alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. AC19-43-000]

Take notice that on December 6, 2018, Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC filed a request for approval to use Account 439, authorized by the Financial Accounting Standards Board.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

                    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at                     *http://www.ferc.gov.*                     Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.                

                    This filing is accessible on-line at                     *http://www.ferc.gov,*                     using the eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,*                     or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                

*Comments:*                     5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 26, 2018.                

Dated: December 12, 2018.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2018-27314 Filed 12-17-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
# L_2015282EN.01000101.xml

| 28.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 282/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 282/1

---

Information concerning the entry into force of the Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation between the European Union and European Atomic Energy Community and the Swiss Confederation associating the Swiss Confederation to Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation and the Research and Training Programme of the European Atomic Energy Community complementing Horizon 2020 and regulating the Swiss Confederation's participation in the ITER activities carried out by Fusion for Energy

The Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation between the European Union and European Atomic Energy Community and the Swiss Confederation associating the Swiss Confederation to Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation and the Research and Training Programme of the European Atomic Energy Community complementing Horizon 2020, and regulating the Swiss Confederation's participation in the ITER activities carried out by Fusion for Energy (1), signed on 5 December 2014, has, in accordance with Article 15.1 thereof, entered into force on 8 October 2015.

1

---

(1)  
  OJ L 370, 30.12.2014, p. 3.

1

---
#### § 3901.101 General.

In accordance with 5 CFR 2635.105, the regulations in this part apply to employees of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and supplement the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch contained in 5 CFR part 2635. In addition to the standards in 5 CFR part 2635 and this part, employees are subject to the Executive Branch Financial Disclosure Regulations contained in 5 CFR part 2634, the FCC's regulations at 5 CFR part 3902 supplementing 5 CFR part 2634, and to FCC regulations regarding their responsibilities and conduct in 47 CFR part 19.
#### § 332.403 Selective certification.

When there is no register appropriate as a whole for the certification of eligibles for a particular position, OPM may prepare a certificate from the most nearly appropriate existing register by the selective certification of eligibles qualified for the particular position in the order of their ranking on the register. Special overseas selection factors may also be used as a basis for selective certification from a register used for filling overseas positions. When appropriate, OPM may rerate the eligibles on the register on the basis of the particular requirements of the position.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

JEMARA AKIL BUTLER, AKA Michael Smith, AKA Brian Williams,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 17

- 10461

D.C. No.

4:06

- cr

- 00811

- CKJ

- DTF

- 2

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 12, 2019 **
Pasadena, California

Before: RAWLINSON, IKUTA, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Jemara Butler (“Butler”) appeals from a judgment and commitment order

following revocation of his supervis ed release. W e have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291

, and w e affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

SEP 27 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

First, Butler claims he did not provide the required consent to the district

court’s delegation of authority to the magistrate judge to conduct his supervise d

release revocation hearing

. We review this issue de novo. See United States v.

Colacurcio , 84 F.3d 326, 328 (9th Cir. 1996) (reviewing district court’s delegation

of authority to conduct a probation revocation hearing to a magistrate judge)

. Th ere

is sufficient evidence of Butler’s consent to the delegation to a magistrate judge. T he

Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), requires “ explicit, clear, and

unambiguous ” consent

. United States v. Sanchez

- Sanchez , 333 F.3d 1065, 106 9 (9th

Cir. 20 03) ( quotation marks and citation omitted)

. Butler’s consent here

— in writing

and on the record

— satisfies the statutory requirement. Butler relies on 18 U.S.C.

§ 3401(b) . But that subsection applies to the delegation of misdemeanor criminal

trials

, and the specific consent inquiry required for misdemeanor trial delegations

was not r e quired here

.

Second

, Butler claims the district court failed to conduct the appropriate

review of the proceedings before the magistrate judge. The “ threshold requirement

f or a de novo determination is that the district court review a tape recording or a

transcript of the relevant portions of the proceedings before the magistrate.” United

States v. Remsing , 874 F.2d 614, 618 (9th Cir. 1989)

. Here

, the district court judge

confirmed that she had reviewed the proceeding before the magistrate judge. We

pre s ume that district judges know and follow the la w

. United States v. Carty , 5203

F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008)

. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise here.

Finally, there is no reversible error in the magistrate judge’s filing of

“boilerplate” findings and recommendations where the district court properly

reviewed t hose findings and recommendations de novo.

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.19

Nikhil Sinha, Paul H. Bristow, Steven F. Coleman and Colleen McKeown Adstedt
have entered into Change in Control Agreements which, as amended (see, Exhibits
10.29 and 10.30 to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2000), are substantially identical in all material respects to the
agreement with Mr. Finch that is incorporated by reference as Exhibit 10.18 to
this Annual Report on Form 10-K. John A. Blanchard III has also entered into a
Change in Control Agreement that is substantially identical in all material
respects to the agreement with Mr. Finch.
**EXHIBIT 32.1****Written Statement Pursuant to Section 906****of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**The undersigned, the President of Webster Preferred Capital Corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:(a) the Form 10-K Report of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2005 filed on the datehereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(b) information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.     /s/ William T. Bromage     William T. Bromage
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. 04-163 December 16, 2004

NRC PLANS TO ISSUE LICENSE RENEWAL EXEMPTION

FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR STATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has completed its environmental assessment and plans to

issue an exemption from its license renewal regulations for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating

Station near Toms River, N.J.

Oyster Creek’s operator, AmerGen, asked Aug. 10 for an exemption from the NRC’s

regulations regarding the federal government’s “timely renewal” provision, which deals with the timing

for submitting license renewal applications for commercial nuclear power plants. The provision

stipulates that if a nuclear power plant licensee applies for license renewal at least five years before its

current operating license expires, the existing license will not expire while the NRC decides whether to

grant the requested renewal.

AmerGen did not file a renewal application for Oyster Creek by April 9, five years prior to its

license expiration, and has therefore requested an exemption to retain the “timely renewal” status. The

NRC reviewed the request based on existing law and the agency’s regulations.

 The NRC must publish environmental assessments before issuing exemptions. The Oyster

Creek assessment, which will be published shortly in the Federal Register, finds that granting the

proposed exemption will not have a significant impact on the quality of the environment. The agency

expects to issue the exemption soon after the Federal Register notice.

“The NRC will continue its full program of licensing, inspection and oversight activities at

Oyster Creek to protect public health and safety, whether it is operating under its original 40-year

license or in a ‘timely renewal status,’ ” said David Matthews, director of the Division of Regulatory

Improvement Programs in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. “The issuance of the exemption

will not affect NRC’s authority to modify, suspend or revoke Oyster Creek’s license if there is a serious

safety concern. Furthermore, the public retains its usual opportunities to participate in the review of a

license renewal request for Oyster Creek.”

The NRC has notified the state of New Jersey concerning the environmental assessment. The

state has already commented on the proposed exemption, and if the state chooses, it can offer

additional comments on the environmental assessment.
-2-

The exemption requires AmerGen to submit a sufficient license renewal application by July 29,

2005, giving the NRC about 44 months to review the application. That period of time is longer than

license renewal reviews have taken thus far. AmerGen must also provide required information to

support completion of NRC’s safety and environmental reviews.

###
### §176. National emergencies; appointment of board of inquiry by President; report; contents; filing with Service

Whenever in the opinion of the President of the United States, a threatened or actual strike or lockout affecting an entire industry or a substantial part thereof engaged in trade, commerce, transportation, transmission, or communication among the several States or with foreign nations, or engaged in the production of goods for commerce, will, if permitted to occur or to continue, imperil the national health or safety, he may appoint a board of inquiry to inquire into the issues involved in the dispute and to make a written report to him within such time as he shall prescribe. Such report shall include a statement of the facts with respect to the dispute, including each party's statement of its position but shall not contain any recommendations. The President shall file a copy of such report with the Service and shall make its contents available to the public.

(June 23, 1947, ch. 120, title II, §206, 61 Stat. 155.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Executive Order No. 11621

Ex. Ord. No. 11621, Oct. 4, 1971, 36 F.R. 19435, as amended by Ex. Ord. No. 11622, Oct. 5, 1971, 36 F.R. 19491, which created a Board of Inquiry to inquire into issues involved in certain labor disputes, was revoked by Ex. Ord. No. 12553, Feb. 25, 1986, 51 F.R. 7237.
§ 550.1006 Scheduling time to earn and use religious compensatory time off. ( a ) The scheduling of time to earn and use religious compensatory time off by an employee is subject to the agency's approval as provided in § 550.1005.
( b ) For an employee who earns religious compensatory time off prior to using it, religious compensatory time off may be earned up to 13 pay periods in advance of the pay period in which the targeted religious observance commences and must be linked to specific dates and times for future use, as compatible with agency mission requirements.
( c ) ( 1 ) An employee who uses religious compensatory time off prior to earning it must fulfill his or her obligation to perform overtime work in exchange for the advanced religious compensatory time off within 13 pay periods after the pay period in which he or she used religious compensatory time off, or the agency must take action as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
( 2 ) The 13 pay periods described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section are calculated beginning with the first pay period beginning after the date on which the religious compensatory time off was used.
( 3 ) If the employee fails to earn religious compensatory time off within 13 pay periods after taking religious compensatory time off, the agency may take corrective action to eliminate or reduce the negative balance by making a corresponding reduction in the employee's balance of annual leave, credit hours, compensatory time off in lieu of regular overtime pay, compensatory time off for travel, or time-off awards. An agency may determine the order of precedence for applying the various types of paid time off to offset the negative balance. Any negative balance of religious compensatory time off remaining after any charging of these types of paid time off must be resolved by charging the employee leave without pay, which would result in an indebtedness that is subject to the agency's internal debt collection procedures.
§ 2429.22 Additional time for filing with the FLRA if you are filing in response to a document that has been served on you by first-class mail or commercial delivery. ( a ) *General rules.* Except as discussed in paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) of this section, apply the following rules if and only if you are filing a document with the FLRA in response to a document that has been served on you by first-class mail or commercial delivery. First, look to § 2429.21(a)(1) and apply steps 1 through 5 of that section in order to determine what normally would be your due date. Second, starting with the next calendar day, which will be day one, count forward on the calendar, including Saturdays, Sundays, and federal legal holidays, until you reach day five. If day five is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal legal holiday, then your filing is due with the FLRA on that day. If day five is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal legal holiday, then find the next calendar day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal legal holiday; your filing is due with the FLRA on that day.
( b ) *Rules that apply when you have been served by more than one method.* If someone has served you with a document using more than one method of service, then, as a general rule, the first method of service is controlling for purposes of determining your due date for filing with the FLRA. For example, if someone serves you with a document by first-class mail or commercial delivery on one day, and then serves you by some other method (such as electronic mail) the next day, then you may add 5 days to your due date, as described in paragraph (a) of this section. But if someone serves you with a document one day by any method *other than* first-class mail or commercial delivery, and *later* serves you with the document by first-class mail or commercial delivery, then you may not add 5 days to your due date; rather, you must look to § 2429.21(a)(1) and apply steps 1 through 5 of that section in order to determine your due date. Also, if someone serves you by first-class mail or commercial delivery on one day, and by any other method on the same day, then you may not add 5 days—even if the first-class mail was postmarked or the time of deposit with the commercial-delivery service was earlier in the day than the time at which the other method of service was effected.
( c ) *Exception for applications for review filed under 5 CFR 2422.31 .* You do not get an additional 5 days to file an application for review of a Regional Director's Decision and Order under 5 CFR 2422.31, regardless of the method of service of that Decision and Order.
( d ) *Exception where extension of time has been granted.* You do not get an additional 5 days in any instance where an extension of time already has been granted.
( e ) *Rules that apply to exceptions to arbitration awards.* For specific rules that apply to filing exceptions to arbitration awards, *see* 5 CFR 2425.2(c).
[77 FR 26436, May 4, 2012]
#### Henry C. Quinby, Respondent, v. Edmund K. Stallo, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1147 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 225 ) IV-E-99 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 4/22/20082:42:59PM

Sheet 225of 242*

£--. \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# Uss y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 P. 2 

# W-E-99

NA Y12199 3 OFFIC E O F AI R AN O RADIATIO N



### - W N- 31993 MEMORANDU M SUBJECT : FROM : THRU : TO : EPA/Industr yMeetin g o nOnboar d Refuelin g

Vapo r Recover y* Ji m Bryson , Mechanica l Enginee r CJA*~ /PA Specia l Regulator yProject s Branp h a*f4JPH Ta d Wysor , Senio r Projec t Manage r Specia l Regulator yProject s Branc h EP AAi r Docke t A-87-1 1 

# ^AW^

O n Apri l 2 7 1993 , EP Astaf f an d managemen t me t i nAn n Arbo r wit hrepresentative s o f America nAutomotiv e Manufacturer s Association , Inc . an d th e Associatio no f Internationa l Automobil e Manufacturers , Inc . t o discus s th e statu s o f th e onboar d refuelin g vapo r recover yrulemaking . Attache d i s a lis t o f attendee s an d thei r affiliations . A t thi s meeting , view s wer e exchange d betwee nth e industr y representative s an d EP Aofficial s o nth e topic s liste d i n th e attache d agenda . I t i s expecte d tha t al l o f thes e issue s wil l b e par t o f th e upcomin g hearin g an d reopene d commen t perio d o n thi s rulemaking . Attachment sP. 3



## Onboard Refuelin g Vapo rRecover y Industryan d EPA Discussio n Outlin e Tes tRequirement s NPR M Tes tprocedure s Standard s Trucks Californi a Model s Syste m Distinctio n Integrate d Non-Integrate d Non-Caniste r Impac to fothe rRegulation s Enhance d Eva p Spitbac k OnBoar d Diagnostic s Exhaus tEmission s (FTP )+

s P. 4



## TA- D vns&a^, /MIK E 5

&UI>OQVCLBKJ V v « Btook S <U/ ( 

# G^ v*u

* 

## 0»Jaoa*c l Me*£yvj k 4/2^/9 3 ^?A s / / 

# e?/^ C5? A 

# SPA

1i 

### £Cu*y} /*t cHHtsLea^ C-^ r 

### v.jil«. e 

## 6 H riuj^rT^'i- ) p ^ £M//AV . <?&/&?> F&tt-Q Q/^ Gt/ WSctJi . 

# FW J /M-^/4 

## 75ec ? AIM f-O/LX^ 

### &iM. &VA 

### £/># 

## tei*)G68-4Z29 ^ 0 44^ _ ^V«?B2 & 

# 6^-^o H /«-**53 ^ 

# ^s-ryoy 5~76-2<yzzrj 57t.-62lQ 

## s*u -s* m 

## ^Sr - ST4 f '^^/ ^ <?*7-l??f &^5-2/SzT ' 68S~^'5C 

## \ STfe-^99 Z 

## 3ZZ.-SV7 0 ($,i > m -43 W (3l3)3Z2-0O33
c 

### 7 o 3 

### j S2 S -77* £ 

## &3 ;$-**
. z- 4 ** - 3iS^^t/? - 2/0* 7 

### jT/7- 377-^7 / 

# M/Mr'nte
### §891c. Design of NOAA vessels

#### (a) Design requirement

Except for the vessel designs identified under subsection (b), the Secretary, working through the Office of the NOAA Corps Operations and the Systems Procurement Office, shall—

(1) prepare requirements for each class of vessel to be constructed or converted under the Plan; and

(2) contract competitively from nongovernmental entities with expertise in shipbuilding for vessel design and construction based on the requirements for each class of vessel to be acquired.

#### (b) Exception

The Secretary shall—

(1) report to Congress identifying any existing vessel design or design proposal that meets the requirements of the Plan within 30 days after October 29, 1992, and shall promptly advise the Congress of any modification of these designs; and

(2) submit to Congress as part of the annual update of the Plan required in section 891b of this title, any subsequent existing vessel design or design proposals that meet the requirements of the Plan.

(Pub. L. 102–567, title VI, §605, Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4300.)
§ 575.312 Internal monitoring requirements and revocation or suspension of authority. ( a ) Each agency must monitor the use of retention incentives to ensure that its retention incentive plan and the payment of retention incentives are consistent with the requirements and criteria established under 5 U.S.C. 5754 and this subpart.
( b ) When OPM finds that an agency is not paying retention incentives consistent with the agency's retention incentive plan and the criteria established under 5 U.S.C. 5754 or this subpart or otherwise determines that the agency is not using this authority selectively and judiciously, OPM may— ( 1 ) Direct the agency to revoke or suspend the authority granted to any organizational component of the agency and, with respect to any category or categories of employees, require that the component obtain approval from the agency's headquarters level before paying a retention incentive to such employees; or
( 2 ) Revoke or suspend the authority granted to the agency under this subpart for all or any part of the agency and, with respect to any category or categories of employees, require that the agency obtain OPM's approval before paying a retention incentive to such employees.