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

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 154 (Monday, August 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 46801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18926]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OA-2014-0001; FRL-9915-00-OA]

Good Neighbor Environmental Board; Notification of Public 
Advisory Committee Teleconferences

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Public Advisory Committee Teleconferences.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-
463, notice is hereby given that the Good Neighbor Environmental Board 
(Board) will hold two separate public teleconferences. The first 
teleconference will take place on Wednesday, September 3, 2014 and the 
second on Tuesday, September 16, 2014. The teleconference held on 
September 3 will take place from 1:00-3:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. 
The teleconference being held on September 16 will take place from 11 
a.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Both teleconferences are open to 
the public. For further information regarding the teleconferences and 
background materials, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at the number 
provided below.
    Background: The Good Neighbor Environmental Board is a federal 
advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 
Public Law 92-463. By statute, the Board is required to submit an 
annual report to the President and Congress on environmental and 
infrastructure issues along the U.S. border with Mexico.
    Purpose of Meeting: The purpose of the September 3 call will be to 
discuss an advice letter on the proposed merger of the Border 
Environment Cooperation Commission and the North American Development 
Bank. The purpose of the September 16 teleconference will be to 
continue discussion on the Board's Sixteenth Report, which focuses on 
ecological restoration in the U.S.-Mexico border region.
    General Information: The agenda and teleconference materials will 
be available at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OA-
2014-0001. General information about the Board can be found on its Web 
site at http://www2.epa.gov/faca/gneb.
    If you wish to make oral comments or submit written comments to the 
Board, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at least five days prior to the 
teleconference. Written comments should be submitted at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2014-0001.
    Meeting Access: For information on access or services for 
individuals with disabilities, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at 
(202) 564-4330 or email at gantner.ann-marie@epa.gov. To request 
accommodation of a disability, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at 
least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible 
to process your request.

    Dated: July 31, 2014.
Mark Joyce,
Acting Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-18926 Filed 8-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
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

 

No. 07-063 May 21, 2007

NRC ANNOUNCES APPOINTMENT OF NEW MEMBER TO THE

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL USES OF ISOTOPES 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission today announced the appointment of Bruce R.

Thomadsen, Ph.D., as the medical physicist in radiation therapy expert on the Advisory Committee on

the Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI). The ACMUI was established in 1958 and advises the NRC on

policy and technical issues related to the regulation of the medical use of radioactive material.

Dr. Thomadsen is board certified by the American Board of Radiology in radiologic physics,

the American Board of Health Physics in comprehensive health physics and the American Board of

Medical Physics in radiation oncology physics. He holds an undergraduate degree in physics and

political science from the University of Michigan, a master of science in physics from Michigan State

University, and a master’s degree and Ph.D. in medical physics from the University of Wisconsin. 

Dr. Thomadsen was a resident in radiological physics at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit.

He served as a medical physicist at Hurley Hospital, in Flint, Mich., and St. Barnabas Medical Center,

in Short Hills, N.J., before going to the University of Wisconsin in 1975, where he has served as the

chair of the University Radiation Safety Committee since 1992 and has been very active in clinical

service, research and teaching. His lengthy service to the university was only interrupted by a one-year

exchange with Copenhagen County Hospital in Denmark from 1985 to 1986. 

Dr. Thomadsen was made a fellow of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine

(AAPM), and has served on and chaired many AAPM committees, including the Radiation Safety

Committee. He has also been active in the American Brachytherapy Society and served on panels for

the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measures, and the National Council on Radiation

Protection and Measurements. Dr. Thomadsen has been active in the Commission on Accreditation of

Medical Physics Education Programs and with the American Board of Radiology both as an examiner

and with the maintenance of certificate program.
Brachytherapy physics has been one of the main areas of Dr. Thomadsen’s research, but he has

also been involved in research on quality assurance and patient safety, as well as dosimetry for

external-beam radiotherapy.

# # #

News releases are available through a free list serve 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.
### §150512. Liability for acts of officers and agents

The corporation is liable for the acts of its officers and agents acting within the scope of their authority.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1391.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 150512 | 36:412. | Apr. 3, 1952, ch. 131, §12, 66 Stat. 40. |

Section
### §11312. Duties and functions of the Administrator

The Administrator shall—

(1) make such arrangements as are necessary and appropriate to facilitate coordination and policy development among all activities funded through the Department of Justice relating to delinquency prevention (including the preparation of an annual comprehensive plan for facilitating such coordination and policy development);

(2) provide adequate staff and resources necessary to properly carry out this subchapter; and

(3) not later than 180 days after the end of each fiscal year, submit a report to the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate—

(A) describing activities and accomplishments of grant activities funded under this subchapter;

(B) describing procedures followed to disseminate grant activity products and research findings;

(C) describing activities conducted to develop policy and to coordinate Federal agency and interagency efforts related to delinquency prevention; and

(D) identifying successful approaches and making recommendations for future activities to be conducted under this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 93–415, title V, §503, as added Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title II, §12222(a), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1894; amended Pub. L. 115–385, title III, §303, Dec. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5147.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 5782 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 503 of title V of Pub. L. 93–415, as added Pub. L. 102–586, §5(a), Nov. 4, 1992, 106 Stat. 5027, defined "State advisory group", prior to the general amendment of title V of Pub. L. 93–415 by Pub. L. 107–273.

Another prior section 503 of Pub. L. 93–415, title V, Sept. 7, 1974, 88 Stat. 1135, amended section 5033 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 115–385, title III, §307, Dec. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5152.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–385 redesignated pars. (2) to (4) as (1) to (3), respectively, and struck out former par. (1) which read as follows: "issue such rules as are necessary or appropriate to carry out this subchapter;".

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

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–385 not applicable with respect to funds appropriated for any fiscal year that begins before Dec. 21, 2018, see section 3 of Pub. L. 115–385, set out as a note under section 11102 of this title.
###### Editorial Note on Part 352

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 352 appear at 69 FR 2050, Jan. 13, 2004.

#### § 352.306 Length of details.

The total length of a detail or several details combined must not exceed 5 consecutive years, except that when the Secretary of State, on the recommendation of the head of the agency, determines it to be in the national interest, the 5 years allowed for details may be extended for up to an additional 3 years. A detail or combination of details and transfers must not exceed 8 years in the aggregate throughout an employee's Federal career.

[73 FR 64860, Oct. 31, 2008]
### §24. Subpoenas, witnesses

The clerk of any United States court for the district wherein testimony is to be taken for use in any contested case in the Patent and Trademark Office, shall, upon the application of any party thereto, issue a subpoena for any witness residing or being within such district, commanding him to appear and testify before an officer in such district authorized to take depositions and affidavits, at the time and place stated in the subpoena. The provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure relating to the attendance of witnesses and to the production of documents and things shall apply to contested cases in the Patent and Trademark Office.

Every witness subpoenaed and in attendance shall be allowed the fees and traveling expenses allowed to witnesses attending the United States district courts.

A judge of a court whose clerk issued a subpoena may enforce obedience to the process or punish disobedience as in other like cases, on proof that a witness, served with such subpoena, neglected or refused to appear or to testify. No witness shall be deemed guilty of contempt for disobeying such subpoena unless his fees and traveling expenses in going to, and returning from, and one day's attendance at the place of examination, are paid or tendered him at the time of the service of the subpoena; nor for refusing to disclose any secret matter except upon appropriate order of the court which issued the subpoena.

(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 795; Pub. L. 93–596, §1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §§54, 55 and 56 (R.S. 4906, amended Feb. 18, 1922, ch. 58, §7, 42 Stat. 389, 391–2; R.S. 4907; R.S. 4908).

Three sections of the existing statute are combined with some changes in language and placed in part 1 since they apply to trade-mark cases in the Patent Office as well as to patent cases. Reference to a repealed statute in the first paragraph is replaced by reference to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and certain rules are made applicable.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in text, are set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

#### Amendments

1975—Pub. L. 93–596 substituted "Patent and Trademark Office" for "Patent Office" in two places.

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

#### Effective Date of 1975 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 93–596 effective Jan. 2, 1975, see section 4 of Pub. L. 93–596, set out as a note under section 1111 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.
#### In the Matter of the City of New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Real Property Required for the Widening of East 47th Street and Another Street and for Park Purposes. Joseph I. Lubin et al., as Assignees of Bertha Levy, et al., Appellants.

No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ.
§ 551.432 Sleep time. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, *bona fide* sleep time that fulfills the following conditions shall not be considered hours of work if: ( 1 ) The work shift is *24 hours or more;*
( 2 ) During such time there are adequate facilities such that an employee may usually enjoy an uninterrupted period of sleep; and
( 3 ) There are at least 5 hours available for such time during the sleep period.
( b ) For employees engaged in law enforcement or fire protection activities who receive annual premium pay under 5 U.S.C. 5545(c)(1) or (2), the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section apply, except that on-duty sleep time may be excluded from hours of work only if the work shift is more than 24 hours.
( c ) The total amount of bona fide sleep and meal time that may be excluded from hours of work may not exceed 8 hours in a 24-hour period.
( d ) If sleep time is interrupted by a call to duty, the time spent on duty is considered hours of work.
( e ) On-duty sleep and meal time during regularly scheduled hours for which standby duty premium pay under 5 U.S.C. 5545(c)(1) is payable may not be excluded from hours of work.
( f ) For firefighters compensated under 5 U.S.C. 5545b, on-duty sleep and meal time may not be excluded from hours of work.
[45 FR 85664, Dec. 30, 1980, as amended at 57 FR 59279, Dec. 15, 1992; 64 FR 69180, Dec. 10, 1999]
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 37488

STATE OF IDAHO

,

Plaintiff-Respondent

,

v.

DAVID CLARK LANHAM

,

Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2010 Unpublished Opi nion No. 717

Filed: November 23, 2010

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Deborah A. Bail , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period

of confinement of one year , fo r felony driving under the influence

, affirmed

.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasd en, Attorney General; Jessica M. Lorello, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

______________________________________________

Before LANSING, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

David Clark Lanham pled guilty to felony driving under the influence . I.C. §§ 18

- 8004,

18

- 8005(6) . In exchange for his guilty plea, an additional charge was dismissed. The district

court sentenced Lanham to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of

one year

. 1 Lanham appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentenc e are well established and

1 Lanham also plead guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and was sentenced to a concurrent term of six months. However, he does not challenge this judgment of conviction or sentence on appeal.2

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

-
15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Lanham ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 244 (Thursday, December 20, 2018)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 65279]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27694]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 83 , No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2018 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 65279]]

                Memorandum of November 29, 2018

                
Delegation of Authority Under Section 614(a)(1) 
                of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                By the authority vested in me as President by the 
                Constitution and the laws of the United States of 
                America, including section 301 of title 3, United 
                States Code, and subject to fulfilling the requirements 
                of section 614(a)(3) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
                1961 (FAA), I hereby delegate to you the authority 
                under section 614(a)(1) of the FAA to determine whether 
                it is important to the security interests of the United 
                States to use up to $1.3 million in International 
                Military Education and Training (IMET) funds to furnish 
                assistance to Thailand without regard to any other 
                provision of law within the purview of section 
                614(a)(1) of the FAA.

                You are authorized and directed to publish this 
                memorandum in the Federal Register.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, November 29, 2018

[FR Doc. 2018-27694
Filed 12-19-18; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4710-10-P
#### §§ 723.104-723.109 [Reserved]
FMC PerNOxideSM Process:

Example Case and 

Economics

EPA – Region 9

Jan 19, 2012
NOx Removal Projections

Step 1 - Oxidation

– Over 80% demonstrated at full-scale

– Various oxidized species formed

• NO2(~ 2/3)

• HNO3(~ 1/3)

Step 2 - Capture

– NO2 Capture in Scrubber

• Controlled by chemistry / mass-transfer area (contacting)

• Projections based on URS lab/bench test program

– HNO3 Capture in Scrubber

• Controlled by mass-transfer area (contacting)

• Similar to max SO2removal (or HCl)

2
NO Oxidation Results

3
NO2 Capture Projections

4

Note: Projections based on laboratory data; pilot-scale scrubber testing needed to validate results.
Case Study – 400 MW Plant

• Unit Conditions

– 400 MW

– 10,000 Btu/kW-hr

– 75% Capacity Factor

– 0.20 lb NOx/mmBtu

– 800 lb/hr NOx

• Cost Basis

– $0.50/lb H2O2

– $300/ton Na2CO3

– $30/MW-hr Power

• H2O2 Process

– 70% NO oxidation

– 1.50 NSR (H2O2:NOx)

– 2250 lb/hr H2O2

– 72% FGD Capture

• 60% NO2 Capture

• 95% HNO3 Capture

– 50% Overall NOx Rem

• Results

– 0.10 lb NOx/MMBtu

5
Case Study - Economics

• Operating Costs

– Peroxide - $2.9 M/yr

– Soda Ash - $0.5 M/yr

– Power - $0.1 M/yr

– Maint - $0.1 M/yr

– Total = $3.5 M/yr

• Capital Costs

– Estimate ~ $4-8 Million

– Conceptual Engineering Study Needed

• Economic Analysis

– $2700 / ton NOx rem

– $1.65 / MW-hr

– $0.16 / MMBtu

6
Comparison to SCR

7

Basis Units PerNOxide SCR

Capacity Treated MW 400 400

Inlet NOx lb/MMBtu 0.20 0.20

NOx Removal % 50 75

NOx Emissions lb/MMBtu 0.10 0.05

NOx Removed TPY 1,316 1,971

Capacity Factor % 75 75

Reagent Peroxide Ammonia

Reagent Molar Ratio mol:mol NOx 1.50 0.75

Reagent Cost $/ton $1,000 $600

Soda Ash Cost $/ton $300

Catalyst Cost $/c.f. $150

SCR Catalyst Life Yrs 3

Power Cost $/MW-hr $30 $30

Annual Maint. Cost % of Capital 1.0 1.0

Capital Cost $/kW $20 $250

Capital Recovery Period Yrs 20 20

Capital Discount Rate % 8 8

Capital Recovery Factor % 10 10
Annualized Costs

8
Cost Effectiveness Analysis

9
Take Aways...

• PerNOxide is cost-effective alternative to SCR for 

modest NOx reductions

• PerNOxide economics more favorable for ...

– Lower inlet NOx levels

– Smaller unit size

– Lower capacity factor

– Sodium and lime scrubbers

– Space limited site (difficult retrofit)

• PerNOxide can be final “layer” of controls before 

SCR required...

– LNB, OFA, SNCR-Urea,....

10
Comparison to SNCR/SCR

11

Basis Units SNCR PerNOxide SNCR+PerNOxide SCR

Capacity Treated MW 400 400 400 400

Inlet NOx lb/MMBtu 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20

NOx Removal % 25 50 63 75

NOx Emissions lb/MMBtu 0.15 0.10 0.07 0.05

NOx Removed TPY 657 1,316 1,644 1,971

Capacity Factor % 75 75 75 75

Reagent Urea Peroxide Ammonia

Reagent Molar Ratio mol:mol NOx 0.20 1.50 0.75

Reagent Cost $/ton $500 $1,000 $600

Soda Ash Cost $/ton $0 $300

Catalyst Cost $/c.f. $150

SCR Catalyst Life Yrs 3

Power Cost $/MW-hr $30 $30 $30

Annual Maint. Cost % of Capital 1.0 1.0 1.0

Capital Cost $/kW $20 $20 $40 $250

Capital Recovery Period Yrs 20 20 20 20

Capital Discount Rate % 8 8 8 8

Capital Recovery Factor % 15 10 10 10
Annualized Costs

12
Cost Effectiveness Analysis

13
14

END
II 

Calendar No. 549 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1822 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 21, 2004 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

JUNE 7, 2004 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 3751 West 6th Street in Los Angeles, California, as the ‘‘Dosan Ahn Chang Ho Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 3751 West 6th Street in Los Angeles, California, 

6 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Dosan Ahn Chang 

7 Ho Post Office’’. 
2 

•HR 1822 RS 

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

5 to the ‘‘Dosan Ahn Chang Ho Post Office’’. 

Calendar No. 549 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1822 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostChang Ho Post Office’’. Los Angeles, California, as the ‘‘Dosan Ahn al Service located at 3751 West 6th Street in 

JUNE 7, 2004 

Reported without amendment