alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §5144. Providing impressions of portraits and vignettes

The Secretary of the Treasury may provide impressions from an engraved portrait or vignette in the possession of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. An impression shall be provided—

(1) at the request of—

(A) a member of Congress;

(B) a head of an agency;

(C) an art association; or

(D) a library; and

(2) for a charge and under conditions the Secretary decides are necessary to protect the public interest.

(Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 991.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 5144 | 31:174. | Dec. 22, 1879, ch. 2, 21 Stat. 59. |

In the section, before clause (1), the word "engraved" is added before "portrait" because of the restatement. The words "in the possession" are substituted for "which is now, or may be a part of the engraved stock" to eliminate unnecessary words. The words "An impression shall be provided" are added because of the restatement. In clause (1)(A), the words "member of Congress" are substituted for "Senator, Representative, or Delegate in Congress" for consistency. In clause (1)(B), the word "agency" is substituted for "department or bureau" because of section 101 of the revised title and for consistency in the revised title. In clause (2), the words "for a charge and under conditions the Secretary decides are" are substituted for "at such rates and under such conditions as he may deem" for consistency.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         68,018
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  224,886
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (15,979)
<INVENTORY>                                    223,478
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               625,390
<PP&E>                                         360,016
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (324,857)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 682,835
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,408,949
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       9,192,270
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   682,835
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               257,473
<CGS>                                          173,796
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  626,169
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (12,302)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             23,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (554,090)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (554,090)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .07
        

</TABLE>
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs, Region I

 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406

 www.nrc.gov

No. I-04-013 March 18, 2004

CONTACT: Diane Screnci, 610/337-5330 Email: opa1@nrc.gov

Neil Sheehan, 610/337-5331

NRC TO DISCUSS ANNUAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

OF BEAVER VALLEY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of FirstEnergy

Nuclear Operating Company on Thursday, March 25, to discuss the results of the agency’s

annual assessment of safety performance at the Beaver Valley nuclear power plant. The twinreactor facility is located in Shippingport, Pa., and operated by FirstEnergy.

 The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at

1 p.m. at the Emergency Response Facility at the plant, on Route 168. Before the session is

adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the plant’s safety

performance, as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe operation of the facility.

 The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2003. In

addition, NRC staff will provide an overview of how the agency’s Reactor Oversight Process

works.

 A letter sent from the NRC Region I Office to plant officials addresses the performance

of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is

available on the NRC web site at:

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/bv_2003q4.pdf .

 Overall, the Beaver Valley plant operated safely and met all cornerstone objectives

during the period. (Cornerstones are measures of plant performance.) Therefore, at this time the

NRC plans to conduct only baseline inspections at the site through September 30, 2005.

 The plant did have a “white” inspection finding, or a finding of low to moderate safety

significance, in the second quarter of 2003. It involved a failure to have adequate and timely

emergency response staffing in four key functional areas at all times. However, a supplemental

inspection completed by the NRC in November 2003 determined that corrective actions taken by

FirstEnergy to resolve the issue and prevent a recurrence were satisfactory.
-2-

 With regard to security issues, the NRC has issued several orders and threat advisories

to enhance security capabilities and improve guard force readiness since the terrorist attacks on

September 11, 2001. The agency has also conducted inspections to review the implementation of

these requirements and has monitored the action of plant operators in response to changing threat

conditions. “For calendar year 2004, we plan to continue inspections of order implementation

combined with newly developed portions of the security baseline inspection program,” the letter

states.

 Current performance information for Beaver Valley Unit 1 is available on the NRC web

site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BV1/bv1_chart.html .

 Current performance information for Beaver Valley Unit 2 is available on the NRC web

site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BV2/bv2_chart.html .

 ###
<PAGE>




                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

         I, Ted Drysdale, Chief Executive Officer of NexPrise, Inc. (the
"Registrant"), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my
knowledge:

                  (1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which
         this certification is attached as an exhibit (the "Report"), fully
         complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
         Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

                  (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
         in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Registrant.


Date:  March 17, 2003                         /s/  Ted Drysdale
                                              Ted Drysdale
                                              President, Chief Executive Officer
                                              and Chairman of the Board
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PR ECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court Ayree Henderson, Respondent,

v. State of South Carolina, Petitioner. Appellate Case No. 2014-001126

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
Appeal from Richland County G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Mem orandum Opinion No. 2015-MO-063 Heard September 23, 2015 – Filed October 28, 2015

CERTIORARI DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED

Attorney General Alan M. W ilson and Assistant Attorney General Megan H. Jameson, both of Columbia, for Petitioner. Deputy Chief Appellate Defe nder Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Respondent.PER CURIAM: We granted certiorari to revi ew the court of appeals' opinion in Henderson v. State , Op. No. 2014-UP-122 (S.C. Ct. App. filed March 19, 2014). We now dismiss the writ as improvidently granted.
DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY , KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 8, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-60477

Summary Calendar

 

RUBEN PEREIRA; VILMA ESPERANZA SOLIS-RIVERA;

RUBEN ALBERTO PEREIRA-SOLIS; VILMA VIOLETA

PEREIRA-SOLIS,

Petitioners,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

 * * * * * * * * * * 

 CONSOLIDATED WITH 

02-60478 

* * * * * * * * * * 

ROBEL PEREIRA-SOLIS,

Petitioner,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

--------------------

Petition for Review of Orders of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A73 756 832

BIA No. A73 756 834

BIA No. A73 756 836

BIA No. A73 756 837

BIA No. A76 226 680

--------------------

Before DAVIS, WIENER and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
No. 02-60477 c/w 02-60478

-2-

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

** The regulation is currently codified under 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003.1(a)(7)(ii).

PER CURIAM:*

Ruben Pereira, his wife, and his children (collectively, the

Pereiras) petition for review of the decision of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (BIA) summarily affirming the immigration

judge’s decision to deny their application for asylum and for a

withholding of deportation. They argue that the summary

affirmance procedures of the BIA, as codified at the time of

their hearing under 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(a)(7)(ii),** deprive them of

meaningful judicial review and deny them due process. Their

contentions are without merit. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, ___

F.3d ___ (5th Cir. Mar. 28, 2003), 2003 WL 1093979.

The Pereiras also assert that the BIA violated 8 C.F.R.

§ 3.1(a)(7)(ii) because it affirmed the decision of the

immigration judge despite the fact that the immigration judge

committed material errors. This is in effect a challenge to the

merits of the immigration judge’s decision. Even if it is

assumed that the immigration judge did not consider their

documentary evidence detailing the conditions in Guatemala during

the 1980s and at the time of their departure (despite having

considered other documentary evidence presented before the

hearing), the Pereiras have not shown that this general
No. 02-60477 c/w 02-60478

-3-

information was sufficient to overcome the flaws in the evidence

presented in the application and at the hearing. The Pereiras

likewise have not established that Ruben Pereira’s membership in

a particular social group, resulting from his position as a

former national police officer, is sufficient to overcome that

evidence, in light of the fact that Ruben Pereira stayed on

relatively amicable terms with the police while working as a

truck driver. We have reviewed the record and the briefs and

determine that the decision is supported by substantial evidence. 

See Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996). 

The petition for review is DENIED.
Editorial Note on Part 356
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 356 appear at 78 FR 62418, Oct. 22, 2013.

§ 356.26 Initial decision. ( a ) *Initial decision.* The administrative law judge, if a hearing was requested, or the Deputy Under Secretary will submit an initial decision to the APO Sanctions Board, providing copies to the parties. The administrative law judge or the Deputy Under Secretary will ordinarily issue the decision within 20 days of the conclusion of the hearing, if one was held, or within 15 days of the date of service of final written submissions. The initial decision will be based solely on evidence received into the record and the pleadings of the parties.
( b ) *Findings and conclusions.* The initial decision will state findings and conclusions as to whether a person has violated a protective order or a disclosure undertaking; the basis for those findings and conclusions; and whether the sanctions proposed in the charging letter, or lesser included sanctions, should be imposed against the charged or affected party. The administrative law judge or the Deputy Under Secretary may impose sanctions only upon determining that the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding of violation of a protective order or a disclosure undertaking and that the sanctions are warranted against the charged or affected party.
( c ) *Finality of decision.* If the APO Sanctions Board has not issued a decision on the matter within 60 days after issuance of the initial decision, the initial decision becomes the final decision of the Department.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

BRUCE A. HILER, as Trustee of BRUCE A. §

HILER DELAWARE QPRT and ELAINE §

M. CACHERIS, as Trustee of the ELAINE § No. 576, 2014

M. CACHERIS DELAWARE QPRT, §

§

Respondents/Counterclaim and §

Third

- Party Plaintiffs Below, § Court Below:

Appellants, §

§

v. § Court of Chancery of the

§ State of Delaware

PAUL G. KUHNS and ANNE M. KUHNS, §

§ C. A. No. 7586

- VCG

Petitioners/Counterclaim §

Defendants Below, §

Appellees, §

§

a nd §

§

THE CITY OF REHOBOTH BEACH, §

a municipal corporation of the State of §

Delaware, and GREGORY FERRESE, in §

his capacity as the City Manager of the City §

of Rehoboth Beach, §

§

Third

- Party Defendants Below, §

Appellees. §

Submitted: June 17 , 2015

Decided: July 6

, 2015

Before VALIHURA

, VAUGHN and SEITZ , Justices.

O R D E R

This 6 th day of July 2015 , the Court, having considered this matter on the

briefs and the oral arguments of the parties, and having concluded that the same2

should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Court of

Chancery in its Memorandum Opinion dated March 31, 2014, its Order entering

summary judgment dated May 28, 2014

, and its Order of Final Ju dgment pursuant

to Court of Chancery R ule 54(b) dated September 11, 2014.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED t hat the judgment s of the

Court of Chancery be, and the same hereby are , AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

Justice
### §1901. Definitions

In this chapter:

(1) The term "contract" has the same meaning as "procurement contract" in section 6303 of title 31.

(2) The term "cooperative agreement" has the same meaning as in section 6305 of title 31.

(3) The term "eligible entity" means—

(A) a research or educational entity chartered or incorporated under Federal or State law;

(B) an individual who is a United States citizen; or

(C) a State or regional agency.

(4) The term "grant" has the same meaning as "grant agreement" in section 6304 of title 31.

(5) The term "in-kind contribution" means a noncash contribution provided by a non-Federal entity that directly benefits and is related to a specific project or program. An in-kind contribution may include real property, equipment, supplies, other expendable property, goods, and services.

(6) The term "marine mineral resource" means—

(A) sand and aggregates;

(B) placers;

(C) phosphates;

(D) manganese nodules;

(E) cobalt crusts;

(F) metal sulfides;

(G) for purposes of this section and sections 1902 through 1905 of this title only, methane hydrate; and

(H) other marine resources that are not—

(i) oil and gas;

(ii) fisheries; or

(iii) marine mammals.

(7) The term "methane hydrate" means—

(A) a methane clathrate that is in the form of a methane-water ice-like crystalline material and is stable and occurs naturally in deep-ocean and permafrost areas; and

(B) other natural gas hydrates found in association with deep-ocean and permafrost deposits of methane hydrate.

(8) The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.

(Pub. L. 91–631, title II, §201, as added Pub. L. 104–325, §2(3), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3994; amended Pub. L. 106–193, §4, May 2, 2000, 114 Stat. 236.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2000—Par. (6)(G), (H). Pub. L. 106–193, §4(1), added subpar. (G) and redesignated former subpar. (G) as (H).

Pars. (7), (8). Pub. L. 106–193, §4(2), (3), added par. (7) and redesignated former par. (7) as (8).

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

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 104–325, §1, Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3994, provided that: "This Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the 'Marine Mineral Resources Research Act of 1996'."
NRC NEWS U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone 301/415-820

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

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 03-049 April 23, 2003

NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS

TO MEET MAY 8-9 IN ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

(ACRS) will hold a meeting on May 8 and 9 in Rockville, Md. The committee will discuss,

among other items, reactor vessel head penetration cracking and degradation, as well as the

effectiveness of the NRC’s operating experience program.

The meeting, portions of which are open to the public, will be held in Room T-2B3 of the

agency’s Two White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. It will begin at 8:30 a.m.

each day. A complete agenda is available on the NRC’s Web site at this address:

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/agenda/2003-0341.pdf .

For additional information, please contact Dr. Sher Bahadur, at 301-415-0138.

###
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 24 (Thursday, February 5, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 5544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2420]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-7618-6]


Great Lakes National Program Office FY2004-2005 Funding Guidance-
-Request for Initial Proposals

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of funding availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Great Lakes 
National Program Office (GLNPO) is requesting Initial Proposals for 
projects, collectively totaling up to $4,180,000, furthering protection 
and clean up of the Great Lakes ecosystem. Initial Proposals are 
requested through the USEPA Great Lakes National Program Office FY2004-
2005 Funding Guidance (``Funding Guidance'').

DATES: The deadline for all Initial Proposals is 8 a.m. Central time, 
Monday morning, March 29, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The Funding Guidance is available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/2004guid/. It is also available from Lawrence 
Brail (312-886-7474/ <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7a18081b131654161b0d081f14191f3a1f0a1b541d150c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="543626353d387a38352326313a3731143124357a333b22">[email protected]</span></a>).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Russ, EPA-GLNPO, G-17J, 77 West 
Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604 (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c3f3d3e2134343a21383c3d3f237e797f7f2261656f646d69604c697c6d226b637a">312-886-4013/<span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e694939595c88b8f858e87838aa6839687c8818990">[email protected]</span></a>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Projects should address Contaminated 
Sediments, Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction, Habitat 
(Ecological) Protection and Restoration, Invasive Species, Strategic or 
Emerging Issues, and Other Lakewide Management Plan or Remedial Action 
Plan (LaMP/RAP) Priorities.
    Assistance is available pursuant to Clean Water Act section 
104(b)(3) for activities in the Great Lakes Basin and in support of the 
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. State pollution control agencies, 
interstate agencies, other public or nonprofit private agencies, 
institutions, and organizations are eligible to apply.

    Dated: January 28, 2004.
Gary V. Gulezian,
Director, Great Lakes National Program Office.
[FR Doc. 04-2420 Filed 2-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1431

To repeal the requirements under the United States Housing Act of 1937 

for residents of public housing to engage in community service and 

to complete economic self-sufficiency programs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 25, 2003

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

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL

To repeal the requirements under the United States Housing 

Act of 1937 for residents of public housing to engage 

in community service and to complete economic selfsufficiency programs.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Public Housing Ten5 ants Respect Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 1431 IH 

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF PUBLIC HOUSING COMMUNITY SERVICE 

2 AND FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY REQUIRE3 MENTS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 12 of the United States 

5 Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437j) is amended by 

6 striking subsections (c) through (g). 

7 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—The United States 

8 Housing Act of 1937 is amended—

9 (1) in section 5A(d)(12) (42 U.S.C. 1437c–

10 1(d)(12))—

11 (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting 

12 ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon; 

13 (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the 

14 semicolon and inserting a period; and 

15 (C) by striking subparagraph (C); 

16 (2) in section 6(l)(1) (42 U.S.C. 1437d(l)(1)), 

17 by striking ‘‘except for noncompliance’’ and all that 

18 follows through ‘‘based on such noncompliance’’; and 

19 (3) in section 9(e)(1)(H) (42 U.S.C. 

20 1437g(e)(1)(H)), by striking ‘‘a public housing work 

21 program under section 12’’ and inserting ‘‘any pro22 gram that provides work for residents of public 

23 housing’’.

Æ