alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1206.9 Procedures for expedited closing of meetings. Instead of following the procedures described in §§ 1206.4 through 1206.8 of this part, and in §§ 1206.11 and 1206.12, the Board may expedite the closing of its meetings under the following conditions by using the following procedures: ( a ) *Finding.* ( 1 ) Most regular Board business consists of reviewing initial decisions in cases adjudicated after an opportunity for a hearing has been provided. Based on a review of this circumstance, the legislative history of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-454), the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), and the Board's regulations at 5 CFR part 1201, the Board finds that a majority of its meetings may properly be closed to the public under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(10) and 552b(d)(4).
( 2 ) Absent a compelling public interest to the contrary, meetings or portions of meetings that can be expected to be closed under these procedures include meetings held to consider the following: Petitions for review or cases that have been or may be reopened under 5 CFR 1201.114 through 1201.117; proposals to take action against administrative law judges under 5 CFR 1201.131 through 1201.136; and actions brought by the Special Counsel under 5 CFR 1201.129.
( b ) *Announcement.* The Board will announce publicly, at the earliest practicable time, the time, place, and subject matter of meetings or portions of meetings that are closed under this provision.
( c ) *Procedure for closing meetings under this section.* At the beginning of a meeting or portion of a meeting that is to be closed under this section, the Board may, by recorded vote of two of its members, decide to close the meeting or a portion of it to public observation. The Board may take this action, however, only after it receives a certification by the General Counsel under § 1206.6(b) of this part.
( d ) *Record Availability.* When the Board has closed a meeting or portion of a meeting under this paragraph, it will make the following available as soon as practicable: ( 1 ) A written record reflecting the vote of each participating member of the Board with respect to closing the meeting; and
( 2 ) The General Counsel certification under § 1206.6(b).
### §276b. Travel and related expenses

Funds expended by the Legislative Counsel of the Senate for travel and related expenses shall be subject to the same regulations and limitations (insofar as they are applicable) as those which the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration prescribes for application to travel and related expenses for which payment is authorized to be made from the contingent fund of the Senate.

(Pub. L. 98–51, title I, §106, July 14, 1983, 97 Stat. 267.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Congressional Operations Appropriation Act, 1984, which is title I of the Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1984, and not as part of section 1303 of act Feb. 24, 1919 which comprises this subchapter.

Section, as it relates to funds expended by the Senate Legal Counsel, is classified to section 288n of this title.
§ 1651.1 Definitions. ( a ) Definitions generally applicable to the Thrift Savings Plan are set forth at 5 CFR 1690.1.
( b ) As used in this subpart:
*Administrative finding* means an evidence-based determination reached by a hearing, inquiry, investigation, or trial before an administrative agency of competent jurisdiction in any State, territory or possession of the United States.
*Death benefit* means the portion of a deceased participant's account that is payable under FERSA's order of precedence.
*Order of precedence* means the priority of entitlement to a TSP death benefit specified in 5 U.S.C. 8424(d).
*Required beginning date* means the required beginning date as defined in Internal Revenue Code section 401(a)(9) and the regulations and guidance promulgated thereunder.
*Required minimum distribution* means the amount required to be distributed to a beneficiary participant beginning on the required beginning date and every year thereafter pursuant to Internal Revenue Code section 401(a)(9) and the regulations promulgated thereunder, as applicable.
[68 FR 35509, June 13, 2003, as amended at 74 FR 63062, Dec. 2, 2009; 78 FR 57784, Sept. 20, 2013; 84 FR 46423, Sept. 4, 2019; 85 FR 40571, July 7, 2020; 87 FR 31685, May 24, 2022]
<PAGE>   1
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-95181) and the Registration Statements on Form
S-8 (Nos. 333-70203 and 333-73053) of King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of our report
dated February 25, 2000, except for the information in Note 20 for which the
date is March 17, 2000, relating to the consolidated financial statements and
financial statement schedule, which appear in this Form 10-K.




/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Greensboro, North Carolina
March 30, 2000
### **CHAPTER 44—OCEANS AND HUMAN HEALTH**

Sec.
3101.
Interagency oceans and human health research program.
3102.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Oceans and Human Health Initiative.
3103.
Public information and outreach.
3104.
Authorization of appropriations.
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. 99-157 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Monday, July 26, 1999)

NOTE TO EDITORS: MEETING POSTPONED

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has postponed a meeting which was to be held

August 4-5 in Chicago to obtain public comment on issues related to the release of solid

materials having very small amounts of residual radioactivity from licensed facilities.

The request for comment was described in a Federal Register notice published June 30.

Some stakeholders indicated that the short period between the Federal Register notice

and the August workshop did not allow for adequate preparation time to become familiar with all

the issues.

This meeting was to be the first in a series of four on this topic. The first meeting will

now be held September 15-16 in San Francisco. Details on that meeting, as well as those

planned in Chicago, Atlanta, and Rockville, Maryland, will be announced at a later date.

###
§ 2422.9 How is the adequacy of a showing of interest determined? ( a ) *Adequacy.* Adequacy of a showing of interest refers to the percentage of employees in the unit involved as required by §§ 2422.3(c) and (d) and 2422.8(c)(1).
( b ) *Regional Director investigation of showing of interest and Decision and Order.* The Regional Director will conduct an investigation if deemed appropriate. A Regional Director's determination that the showing of interest is adequate is final and binding and not subject to collateral attack at a representation hearing or on appeal to the Authority. If the Regional Director determines that a showing of interest is inadequate, the Regional Director will issue a Decision and Order dismissing the petition, or denying a request for intervention.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1549 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1549

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to restore and make 
 permanent the exclusion from gross income for amounts received under 
qualified group legal services plans and to increase the maximum amount 
                           of the exclusion.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 1, 2003

  Mr. Rangel introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to restore and make 
 permanent the exclusion from gross income for amounts received under 
qualified group legal services plans and to increase the maximum amount 
                           of the exclusion.

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

SECTION 1. EXCLUSION FOR AMOUNTS RECEIVED UNDER QUALIFIED GROUP LEGAL 
              SERVICES PLANS RESTORED AND MADE PERMANENT.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (e) of section 120 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
    ``(e) Application of Section.--This section and section 501(c)(20) 
shall apply to taxable years beginning--
            ``(1) after December 31, 1976, and before July 1, 1992, and
            ``(2) after December 31, 2001.''
    (b) Increase in Maximum Exclusion.--The last sentence of section 
120(a) of such Code is amended by striking ``$70'' and inserting 
``$150''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2001.
                                 <all>
```
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

No. III-04-035 May 25, 2004

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC TO MEET WITH NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO DISCUSS

PERFORMANCE OF KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR PLANT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Nuclear

Management Company on June 2 to discuss the results of the agency’s assessment of safety

performance at the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant during 2003. The facility is located in Kewaunee,

Wisconsin.

The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at the Kewaunee Municipal Building Council Chamber

Conference Room, 401 5th Street, in Kewaunee. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and

NRC officials will be available before the conclusion of the meeting to answer questions from the

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

Process works.

The NRC has concluded that the plant operated safely last year. All NRC inspection findings

during the year were of very low safety significance and safety performance data indicated no issues

requiring NRC follow-up. 

Routine inspections are performed by the two NRC resident inspectors assigned to the plant

and by inspection specialists from the NRC’s Region III office in Lisle, Illinois. 

In its assessment, the NRC noted two concerns: recent inspections findings indicated

deficiencies within the engineering program and longstanding issues in the area of emergency

preparedness had not been resolved effectively. The NRC will continue to monitor the utility’s

response to these two issues.

A March 4 letter from the NRC to Nuclear Management Company officials addresses the

performance of the plant during 2003 and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is

available at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/kewa_2003q4.pdf

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. 

The NRC will continue security inspections during 2004.
-2-

Current performance indicators and inspection findings for the Kewaunee plant are available on

the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/KEWA/kewa_chart.html

###
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: September 17, 2015 520140 

________________________________

In the Matter of the Claim of

NAUM VOLFSON,

Appellant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

COMMISSIONER OF LABOR,

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: August 10, 2015

Before: Garry, J.P., Rose, Devine and Clark, JJ.

__________

Naum Volfson, New York City, appellant pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City

(Linda D. Joseph of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal

Board, filed November 3, 2014, which ruled that claimant's

request for a hearing was untimely.

Decision affirmed. No opinion.

Garry, J.P., Rose, Devine and Clark, JJ., concur.
-2- 520140 

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
### §276. Application of subchapter to Louisiana and New Mexico only

The provisions of this subchapter shall apply only to the States of Louisiana and New Mexico.

(Apr. 17, 1926, ch. 158, §6, 44 Stat. 302; July 16, 1932, ch. 498, 47 Stat. 701.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was not enacted as part of act Feb. 25, 1920, ch. 85, 41 Stat. 437, known as the Mineral Leasing Act, which comprises this chapter.

#### Amendments

1932—Act July 16, 1932, substituted "States of Louisiana and New Mexico" for "State of Louisiana".
### §46e. Repealed. Pub. L. 92–607, ch. V, §506(k)(6), formerly §506(h)(6), Oct. 31, 1972, 86 Stat. 1508, renumbered §506(i)(6), Pub. L. 95–391, title I, §108(a), Sept. 30, 1978, 92 Stat. 773, renumbered §506(j)(6), Pub. L. 96–304, title I, §101, July 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 889, renumbered §506(k)(6), Pub. L. 97–276, §101(e), Oct. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 1189

Section, acts July 1, 1946, ch. 530, 60 Stat. 392; Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 753, title I, §102, 60 Stat. 814, authorized the payment of charges for telegrams by Senators. See section 6314 of this title.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Pub. L. 92–607, ch. V, §506(k), formerly §506(h), Oct. 31, 1972, 86 Stat. 1507, renumbered §506(i) by Pub. L. 95–391, title I, §108(a), Sept. 30, 1978, 92 Stat. 773, renumbered §506(j) by Pub. L. 96–304, title I, §101, July 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 889, and renumbered §506(k) by Pub. L. 97–276, §101(e), Oct. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 1189, provided that the repeal is effective Jan. 1, 1973.
### The South Florida Environment: A Region Under Stress

By: Benjamin F. McPhersonRobert B. Halley

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1134

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (4.3 MB pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

**For additional information, contact:**
Caribbean-Florida Water Science CenterU.S. Geological Survey3321 College AvenueDavie, FL 33314

Contact Pubs Warehouse

#### Study Area

#### Table of Contents

- Abstract
- Introduction
- Environmental Setting—The Natural System
- Environmental Setting—The Altered System
- Water and Environmental Stress
- Summary and Research Needs
- References

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### § 1501.1 Name.

This Board shall be known as the International Organizations Employees Loyalty Board, and any reference to the “Board” in this part shall mean such International Organizations Employees Loyalty Board.
§ 1208.26 Appeals under another law, rule, or regulation. ( a ) The VEOA provides that 5 U.S.C. 3330a shall not be construed to prohibit a preference eligible from appealing directly to the Board from any action that is appealable under any other law, rule, or regulation, in lieu of administrative redress under VEOA (5 U.S.C. 3330a(e)(1)). An appellant may not pursue redress for an alleged violation of veterans' preference under VEOA at the same time he pursues redress for such violation under any other law, rule, or regulation (5 U.S.C. 3330a(e)(2)).
( b ) An appellant who elects to appeal to the Board under another law, rule, or regulation must comply with the provisions of subparts B and C of 5 CFR part 1201, including the time of filing requirement of 5 CFR 1201.22(b)(1).
Exhibit
21.1





**Subsidiaries
of Building Materials Holding Corporation**





**BMC
West Corporation**


****


1.
    
    BMCW, LLC2.
    
    BMC West Corporation SouthCentral3.
    
    BMCW SouthCentral, LP
(a)





(a)
    
    Owned 99% by BMCW, LLC and 1% by Building Materials
      Holding Corporation
 **BMC
Construction, Inc.**




1.
    
    KBI Construction, LLC (b)2.
    
    KB Industries Limited Partnership (c)3.
    
    KBI Norcal General Partnership (d)4.
    
    WBC Construction, LLC (e)5.
    
    WBC Mid-Atlantic,LLC (f)6.
    
    KBI Concrete, LLC (g)7.
    
    RCI Construction, LLC
(h)




(b)
    
    Includes 60% ownership of KBI Mechanical, LLC(c)
    
    Owned 99% by BMC Construction, Inc. and 1% by Building
      Materials Holding Corporation(d)
    
    Includes Vaughn Road, LLC, RJ Norcal, LLC and KBI Norcal
      Windows, Inc.(e)
    
    Owned 60% by BMC Construction, Inc. and includes a 51%
      ownership in A-1 Building Components, LLC(f)
    
    Owned 67.33% by BMC Construction, Inc.(g)
    
    Includes 100% ownership of Total Concrete, LLC(h)
    
    Owned 51% by BMC Construction,
Inc.





**BMC
Insurance, Inc.**
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Mechanism and Estimation of Fatigue Crack Initiation in Austenitic Stainless Steels in LWR Environments (NUREG/CR-6787, ANL-01/25)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6787 (PDF - 1.40 MB)
        - Errata – May 24, 2005

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**September 2001**Date Published:**August 2002

**Prepared by:** O.K. Chopra 

Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439

J. Muscara, NRC Project Manager

**Prepared for:**Division of Engineering Technology Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ****Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC Job Code Y6388

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code provides rules for the construction of nuclear power plant components. Figures I-9.1 through I-9.6 of Appendix I to Section III of the Code specify fatigue design curves for structural materials. However, the effects of light water reactor (LWR) coolant environments are not explicitly addressed by the Code design curves. Existing fatigue strain-vs.-life (ε-N) data illustrate potentially significant effects of LWR coolant environments on the fatigue resistance of pressure vessel and piping steels. This report provides an overview of fatigue crack initiation in austenitic stainless steels in LWR coolant environments. The existing fatigue ε-N data have been evaluated to establish the effects of key material, loading, and environmental parameters (such as steel type, strain range, strain rate, temperature, dissolved-oxygen level in water, and flow rate) on the fatigue lives of these steels. Statistical models are presented for estimating the fatigue ε-N curves for austenitic stainless steels as a function of the material, loading, and environmental parameters. Two methods for incorporating environmental effects into the ASME Code fatigue evaluations are presented. The influence of reactor environments on the mechanism of fatigue crack initiation in these steels is also discussed.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
##### 



DEARBORN BANCORP, INC.
FORM 10-Q (continued) Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C. § 1350, and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2005 (the Form 10-Q) of Dearborn Bancorp, Inc. (the Issuer). I, Michael J. Ross, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify that:  (i)
    The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer. Dated: May 10, 2005/s / Michael J. RossMichael J. RossPresident and Chief Executive Officer,Dearborn Bancorp, Inc.
§ 1201.126 Final decisions. ( a ) In any action to discipline an employee, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the administrative law judge, or the Board on petition for review, may order a removal, a reduction in grade, a debarment (not to exceed five years), a suspension, a reprimand, or an assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed $1,330, 5 U.S.C. 1215(a)(3), 7326; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
( b ) In any action in which the administrative law judge, or the Board on petition for review, finds under 5 U.S.C. 1505 that a State or local government employee has violated the Hatch Political Activities Act and that the employee's removal is warranted, the administrative law judge, or the Board on petition for review, will issue a written decision notifying the employing agency and the employee that the employee must be removed and not reappointed within 18 months of the date of the decision. If the agency fails to remove the employee, or if it reappoints the employee within 18 months, the administrative law judge, or the Board on petition for review, may order the Federal entity administering loans or grants to the agency to withhold funds from the agency as provided under 5 U.S.C. 1506.
[62 FR 48451, Sept. 16, 1997, as amended at 70 FR 30609, May 27, 2005; 78 FR 39545, July 2, 2013; 82 FR 25716, June 5, 2017; 83 FR 1174, Jan. 10, 2018; 84 FR 5584, Feb. 22, 2019; 85 FR 12724, Mar. 4, 2020; 86 FR 7798, Feb. 2, 2021; 87 FR 3176, Jan. 21, 2022; 88 FR 4080, Jan. 24, 2023; 89 FR 1330, Feb. 14, 2024]
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-05-0073 - Implementation of New US NRC Responsibilites under National Defense Authorization Act of 2005 in Reviewing Waste Determination of the US DOE

Accession Number: ML050490264

Date Released: Monday, May 16, 2005

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.
    - ML050260464 - SECY-05-0073 - Implementation of New U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Responsibilities under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2005 Regarding Review of Waste Determinations for the U.S. Department of Energy (7 page(s), 4/28/2005)
    - ML050490260 - Implementation of the NRC Responsibilities Under the NDAA (11 page(s), 4/28/2005)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer