee members. However, persons who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Public input sessions will be provided and individuals who made written requests by October 22, 2004 will have the opportunity to address the committee at those sessions.

Dated: October 18, 2004.

James F. Giachino,

Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 04-23811  Filed 10-22-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsV/STOL Concepts in the United States:  Past, Present, and FutureNonhelicopter types of V/STOL aircraft developed in the United States are reviewed, and some lessons learned from a selected number of concepts are highlighted. The AV-8B, which was developed by modifications to the British Harrier is the only current concept examined. Configurations proposed for the future subsonic, multimissing aircraft and the future supersonic fighter/attack aircraft are described. Emphasis is on these supersonic concepts.Document ID19840014464Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsW P Nelms*(Ames Research Center Mountain View, California, United States)*S B Anderson*(Ames Research Center Mountain View, California, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateApril 1, 1984Subject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:85938A-9695NASA-TM-85938Accession Number84N22532Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-43-01WORK_UNIT: T3288YDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840014464.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-03-0160 - Denial of Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-50-74: Amend Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 to Provide a Voluntary Alternative which would Replace the 1971 American Nuclear Society Decay Heat Standard with the 1994 American Nuclear Society Standard

Accession Number: ML032320318

Date Released: Monday, December 8, 2003

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML032320210 - SECY-03-0160 -Denial of Petition for Rulemaking (PRM 50-74 ) - Amend Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 To Provide a Voluntary Alternative Which Would Replace the 1971 American Nuclear Society Decay Heat Standard with the 1994 American Nuclear Society Standard (4 page(s), 9/11/2003)
    - ML032320269 - SECY-03-0160Atch1 - FRN - Nuclear Energy Institute:  Denial of Petition for Rulemaking (5 page(s), 9/11/2003)
    - ML032320300 - SECY-03-0160Atch2 - Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-74: Amend Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 to Provide a Voluntary Alternative Which Would Replace the 1971 American Nuclear Society Decay Heat Standard with the 1994 American Nuclear Society Standard (2 page(s), 9/11/2003)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
§ 12.120 Definitions. Except as otherwise provided below, the terms used in §§ 12.121 through 12.127 have the meanings set forth for those terms in TSCA. ( a ) *Article* — ( 1 ) *Article* means a manufactured item which: ( i ) Is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture,
( ii ) Has end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon its shape or design during the end use, and
( iii ) Has either no change of chemical composition during its end use or only those changes of composition which have no commercial purpose separate from that of the article and that may occur as described in § 12.120(a)(2); except that fluids and particles are not considered articles regardless of shape or design.
( 2 ) The allowable changes of composition, referred to in § 12.120(a)(1), are those which result from a chemical reaction that occurs upon the end use of other chemical substances, mixtures, or articles such as adhesives, paints, miscellaneous cleaners or other household products, fuels and fuel additives, water softening and treatment agents, photographic films, batteries, matches, and safety flares in which the chemical substance manufactured upon end use of the article is not itself manufactured for distribution in commerce or for use as an intermediate.
( b ) *TSCA chemical substance in bulk form.* “TSCA chemical substance in bulk form” means a chemical substance as set forth in section 3(2) of TSCA, (15 U.S.C. 2602(2)) (other than as part of an article) in containers used for purposes of transportation or containment, provided that the chemical substance is intended to be removed from the container and has an end use or commercial purpose separate from the container.
( c ) *TSCA chemical substance as part of a mixture.* “TSCA chemical substance as part of a mixture” means a chemical substance as set forth in section 3(2) of TSCA, (15 U.S.C. 2602(2)) that is part of a combination of two or more chemical substances as set forth in section 3(10) of TSCA.
( d ) *TSCA-excluded chemicals.* “TSCA-excluded chemicals” means any chemicals that are excluded from the definition of TSCA chemical substance by section 3(2)(B) (ii)-(vi) of TSCA, (15 U.S.C. 2602(2) (B) (ii)-(vi)) (other than as part of a mixture), regardless of form.
( e ) *Covered commodity.* “Covered commodity” means merchandise that meets the terms of one of the definitions specified in paragraph (a), (b), or (d) of this section or that is a mixture as defined in TSCA.
( f ) *Administrator.* “Administrator” means the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
[T.D. 83-158, 48 FR 34739, Aug. 1, 1983, as amended by CBP Dec. 16-28, 81 FR 94985, Dec. 27, 2016]
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1379

To freeze the price of gasoline pending analysis by the Secretary of Energy 

of fluctuations in such price. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 20, 2003

Mr. FILNER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL

To freeze the price of gasoline pending analysis by the 

Secretary of Energy of fluctuations in such price.

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

3 SECTION 1. PRICE FREEZE. 

4 (a) PROHIBITED SALES.—It shall be unlawful for any 

5 person to sell gasoline at wholesale or retail for a price 

6 in excess of the price that grade of gasoline sold for in 

7 the same market on March 10, 2003. 

8 (b) PENALTY.—A person who violates subsection (a) 

9 shall be liable for a civil penalty of $10,000 for each day 

10 on which a violation occurred. 
2

•HR 1379 IH 

1 SEC. 2. EXPIRATION OF FREEZE. 

2 The prohibition in section 1 shall expire 60 days after 

3 the Secretary of Energy transmits to the Congress a re4 port analyzing fluctuations in gasoline prices, giving par5 ticular attention to the occurrence of price gouging as 

6 cause of such fluctuations. Such report shall include the 

7 Secretary’s recommendations for any legislative or admin8 istrative actions that could improve gasoline price stability 

9 and eliminate price gouging.

Æ
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 02-110 September 24, 2002

NRC ADVISES NUCLEAR LICENSEES TO REVIEW SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY

MEASURES AS NATION RETURNS TO YELLOW HOMELAND SECURITY LEVEL

Consistent with today’s announcement by Attorney General John Ashcroft that the Homeland

Security threat level has been lowered from Orange (High) to Yellow (Elevated), the NRC is advising

nuclear power plants and other nuclear facilities to implement the appropriate protective measures

consistent with the NRC’s corresponding Level 3 threat level. Supplemental security measures

implemented September 10, following the establishment of an Orange threat condition, are no longer

necessary. 

On September 10, 2002, the NRC advised licensees to implement the actions specified for the

Level 4 threat level of the agency’s Threat Advisory and Protective Measures System to counter and

respond to terrorist threats. 

Although the NRC has received no information concerning either a general or specific credible

threat to U.S. nuclear facilities or materials, the agency continues to monitor threats and other related

developments as it coordinates its activities with other licensees, Federal agencies, and local and State

law enforcement authorities. 

In addition, the NRC will maintain heightened security measures, consistent with the Yellow

threat level, at its headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, and at its four regional offices.

The NRC’s threat Level 3 corresponds to the Homeland Security Yellow threat level.

###
### §47. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 47 was editorially reclassified as section 4521 of this title.
#### § 143.35 Procedure for electronic entry summary.

In order to obtain entry summary processing electronically, the filer will submit certified entry summary data electronically through ABI. Data will be validated and, if the transmission is found error-free, will be accepted. If it is determined through selectivity criteria and review of data that documentation is required for further processing of the entry summary, Customs will so notify the filer. Documentation submitted before being requested by Customs will not be accepted or retained by Customs. The entry summary will be scheduled for liquidation once payment is made under statement processing (see § 24.25 of this chapter).

[T.D. 98-56, 63 FR 32945, June 16, 1998]
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-98-130 December 15, 1998

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

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC POSTPONES PREHEARING CONFERENCE ON YANKEE ROWE

At the request of the Citizen’s Awareness Network, an Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board has rescheduled a prehearing conference for January 26, 1999, in a licensing

proceeding concerning the decommissioning of the Yankee Atomic Electric Company’s nuclear

reactor at Rowe, Mass. The conference had been set for tomorrow, December 16. the facility

permanently ceased operation in 1991.

The conference, which is open to the public, will begin at 9:30, at the Grand Jury Room

(top floor) of the Franklin County Courthouse. 425 Main Street, in Greenfield, Mass. If

necessary, the proceeding will continue on Wednesday and Thursday, January 27-28,

beginning at 9:00 a.m. each day.

Licensing boards frequently schedule a prehearing conference of the parties in a

proceeding to consider whether a public hearing should be granted. At the forthcoming

conference, the board will consider the admissibility of contentions raised by the New England

Coalition on Nuclear Pollution, Inc. and the Citizens Awareness Network, which requested a

hearing on the unfinished portion of work to be completed under the Yankee decommissioning

plan. The conference will also consider petitions, if any, from interested states or governmental

organizations and to the extent necessary, will consider discovery and future schedules for

various aspects of the proceeding.

The board will hear oral statements at this prehearing conference. Any person not a

party to the proceeding or a petitioner will be permitted to make such a statement, either orally

or in writing, setting forth a position on the issues of concern. These statements do not

constitute testimony or evidence but may held the Board in its deliberations on the extent of the

issues to be considered. Oral limited appearance statements may be given from 7 p.m. to 9:30

p.m. on Tuesday, January 26 at the same location. The number of persons making statements

and the time allotted for each statement may be limited depending on the number of persons

present at the designated time. Normally, an oral statement may extend for up to five minutes.

Written statements may be submitted at any time. Written statements and requests for

oral statements should be submitted to the Office of the Secretary, Rulemakings and

Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D.C. 20555.

#
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.472 Verification in the United States of textile and apparel goods. ( a ) *Procedures to determine whether a claim of origin is accurate.* CBP will endeavor, at the request of the government of Chile, to conduct a verification for the purpose of determining that a claim of origin for a textile or apparel good is accurate. A verification will be conducted under this paragraph regardless of whether a claim is made for preferential tariff treatment. If the government of Chile is unable to make the determination described in this paragraph within 12 months after a request for a verification, Chile may take appropriate action with respect to the textile and apparel good subject to the verification, and with respect to similar goods exported or produced by the entity that exported or produced the good.
( b ) *Procedures to determine compliance with applicable customs laws and regulations of Chile.* CBP will endeavor to conduct a verification at the request of the government of Chile for purposes of enabling Chile to determine that the U.S. exporter or producer is complying with applicable customs laws, regulations, and procedures, if Chile has a reasonable suspicion that a U.S. exporter or producer is engaging in unlawful activity relating to trade in textile and apparel goods. A verification will be conducted under this paragraph regardless of whether a claim is made for preferential tariff treatment. A “reasonable suspicion” for the purpose of this paragraph will be based on relevant factual information, including information of the type set forth in Article 5.5 of the US-CFTA, that indicates circumvention of applicable laws, regulations or procedures regarding trade in textile and apparel goods. If the government of Chile is unable to make the determination described in this paragraph within 12 months after a request for a verification, it may take action as permitted under its laws with respect to any textile or apparel goods exported or produced by the entity subject to the verification.
( c ) *Visits by CBP.* CBP may conduct visits to the premises of a U.S. exporter or producer or any other enterprise involved in the movement of textile or apparel goods from the United States to Chile in order to undertake or assist in a verification pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
( d ) *Initiation of verification by CBP.* CBP may conduct, on its own initiative, a verification for the purpose of determining that a claim of origin for a textile or apparel good is accurate.
( e ) *Treatment of documents and information.* CBP will endeavor to provide to the government of Chile, consistent with U.S. laws, regulations, and procedures, production, trade, and transit documents and other information necessary to conduct a verification under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. Such information will be considered confidential as provided for in Article 5.6 of the US-CFTA.
Editorial Note on Part 351
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 351 appear at 78 FR 62418, Oct. 22, 2013.

Editorial Note on Part 351
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 351 appear at 89 FR 20832, Mar. 25, 2024.

§ 351.520 Export insurance. ( a ) *Benefit* — ( 1 ) In *general.* In the case of export insurance, a benefit exists if the premium rates charged are inadequate to cover the long-term operating costs and losses of the program normally over a five-year period.
( 2 ) *Amount of the benefit.* If the Secretary determines under paragraph (a)(1) of this section that premium rates are inadequate, the Secretary normally will calculate the amount of the benefit as the difference between the amount of premiums paid by the firm and the amount received by the firm under the insurance program during the period of investigation or review.
( b ) *Time of receipt of benefit.* In the case of export insurance, the Secretary normally will consider the benefit as having been received in the year in which the difference described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section occurs.
( c ) *Allocation of benefit to a particular time period.* The Secretary normally will allocate (expense) the benefit from export insurance to the year in which the benefit is considered to have been received under paragraph (b) of this section.
[63 FR 65407, Nov. 25, 1998, as amended at 89 FR 20841, Mar. 25, 2024]
###### Editorial Note on Part 181

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 181 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93026, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 181.13 Failure to comply with requirements.

The port director may apply such measures as the circumstances may warrant where an exporter or a producer in the United States fails to comply with any requirement of this part. Such measures may include the imposition of penalties pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1508(e) for failure to retain records required to be maintained under § 181.12.

[T.D. 95-68, 60 FR 46364, Sept. 6, 1995, as amended by T.D. 98-56, 63 FR 32955, June 16, 1998]
<PAGE> 1
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

Household Finance Corporation
Household Consumer Loan Corporation
Household Consumer Loan Trust 1997-2
<S>                                          <C>


Original Principal Class A    1,050,000,000.00
   Class A-1                    912,000,000.00
   Class A-2                     48,000,000.00
   Class A-3                     90,000,000.00
Number of Class A Bonds           1,050,000.00
(000's)
   Class A-1                        912,000.00
   Class A-2                         48,000.00
   Class A-3                         90,000.00
Original Principal Class B       57,000,000.00
Number of Class B Bond               57,000.00
(000's)
Original Principal Certificate   42,000,000.00
Number of Certificates Bond          42,000.00
(000's)

                                                  1999 Totals
CLASS A
Principal Distribution - A-1                      222,199,412.60
Class A-1 Interest                                 23,803,789.22
Distribution

Principal Distribution - A-2                                0.00
Class A-2 Interest                                  2,650,755.45
Distribution

Principal Distribution - A-3                                0.00
Class A-3 Interest                                  5,070,541.47
Distribution

CLASS B
Principal Distribution                                      0.00
Interest Distribution                               3,355,822.10

Certificates
Principal Distribution                                      0.00
Interest Distribution                               2,917,765.19

</TABLE>
[No. 6933.

Decided March 4, 1908.]

#### The City of Seattle, *Appellant,*v. Seattle Electric Company, *Respondent.*
      *1*

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Morris, X, entered March 7, 1907.

Affirmed.

*Scott Calhoun*and *Elmer E. Todd,*for appellant.

*James B. Howe*and *Hugh A. Tait,*for respondent.

Reported in 94 Pac. 196.

Per Curiam.

This case presents the question discussed and decided in *Seattle v. Seattle Electric Co., ante*p. 599, 94 Pac. 194. For the reasons therein stated it will stand affirmed.