alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §§751 to 752a. Repealed. Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, §20, 63 Stat. 561

Section 751, act Mar. 3, 1915, ch. 81, §4, 38 Stat. 927, related to leave of absence to employees of Lighthouse Service. See section 6301 et seq. of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Section 752, acts Mar. 4, 1913, ch. 168, 37 Stat. 1019; Mar. 4, 1913, ch. 141, §1, 37 Stat. 736, related to sale of condemned supplies, etc., and land not used; disposition of funds. See section 504 of Title 14, Coast Guard.

Section 752a, act May 22, 1926, ch. 371, §5, 44 Stat. 626, related to sale of equipment; disposition of receipts. See section 901 of Title 14.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective first day of third month after approval by President [Aug. 4, 1949], see section 19 of act Aug. 4, 1949, set out as an Effective Date note preceding chapter 1 of Title 14, Coast Guard.
### §59h–1. Repealed. Pub. L. 116–260, div. AA, title III, §316(b), Dec. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 2706

Section, Pub. L. 110–114, title V, §5052, Nov. 8, 2007, 121 Stat. 1211, related to area of nonnavigability in the San Francisco, California, waterfront area.
Editorial Note on Part 352
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 352 appear at 69 FR 2050, Jan. 13, 2004.

§ 352.907 Exercise or termination of reemployment rights. ( a ) *Exercise.* An individual who has been transferred under this subpart to the Commission and wishes to be reemployed must apply in writing to the former employing agency. The time limits for application for reemployment are— ( 1 ) No later than 30 calendar days after the expiration of the term of employment with the Commission;
( 2 ) No later than 30 calendar days after receipt of notice of involuntary separation during the term of employment with the Commission; or
( 3 ) No later than 30 calendar days after resignation with the consent of the Commission.
( b ) *Termination.* Reemployment rights terminate if the individual— ( 1 ) Fails to apply within the time limits stated in paragraph (a) of this section;
( 2 ) Resigns without the written consent of the Commission; or
( 3 ) Within 10 calendar days, fails to accept an offer of reemployment made under § 352.908 that is determined to be a proper offer of reemployment by the reemploying agency or by the Merit Systems Protection Board on appeal.
#### § 3.2 Appointments without competitive examination in rare cases.

Subject to receipt of satisfactory evidence of the qualifications of the person to be appointed, OPM may authorize an appointment in the competitive service without competitive examination whenever it finds that the duties or compensation of the position are such, or that qualified persons are so rare, that, in the interest of good civil-service administration, the position cannot be filled through open competitive examination. Any person heretofore or hereafter appointed under this section shall acquire a competitive status upon completion of at least one year of satisfactory service and compliance with such requirements as OPM may prescribe. Detailed statements of the reasons for the noncompetitive appointments made under this section shall be published in OPM's annual reports.
M A N D A T E

TO THE 327TH DISTRICT COURT OF EL PASO COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Eighth District of Texas, on 12/20/17, the cause upon appeal

to revise or reverse your judgment between

APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD OF

EL PASO COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellant,

No. 08-16-00319-CV and

THE FOUNTAINS AT FARAH, LP, Appellee,

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

The Court has considered this cause on Appellee = s motion to dismiss and concludes the

motion should be granted and the appeal should be dismissed, in accordance with the opinion of

this Court. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We further order costs be assessed against the party

incurring same. We further order that this decision be certified below for observance.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of

Appeals for the Eighth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized,

obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Clerk of the Court of Appeals, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of

El Paso, this May 23, 2018

.

Denise Pacheco, Clerk

Trial Court No. 2016DTX0442
**Exhibit 31.3****CERTIFICATION**I, Jennifer L. Good, in my capacity as principal executive officer of Penwest Pharmaceuticals Co.,certify that:1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A (“this report”) of PenwestPharmaceuticals Co.; and2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report.        Date: April 10,  2008 /s/ Jennifer L. Good   Jennifer L. Good   President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 10(i)(3)  


AMENDMENT NO. 2

TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT  


        AGREEMENT, made as of October 9, 2002, by and between AEP Industries Inc., a Delaware Corporation (the "Company") and J. Brendan Barba
("Executive"). 


        WHEREAS,
by Employment Agreement, dated as of October 11, 1996, between the Company and the Executive (the "Employment Agreement"), the Company employed Executive for a term which
shall expire on October 11, 2001, and 


        WHEREAS,
by Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement, the Company and Executive extended the expiration date for a period of one year, to October 11, 2002, and 


        WHEREAS,
the Company and Executive desire that the employment of Executive by the Company pursuant to the Employment Agreement be extended for a term of one year. 



        IT
IS, THEREFORE, hereby agreed by and between the parties, as follows: 


        1.    Paragraph 2
of the Employment Agreement is hereby modified so that the term of employment of Executive by the Company shall terminate on the earlier of
(i) October 11, 2003, and (ii) termination of Executive's employment pursuant to the Employment Agreement (such term of employment as hereby extended being known herein as the
"Term"); provided, however, that any termination of employment by Executive (other than for death or Permanent Disability) may only be made upon thirty
(30) days prior written notice to the Company. 


        2.    Except
as herein specifically modified, all of the terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement are continued in full force and effect. 


        IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed and entered into this Agreement, as of the date first above written. 



	

 	
 	
AEP INDUSTRIES INC.
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

 
	 	 	By:	 	/s/  PAUL M. FEENEY      
 Name: Paul M. Feeney

Title: Executive Vice President
	

 	
 	

 	
 	

/s/  J. BRENDAN BARBA      
 J. Brendan Barba,
 Executive
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents SECY-06-0143 - Stakeholder Comments and Path Forward on Decommissioning Guidance to Address License Termination Rule Analysis Issues Accession Number: ML061110228 Date Released: Friday, July 21, 2006 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. ML061010367 - SECY-06-0143 - Stakeholder Comments and Path Forward on Decommissioning Guidance to Address License Termination Rule Analysis Issues (7 page(s), 7/5/2006)
            ML061090222 - SECY-06-0143 - Enclosure 1 - List of Stakeholder Coments on NUREG-1757, Draft Supplement 1 (1 page(s), 7/5/2006)
            ML061640324 - Revised Decommissioning Guidance to Implement the License Termination Rule (3 page(s), 6/9/2006)
            ML061020544 - SECY-06-0143 - Enclosure 3 - Discussion of Significant Stakeholder Comments and Staff Path Forward on Restricted Use and Institutional Controls (4 page(s), 7/5/2006)
            ML061090038 - SECY-06-0143 - Enclosure 4 - Discussion of Significant Stakeholder Comments and Staff Path Forward on Realistic Scenarios (1 page(s), 7/5/2006)
            ML061090043 - SECY-06-0143 - Enclosure 5 - Discussion of Significant Stakeholder Comments and Staff Path Forward on Intentional Mixing of Contaminated Soil (2 page(s), 7/5/2006)
            ML061100342 - SECY-06-0143 - Enclosure 6 - Discussion of Significant Stakeholder Comments and Staff Path Forward on Removal of Material After License Termination (1 page(s), 7/5/2006)
            ML061090074 - SECY-06-0143 - Enclosure 7 - Summary of 10 CFR Part 20.2002 Requests for Onsite Disposal Received Since January 1, 2000 (1 page(s), 7/5/2006)


Privacy Policy Site Disclaimer
#### § 2421.7 Executive Director.

*Executive Director* means the Executive Director of the Authority.
### §929. Record of injury or death

Every employer shall keep a record in respect of any injury to an employee. Such record shall contain such information of disease, other disability, or death in respect of such injury as the Secretary may by regulation require, and shall be available to inspection by the Secretary or by any State authority at such times and under such conditions as the Secretary may by regulation prescribe.

(Mar. 4, 1927, ch. 509, §29, 44 Stat. 1438; Pub. L. 98–426, §27(a)(2), Sept. 28, 1984, 98 Stat. 1654.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1984—Pub. L. 98–426, §27(a)(2), substituted "Secretary" for "commission". See Transfer of Functions note set out under section 902 of this title.

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

#### Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–426 effective Sept. 28, 1984, see section 28(e)(1) of Pub. L. 98–426, set out as a note under section 901 of this title.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00106-CV

PETROLEUM ASSET 

MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

APPELLANT

V.

JUVENTAS, LLC, SKYEVIL 

INVESTMENTS, LLP, AND BRIAN 

GRONA

APPELLEES 

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

FROM THE 67TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

We have considered appellant's “Agreed Motion To Dismiss Appeal.” It is 

the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the 

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2), 43.2(f).

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

Costs of the appeal shall be paid by the party incurring the same, for which 

let execution issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEIER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J.

DELIVERED: June 26, 2014
#### § 185.101 Purpose.

This subpart implements the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986, Public Law 99-509, 6101-6104, 100 Stat. 1874 (October 21, 1986), codified at 31 U.S.C. 3801-3812. Section 3809 requires each authority head to promulgate regulations necessary to implement the provisions of the statute. The subpart establishes administrative procedures for imposing civil penalties and assessments against persons who make, submit, or present, or cause to be made, submitted, or presented, false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims or written statements to authorities or to their agents, and specifies the hearing and appeal rights of persons subject to allegations of liability for such penalties and assessments. The moneys collected as a result of these procedures are deposited as miscellaneous receipts in the Treasury of the United States.
### §521. Regulations and orders

The Secretary is authorized to prescribe such rules and regulations, and to make and issue such orders, as may be necessary or appropriate for carrying out the provisions of this subchapter.

(June 21, 1940, ch. 409, §11, 54 Stat. 501.)
§ 191.152 Merchandise released from Customs custody. No remission, refund, abatement, or drawback of duty shall be allowed under this subpart because of the exportation or destruction of any merchandise after its release from Government custody, except in the following cases: ( a ) When articles are exported or destroyed on which drawback is expressly provided for by law;
( b ) When prohibited articles have been regularly entered in good faith and are subsequently exported or destroyed pursuant to statute and regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury; or
( c ) When articles entered under bond are destroyed within the bonded period, as provided in § 557(c) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1557(c)), or destroyed within the bonded period by death, accidental fire, or other casualty, and satisfactory evidence of destruction is furnished to Customs (see § 191.71), in which case any accrued duties shall be remitted or refunded and any condition in the bond that the articles shall be exported shall be deemed to have been satisfied (see 19 U.S.C. 1558).
§ 2425.4 Content and format of exceptions. ( a ) *What is required.* You must date your exception, unless you file it electronically through use of the eFiling system on the FLRA's Web site at *www.flra.gov .* Regardless of how you file your exception, you must ensure that it is self-contained and that it sets forth, in full, the following: ( 1 ) A statement of the grounds on which review is requested, as discussed in § 2425.6 of this part;
( 2 ) Arguments in support of the stated grounds, including specific references to the record, citations of authorities, and any other relevant documentation;
( 3 ) Legible copies of any documents (which you may upload as attachments if you file electronically through use of the FLRA's eFiling system) that you reference in the arguments discussed in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, and that the Authority cannot easily access (such as internal agency regulations or provisions of collective bargaining agreements);
( 4 ) Arguments in support of any request for an expedited, abbreviated decision within the meaning of § 2425.7 of this part;
( 5 ) A legible copy of the award of the arbitrator; and
( 6 ) The arbitrator's name, mailing address, and, if available and authorized for use by the arbitrator, the arbitrator's e-mail address or facsimile number.
( b ) *What is not required.* Exceptions are not required to include copies of documents that are readily accessible to the Authority, such as Authority decisions, decisions of Federal courts, current provisions of the United States Code, and current provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations.
( c ) *What is prohibited.* Consistent with 5 CFR 2429.5, an exception may not rely on any evidence, factual assertions, arguments (including affirmative defenses), requested remedies, or challenges to an awarded remedy that could have been, but were not, presented to the arbitrator.
( d ) *Format.* You may file your exception on an optional form that is available on the FLRA's Web site at *www.flra.gov ,* or in any other format that is consistent with paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section. You meet this requirement if you file your exception electronically through use of the FLRA's eFiling system on that Web site. Your failure to use, or properly fill out, an Authority-provided form will not, by itself, provide a basis for dismissing your exception.
[75 FR 42290, July 21, 2010, as amended at 77 FR 26434, May 4, 2012]
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

December 15, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 132284 & (53) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 132284 COA: 267976 Sanilac CC: 05-006016-FC THOMAS JAMES EARLS, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion fo r immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the October 3, 2006 judgme nt of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to sche dule oral argument on wh ether to grant the application or take other peremptory action. MCR 7.302(G)(1). At oral argument, the parties shall address whether th e defendant has standing to challenge evidence seized in violation of MCL 767A.1 et seq . and, if so, whether the vi olation of that statutory provision authorizes exclusion of the evidence, in light of People v Hawkins , 468 Mich 488, 507 (2003), and People v Anstey , 476 Mich 436, 44 8 (2006). The parties may file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order, but they should avoid submitting a mere restatement of the arguments made in their application papers.

The Criminal Defense A ttorneys of Michigan and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.

s1212 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 15, 2006

Clerk
#### § 351.806 Status during notice period.

When possible, the agency shall retain the employee on active duty status during the notice period. When in an emergency the agency lacks work or funds for all or part of the notice period, it may place the employee on annual leave with or without his or her consent, or leave without pay with his or her consent, or in a nonpay status without his or her consent.
Exhibit 13.1

Officer Certifications Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Lan Airlines S.A. (the ‘‘Company’’), does hereby certify to such officer’s knowledge that:

The annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the ‘‘Form 20-F’’) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                              |  |  |                                   |
|------------------------------|--|--|-----------------------------------|
| Dated: May 7, 2007 |  |  | /s/ Enrique Cueto Plaza           |
|                         |  |  | Name: Enrique Cueto Plaza         |
|                         |  |  | Title: Chief Executive Officer    |
| Dated: May 7, 2007 |  |  | /s/ Alejandro de la Fuente Goic   |
|                         |  |  | Name: Alejandro de la Fuente Goic |
|                         |  |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer    |
|                              |

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Regulatory Effectiveness of Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-45, "Shutdown Decay Heat Removal Requirements" (NUREG/CR-6832)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6832 (PDF - 487 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** July 2003**Date Published:** August 2003

**Prepared by:** S.A. Faridi, R.W. Youngblood, B.B. Mrowca, F. Zikria, J.F. Meyer Information Systems Laboratories, Inc. 11140 Rockville Pike, Suite 500 Rockville, Maryland 20852

J.V. Kauffman, NRC Technical Monitor 

**Prepared for:** Division of Systems Analysis and Regulatory Effectiveness Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC Job Code Y6406

Availability Notice

## Abstract

As part of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's program to assess regulatory effectiveness, the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research has examined regulations such as the station blackout rule, and anticipated transient without scram rule. As part of this program, the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research is also reviewing the effectiveness of generic safety issue resolution. One such issue currently being reviewed is Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-45 to determine if the requirements are achieving the desired outcomes. It is anticipated that the results of these reviews can be used to improve the effectiveness of NRC requirements and guidance, staff inspection guidance, and oversight decision processes for NRC licensee performance. This report evaluates the effectiveness of the USI A-45 resolution by comparing USI A-45 expectations to outcomes. A set of baseline expectations was established from NUREG-1289, "Regulatory and Backfit Analysis: Unresolved Safety Issue A-45, Shutdown Decay Heat Removal Requirements," November 1988, and NUREG/CR-5230, "Shutdown Decay Heat Removal Analysis: Plant Case Studies and Special Issues," April 1989, and the actual outcomes were obtained from the individual plant examinations and individual plant examination of external events in the areas of total core damage frequency, decay heat removal risk categories and decay heat removal vulnerability. The report concludes that the USI A-45 program expectation regarding decay heat removal-related contribution to core damage frequency was generally met without the imposition of generic hardware fixes expressly for USI A-45. In addition, it is likely that licensees' awareness of the significance of decay heat removal strategies was fostered through the conduct of the individual plant examinations and individual plant examination of external events. Therefore, the USI A-45 resolution approach appears effective in achieving its goals.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
### §§861b, 861c. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 861b, act Feb. 21, 1929, ch. 288, 45 Stat. 1254, defined the terms "child" and "children" as formerly used in section 861a of this title, and has been omitted in view of the repeal of section 861a.

Section 861c, act June 24, 1935, ch. 291, §3, 49 Stat. 421, defined the phrase "permanent change in station" as formerly used in section 861a of this title, and has been omitted in view of the repeal of section 861a.
§ 511.605 Time limits. ( a ) *Employees.* ( 1 ) An employee may submit an appeal of his or her official position at any time. If the employee has suffered a loss in grade or pay, is not entitled to retained grade or pay, and desires retroactive adjustments, the time limits in § 511.703 must be observed.
( 2 ) If the employee is appealing an agency decision or an Office classification certificate issued under 5 U.S.C. 5103 or 5110, the employee shall promptly appeal if he or she disagrees with the classification certificate. Employees must meet the time limits provided in § 511.703 in order to preserve the right to retroactive adjustment.
( b ) *Agency.* An agency may appeal an Office classification certificate issued under authority of section 5103 or 5110 of title 5, United States Code, at any time. Heads of agencies should appeal prior to the implementation date of the certificate if they disagree with the classification rationale.
( c ) *Reconsideration.* An employee or agency may request reconsideration of an Office appellate decision. The request must be in writing, and filed not later than 45 calendar days after the decision is issued. This time limit may be waived under exceptional circumstances by either the Director or the Director's designee.
[46 FR 9913, Jan. 30, 1981, as amended at 71 FR 37489, June 30, 2006]