alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §§889, 890. Repealed. June 21, 1955, ch. 172, §5(5), 69 Stat. 170

Section 889, acts Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 313, §1, 35 Stat. 1064; Mar. 4, 1913, ch. 141, §1, 37 Stat. 736, authorized cooperation with North Carolina State Fish Commission in survey of waters of State.

Section 890, acts Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 313, §2, 35 Stat. 1065; Mar. 4, 1913, ch. 141, §1, 37 Stat. 736, provided for marking triangulation points of North Carolina survey.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-07-0062 - Final Rule:  Requirements for Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material (RIN 3150-AH84)

Accession Number: ML062010465

Date Released: Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML070720153 - SECY-07-0062 - Final Rule:  Requirements for Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material (RIN 3150-AH84) (10 page(s), 4/3/2007)
    - ML070740071 - SECY-07-0062 - Enclosure 1:  Federal Register Notice re:  Final Rule:  Requirements For Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material (RIN 3150 -AH84 (264 page(s), 4/3/2007)
    - ML070740102 - SECY-07-0062 - Enclosure 2:  Environmental Assessment for   Final Rulemaking - Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material Established by Section 651(e) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (20 page(s), 4/3/2007)
    - ML070750118 - SECY-07-0062 - Enclosure 3:  Regulatory Analysis for Final Rulemaking - Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material Established by Section 651(e) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (44 page(s), 3/1/2007)
    - ML070740332 - SECY-07-0062 - Enclosure 4:  Congressional Review Act Forms (CRA) re:  Final  Rule: Requirements For Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material (RIN 3150-AH84) (6 page(s), 4/3/2007)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
#### § 3902.101 General.

The regulations in this part apply to employees of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and supplement the Executive Branch Financial Disclosure Regulations contained in 5 CFR part 2634.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsLongwave radiation parameterization for UCLA/GLAS GCMThis document describes the parameterization of longwave radiation in the UCLA/GLAS general circulation model. Transmittances have been computed from the work of Arking and Chou for water vapor and carbon dioxide and ozone absorptances are computed using a formula due to Rodgers. Cloudiness has been introduced into the code in a manner in which fractional cover and random or maximal overlap can be accommodated. The entire code has been written in a form that is amenable to vectorization on CYBER and CRAY computers. Sample clear sky computations for five standard profiles using the 15- and 9-level versions of the model have been included.Document ID19840012903Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsHARSHVARDHAN*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD, United States)*Corsetti, T.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1984Subject CategoryGeophysicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:86072NASA-TM-86072Accession Number84N20971Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840012903.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
§ 351.807 Certification of Expected Separation. ( a ) For the purpose of enabling otherwise eligible employees to be considered for eligibility to participate in dislocated worker programs under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 administered by the U.S. Department of Labor, an agency may issue a Certificate of Expected Separation to a competing employee who the agency believes, with a reasonable degree of certainty, will be separated from Federal employment by reduction in force procedures under this part. A certification may be issued up to 6 months prior to the effective date of the reduction in force.
( b ) This certification may be issued to a competing employee only when the agency determines: ( 1 ) There is a good likelihood the employee will be separated under this part;
( 2 ) Employment opportunities in the same or similar position in the local commuting area are limited or nonexistent;
( 3 ) Placement opportunities within the employee's own or other Federal agencies in the local commuting area are limited or nonexistent; and
( 4 ) If eligible for optional retirement, the employee has not filed a retirement application or otherwise indicated in writing an intent to retire.
( c ) A certification is to be addressed to each individual eligible employee and must be signed by an appropriate agency official. A certification must contain the expected date of reduction in force, a statement that each factor in paragraph (b) of this section has been satisfied, and a description of Workforce Investment Act of 1998, title I, programs, the Interagency Placement Program, and the Reemployment Priority List.
( d ) A certification may not be used to satisfy any of the notice requirements elsewhere in this subpart.
( e ) An agency determination of eligibility for certification may not be appealed to OPM or the Merit Systems Protection Board.
( f ) An agency may also enroll eligible employees on the agency's Reemployment Priority List up to 6 months in advance of a reduction in force. For requirements and criteria, see subpart B of part 330 of this chapter.
[60 FR 2678, Jan. 11, 1995, as amended at 60 FR 44254, Aug. 25, 1995; 65 FR 64134, Oct. 26, 2000; 66 FR 29896, June 4, 2001]
§ 536.302 Optional pay retention. ( a ) Subject to the requirements in § 536.102 and this section, an authorized agency official may provide pay retention to an employee not entitled to pay retention under § 536.301, but whose payable rate of basic pay otherwise would be reduced (after application of any applicable geographic conversion under § 536.303(a)) as the result of a management action. This includes a management action to move an employee's position, without a break in service of more than 3 days, from a Department of Defense or Coast Guard nonappropriated fund instrumentality (as defined in 5 U.S.C. 2105(c)) to a position under a covered pay system in the same agency.
( b ) If an employee's official worksite changes in conjunction with an action that may entitle the employee to pay retention under paragraph (a) of this section, the agency must apply the geographic conversion rule in § 536.303(a) before determining whether an employee's rate of basic pay otherwise would be reduced.
( c ) Eligibility for pay retention under this section ceases under the conditions specified in § 536.308.
NRC NEWS

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. II-06-020 April 11, 2006

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

Roger Hannah (404)562-4417

NRC TO DISCUSS 2005 PERFORMANCE AT NORTH ANNA NUCLEAR PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is scheduled to meet with Dominion officials on

Tuesday, April 18, to discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance last year at the North

Anna nuclear power plant, located near Mineral in central Virginia.

The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled for 1:00 p.m. in the North Anna Nuclear

Information Center at the plant site. The NRC staff will present the results of the assessment and be

available to respond to questions or comments from the public before the close of the meeting. 

“The NRC continually reviews the performance of the North Anna plant and the nation’s other

commercial nuclear power facilities,” NRC Region II Administrator William Travers said. “This

meeting is a chance for us to discuss that safety performance with the company, with local officials and

with people living near the plant.”

A letter sent from the NRC Region II Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the

plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the

NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/na_2005q4.pdf .

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear

plant performance. The colors start with “green” and then increase to “white,” “yellow” or “red,”

depending on the safety significance of the issues involved. 

The NRC said the North Anna plant operated safely during 2005 with all inspection findings

being “green,” or very low safety significance, and all performance indicators also indicating

performance at levels requiring no additional NRC oversight. 

As a result, the NRC plans to conduct only routine baseline inspections at the plant for the rest

of 2006. The NRC staff will also conduct several non-routine inspections, including the independent

spent fuel storage facility and the containment sump for both units. 

Routine inspections are performed by NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant and by

specialists from the Region II Office in Atlanta, and the agency’s headquarters in Rockville, Md. 
Current information for the North Anna plant is available on the NRC web site at:

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/NA1/na1_chart.html and

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/NA2/na2_chart.html .

###
2000 Coal Controls for SO2and NOXSource:National Electric Energy Data System(NEEDS 4.10) (EPA, December 2010) and Data &Maps (EPA, August 2011)Virtually all coal-fired units haveelectrostatic precipitators, baghouses, orother advanced controls for high levels ofparticulate removal.2005 Coal Controls for SO2and NOXVirtually all coal-fired units haveelectrostatic precipitators, baghouses, orother advanced controls for high levels ofparticulate removal.Source:National Electric Energy Data System(NEEDS 4.10) (EPA, December 2010) and Data &Maps (EPA, August 2011)2008 Coal Controls for SO2and NOXVirtually all coal-fired units haveelectrostatic precipitators, baghouses, orother advanced controls for high levels ofparticulate removal.Source:National Electric Energy Data System(NEEDS 4.10) (EPA, December 2010) and Data &Maps (EPA, August 2011)2010 Coal Controls for SO2and NOXVirtually all coal-fired units haveelectrostatic precipitators, baghouses, orother advanced controls for high levels ofparticulate removal.Source:National Electric Energy Data System(NEEDS 4.10) (EPA, December 2010) and Data &Maps (EPA, August 2011)2012 Coal Controls for SO2and NOXVirtually all coal-fired units haveelectrostatic precipitators, baghouses, orother advanced controls for high levels ofparticulate removal.Source:National Electric Energy Data System(NEEDS 4.10) (EPA, December 2010) and Data &Maps (EPA, August 2011)2014 Coal Controls for SO2and NOXVirtually all coal-fired units haveelectrostatic precipitators, baghouses, orother advanced controls for high levels ofparticulate removal.Source:National Electric Energy Data System(NEEDS 4.10) (EPA, December 2010) and Data &Maps (EPA, August 2011)
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 2443 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

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

No. III-06-025 June 12, 2006

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC TO DISCUSS 2005 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

FOR QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Exelon Generation

Co. on Wednesday, June 14, to discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance for last year at

the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Plant. The plant is located near Cordova, Ill.

The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at Best Western

Steeplegate Inn, 100 West 76th Street, in Davenport, Iowa. The NRC will respond to questions or

comments from the public before the close of the meeting.

“The NRC continually reviews the performance of the Quad Cities plant and the nation’s other

commercial nuclear power facilities,” NRC Region III Administrator James Caldwell said. “This

meeting will provide an opportunity for a discussion of our annual assessment of safety performance

with the company and with local officials and residents who live near the plant. Our goal is to explain

the NRC oversight process and make as much information as possible available to the public regarding

our regulation of these facilities.”

A letter sent from the NRC Region III Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the

plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting’s discussion. It is available on the

NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/quad_2005q4.pdf .

The NRC’s assessment concluded that the Quad Cities plant operated safely during the period. 

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear plant

performance. The colors start with “green” and then increase to “white,” “yellow” or “red,”

commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved. 

All of the inspection findings and performance indicators for Quad Cities during 2005 were

determined to be “green.” 

However, the assessment also states that “equipment degradation related to extended power

upgrade continues to be a major issue.” As a result, in addition to normal, baseline inspections, the

NRC will continue to monitor and review this issue in 2006.

Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant and

by inspection specialists from the Region III Office in Lisle, Ill. Among the areas of plant operations
to be inspected this year by NRC specialists are access control to radiologically significant areas, fire

protection, emergency preparedness exercise evaluation, alert and notification system testing, and

identification and resolution of problems.

Current performance information for Quad Cities is available on the NRC’s web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/QUAD1/quad1_chart.html

and

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/QUAD2/quad2_chart.html . 

###
#### In the Matter of the City of New York, Acting for and on Behalf of the New York City Housing Authority, Appellant, Relative to Acquiring Title to Real Property within the Area Bounded by East 112th Street and Other Streets, in the Borough of Manhattan, Selected as a Site for Jefferson Houses. Henry Lombardi, Respondent.

Decree affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Callahan and Breitel, JJ.; Glennon and Callahan, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse in the following memorandum: In our opinion the court presiding in condemnation had the power and the duty to decide the question involved herein in connection with the application for a final decree. We vote to reverse the decree insofar as appealed from and order a new trial of the issues as to the rights of the parties under the contract of sale.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1740 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1740

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 1502 East Kiest Boulevard in Dallas, Texas, as the ``Dr. Caesar A.W. 
                   Clark, Sr. Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 10, 2003

  Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas (for herself, Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. 
Green of Texas, Mr. Rodriguez, Mr. Bell, Mr. Lampson, Mr. Hinojosa, Mr. 
Edwards, Mr. Ortiz, Mr. Doggett, Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. Sandlin, 
 Mr. Culberson, Mr. Hall, Mr. Frost, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Sam Johnson of 
Texas, Mr. Bonilla, Mr. DeLay, Mr. Stenholm, Mr. Paul, Mr. Burgess, Ms. 
  Granger, Mr. Hensarling, Mr. Carter, Mr. Thornberry, Mr. Reyes, Mr. 
Turner of Texas, Mr. Barton of Texas, Mr. Brady of Texas, Mr. Smith of 
   Texas, and Mr. Combest) 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 1502 East Kiest Boulevard in Dallas, Texas, as the ``Dr. Caesar A.W. 
                   Clark, Sr. Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DR. CAESAR A.W. CLARK, SR. POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1502 East Kiest Boulevard in Dallas, Texas, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Dr. Caesar A.W. Clark, Sr. 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 Dr. Caesar 
A.W. Clark, Sr. Post Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 244 (Thursday, December 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 65353]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27574]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan 
Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 et 
seq.) (HOLA), Regulation LL (12 CFR part 238), and Regulation MM (12 
CFR part 239), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to 
become a savings and loan holding company and/or to acquire the assets 
or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a 
savings association and nonbanking companies owned by the savings and 
loan holding company, including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(e)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 10(c)(4)(B) of the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(4)(B)). Unless 
otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the 
United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than January 22, 2019.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Mark A. Rauzi, Vice 
President), 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291:
    1. The Farrar Beresford Bancorporation Inc. Irrevocable Trust and 
Beresford Bancorporation (``Applicants''), both of Britton, South 
Dakota; to acquire Western Bancshares of Alamogordo, Inc., Carlsbad, 
New Mexico, and thereby acquire Western Bank, Alamogordo, New Mexico. 
Applicants will retain their ownership of First Savings Bank, 
Beresford, South Dakota, and continue to operate a savings and loan 
association. Applicants will convert back to a savings and loan holding 
company after the merger of Western Bank into First Savings Bank.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 17, 
2018.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2018-27574 Filed 12-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P
### §59f. Boston Inner Harbor and Fort Point Channel, Massachusetts

That portion of Boston Inner Harbor and Fort Point Channel in Suffolk County, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, lying within the following described area is hereby declared to be not a navigable water of the United States within the meaning of the laws of the United States: Beginning at the intersection of the northeasterly sideline of Northern Avenue and the westerly United States Pierhead Line of the Fort Point Channel and running northwesterly by the northwesterly sideline of Northern Avenue to the westerly sideline of Atlantic Avenue: thence turning and running northerly and northwesterly by the westerly sideline of Atlantic Avenue and of Commercial Street to the southeasterly sideline of Hanover Street; thence turning and running northeasterly by the southeasterly sideline of Hanover Street to the southwesterly property line of the United States Coast Guard Base; thence turning and running southeasterly by the southwesterly property line of the United States Coast Guard Base to the southeasterly property line of the United States Coast Guard Base; thence turning and running northeasterly by the southeasterly property line of the United States Coast Guard Base extended to the United States Pierhead Line; thence turning and running southeasterly, southerly and southwesterly by the United States Pierhead Line, to the point of beginning.

(Pub. L. 90–312, May 18, 1968, 82 Stat. 125.)
§ 3401.103 Procedures for accomplishing disqualification. ( a ) An employee, other than a member of the Commission, who is required, in accordance with 5 CFR 2635.402(c), 2635.502(e), or 2635.604(a), to disqualify himself from participation in a particular matter before the Commission shall provide written notice of disqualification to his supervisor and to the DAEO when he becomes aware of the need to disqualify himself from participation in the matter. This procedure is required notwithstanding the guidance in 5 CFR 2635.402(c)(2), 2635.502(e)(2), and 2635.604(c).
( b ) An employee may withdraw written notice under paragraph (a) of this section upon determining that disqualification from participation in the matter is no longer required. A withdrawal of disqualification shall be in writing and shall be provided to the employee's supervisor and to the DAEO.
§ 300.405 Requirement for contract. ( a ) A written contract awarded in accordance with procedures stipulated in the Federal Acquisition Regulations is required between the Federal agency and a commercial recruiting firm or nonprofit employment service. The contract will satisfy the “written request” required by 18 U.S.C. 211. That statute prohibits the acceptance of payment for aiding an individual to obtain Federal employment *except* when an employment agency renders services pursuant to the written request of an executive department or agency.
( b ) The contract must include the qualifications requirements for the position(s) to be filled and also provide that the firm or service will: ( 1 ) Screen candidates only against the basic qualifications requirements for the position(s) specified by the Federal agency in the contract and refer to the agency all candidates who appear to meet those requirements;
( 2 ) Refer to the Federal agency only those applicants from whom the firm or service has not accepted fees other than those permitted under § 300.404(b) of this part;
( 3 ) Not imply that it is the sole or primary avenue for employment with the Federal Government or a specific Federal agency; and
( 4 ) Recruit and refer candidates in accordance with applicable merit principles and equal opportunity laws.