alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: <Rick.Boddicker@state.sd.us>

To: Gail Fallon/R8/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: <Brian.Gustafson@state.sd.us> Date: 03/26/2012 06:49 AM Subject: Big Stone Information for EPA



## Gail,

The two attached PDF files discuss when the Over Fi re Air System was installed at Big Stone and the reasons why Big Stone was installing those syst ems. Let us know if you have any other questions.

Rick

Big Stone Overfire AirA.pdf

Big Stone Overfire AirB.pdf
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-97-31 March 17, 1997

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC TO HOLD A PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE WITH ILLINOIS

POWER COMPANY ON APPARENT VIOLATIONS AT CLINTON NUCLEAR STATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet March 20 with

representatives of Illinois Power Company for a predecisional enforcement

conference on findings from a radiation protection inspection at the Clinton

Nuclear Power Station. The station is located near Clinton, Illinois.

The meeting will start at 12:30 p.m. in the Third Floor Conference Room

of the NRC Region III Office, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois. It will

be open to public observation.

The focus will be on several apparent radiation protection violations in

November and January. On November 14, three plant workers were allowed to

perform work in a prohibited area of containment during refueling operations.

They were in the area for about 10 minutes before Illinois Power realized they

should not have been there at that time. The workers received a small

fraction of the radiation dose limit, but significant radiation doses to

workers could have occured in that containment area in the event of a mishap

during fuel movements.

In another instance, on January 7, three workers became contaminated

with low levels of radioactive waste during a spill in the radioactive waste

treatment area. As the workers were flushing sediment from a radioactive

waste drum, a hose connected to a pump became blocked. When they disconnected

the hose to attempt repair, it depressurized and sprayed them with low level

radioactive sludge. All radioactive waste processing was halted and the three

were promptly decontaminated.

Other apparent violations to be discussed include: workers not adhering

to procedures when setting off personal contamination monitors; a worker

exiting a posted contamination area without removing his protective outer

clothing; and workers sleeping and smoking in a radiologically controlled

area.

The decision to hold an enforcement conference does not mean the NRC has

determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be

taken. Rather, the purpose is to discuss apparent violations, their causes

and safety significance; to provide the licensee an opportunity to point out

any errors that may have been made in the NRC inspection report; and to enable

the company to outline its proposed corrective actions.

No decisions on the apparent violations or any contemplated enforcement

action, such as a fine, will be made at this conference. Those decisions will

be made by senior NRC officials at a later date.

####
### SUBCHAPTER I—IMPROVING INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION OF CHILD ABUSE CASES
NRC NEWS U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

 Arlington, TX 76011-4005

No. IV-04-039 September 17, 2004

Contact: Victor Dricks E-Mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128

NRC TO MEET WITH PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC TO DISCUSS RADIOACTIVE

MATERIAL CONTROL PROGRAM AT HUMBOLDT BAY NUCLEAR PLANT

Officials of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with executives from

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. on September 29 to discuss the control and accountability of licensed

radioactive material and the search for missing fuel rod segments at the Humboldt Bay nuclear

plant near Eureka, Calif. PG&E owns the plant, which shut down in 1976.

PG&E officials notified the NRC on August 17 that they have been unable to locate three

18-inch sections of a spent fuel rod that records show was removed from the reactor in 1968. 

They will update the NRC on the progress of their continuing search.

The meeting, which is open to public observation, will be held between 6:30 and 9:00

p.m. at the Humboldt Bay Yacht Club, Wharfinger Building, One Marina Way, in Eureka. The

public is invited to observe the meeting and the NRC staff will be available for comments and

questions from the public before the meeting adjourns. 

###
#### § 3801.101 General.

In accordance with § 2635.105 of this title, the regulations in this part apply to employees of the Department of Justice and supplement the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch in part 2635 of this title. In addition to the regulations contained in part 2635 of this title and in this part, employees are subject to the conduct regulations contained in part 735 of this title and 28 CFR part 45.
#### § 1201.147 Requests for protective orders by persons other than the Special Counsel.

Requests for protective orders by persons other than the Special Counsel in connection with pending original jurisdiction proceedings are governed by § 1201.55(d) of this part.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 30, 2002

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-20054

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM ERNESTO PEREZ-BOLLANO, also

known as William Bollano-Perez, also 

known as William Perez, also known as 

William Ernesto Perez, also known as

William Ernesto Bolan Perez, also known

as William Perez-Bollanos,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CR-113-1

- - - - - - - - - -

Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Willam Ernesto Perez-Bollano (Perez) appeals his conviction

after a bench trial of illegal re-entry in violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2). He raises three issues on appeal: (1) that the

district court erred by delegating authority to the United States

Probation Office to determine his ability to pay the costs of the
No. 02-20054 

-2-

court-ordered drug and alcohol treatment program; (2) that 8

U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is unconstitutional because it does not

require a prior aggravated felony offense to be proven to the

factfinder beyond a reasonable doubt; and (3) that the evidence

of his prior deportation should have been suppressed because the

removal procedures violated due process. Perez concedes that the

latter two arguments are foreclosed by this court’s precedent but

raises these issues in order to preserve possible Supreme Court

review. 

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), did not

overrule Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). 

See Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231

F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1202

(2001). Accordingly, Perez’s argument that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2)

is unconstitutional lacks merit. 

In United States v. Benitez-Villafuerte, 186 F.3d 651, 656-

59 (5th Cir. 1999), this court held that the administrative

removal procedures in 8 U.S.C. § 1228 do not violate due process

and that in order to collaterally attack a prior deportation

proceeding in a prosecution under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 a defendant is

required to establish that there is a reasonable likelihood that

he would not have been deported but for the alleged errors in the

deportation proceeding. Perez has conceded that he cannot meet

this standard. Therefore, this issue is foreclosed. 
No. 02-20054 

-3-

In United States v. Warden, 291 F.3d 363 (5th Cir. 2002), we

recently rejected an appellant’s assertion that allowing a

probation officer to determine the appellant’s ability to pay the

costs of court-ordered treatment programs was an impermissible

delegation of authority. Thus, Perez’s first argument also is

foreclosed by circuit precedent. Id. at 366.

AFFIRMED.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Harry Newirth, Respondent, against La Pidus Printing & Lithographing Co., Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

This is an appeal by the employer and its insurance carrier from the decision and award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board dated March 20, 1947, to the effect that an occupational disease has been established under paragraph 28 of subdivision 2 of section 3 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, and from a decision of the reviewing panel of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, dated November 18, 1946, reversing the decision of the hearing referee, dated April 9, 1946, which decision disallowed the claim. Claimant was employed as a bookbinder working on folding machines which required him to turn his head to the right continuously while in the act of loading the machine. Prior to April 16, 1943, the day he became disabled,, claimant was put to work on a single machine in connection with a *“*very fast job ” which required him to increase the number of movements of his head in performing his work. The issue arose as to whether the disease was functional or organic. The board found that the condition was that of spasmodic functional torticollis. The evidence sustains the finding of the board. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Hill, P. J., Brewster, Foster, Russell and Deyo, JJ.
EXHIBIT
      32.1


CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
      THE
      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002











In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of GeoGlobal Resources Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2007 and this Form 10-Q/A (the "Report"),
      I, Jean Paul Roy, Chief Executive Officer 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, to the best of 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
                for the periods presented.

















/s/
      Jean
      Paul Roy


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








Jean
      Paul
      Roy


President
      and Chief Executive Officer


September
      12, 2007
### **CHAPTER 18—COAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT**

Sec.
661.
Short title; definitions.
662.
Powers and duties of Secretary.
663, 664.
Repealed.
665.
Sites for conducting research; availability of personnel and facilities.
666.
Public-availability requirement; national defense; patent agreements.
667.
Repealed.
668.
Authorization of appropriations.
GAO-01-1092R United Service Organizations, Incorporated

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548

August 21, 2001

The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

Subject: Federally Chartered Corporation: Review of the Financial Statement Audit

 Report for the United Service Organizations, Incorporated, for 1999

Dear Mr. Chairman:

As requested, we reviewed the audit report covering the financial statements of the

United Service Organization, Incorporated, a federally chartered corporation, for the

year ended December 31, 1999. The corporation serves the needs of military lifestyle

by fostering a viable partnership between the military and civilian communities. To

carry out this mission, the corporation operates centers at major military installations

around the world, produces free-of-charge celebrity entertainment tours for military

personnel stationed abroad, and manages donor-restricted scholarship and crisis

funds for benefit of military personnel and their families.

Federally chartered corporations are required under 36 U.S.C. 10101 to

! present the corporation’s assets and liabilities and reasonable detail on the

corporation’s income and expenses in annual financial statements,

! obtain an annual financial audit by an independent public accountant, and

! submit the auditors’ report and the corporation’s financial statements to the

Congress.

The objective of our review was to determine whether the audit report complied with

the financial reporting requirements of the law. In carrying out our work, we

reviewed the corporation’s financial statements and the accompanying notes,

performed certain analytical procedures related to information presented in the

financial statements, reviewed the auditors’ report, and made inquiries to corporation

officials or the auditors as we deemed necessary. We did not review the auditors’

working papers. Our review disclosed no reportable instances of noncompliance.
Page 2 GAO-01-1092R United Service Organizations, Incorporated

The audit report included the auditors’ opinion that the financial statements of the

corporation were presented fairly in accordance with generally accepted accounting

principles. We are returning the audit report you sent with your letter.

Sincerely yours,

Jeffrey C. Steinhoff

Managing Director

Financial Management and Assurance

w/o Enclosure

(194066)
**Exhibit 3.4**

 

**CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT TO THE**

**CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION**

**OF THE**

**THE SERIES B JUNIORPARTICIPATING PREFERRED STOCK**

**OF**

**MOTHERS WORK, INC.**

 

(Pursuant to 8 Del.C. §151(g))

 

Mothers Work,Inc., (the “Corporation”), a corporation organized and existing under and byvirtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the “DGCL”),does hereby certify that:

** **

**FIRST**:  A Certificate of Designation of the Series BJunior Participating Preferred Stock (the “Certificate of Designation”) of the Corporationwas filed on May 14, 1998 with the Delaware Secretary of State, designating tenthousand (10,000) shares of the authorized Preferred Stock of the Corporationas Series B Junior Participating Preferred Stock.

** **

**SECOND**:  The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of theCorporation, at the meeting of the Board held on January 15, 2003, duly adopteda resolution declaring advisable the amendment of the Certificate ofDesignation to increase the number of shares of authorized Preferred Stockdesignated as Series B Junior Participating Preferred Stock by an additionaltwo hundred ninety thousand (290,000) shares.

** **

**THIRD**:  The Certificate of Designation is herebyamended by deleting Section 1 thereof and substituting in lieu therefor thefollowing:

 

Section 1.               Designation and Amount.  The shares of such series shall bedesignated as “Series B Junior Participating Preferred Stock” and the number ofshares of constituting such series shall be 300,000.

** **

**FOURTH**:  The foregoing amendment was authorized anddirected by resolutions adopted by the Board of the Corporation pursuant to theprovisions of § 151(g) of the DGCL and pursuant to authority expressly vestedin the Board by the Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation.

 

----

 

**INWITNESS WHEREOF**, Mothers Work, Inc. has caused thisCertificate to be signed by Rebecca C. Matthias, its President, this 11th dayof February, 2003.

 
|        | By:                 | /s/ Rebecca C. Matthias |   |
|-------------|---------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|        |                | Rebecca C. Matthias     |
|        |                | President               |
|        |                |
| **Attest:** |                |
| By:         | /s/ Dan W. Matthias |                    |   |
|        | Dan W. Matthias     |                    |
|        | Secretary           |                    |
|             |                     |                         |        |  |  |

 

2

----
### §426e–2. Clarification of munition disposal authorities

#### (a) In general

The Secretary may, at full Federal expense, implement any response action the Secretary determines to be necessary at a site where—

(1) the Secretary has carried out a project under civil works authority of the Secretary that includes placing sand on a beach; and

(2) as a result of the project described in paragraph (1), military munitions that were originally released as a result of Department of Defense activities are deposited on the beach, posing a threat to human health or the environment.

#### (b) Response action funding

A response action described in subsection (a) shall be reimbursed from amounts made available to the agency within the Department of Defense responsible for the original release of the munitions.

(Pub. L. 113–121, title I, §1027, June 10, 2014, 128 Stat. 1230; Pub. L. 114–322, title I, §1154, Dec. 16, 2016, 130 Stat. 1663.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2016—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 114–322, §1154(1), inserted ", at full Federal expense," after "The Secretary may" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 114–322, §1154(2), substituted "reimbursed" for "funded".

#### **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.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

# AGENCY:

Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor. 

# ACTION:

Notice; correction. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Employment and Training Administration published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         on September 17, 2004, concerning the availability of grant funds to address labor shortages, innovative training strategies, and other workforce challenges in the healthcare and biotechnology industries. This correction is to provide additional clarification on eligibility information and to extend the closing date to November 16, 2004.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kevin Brumback, Grants Management Specialist, Division of Federal Assistance, (202) 693-3381. 

## Corrections 

                        In the                         **Federal Register**                         of September 17, 2004, in FR Volume 69, Number 180: On page 56086, in the third column, is corrected to read:                     

                        B.                         *Matching Funds:*                         Paid employee release time will be accepted as match on a case-by-case basis where: (a) Trainees are bona-fide employees; (b) the employer counts only regular salary and wages, but not overtime, benefits, or other costs, for each trainee for time spent attending classes during working hours; and (c) the trainee remains employed with the employer for sixty days after completion of training.                     

On page 56087, in the third column, is corrected to read: 

                        C.                         *Submission Date, Times and Addresses:*                         The closing date for receipt of applications under this announcement is November 16, 2004 at 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.                     

Signed at Washington, DC, this 28th day of October, 2004. 

R. Lance Grubb, 

Deputy Administrator, OFAM. 

[FR Doc. 04-24424 Filed 10-29-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
§ 300.705 Agency action following statement. ( a ) Agencies must resolve conflicts of information and other questions concerning an individual's registration status prior to appointment. An agency may verify, at its discretion, an individual's registration status by requesting the individual to provide proof of registration or exemption issued by the Selective Service System and/or by contacting the Selective Service System at 888-655-1825.
( b ) An agency may continue regular pre-employment consideration of individuals whose statements show they have registered or are exempt.
( c ) An agency will take the following actions when a covered individual who is required to register has not done so, and is under age 26: ( 1 ) Advise him to register promptly and, if he wishes further consideration, to submit a new statement immediately to the agency once he has registered. The agency will set a time limit for submitting the statement.
( 2 ) Provide written notice to an individual who still does not register after being informed of the above requirements that he is ineligible for appointment according to 5 U.S.C. 3328 and will be given no further employment consideration.
( d ) An agency will take the following actions when a covered individual who is age 26 or over, was required to register, and has not done so: ( 1 ) Provide written notice to the individual that, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 3328, he is ineligible for appointment unless his failure to register was neither knowing nor willful, and that OPM will decide whether his failure to register was knowing and willful if he submits a written request for such decision and an explanation of his failure to register.
( 2 ) Submit the individual's application, the statement described in § 300.704(b), a copy of the written notice, his request for a decision and explanation of his failure to register, and any other papers pertinent to his registration status for determination to—Registration Review, Staffing Operations Division, Career Entry Group, room 6A12, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415.
( 3 ) An agency is not required to keep a vacancy open for an individual who seeks an OPM determination.
( e ) Individuals described in paragraph (c) of this section who do not submit a statement of registration or exemption are not eligible for employment consideration. Individuals described in paragraph (d) of this section are not eligible for employment consideration unless OPM finds that failure to register was neither knowing nor willful. Agencies are not required to follow the objections-to-eligibles procedures described in § 332.406 concerning such individuals who were certified or otherwise referred by an OPM examining office or other office delegated examining authority by OPM. Instead, an agency will provide, for information as part of its certification report to that office, a copy of its written notice to the individual.
[52 FR 7400, Mar. 11, 1987, as amended at 64 FR 28713, May 27, 1999]