alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### **CHAPTER 11—THE BUDGET AND FISCAL, BUDGET, AND PROGRAM INFORMATION**

Sec.
1101.
Definitions.
1102.
Fiscal year.
1103.
Budget ceiling.
1104.
Budget and appropriations authority of the President.
1105.
Budget contents and submission to Congress.
1106.
Supplemental budget estimates and changes.
1107.
Deficiency and supplemental appropriations.
1108.
Preparation and submission of appropriations requests to the President.
1109.
Current programs and activities estimates.
1110.
Year-ahead requests for authorizing legislation.
1111.
Improving economy and efficiency.
1112.
Fiscal, budget, and program information.
1113.
Congressional information.
[1114.
Repealed.]
1115.
Federal Government and agency performance plans.
1116.
Agency performance reporting.
1117.
Exemptions. 1

1118.
Pilot projects for performance goals.
1119.
Pilot projects for performance budgeting.
1120.
Federal Government and agency priority goals.
1121.
Quarterly priority progress reviews and use of performance information.
1122.
Transparency of programs, priority goals, and results.
1123.
Chief Operating Officers.
1124.
Performance Improvement Officers and the Performance Improvement Council.
1125.
Elimination of unnecessary agency reporting.
1126.
Program Management Improvement Officers and Program Management Policy Council. 2

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2011**—Pub. L. 111–352, §13(b), (c), Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3882, added items 1115, 1116, and 1120 to 1125, and struck out former items 1115 "Performance plans" and 1116 "Program performance reports".

**1994**—Pub. L. 103–355, title II, §2454(c)(3)(B), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3326, struck out item 1114 "Budget information on consulting services".

**1993**—Pub. L. 103–62, §11(b)(1), Aug. 3, 1993, 107 Stat. 295, added items 1115 to 1119.

1  So in original. Does not conform to section catchline.

2  Editorially supplied. Section 1126 added by Pub. L. 114–264 and Pub. L. 114–328 without corresponding amendment of chapter analysis.
§ 2425.3 Oppositions—who may file; time limits for filing; procedural and other requirements for filing. ( a ) *Who may file.* A party to arbitration under the provisions of chapter 71 of title 5 of the United States Code may file an opposition to an exception that has been filed under § 2425.2 of this part.
( b ) *Timeliness requirements.* Any opposition must be filed within thirty (30) days after the date the exception is served on the opposing party. For additional rules regarding computing the filing date, *see* 5 CFR 2425.8, 2429.21 and 2429.22.
( c ) *Procedural requirements.* Oppositions must comply with the requirements set forth in 5 CFR 2429.24 (Place and method of filing; acknowledgment), 2429.25 (Number of copies and paper size), 2429.27 (Service; statement of service), and 2429.29 (Content of filings).
#### Alfred G. Bennett, Plaintiff, v. Long Island Rail Road Company, Respondent, and August Posillico, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
### §791. Center for Audit Excellence

(a) Establishment.—The Comptroller General shall establish, maintain, and operate a center within the Government Accountability Office to be known as the "Center for Audit Excellence" (hereafter in this subchapter referred to as the "Center").

(b) Purpose and Activities.—

(1) In general.—The Center shall build institutional auditing capacity and promote good governance by providing affordable, relevant, and high-quality training, technical assistance, and products and services to qualified personnel and entities of governments (including the Federal Government, State and local governments, tribal governments, and governments of foreign nations), international organizations, and other private organizations.

(2) Determination of qualified personnel and entities.—Personnel and entities shall be considered qualified for purposes of receiving training, technical assistance, and products or services from the Center under paragraph (1) in accordance with such criteria as the Comptroller General may establish and publish.

(c) Fees.—

(1) Permitting charging of fees.—The Comptroller General may establish, charge, and collect fees (on a reimbursable or advance basis) for the training, technical assistance, and products and services provided by the Center under this subchapter.

(2) Deposit into separate account.—The Comptroller General shall deposit all fees collected under paragraph (1) into the Center for Audit Excellence Account established under section 792.

(d) Gifts of Property and Services.—The Comptroller General may accept and use conditional or non-conditional gifts of property (both real and personal) and services (including services of guest lecturers) to support the operation of the Center, except that the Comptroller General may not accept or use such a gift if the Comptroller General determines that the acceptance or use of the gift would compromise or appear to compromise the integrity of the Government Accountability Office.

(e) Sense of Congress Regarding Personnel.—It is the sense of Congress that the Center should be staffed primarily by personnel of the Government Accountability Office who are not otherwise engaged in carrying out other duties of the Office under this chapter, so as to ensure that the operation of the Center will not detract from or impact the oversight and audit work of the Office.

(Added Pub. L. 113–235, div. H, title I, §1401(a)(1), Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2539.)

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

#### Approval of Business Plan

Pub. L. 113–235, div. H, title I, §1401(b), Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2541, provided that: "The Comptroller General may not begin operating the Center for Audit Excellence under subchapter VII of chapter 7 of title 31, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)) until—

"(1) the Comptroller General submits a business plan for the Center to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate; and

"(2) each such Committee approves the plan."
#### § 1320.17 Information collection budget.

Each agency's Senior Official, or agency head in the case of any agency for which the agency head has not delegated responsibility under the Act for any component of the agency to the Senior Official, shall develop and submit to OMB, in such form, at such time, and in accordance with such procedures as OMB may prescribe, an annual comprehensive budget for all collections of information from the public to be conducted in the succeeding twelve months. For good cause, OMB may exempt any agency from this requirement.
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-04-043 September 16, 2004

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

Neil Sheehan, 610/337-5331

NRC, FPL TO DISCUSS APPARENT VIOLATION AT SEABROOK NUCLEAR PLANT

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of FPL Seabrook,

LLC, on Sept. 23 to discuss an apparent violation of agency requirements at the Seabrook nuclear

power plant. The company operates the plant, which is located in Seabrook, N.H.

 The meeting, known as a Predecisional Enforcement Conference, will begin at 9 a.m.

in the Public Meeting Room at the NRC’s Region I Office, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia,

Pa. The meeting will be open to the public. Interested members of the public will have an

opportunity to ask questions of NRC staff before the meeting is adjourned.

 The apparent violation involves a portion of NRC regulations known as 10 CFR (Code

of Federal Regulations) 50.59. Under 10 CFR 50.59, nuclear power plant operators may make

changes to their facilities without prior NRC approval but only if certain requirements are met.

 When the plant was licensed, the Safety Evaluation Report stated that the plant’s

circulating-water system (the system that draws water from the ocean, circulates it to cool various

plant components and then discharges it) had the potential to flood the turbine building if one of

its lines ruptured and its pumps were not halted. However, the safety evaluation further noted

that even if the pumps continued to operate, scuppers, or drains, and doors that were to be

installed in the turbine building would cause the water to flow out to the yard and away from

plant structures. In addition, water level alarms were to be installed in the circulating-water pits

in the turbine building to alert the control room of a system rupture.

 In 1997, Seabrook determined that neither the scuppers nor the pit level alarms had

been installed. In response, the level alarms were installed, but the scuppers were not. Instead,

the scuppers were removed from the plant’s FSAR. Seabrook took that action based on a 10

CFR 50.59 evaluation it conducted that indicated NRC approval was not needed.

 Based on an inspection completed on June 30 of this year, NRC inspectors have

concluded that the change to eliminate the scuppers required prior NRC approval.
-2-

 At the Predecisional Enforcement Conference, FPL Seabrook will be able to present

additional information concerning the issue, including the safety significance of the change.

 No decision will be made at the conference. Rather, NRC staff will take information

provided under consideration and render a decision regarding any possible enforcement action in

the near future.

 ###
### §35. Mississippi River, West Channel, opposite La Crosse, Wisconsin

The branch of the Mississippi River flowing between Grand Island and the mainland opposite the city of La Crosse, State of Wisconsin, and known as the West Channel, is declared unnavigable, and the said city of La Crosse is relieved of the necessity of maintaining a draw or pontoon bridge over said West Channel.

(Feb. 23, 1901, ch. 470, 31 Stat. 804.)
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 05-131 September 21, 2005

NRC RAISES SECURITY DESIGN EXPECTATIONS

FOR NEW REACTOR LICENSING ACTIVITIES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is modifying its approach to regulating advanced nuclear

power plants to explicitly encourage consideration of security earlier in reactor designs and license

applications.

The NRC is developing proposed revisions to its policy statement on advanced reactors, as well

as revisions to security-related aspects of the agency’s regulations for licensing new reactors. The aim

of the process is to have applicants submit security assessments early, so that plant designers establish

security features well before construction is planned. The NRC will notify the public about

opportunities to comment on the proposed changes.

“We’re looking to take advantage of the opportunities for early consideration of security, as

well as safety, to be incorporated into reactor designs,” said David Matthews, Director of the Division

of Regulatory Improvement Programs in the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

“Accordingly, security design expectations should be considered as early as possible in the design and

licensing of new reactors.”

The NRC staff will also work on setting standards for future reactor designs so that security is

integral to the design process. The staff’s discussion of the topic will be available from the NRC’s

electronic document database, ADAMS, by entering ML051100233 at this Web address:

http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm .

###
### §2238a. Estimate of harbor maintenance needs

For fiscal year 2014 and each fiscal year thereafter, the President's budget request submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, shall include—

(1) an estimate of the nationwide average availability, expressed as a percentage, of the authorized depth and authorized width of all navigation channels authorized to be maintained using appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund that would result from harbor maintenance activities to be funded by the budget request; and

(2) an estimate of the average annual amount of appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund that would be required to increase that average availability to 95 percent over a 3-year period.

(Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, §1537, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 585.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, also known as the MAP–21, and not as part of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 which comprises this chapter.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 2012, see section 3(a) of Pub. L. 112–141, set out as an Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment note under section 101 of Title 23, Highways.
#### The People of the State of New York *ex*rel. Cerana Apartments Corporation, Appellant, against Joseph Lilly et al., Constituting the Tax Commission of the City of New York, Respondents.

Settle order on notice. Present—Townley, Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

AnworthMortgage Asset Corporation 

Santa Monica, California 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-3 (No. 333-110744, No. 333-115392 and No. 333-164046) and Forms S-8 (No. 333-70478,No. 333-96563, No. 333-104227 and No. 333-129528) of Anworth Mortgage Asset Corporation of our report dated March 12, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements which appear in this Form 10-K. 

BDO Seidman, LLP 

Los Angeles, California

February 25, 2010
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 20, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 133056 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 133056 

 COA: 263671 
 Wayne CC: 04-010835-01

DENVER EDWIN LEE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 28, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal. 

d0613 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

June 20, 2007 

 Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 3, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64125-64126]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24548]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 4870]


Notice of Meeting of the Advisory Committee on International Law

    A meeting of the Advisory Committee on International Law will take 
place on Friday, November 19, 2004, from 10 a.m. to approximately 4 
p.m., as necessary, in Room 1105 of the United States Department of 
State, 2201 C Street, NW., Washington, DC. The meeting will be chaired 
by the Legal Adviser of the Department of State, William H. Taft, IV, 
and will be open to the public up to the capacity of the meeting room. 
The meeting will cover various issues relating to current international 
legal topics, including the role of the State Department in domestic 
litigation in light of the Supreme Court's decisions in Republic of 
Austria v. Altmann and Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, an update on the work 
of the International Law Commission, an update on prisoners and 
detainees, and

[[Page 64126]]

UN Security Council resolutions on general threats to peace and 
security.
    Entry to the building is controlled and will be facilitated by 
advance arrangements. Members of the public desiring access to the 
session should, by Wednesday, November 17, 2004 notify the Office of 
the Assistant Legal Adviser for United Nations Affairs (telephone (202) 
647-2767) of their name, Social Security number, date of birth, 
professional affiliation, address and telephone number in order to 
arrange admittance. This includes admittance for government employees 
as well as others. All attendees must use the ``C'' Street entrance. 
One of the following valid IDs will be required for admittance: any 
U.S. driver's license with photo, a passport, or a U.S. Government 
agency ID. Because an escort is required at all times, attendees should 
expect to remain in the meeting for the entire morning or afternoon 
session.

    Dated: October 27, 2004.
Judith L. Osborn,
Attorney-Adviser, Office of United Nations Affairs, Office of the Legal 
Adviser, Executive Director, Advisory Committee on International Law, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 04-24548 Filed 11-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-P
#### § 2416.140 Employment.

No qualified individual with disabilities shall, on the basis of disability, be subject to discrimination in employment under any program or activity conducted by the agency. The definitions, requirements, and procedures of section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 791), as established by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 29 CFR part 1614, shall apply to employment in federally conducted programs or activities.

[74 FR 51743, Oct. 8, 2009]
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 61 Forsyth Street, SW

 Atlanta, GA, 30303-8931

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov 

No. II-04-025 April 7, 2004

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

Roger Hannah (404)562-4417

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $88,000 CIVIL PENALTY AGAINST PROGRESS ENERGY

FOR TERMINATING CP&L EMPLOYEE ENGAGED IN PROTECTED ACTIVITY

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed an $88,000 civil penalty against

Progress Energy for violation of NRC regulatory requirements due to termination of a former Carolina

Power & Light Company employee engaged in activity protected by federal regulations.

NRC officials said the action is based upon a Department of Labor Administrative Review

Board Final Decision and Order of Remand, dated September 30, 2003, which found that protected

activity was a contributing factor when CP&L terminated the employment of its former Superintendent

of Site Access Authorization in April of 1999.

The NRC staff determined that CP&L, now Progress Energy, discriminated against the former

employee by terminating his employment, in part, for engaging in protected activity.

The matter was fully litigated during DOL proceedings, and the NRC has adopted the review

board’s Final Decision and Order of Remand. 

NRC officials said Progress Energy (formerly CP&L) has taken adequate corrective action to

prevent recurrence of similar problems.

###
### §2351. Durability, sustainability, and resilience

In carrying out the activities of the Corps of Engineers, the Secretary, to the maximum extent practicable, shall encourage the use of durable and sustainable materials and resilient construction techniques that—

(1) allow a water resources infrastructure project—

(A) to resist hazards due to a major disaster; and

(B) to continue to serve the primary function of the water resources infrastructure project following a major disaster;

(2) reduce the magnitude or duration of a disruptive event to a water resources infrastructure project; and

(3) have the absorptive capacity, adaptive capacity, and recoverability to withstand a potentially disruptive event.

(Pub. L. 113–121, title III, §3022, June 10, 2014, 128 Stat. 1301.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014, and not as part of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 which comprises this chapter.

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

#### "Secretary" Defined

Secretary means the Secretary of the Army, see section 2 of Pub. L. 113–121, set out as a note under section 2201 of this title.
§ 190.171 General; drawback allowance. ( a ) *General.* Section 313(p) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1313(p)), provides for drawback for duties, taxes, and fees paid on qualified articles (see definition below) which consist of either petroleum derivatives that are imported, duty-paid, and qualified for drawback under the unused merchandise drawback law (19 U.S.C. 1313(j)(1)), or petroleum derivatives that are manufactured or produced in the United States, and qualified for drawback under the manufacturing drawback law (19 U.S.C. 1313(a) or (b)).
( b ) *Allowance of drawback.* Drawback may be granted under 19 U.S.C. 1313(p): ( 1 ) In cases where there is no manufacture, upon exportation of the imported article, an article of the same kind and quality, or any combination thereof; or
( 2 ) In cases where there is a manufacture or production, upon exportation of the manufactured or produced article, an article of the same kind and quality, or any combination thereof.
( c ) *Calculation of drawback.* For drawback of finished petroleum derivatives pursuant to section 1313(p), the claimant is required to calculate the total amount of drawback due, for purposes of § 190.51(b), which will not exceed 99 percent of the allowable duties, taxes, and fees, subject to the following: ( 1 ) *Per unit averaging calculation.* The amount of duties, taxes, and fees eligible for drawback is determined by per unit averaging, as defined in § 190.2, for any drawback claim based on 19 U.S.C. 1313(p) pursuant to the standards set forth in § 190.172(b) and without respect to the limitations set forth in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of 19 U.S.C. 1313(l).
( 2 ) *Limitations.* The amount of duties, taxes, and fees eligible for drawback is not subject to the limitations set out in 19 U.S.C. 1313(p)(4) for unused merchandise claims (no manufacture) and manufacturing claims (see 190.173(e) and 190.174(f)).
( 3 ) *Federal excise tax.* For purposes of drawback of internal revenue tax imposed under Chapters 32 and 38 (with the exception of Subchapter A of Chapter 38) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (IRC), drawback granted on the export of substituted merchandise will be limited to the amount of taxes paid (and not returned by refund, credit, or drawback) on the substituted merchandise.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Bio Medica
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30,
2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 10, 2004
(the "Report"), I, Keith E. Palmer, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice
President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                              /s/ Keith E. Palmer
                              ---------------------
                              Keith E. Palmer
                              Chief Financial Officer and
                              Executive Vice President

                                November 12, 2004

                                       20