alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 174
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 174 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93025, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 174.24 Criteria for further review. Further review of a protest which would otherwise be denied by the Center director shall be accorded a party filing an application for further review which meets the requirements of § 174.25 when the decision against which the protest was filed: ( a ) Is alleged to be inconsistent with a ruling of the Commissioner of CBP or his designee, or with a decision made by CBP with respect to the same or substantially similar merchandise;
( b ) Is alleged to involve questions of law or fact which have not been ruled upon by the Commissioner of CBP or his designee or by the Customs courts;
( c ) Involves matters previously ruled upon by the Commissioner of CBP or his designee or by the Customs courts but facts are alleged or legal arguments presented which were not considered at the time of the original ruling; or
( d ) Is alleged to involve questions which the Headquarters Office, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, refused to consider in the form of a request for internal advice pursuant to § 177.11(b)(5) of this chapter.
[T.D. 70-181, 35 FR 13429, Aug. 22, 1970, as amended by T.D. 71-133, 36 FR 8732, May 12, 1971; T.D. 75-186, 40 FR 31928, July 30, 1975]
#### Mike Mario, Appellant, v. May De Oteris, Respondent.

The record discloses that at the conclusion of the evidence the case was finally submitted to the trial court, without request for permission to submit findings or requests to find. No decision was made until upwards of three weeks there*791after. Under such circumstances, section 439 of the Civil Practice Act has no application. However, since the judgment in favor of defendant was on the merits, and not a nonsuit, a decision, stating the facts which the trial court deemed essential, was required. (Civ. Prae. Act, § 440; *Aufiero*v. *Aufiero,*222 App. Div. 479; *Murphy*v. *Murphy,*223 App. Div. 701; *Minner*v. *Minner,*238 N. Y. 529.) We are unable to determine, on the basis of the decision in the record, what facts the trial court deemed essential, or the allegations of the complaint as to which the trial court concluded that the plaintiff had not sustained the burden of proof. A new trial is not required, but a proper decision is necessary as a basis for the judgment appealed from. Since the case is remitted, and while we do not so direct, the court at Special Term may, if so advised, consider and pass upon the findings and requests to find heretofore submitted. Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of Henry Ettinger, as Assignee of Arthur A. Ballantine, Trustee, Respondent, against George H. Clayton, Jr., Appellant.

-In proceedings supplementary to judgment, respondent moved for an order pursuant to section 793 of the Civil Practice Act, directing appellant to make installment payments of $25 a week on account of the judgment. Respondent’s motion was granted and appellant’s motion for reargument was denied. Appellant then moved for an order vacating or modifying the order directing him to make such payments, on the ground that his status had materially changed since the entry of the order, and the appeal is from the denial of that motion. Order reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to Special Term for determination, after a hearing before the court or a referee, as the court may be advised. Appellant’s affidavit stated that he was newly employed by a named corporation in a stated capacity at a salary of $40 a week. In opposition, *877nothing was presented to show that he or his relatives or his wife’s relatives, or some friend owned or controlled such corporation, or that his employment there was not actual employment, or that he was working as a toolmaker, or that his compensation was merely colorable and designed to defraud or impede his creditors. Nolan, P. J., Adel, MaeCrate, Schmidt and Beldoek, JJ., concur.
Rev 0 (9/08) 

## Com **ments i**  **n Response to “**  **Final r**  **ule; r**  **equest for c**  **om ments**  **”**
**Docket: FAA**  **- 20**  **11 -**  **1000 Directorate Identifier**  **2011 -**  **NM -**  **048 -** **AD** Comments have been received in response to : **“ Final rule; requ**  **est for comments,”** Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket and Directorate Identifier entered above. (Project engineer: Please review any comments to determine if additional action is warranted. Once you have made your determination, please fill in the com menter(s) name(s) and check the appropriate response below. Include additional information following the appropriate response, if necessary. Then **include your name and**  **the date**  in the spaces provided, and return it to the AD directorate focal. The FAA has reviewed comment(s) related to the above FAA Docket that we re ceived from: Empire Airlines **(Please check on**  **e**

**)** These comments **have not** been found to contain any information to warrant reconsideration or change of this AD. These comments **have** been found to contain information that warrants consideration of additional regulatory

action. 

### (SEE Airworthiness Directives Manual **FAA -**  **IR -**  **M -**  **8040.1 FOR ADDITIONAL ACTION.)**

______Jeffrey

L ee

____ _ December 9, 2011

__ Name: Date:

(This form is part of the official docket file for this AD action.)
----

**Foreword**
**Preface**
- Acronyms and Abbreviations  Chronology
**Part I: The American Response to Soviet Espionage**
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-02-0098 - Status of the Staff's Evaluation of the Possible Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Agency's Enforcement Program

Accession Number: ML021300507

Date Released: Wednesday, June 19, 2002

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.
    - ML021300431 - SECY-02-0098 - Status of the Staff's Evaluation of the Possible Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Agency's Enforcement Program (6 page(s), 6/4/2002)
    - ML020160325 - General Notice Comment Letter Regarding Alternative Dispute Resolution from Marvin I. Lewis (1 page(s), 1/12/2002)
    - ML020310039 - General Notice Comment Letter on Enforcement Program and Alternative Dispute Resolution from Florida Power & Light. (1 page(s), 1/25/2002)
    - ML020310012 - General Notice Comment Letter on Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the NRC'S Enforcement Program from Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP (4 page(s), 1/28/2002)
    - ML020310010 - General Notice Comment Letter on ADR in NRC Enforcement from USI. (6 page(s), 1/25/2002)
    - ML020310008 - General Notice Comment Letter on Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the NRC's Enforcement Program from NEI. (10 page(s), 1/28/2002)
    - ML020310036 - General Notice Comment Letter on Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the NRC's Enforcement Program 66 Fed. Reg. 64890, December 14, 2001 from North Atlantic. (1 page(s), 1/25/2002)
    - ML020430016 - General Notice Comment Letter on Use of Alternate Dispute Resolution in the NRC's Enforcement Program from Exelon. (2 page(s), 1/28/2002)
    - ML020360373 - General Notice Comment Letter on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the NRC's Enforcement Program from TVA. (1 page(s), 1/30/2002)
    - ML020300013 - General Notice Comment Letter on the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the NRC's Enforcement Program from Akin Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld. (8 page(s), 1/28/2002)
    - ML020430017 - General Notice Comment Letter on NRC Enforcement Program and Alternative Dispute Resolution UCS. (6 page(s), 2/5/2002)
    - ML020440299 - General Notice Comment Letter on NRC intent to evaluate use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in NRC's enforcement program from State of Illinois. (3 page(s), 2/8/2002)
    - ML021010317 - General Notice Comment Letter on Enforcement Program and Alternative Dispute Resolution Request from Clifford, Lyons & Garde dated 3/28/02. (41 page(s), 3/28/2002)
    - ML021340553 - SECY-02-0098Atch1 - Summary of March 2002 Workshop (2 page(s), 6/4/2002)
    - ML021340570 - SECY-02-0098Atch2- Summary of Public Comments (33 page(s), 6/4/2002)
    - ML021350380 - The Role of the Commission: The Need for a Comprehensive Solution in Addressing Employee Concerns of Retaliation (8 page(s), 3/25/2002)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
REGULATORY EV AL UAnON

Directorate Identifier: 2009-NM~206-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory- action"?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES () explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a s bstantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is iI appropriate to include specific

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aVIation might be the only mode of

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
VII 

Private Calendar No. 1

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1658

[Report No. 108–251] 

To amend the Railroad Right-of-Way Conveyance Validation Act to validate 

additional conveyances of certain lands in the State of California that 

form part of the right-of-way granted by the United States to facilitate 

the construction of the transcontinental railway, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 7, 2003

Mr. POMBO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Resources 

SEPTEMBER 3, 2003

Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to be printed 

A BILL

To amend the Railroad Right-of-Way Conveyance Validation 

Act to validate additional conveyances of certain lands 

in the State of California that form part of the rightof-way granted by the United States to facilitate the 

construction of the transcontinental railway, and for 

other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2

•HR 1658 RH 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Railroad Right-of-Way 

3 Conveyance Validation Act of 2003’’. 

4 SEC. 2. VALIDATION OF ADDITIONAL RAILROAD CONVEY5 ANCES, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 

6 Section 4 of the Railroad Right-of-Way Conveyance 

7 Validation Act (Private Law 103–2; 108 Stat. 5061) is 

8 amended by adding at the end the following new para9 graphs: 

10 ‘‘(9) The conveyance entered into between the 

11 Central Pacific Railway Company and the Southern 

12 Pacific Transportation Company and the Bank of 

13 America, as trustee of the last will and testament of 

14 Aaron Herschel, recorded September 27, 1945, in 

15 volume 942 at page 104 of the official records of the 

16 county of San Joaquin. 

17 ‘‘(10) The conveyance entered into between the 

18 Central Pacific Railway Company and the Southern 

19 Pacific Transportation Company and the Tri-Valley 

20 Packing Association, recorded November 13, 1957, 

21 in volume 2016 at page 149 of the official records 

22 of the county of San Joaquin.’’. 

Private Calendar No. 1

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1658

[Report No. 108

–251] 

A BILL

To amend the Railroad Right-of-Way Conveyance 

Validation Act to validate additional conveyances of certain lands in the State of California that form part of the right-of-way granted by the United States to facilitate the construction of the transcontinental railway, and for other purposes. 

SEPTEMBER 3, 2003

Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
June 9, 2011 

Average utilization of the nation's natural gas 

combined-cycle power plant fleet is rising

Average capacity factors for the Nation's fleet of natural gas combined-cycle power plants have 

increased steadily since 2005. Increased use of these plants means that facilities that previously

served peaking or more often intermediate load needs now contribute more significantly to 

baseload electricity needs. 

The chart shows that the average utilization of natural gas combined-cycle power plants has 

increased across hours of the day. Between 2005 (purple line) and 2010 (red line) average 

capacity factors for natural gas plant operations between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. rose from 26% to 

32%. For peak hours—from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.—capacity factors averaged about 50% (the 

red line) on a national basis in 2010 compared to about 40% in 2005. 

Both increasing domestic supply of natural gas and lower natural gas prices, together with the 

high efficiency of combined-cycle power plants, have contributed to their increased use.
NRC NEWS

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. II-04-036 April 23, 2004

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

Roger Hannah (404)562-4417

NRC NAMES WIDMANN SENIOR RESIDENT INSPECTOR 

AT NORTH ANNA NUCLEAR STATION

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in the Region II office in Atlanta have announced

the assignment of Malcolm Widmann as the new Senior Resident Inspector at the North Anna nuclear

station near Mineral, Virginia.

Before being assigned to North Anna, Widmann had been the Senior Resident Inspector at the

Summer nuclear plant, located near Jenkinsville, South Carolina. Prior to that assignment, Widmann was

a resident inspector at the Vogtle nuclear plant near Waynesboro, Georgia. Widmann joined the NRC in

1991 as a technical reviewer in the agency’s Rockville, Maryland, headquarters. 

Widmann holds a Bachelor of Science degree in mechanical engineering from Drexel University

in Philadelphia. Before joining the NRC, he held positions with the U.S. Department of Defense, Dupont

Chemical and Westinghouse Savannah River Company.

Each of the country’s commercial nuclear power plants has assigned NRC resident inspectors who

serve as the agency's eyes and ears at the facility, conducting regular inspections, monitoring significant

work projects and interacting with plant workers and the public. 

Widmann joins NRC Resident Inspector James Canady and Site Secretary Barbara Longley at the

North Anna plant. The NRC inspectors at North Anna can be reached at 540-894-5421.

###
###### 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.

#### § 351.529 Certain fees, fines, and penalties.

(a) *Financial contribution.* When determining if a fee, fine, or penalty that is otherwise due, has been forgone or not collected, within the meaning of section 771(5)(D)(ii) of the Act, the Secretary may conclude that a financial contribution exists if information on the record demonstrates that payment was otherwise required and was not made, in full or in part. In making such a determination, the Secretary will not be required to consider whether the government took efforts to seek payment or grant deferral, or otherwise acknowledged nonpayment, of the fee, fine, or penalty.

(b) *Benefit.* If the Secretary determines that the government has exempted or remitted in part or in full, a fee, fine, or penalty under paragraph (a) of this section, a benefit exists to the extent that the fee, fine, or penalty paid by a party is less than if the government had not exempted or remitted that fee, fine, or penalty. Further, if the government is determined to have deferred the payment of the fee, fine, or penalty, in part or in full, a benefit exists to the extent that appropriate interest charges are not collected. Normally, a deferral of payment of fees, fines, or penalties will be treated as a government provided loan in the amount of the payments deferred, according to the methodology described in § 351.505.

[89 FR 20841, Mar. 25, 2024]
### §2609. Penalties

#### (a) General penalty

Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a person violating this chapter is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $25,000. Each day of a continuing violation is a separate violation. A vessel involved in the violation also is liable in rem for the penalty.

#### (b) Operating without a permit

A person violating section 2602 of this title is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $10,000. Each day of a continuing violation is a separate violation. A vessel involved in the violation also is liable in rem for the penalty.

#### (c) Criminal penalty

Any person that knowingly violates, or that knowingly aids, abets, authorizes, or instigates a violation of this chapter, shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 3 years, or both.

#### (d) Payments for information

The court, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Administrator, as the case may be, may pay up to one-half of a fine or penalty to any person giving information leading to the assessment of the fine or penalty.

(Pub. L. 100–688, title IV, §4109, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4158.)
#### §§ 1636.112-1636.129 [Reserved]
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. 03-101 August 12, 2003

NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING AUGUST 19 ON ISSUES

ASSOCIATED WITH LOWER REACTOR HEAD INSPECTIONS

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with interested stakeholders on August

19 in Rockville, Md., to discuss issues relating to leakage from, and inspection of, penetrations in

reactor pressure vessel lower heads. The meeting will be held in the Commission Meeting Room

at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, from 9 a.m. until noon.

Members of the public are invited to participate by discussing these issues with NRC staff

at designated points during the meeting. Those interested can also participate via a toll-free

teleconference, by calling 888/769-8514 and providing the call leader’s name, “William

Reckley,” and the passcode “bulletin.” For more information on the meeting, contact William

Reckley at 301/415-1323 or Edmund Sullivan at 301/415-2796.

###
### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WILLIAM M. WINDSOR ) ) ) ) 

### Plaintiff,prose 

### v. ) Civil Case No. 10-0197 (RJL) ) 

### JUDGE ORINDA D. EVANS, etal. )

hereby ) 

### Defendants. ) 

### ORDER

# ~ (February 

### ",2010) Forthe reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is 

### ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for a Temporary Restraining Orderand Preliminary Injunction [# 3] is DENIED, and it is further 

### ORDERED that plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED, and it is further 

### ORDERED that all remaining motions [# 4, 5, 6, and 

### 7] are DENIED as MOOT, and it is further

1

### ORDERED thatthis matter be referred to the United States District Court for the Northern District ofGeorgia to determine whether plaintiffis in contempt ofan Order entered in that Court. SO ORDERED.

United States District Judge

2
§ 2606.103 Systems of records. ( a ) *Governmentwide systems of records.* The Office of Government Ethics maintains two executive branch Governmentwide systems of records: the OGE/GOVT-1 system of records, comprised of Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Reports and Other Name-Retrieved Ethics Program Records; and the OGE/GOVT-2 system of records, comprised of Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Reports. These Governmentwide systems of records are maintained by OGE, and through Office delegations of authority, by Federal executive branch departments and agencies with regard to their own employees, applicants for employment, individuals nominated to a position requiring Senate confirmation, candidates for a position, and former employees.
( b ) *OGE Internal systems of records.* The Office of Government Ethics internal systems of records are under OGE's physical custody and control and are established and maintained by the Office on current and former OGE employees regarding matters relating to the internal management of the Office. These systems of records consist of the OGE/INTERNAL-1 system, comprised of Pay, Leave and Travel Records; the OGE/INTERNAL-2 system, comprised of Telephone Call Detail Records; the OGE/INTERNAL-3 system, comprised of Grievance Records; the OGE/INTERNAL-4 system, comprised of Computer Systems Activity and Access Records; and the OGE/INTERNAL-5 system, comprised of Employee Locator and Emergency Notification Records.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

              CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 File Nos. 33-87591, 33-95803, 33-90727) pertaining to the 1999
Employee Stock Purchase Plan, 1998 Stock Plan, 1999 Directors' Stock Option
Plan; the 1998 Stock Option Plan; and the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
1998 Stock Plan, Promedix.com Inc. 1998 Stock Option Plan, SpecialtyMD.com
Corporation 1998 Stock Option Plan of our report dated February 7, 2000
(except for Note 18, as to which the date is February 10, 2000 and Note 19, as
to which the date is March 6, 2000) with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Ventro Corporation included in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1999.

                                                          /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

San Jose, California
March 13, 2000