alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsMOD-2 wind turbine developmentThe development of the Mod-2 turbine, designed to achieve a cost of electricity for the 100th production unit that will be competitive with conventional electric power generation is discussed. The Mod-2 wind turbine system (WTS) background, project flow, and a chronology of events and problem areas leading to Mod-2 acceptance are addressed. The role of the participating utility during site preparation, turbine erection and testing, remote operation, and routine operation and maintenance activity is reviewed. The technical areas discussed pertain to system performance, loads, and controls. Research and technical development of multimegawatt turbines is summarized.Document ID19840005602Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsGordon, L. H.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Andrews, J. S.*(Boeing Engineering and Construction Co. Tukwila, Wash., United States)*Zimmerman, D. K.*(Boeing Engineering and Construction Co. Tukwila, Wash., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1983Subject CategoryEnergy Production And ConversionReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:83460DOE/NASA/20305-9NASA-TM-83460E-1776Meeting InformationMeeting: Wind WorkshopLocation: Minneapolis, MNCountry: United StatesStart Date: June 1, 1983End Date: June 3, 1983Accession Number84N13670Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: DE-AI01-79ET-20305Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840005602.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
### §2002. Definitions

In this chapter:

#### (1) Contract

The term "contract" means a procurement contract within the meaning of section 6303 of title 31.

#### (2) Cooperative agreement

The term "cooperative agreement" means a cooperative agreement within the meaning of section 6305 of title 31.

#### (3) Director

The term "Director" means the Director of the National Science Foundation.

#### (4) Grant

The term "grant" means a grant awarded under a grant agreement (within the meaning of section 6304 of title 31).

#### (5) Industrial enterprise

The term "industrial enterprise" means a private, nongovernmental enterprise that has an expertise or capability that relates to methane hydrate research and development.

#### (6) Institution of higher education

The term "institution of higher education" means an institution of higher education (as defined in section 1002 of title 20).

#### (7) Secretary

The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy.

#### (8) Secretary of Commerce

The term "Secretary of Commerce" means the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

#### (9) Secretary of Defense

The term "Secretary of Defense" means the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Secretary of the Navy.

#### (10) Secretary of the Interior

The term "Secretary of the Interior" means the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the United States Geological Survey, the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, and the Director of the Minerals Management Service.

(Pub. L. 106–193, §3, as added Pub. L. 109–58, title IX, §968(a), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 895.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3 of Pub. L. 106–193 was set out in a note under section 1902 of this title prior to the general amendment of Pub. L. 106–193 by Pub. L. 109–58.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

The Minerals Management Service was abolished and functions divided among the Office of Natural Resources Revenue, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement. See Secretary of the Interior Orders No. 3299 of May 19, 2010, and No. 3302 of June 18, 2010, and chapters II, V, and XII of title 30, Code of Federal Regulations, as revised by final rules of the Department of the Interior at 75 F.R. 61051 and 76 F.R. 64432.
#### Habakkuk E.B. YOWEL, a/k/a Bartholomew Robinson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James S. GILMORE, III, Governor of Virginia; John H. Hager, Lieutenant Governor of Virginia; Mark L. Earley, former Attorney General of Virginia; Mark R. Davis, Senior Assistant Attorney General; R. Angelone, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections; Fred L. Finkbeiner, Chairman of Virginia Board of Corrections; R.A. Young, Regional Director of Virginia Department of Corrections; L.W. Jarvis, Warden, Bland Correctional Center, Defendants-Appellees.

*64No. 02-6316.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 25, 2002.

Decided May 8, 2002.

Habakkuk E.B. Yowel, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Habakkuk E.B. Yowel appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Yowel v. Gilmore,*No. CA-01-952-2 (E.D. Va., filed Feb. 6, 2002; entered Feb. 7, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
### **CHAPTER 46—NATIONAL LEVEE SAFETY PROGRAM**

Sec.
3301.
Definitions.
3302.
Committee on Levee Safety.
3303.
Inventory and inspection of levees.
3303a.
Levee safety initiative.
3303b.
Reports.
3304.
Limitations on statutory construction.
3305.
Authorization of appropriations.
3306.
Certain levee improvements.
3307.
Assessment of Corps of Engineers levees.
#### § 118.12 Action on application.

Following submission of all applications in accordance with §§ 118.2 and 118.11 of this part, the port director will advise the public of the applications received and invite comments thereon under the public notice and comment procedures set forth in § 118.2; with regard to each application, the notice will set forth the name of the applicant, the address of the facility proposed to be operated as the CES, the proposed fee schedule, the list of equipment at the facility, and the number of employees to be involved in the CES operation. The port director, based on a review of all applications under the criteria set forth in § 118.11 and any public comments submitted under § 118.2 or this section, shall determine whether a CES operator should be selected and, if a CES operator is to be selected, shall select the applicant that will best meet the examination needs of Customs and facilitate the movement of merchandise.

[T.D. 93-6, 58 FR 5604, Jan. 22, 1993, as amended by T.D. 99-64, 64 FR 43266, Aug. 10, 1999]
### Water quality in the Georgia-Florida coastal plain, Georgia and Florida, 1992-96

By: Marian P. BerndtHilda H. HatzellChristy A. CrandallMichael TurtoraJohn R. PittmanEdward T. Oaksford

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1151

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area
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. 03-133 October 15, 2003

NRC ANNOUNCES AVAILABILITY OF APPLICATION FOR

EARLY SITE PERMIT AT CLINTON NUCLEAR PLANT LOCATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is announcing the availability of an application from

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, for an early site permit for the Clinton nuclear power plant site,

near Clinton, Illinois. AmerGen Energy Co., LLL, currently operates a nuclear reactor at the site.

In March the NRC held a public meeting in Clinton to discuss the early site review process. If

an early site permit were granted, it would allow the site to be used for one or more new nuclear

reactors. The NRC’s early site permit process allows resolution of issues relating to a site before a

company decides whether to file an application for permission to actually build and operate a nuclear

power plant at that location. The NRC’s formal review will address site safety, environmental

protection, and emergency planning issues. If the agency approves the early site permit request, Exelon

could reference the permit at any time for up to 20 years in an application with the NRC for approval to

begin construction of one or more new reactors.

The Clinton early site permit application is available electronically at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html -- enter ML032721596 as the search term. A

copy of the application is also available for public review at the NRC Public Document Room, located

at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; telephone: 800/397-4209 or 301/415-4737.

Local residents may view the application at the Vespasian Warner Public Library in Clinton.

The NRC staff is currently conducting an initial review of the application to determine whether

it contains enough information for the staff to perform a comprehensive technical review. If the

application has sufficient information, the NRC will formally “docket,” or file, the application and will

announce an opportunity for affected persons to participate in the required hearing. 

###
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
AUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31ST, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> 0
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          16,150
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,767
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,800
<INVENTORY>                                      2,834
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                69,209
<PP&E>                                         111,170
<DEPRECIATION>                                  48,413
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 462,863
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           46,582
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           306
<OTHER-SE>                                     343,621
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   462,863
<SALES>                                        185,084
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               185,084
<CGS>                                           52,830
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   96,904
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                65,113
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,986
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (32,873)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,680
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (35,553)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    830
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (36,383)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 208 (Thursday, October 28, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62916-62917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24195]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

October 20, 2004.

Time and Date: 10 a.m., Tuesday, November 9, 2004.

Place: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, 9th Floor, 601 New Jersey 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.

Status: Open.

Matters to be Considered: The Commission will hear oral argument on an 
appeal of Eastern Associated Coal Corporation from the decision of an 
administrative law judge in Secretary of Labor v. Eastern Associated 
Coal

[[Page 62917]]

Corporation, Docket No. WEBA 2002-46. (Issues include whether the judge 
properly concluded that Eastern Associated Coal Corp. violated 30 CFR 
48.11(a)(3) when it did not train two independent contractor employees 
on the provisions of its roof control plan addressing roof grouting.)
    Any person attending this meeting who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs, 
subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d).

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Ellen, (202) 434-9950/(202) 708-9300 
for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

Jean H. Ellen,
Chief Docket Clerk.
[FR Doc. 04-24195 Filed 10-26-04; 11:49 am]
BILLING CODE 6735-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 240 (Friday, December 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 64344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27135]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Final Effect of Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition 
to the Special Exposure Cohort

AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and 
Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: HHS gives notice concerning the final effect of the HHS 
decision to designate a class of employees from the Sandia National 
Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico, as an addition to the Special 
Exposure Cohort (SEC) under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
Compensation Program Act of 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Director, 
Division of Compensation Analysis and Support, NIOSH, 1090 Tusculum 
Avenue, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226-1938, Telephone 877-222-7570. 
Information requests can also be submitted by email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#88cccbc9dbc8cbcccba6cfc7de"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b8fcfbf9ebf8fbfcfb96fff7ee">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b). 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C).

    On October 18, 2018, as provided for under 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C), 
the Secretary of HHS designated the following class of employees as an 
addition to the SEC:

    All employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor 
agencies, and its contractors or subcontractors who worked in any 
area at the Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico, 
during the period from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 1996, 
for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, 
occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with 
work days within the parameters established for one or more other 
classes of employees included in the Special Exposure Cohort.

    This designation became effective on October 18, 2018. Therefore, 
beginning on November 17, 2018, members of this class of employees, 
defined as reported in this notice, became members of the SEC.

Frank J. Hearl,
Chief of Staff, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2018-27135 Filed 12-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4163-19-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6535
ROBERT LEE COBBS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Justice Committee; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-1577-0-20BD) Submitted: January 6, 1998 Decided: January 22, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lee Cobbs, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Robert Cobbs seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions accepting the magistrate judge's report and find no reversible error. Cobbs's petition challenged the voluntarinessof his guilty plea and alleged that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Cobbs failed to preserve these issues for our review, both by failing to file timely objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation that these claims be denied despite being warned that such failure would waive appellate review, see Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985), and by failing to raise these issues in his informal brief, see Local Rule 34(b). Cobbs's only remaining contention is that a post-conviction affidavit submitted by the victim of his crime recanting her trial testimony proves his actual innocence. We dismiss this claim on the reasoning of the district court. See Cobbs v. South Carolina , No. CA-96-1577-20BD (D.S.C. Mar. 31, 1997). Accordingly, we denya certificate of appealability and dismiss this appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
§ 1215.7 Coordinating offset with another Federal agency. ( a ) *The MSPB as the creditor agency.* ( 1 ) When the Chairman determines that an employee of a Federal agency owes a delinquent debt to the MSPB, the Chairman shall as appropriate: ( i ) Arrange for a hearing upon the proper petitioning by the employee;
( ii ) Certify in writing that the employee owes the debt, the amount and basis of the debt, the date on which payment is due, the date the Government's right to collect the debt accrued, and that MSPB regulations for salary offset have been approved by the Office of Personnel Management;
( iii ) Advise the paying agency of the amount or percentage of disposable pay to be collected in each installment, if collection is to be made in installments;
( iv ) Advise the paying agency of the actions taken under 5 U.S.C. 5514(b) and provide the dates on which action was taken unless the employee has consented to salary offset in writing or signed a statement acknowledging receipt of procedures required by law. The written consent or acknowledgment must be sent to the paying agency;
( v ) If the employee is in the process of separating, MSPB must submit its debt claim to the paying agency as provided in this part. The paying agency must certify any amounts already collected, notify the employee, and send a copy of the certification and notice of the employee's separation to the creditor agency. If the paying agency is aware that the employee is entitled to Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund or similar payments, it must certify to the agency responsible for making such payments the amount of the debt and that the provisions of this part have been followed; and
( vi ) If the employee has already separated and all payments due from the paying agency have been paid, the Chairman may request unless otherwise prohibited, that money payable to the employee from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund or other similar funds be collected by administrative offset.
( b ) *MSPB as the paying agency.* ( 1 ) Upon receipt of a properly certified debt claim from another agency, deductions will be scheduled to begin at the next established pay interval. The employee must receive written notice that the MSPB has received a certified debt claim from the creditor agency, the amount of the debt, the date salary offset will begin, and the amount of the deduction(s). The MSPB shall not review the merits of the creditor agency's determination of the validity or the amount of the certified claim.
( 2 ) If the employee transfers to another agency after the creditor agency has submitted its debt claim to the MSPB and before the debt is collected completely, the MSPB must certify the total amount collected. One copy of the certification must be furnished to the employee. A copy must be furnished the creditor agency with notice of the employee's transfer.
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of USA Technologies, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 (the “Report”), I, David M. DeMedio, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:





(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/ David M. DeMedioDavid M. DeMedioChief Financial Officer