alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
J~~SED STqT~s 

A '2 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

o aw /J Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

z ~~(~' z 

( PFiOZEG~ 

JAN - 5 2011 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

Mr. Dan Regan 

Attorney 

Interstate Natural Gas Association of America 

20 F Street, N.W., Suite 450 

Washington, D.C. 20001 

Dear Mr. Regan: 

The U.S . Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received the Petition for 

Reconsideration of the final National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines you submitted on October 19, 2010. This 

letter is to inform you that we intend to initiate a reconsideration process to address issues raised 

in that petition regarding the requirements for continuous parametric monitoring systems and the 

emission standard for four stroke lean burn engines. 

We received a total of six petitions for reconsideration of the August 20, 2010 final 

NESHAP for stationary RICE . We are granting reconsideration on the following issues raised in 

the petitions : 

" continuous parametric monitoring system requirements; 

" emission standard for existing four-stroke lean burn spark ignition engines; 

" methodology for considering emissions variability and establishing the floor for the 

maximum achievable control technology; 

" use of co-benefits of non-hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions reductions when 

determining maximum achievable control technologies and generally available control 

technologies ; 

" use of total hydrocarbons rather than formaldehyde as a surrogate for HAP emissions ; 

and 

" allowance for emergency engines to operate up to 15 hours per year as part of an 

emergency demand response program. 

At this time, we are not taking action of the following issues raised in the petitions: 

" provisions prohibiting use of emergency engines for peak shaving operation; 

" EPA's decision not to distinguish between engines located in urban and rural areas in 

establishing emission standards; and 

" EPA's decision not to have separate standards that would apply during periods of 

shutdown and malfunction. 

Recycled/Recyclable 

Internet Address (URL) " http://www .epa .gov 

" Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
The reconsideration process will allow for public participation on the issues raised under 

reconsideration. A more detailed description of the particular issues to be reconsidered and 

specific information about the process to be followed will be set out in a forthcoming Federal 

Re ister notice . If you have any questions regarding the reconsideration process, please contact 

Melanie King of my staff at (919) 541-2469. We thank you for your continuing interest in this 

rule and look forward to hearing from you during the reconsideration process . 

Assistant Administrator 

ina McCarthy
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2121

DONALD C. MARRO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CROSSCHECK, INCORPORATED,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (CA-04-147)

Submitted: December 16, 2004 Decided: December 20, 2004

Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald C. Marro, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Saindon Dudley, WHITEFORD,

TAYLOR & PRESTON, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Donald C. Marro appeals from the district court’s order

dismissing his complaint for failure to state claims for defamation

and for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15

U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692o (2000). We have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. See Marro v. Crosscheck, Inc., No. CA-04-

147 (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 6, 2004 & entered Aug. 11, 2004). 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
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1596 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1596

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2318 Woodson Road in St. Louis, Missouri, as the ``Timothy Michael 
                    Gaffney Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 3, 2003

    Mr. Clay (for himself, Mr. Akin, Mr. Gephardt, Mr. Skelton, Ms. 
  McCarthy of Missouri, Mr. Graves, Mr. Blunt, Mrs. Emerson, and Mr. 
   Hulshof) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2318 Woodson Road in St. Louis, Missouri, as the ``Timothy Michael 
                    Gaffney Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. TIMOTHY MICHAEL GAFFNEY POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2318 Woodson Road in St. Louis, Missouri, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Timothy Michael Gaffney Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Timothy 
Michael Gaffney Post Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
#### Lucy W. Wood, Appellant, v. Vogor Realty Corporation, Respondent.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Glennon, J., dissents and votes to affirm; Martin, P. J., taking no part.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 26, 2010 

p1018 

Order 

 

October 26, 2010 

141313 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141313 

 COA: 297212 

St. Clair CC: 08-002275-FC 

ALLAN JAY JAHN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 14, 2010 order 

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.
### §1012. Waiver, suspension, or reduction of rental or royalty

The Secretary may waive, suspend, or reduce the rental or royalty for any lease or portion thereof in the interests of conservation and to encourage the greatest ultimate recovery of geothermal resources, if he determines that this is necessary to promote development or that the lease cannot be successfully operated under the lease terms.

(Pub. L. 91–581, §13, Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1570; Pub. L. 109–58, title II, §236(13), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 672.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2005—Pub. L. 109–58 inserted section catchline.
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: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 04-114 September 14, 2004

NRC ISSUES GENERIC LETTER CONCERNING

POTENTIAL REACTOR CONTAINMENT SUMP ISSUE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has asked all operators of pressurized-water reactors

(PWR) for information related to containment sumps, a component of a safety-related water

recirculation system in nuclear power plants.

 Operating experience at boiling water reactors (the other type of commercial U.S. nuclear

power plant), as well as recent research, has indicated debris from certain pipe-break accidents inside a

containment building could potentially block PWR sumps. The NRC is requesting that PWR operators

evaluate how their plants’ long-term reactor core cooling systems would function, given the potential

for sump blockage, and take any appropriate actions to ensure the systems would work properly.

“We want reactor operators to take into account what might happen if a lot of debris ends up on

sump screens in an accident,” said Bruce Boger, Director of the Division of Inspection Program

Management in the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. “Several emergency systems could

require water from the sump, and the analysis we ask for will help ensure sumps remain available as an

ongoing water source if an accident occurs.”

The request is being made in a Generic Letter, one of several methods the NRC has for

communicating with the nuclear industry. The letter outlines requested actions for reactor operators,

including:

 Within 90 days of the NRC finalizing its guidance on evaluation methods (expected by the end

of October), PWR operators are asked to --

-- Describe the methodology to be used in evaluating the long-term core cooling

systems, as well as the anticipated completion date for the evaluation, and;

-- Describe how the interior of each PWR containment building will be examined

during the evaluation, as well as the anticipated completion date for the examination, or

justify why no such examination is needed;

 By Sept. 1, 2005 --
-2-

-- Provide confirmation that the Emergency Core Cooling System and Containment

Spray System comply with regulations, or will do so, including a description of the

plant’s configuration once all modifications are finished, and;

-- Provide a schedule for all corrective actions to be taken, starting no later than April 1,

2006, and finishing by Dec. 31, 2007.

The Generic Letter is available electronically through the NRC’s Agencywide Documents

Access and Management System (ADAMS) on the NRC web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html , by entering accession number ML042360586 . 

Help in using ADAMS is available from the NRC’s Public Document Room at 800-397-4209 or 301-

415-4737.

The NRC web site also contains a section dealing with staff activities on the PWR containment

sump issue, available at this address:

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/pwr-sump-performance.html .

###
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-40026 Summary Calendar

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus JOHN FREDERICK PETERMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C:94-CV-228 (C:91-CR-233)

- - - - - - - - - - December 20, 1995 Before KING, SMITH and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * This is an appeal from the district court's order denying appellant's motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He argues that the district court erred in dismissing his claims on the basis of procedural default. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for essentially the reasons given by the district court. AFFIRMED.
#### § 4.23 Certificate of payment and cash receipt.

Upon each payment of tonnage tax or light money, the master of the vessel shall be given a certificate on Customs Form 1002 on which the control number of the cash receipt (Customs Form 368 or 368A) upon which payment was recorded shall be written. This certificate shall constitute the official evidence of such payment and shall be presented upon each entry during the tonnage year to establish the date of commencement of the tonnage year and to insure against overpayment. In the absence of the certificate, evidence of payment of tonnage tax shall be obtained from the port director to whom the payment was made.

[T.D. 85-71, 50 FR 15415, Apr. 18, 1985, as amended by T.D. 92-56, 57 FR 24943, June 12, 1992]
#### § 2638.103 Government ethics responsibilities of supervisors.

Every supervisor in the executive branch has a heightened personal responsibility for advancing government ethics. It is imperative that supervisors serve as models of ethical behavior for subordinates. Supervisors have a responsibility to help ensure that subordinates are aware of their ethical obligations under the Standards of Conduct and that subordinates know how to contact agency ethics officials. Supervisors are also responsible for working with agency ethics officials to help resolve conflicts of interest and enforce government ethics laws and regulations, including those requiring certain employees to file financial disclosure reports. In addition, supervisors are responsible, when requested, for assisting agency ethics officials in evaluating potential conflicts of interest and identifying positions subject to financial disclosure requirements.
Order filed, March 8, 2018.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 17

- 00847

- CV

____________ MARCUS LADETTE DUNCA N , Appellant

V.

ARDMORE APARTMENTS , Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at Law No

. 4 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1099611



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due December 27, 2017. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. On February 6, 2018, this court issued an order requiring the court reporter to file the reporter’s record on or before March 8, 2018. On March 6, 2018, the court reporter notified this court that appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the record and is not appealing as indigent.Appellant filed a Statement of Inability to Afford Payment of Court Costs in
the trial court. No contest was filed. “ A party who files a Statement of Inability to Afford Payment of Court Costs cannot be required to pay costs except by order of the court as provided by this rule .” See Tex. R. Civ . P. 145(a)

. Appellant has not been ordered to pay costs pursuant to Rule 145.
Accordingly, w e order Jodi Masera, the official court reporter, to file the record in this ap peal within 30 days of the date of this order

.

PER CURIAM
458 P.2d 859

#### STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Billy Bob PARKER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 8895.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Sept. 2, 1969.

Ordered that petition for writ of certiorari he and the same is hereby denied.

Further ordered that the record in Court of Appeals Cause No. 282, 80 N.M. 551, 458 P.2d 803, be and the same is hereby returned to the Clerk of the Court of Appeals.
### §5326. "Member of the House" defined

As used in section 5324 of this title the phrase "Member of the House" shall mean a Representative, Representative-elect, Delegate, Delegate-elect, Resident Commissioner, or Resident Commissioner-elect.

(Aug. 21, 1935, ch. 600, §3, 49 Stat. 680.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 92d of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 3, 1935, see section 4 of act Aug. 21, 1935, set out as a note under section 5324 of this title.
Editorial Note on Part 142
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 142 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 142.14 Delinquent payment of Customs bills. The following procedure shall be followed if an importer is substantially or habitually delinquent in the payment of Customs bills: ( a ) *Notice.* The importer shall be advised in writing by the port director in which he is substantially or habitually delinquent that he shall file the entry summary documentation with estimated duties attached, before his merchandise may be released from Customs custody at that port. The notice shall state the reason for the action and advise the importer that if payment of all his delinquent Customs bills is not made within 10 working days from the date of the notice, he shall be required to file the entry summary document with estimated duties attached, before his merchandise may be released. In either case, the entry summary shall serve as both the entry and the entry summary.
( b ) *Removal of requirement by port.* If the importer pays all his delinquent Customs bills within 10 working days after the date of the notice, the requirement shall be removed, and the importer need file only the entry documentation specified in § 142.3 to secure release of his merchandise.
( c ) *Removal of requirement by Headquarters.* If the importer has not paid all his delinquent Customs bills within 10 working days after the date of the notice, he also shall be required to file the entry summary documentation, with estimated duties attached, at each Customs port. In this case, the entry summary shall serve as both the entry and the entry summary. This requirement shall remain in effect in each port of entry until notification is received from Headquarters that the requirement is removed and that the importer need submit only the entry documentation listed in § 142.3 to secure release of his merchandise.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1402 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 1402

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To designate the United States courthouse located at the corner of 
 Seventh Street and East Jackson Street in Brownsville, Texas, as the 
  ``Reynaldo G. Garza and Filemon B. Vela United States Courthouse''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 1402

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To designate the United States courthouse located at the corner of 
 Seventh Street and East Jackson Street in Brownsville, Texas, as the 
  ``Reynaldo G. Garza and Filemon B. Vela United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States courthouse located at the corner of Seventh 
Street and East Jackson Street in Brownsville, Texas, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Reynaldo G. Garza and Filemon B. Vela United 
States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States courthouse referred to 
in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Reynaldo G. 
Garza and Filemon B. Vela United States Courthouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 29, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
### §51. Water users' vested and accrued rights; enumeration of uses; protection of interest; rights-of-way for canals and ditches; liability for injury or damage to settlers' possession

Whenever, by priority of possession, rights to the use of water for mining, agricultural, manufacturing, or other purposes have vested and accrued, and the same are recognized and acknowledged by the local customs, laws, and the decisions of courts, the possessors and owners of such vested rights shall be maintained and protected in the same; and the right-of-way for the construction of ditches and canals for the purposes herein specified is acknowledged and confirmed; but whenever any person, in the construction of any ditch or canal, injures or damages the possession of any settler on the public domain, the party committing such injury or damage shall be liable to the party injured for such injury or damage.1

(R.S. §2339.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §2339 derived from act July 26, 1866, ch. 262, §9, 14 Stat. 253.

Section is also set out as the first par. of section 661 of Title 43, Public Lands.

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

#### Repeal; Savings Provision

Provision of this section, "and the right-of-way for the construction of ditches and canals for the purposes herein specified is acknowledged and confirmed; but whenever any person, in the construction of any ditch or canal, injures or damages the possession of any settler on the public domain, the party committing such injury or damage shall be liable to the party injured for such injury or damage." was repealed by Pub. L. 94–579, title VII, §706(a), Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2793, effective on and after Oct. 21, 1976, insofar as applicable to the issuance of rights-of-way over, upon, under, and through the public lands and lands in the National Forest System. Such repeal not to be construed as terminating any valid lease, permit, patent, etc., existing on Oct. 21, 1976, see section 701 of Pub. L. 94–579, set out as a note under section 1701 of Title 43, Public Lands.

#### Submerged Lands Act

Provisions of this section as not amended, modified or repealed by the Submerged Lands Act, see section 1303 of Title 43, Public Lands.

1 See Repeal; Savings Provision note below.
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-03-018 March 31, 2003

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC TO MEET WITH OFFICIALS FROM EXELON NUCLEAR

TO DISCUSS SAFETY PERFORMANCE AT CLINTON

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with officials from the Exelon

Generation Company on Thursday, April 3, to discuss the results of NRC’s annual assessment of the

Clinton nuclear power plant, located in Clinton, Illinois.

The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at the Vespasian Warner Public Library District, 310 N.

Quincy Street, in Clinton. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be

available before the conclusion of the meeting for questions and comments from the public.

A letter from the NRC to the Exelon Generation Company addresses plant safety performance

during the previous year and forms the basis for the meeting discussions. The letter states that,

overall, Clinton operated in a manner that preserved public health and safety and that plant

performance was at a level requiring no additional NRC inspection beyond normal baseline activities. 

The letter is available from Region III Public Affairs Office and on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/clin_2002q4.pdf

In addition, the letter notes: "As you are aware, since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,

the NRC has issued several Orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve

guard force readiness. We have conducted inspections to review your implementation of these

requirements and have monitored your actions in response to changing threat advisories. For calendar

Year 2003, we plan to continue these inspections and conduct portions of the security baseline inspection

program, as well as perform additional inspections to evaluate your compliance with new requirements

that may be ordered."

Current performance information for Clinton is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CLIN/clin_chart.html

###