alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. I-07-51 

Contact: Diane Screnci 610/337-5330 

 Neil Sheehan 610/337-5331 

October 2, 2007

NRC SETS PUBLIC MEETING WITH EXELON ON OCT. 9 TO DISCUSS 

RESULTS OF INSPECTION INTO SECURITY ISSUES AT PEACH BOTTOM 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will discuss the results of an inspection 

conducted to review security issues at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station in Delta, Pa. 

The plant is operated by Exelon. 

The meeting, which will be between NRC staff and Exelon, is scheduled to be 

held Oct. 9, at 6:30 p.m. at the Peach Bottom Inn, 6085 Delta Road, in Delta, Pa. It will 

be open to the public for observation and there will be an opportunity for members of the 

public to ask questions to NRC staff members before the session is adjourned. 

On Sept. 20, the NRC announced that it was sending an Augmented Inspection 

Team (AIT) to the plant. The team was made up of staff from both Region I in King of 

Prussia, Pa., and NRC Headquarters in Rockville, Md. It was tasked with looking into 

information that security officers may have been inattentive while on duty at Peach 

Bottom. 

An inspection report detailing the team’s findings will be issued within about 30 

days after the meeting. 

### 

 News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a 

SUBSCRIBE link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's 

Web site. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region I 

475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 

E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov 

Site: http://www.nrc.gov
§ 831.1005 Offset from nondisability annuity. ( a ) OPM will reduce the annuity of an individual who has performed Federal service, if the individual is entitled, or on proper application would be entitled, to old-age benefits under title II of the Social Security Act.
( b ) The reduction required under paragraph (a) of this section is effective on the 1st day of the month during which the employee— ( 1 ) Is entitled to an annuity under CSRS; and
( 2 ) Is entitled, or on proper application would be entitled, to old-age benefits under title II of the Social Security Act.
( c ) Subject to paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, the amount of the reduction required under paragraph (a) of this section is the lesser of— ( 1 ) The difference between— ( i ) The Social Security old-age benefit for the month referred to in paragraph (b) of this section; and
( ii ) The old-age benefit that would be payable to the individual for the month referred to in paragraph (b) of this section, excluding all wages from Federal service, and assuming the annuitant was fully insured (as defined by section 215(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 414(a)); or
( 2 ) The product of— ( i ) The old-age benefit to which the individual is entitled or would, on proper application, be entitled; and
( ii ) A fraction— ( A ) The numerator of which is the annuitant's total Federal service, rounded to the nearest whole number of years not exceeding 40 years; and
( B ) The denominator of which is 40.
( d ) Cost-of-living adjustments under 5 U.S.C. 8340 occurring after the effective date of the reduction required under paragraph (a) of this section will be based on only the annuity remaining after reduction under this subpart.
( e ) The amounts for paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii), and (c)(2)(i) of this section are computed without regard to subsections (b) through (l) of section 203 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 403) (relating to reductions in Social Security benefits), and without applying the provisions of the second sentence of section 215(a)(7)(B)(i) or section 214(d)(5)(ii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 415(a)(7)(B)(i) or 415(d)(5)(ii) (relating to part of the computation of the Social Security windfall elimination provisions).
( f ) OPM will accept the determination of the Social Security Administration, submitted in a form prescribed by OPM, concerning entitlement to Social Security benefits and the date thereof.
#### Frances Resnick et al., Appellants, v. Croton Park Colony, Inc., Respondent.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Present — Callahan, J. P., Breitel, Bastow, Botein and Bergan, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 214 (Friday, November 5, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 64580]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24709]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1570-DR]


Virginia; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and 
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the Commonwealth of Virginia (FEMA-1570-DR), dated October 18, 
2004, and related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 26, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the Commonwealth of Virginia is hereby amended to include the 
following area among those areas determined to have been adversely 
affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President 
in his declaration of October 18, 2004: Botetourt County for Individual 
Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management 
Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, 
Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 
Individuals and Households Program--Other Needs, 97.036, Public 
Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)
Michael D. Brown,
Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of 
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 04-24709 Filed 11-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than November 22, 2004.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta**                     (Sue Costello, Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30303:                

*1. Rex Lee Davis, Emily Medlock Davis, Alan Rex Davis, Beverly Renee Davis, Stephen Paul Davis, and Tammy Renee Davis*, all of Boaz, Alabama; to acquire additional voting shares of Peoples Independent Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Peoples Independent Bank, Boaz, Alabama.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 2, 2004.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 04-24791 Filed 11-5-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JANUARY 30, 2015

NO. 03-14-00672-CV

John Dale Dunn and Patricia Louise Sommer, Appellants

v.

Marriott Hotel Corp. d/b/a Renaissance Austin Hotel, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 200TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED ON APPELLANTS’ MOTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the order signed by the district court on September 24, 2014. Appellants 

have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion, the Court agrees 

that the motion should be granted. Therefore, the Court grants the motion and dismisses the 

appeal. The appellants shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court 

below.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1927

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to include wireless telecommunications equipment in the definition of qualified technological equipment 

for purposes of determining the depreciation treatment of such equipment. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 1, 2003

Mr. HULSHOF (for himself and Mr. BECERRA) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to include 

wireless telecommunications equipment in the definition 

of qualified technological equipment for purposes of determining the depreciation treatment of such equipment.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIP4 MENT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (A) of section 

6 168(i)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining 

7 qualified technological equipment) is amended by striking 

8 ‘‘and’’ at the end of clause (ii), by striking the period at 
2

•HR 1927 IH 

1 the end of clause (iii) and inserting ‘‘, and’’, and by adding 

2 after clause (iii) the following new clause: 

3 ‘‘(iv) any wireless telecommunications 

4 equipment.’’

5 (b) WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIP6 MENT.—Section 168(i)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code 

7 of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following 

8 new subparagraph: 

9 ‘‘(D) WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS

10 EQUIPMENT.—For purposes of this paragraph, 

11 the term ‘wireless telecommunications equip12 ment’ means all equipment used in the trans13 mission, reception, coordination, or switching of 

14 wireless telecommunications service, other than 

15 cell towers, buildings, T-1 lines or other cabling 

16 connecting cell sites to mobile switching centers. 

17 For purposes of the preceding sentence, the 

18 term ‘wireless telecommunications service’ in19 cludes any commercial mobile radio service as 

20 defined in title 47 of the Code of Federal Regu21 lations.’’

22 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

23 this section shall apply to property placed in service on 

24 or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-82,923-01

EX PARTE JESSE VASQUEZ, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 39,802-B IN THE 78 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM WICHITA COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated

assault and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. 

Applicant contends that he is illegally confined and should have discharged his sentence in

December 2014. Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. In these

circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294

(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact.
2

The trial court shall order the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s Office of the General

Counsel to file an affidavit listing Applicant’s sentence begin date and specifically accounting for

how his sentence is being calculated, including any time spent out of custody. 

The trial court may also order depositions, interrogatories or a hearing. In the appropriate

case, the trial court may rely on its personal recollection. Id. If the trial court elects to hold a

hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be

represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. 

TEX. C ODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether Applicant

is receiving the proper amount of time credit for his sentence, and whether he is being illegally

confined. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and conclusions of law that it

deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for habeas corpus relief.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 30 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall be forwarded

to this Court within 45 days of the date of this order. No extensions of time shall be entertained by

this Court. 

Filed: April 22, 2015

Do not publish
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 2, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-12-00287-CR

NO. 14-12-00288-CR

KELLYE HENSKE CARTWRIGHT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 21st District Court

Washington County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 13,934 & 14,493

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to two counts of felony driving while 

intoxicated and was placed on probation. On March 6, 2012, the trial court 

revoked appellant’s probation and sentenced appellant to five years’ confinement

in cause number 13,934, and ten years’ confinement in cause number 14,493. 

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.
2

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal 

is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional 

evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to 

be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised 

of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford 

v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 

forty-five days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the 

appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error 

in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders

brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds 

for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Brown, and Busby.

Do Not Publish - TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)
### §40721. Report to Congress on plans to modify CODIS system

If the Department of Justice plans to modify or supplement the core genetic markers needed for compatibility with the CODIS system, it shall notify the Judiciary Committee of the Senate and the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives in writing not later than 180 days before any change is made and explain the reasons for such change.

(Pub. L. 108–405, title II, §203(f), Oct. 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 2271.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section is comprised of subsec. (f) of section 203 of Pub. L. 108–405. For complete classification of section 203, see Tables.

Section was formerly classified as a note under section 531 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 04-143 November 15, 2004

NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING NOV. 22-23 ON

ANALYZING NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIRE HAZARDS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public meeting Nov. 22-23 in Rockville, Md.,

to discuss state-of-the-art methods for performing fire hazard calculations at nuclear power plants.

The meeting will focus on the NRC’s report, NUREG-1805, “Fire Dynamics Tools (FDT) -

Quantitative Fire Hazard Analysis Methods for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fire

Protection Inspection Program.” The report will help agency inspectors perform initial analyses of

potential fire scenarios, using principles of fire dynamics. Both NRC inspectors and plant operators

can use this report’s tools to examine fires capable of damaging the equipment necessary to safely shut

down a nuclear power plant. All U.S. nuclear power plants must have fire protection plans that meet

NRC requirements for safely dealing with fires.

The meeting will be held in the Auditorium of Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike,

from 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. both days. Copies of NUREG-1805 and a CD of the report’s software tools

will be provided. NRC staff will discuss each of the fire dynamics tools in detail. Participants are

encouraged to bring laptop computers with Microsoft Excel 2000 installed (full batteries are

recommended due to limited AC outlets) to work sample problems along with the instructors.

The NRC issued a draft version of the report in June 2003 for public comment and technical

peer review. Stakeholder and reviewer comments were taken into account in preparing the final report,

which is available on the NRC's Web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1805/.

Any technical questions regarding NUREG-1805 should be sent via e-mail to Naeem Iqbal

(nxi@nrc.gov) or Mark Salley (mxs3@nrc.gov), faxed to (301) 415-2300, or sent by regular mail to

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O11-A11,

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. Any questions concerning the November public meeting should be

sent to James Downs via e-mail at jrd2@nrc.gov.

###
ATTACHMENT F

Response to Comments

The following includes responses to comments received at the PAR 2005 Public 

Workshop on March 3, 2011 and during the public comment period.

Comment: If the second and subsequent year RTC holding requirements are 

being removed for existing RECLAIM facilities, why not remove the same 

requirements for new RECLAIM facilities?

Response: The original Rule 2005 requirement was due to EPA’s concern over 

the permanency of emission reductions used to offset emission increases. EPA 

intended to ensure that emission offsets under RECLAIM meet the federal 

permanency requirement set forth in the Emission Offset Interpretation Ruling, 40 

CFR Section 51, Appendix S. On this basis, AQMD staff proposed in the initial 

RECLAIM rulemaking that the permanency requirement would be met by 

supplying one year’s worth of RTCs, since the RECLAIM facilities operate on an 

annual basis and must reduce their total emissions annually. On this basis, new 

RECLAIM facilities must continue to provide one year’s worth of RTCs prior to 

the actual operation and every year thereafter.1

 

1 Reference: RECLAIM Appendix II-Y, Response to Comments (Comments received from June 26, 1993 through 

July 23, 1993, New Source Review for RECLAIM, Pg. 18, Comment No.2)
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1831 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1831

 To extend the grace period for personal watercraft use in Glen Canyon 
                       National Recreation Area.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 12, 2003

 Mr. Renzi (for himself and Mr. Cannon) introduced the following bill; 
            which was referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the grace period for personal watercraft use in Glen Canyon 
                       National Recreation Area.

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

SECTION 1. PERSONAL WATERCRAFT TIME EXTENSION.

    The grace period described in the final rule issued on March 21, 
2000, (65 Fed. Reg. 15,077 (2000)), regarding personal watercraft use 
within certain units of the National Park System, is extended until 
October 31, 2003, for Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.
                                 <all>
```
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1884

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that certain individuals under contract to perform fire fighting services for a local government shall be treated as employees of such government for pension 

plan purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 30, 2003

Mr. BURR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

that certain individuals under contract to perform fire 

fighting services for a local government shall be treated 

as employees of such government for pension plan purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CONTRACT FIREFIGHTERS TREATED AS EM4 PLOYEES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (d) of section 414 of 

6 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to govern7 mental plans) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
2

•HR 1884 IH 

1 lowing new sentence: ‘‘If, pursuant to a State law enacted 

2 before January 1, 2003, individuals who are under con3 tract to provide full-time fire fighting services for a polit4 ical subdivision of such State are permitted to participate 

5 in a plan established and maintained primarily for employ6 ees (determined without regard to this sentence) of 1 or 

7 more political subdivisions of such State, such individuals 

8 who elect to participate in such plan shall be treated as 

9 employees of such political subdivision (and not as self10 employed individuals) for purposes of this part with re11 spect to such services.’’

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

13 this section shall apply to plan years beginning after the 

14 date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ