alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC REQUESTS PLANS FROM 18 NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO ADDRESS 

APPARENT DECOMMISSIONING FUNDING ASSURANCE SHORTFALLS 

The NRC has contacted 18 nuclear power plants to clarify how the companies will 

address the recent economic downturn’s effects on funds to decommission reactors in the future. 

Nuclear power plant operators are required to set aside funds during a reactor’s operating 

life to ensure the reactor site will be properly cleaned up once the reactor is permanently shut 

down. The NRC’s review of the latest reports on decommissioning funding assurance suggests 

several plants must adjust their funding plans. 

“We’ll discuss this with the plants over the next few weeks so they can explain to us how 

they’ll get the funds back on track to account for their decommissioning cost estimates,” said 

Tim McGinty, director of Policy and Rulemaking in the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. “This is not a current safety issue, but the plants do have to prove to us they’re 

setting aside money appropriately.” 

The letters for the affected plants will be available in the NRC’s electronic documents 

database, ADAMS, by entering each letter’s accession number (indicated below) here: 

http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm. 

Plant Letter accession number

Beaver Valley Unit 1 ML091690470 

Braidwood Unit 1 ML091600194 

Braidwood Unit 2 ML091600240 

Browns Ferry Unit 1 ML091670045 

Browns Ferry Unit 2 ML091670080 

Browns Ferry Unit 3 ML091670071 

Byron Unit 1 ML091600336 

Byron Unit 2 ML091600356 

Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 ML091540286 

Clinton ML091600548 

Duane Arnold ML091690407 

Ginna ML091540299 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 09-112 June 19, 2009
Indian Point Unit 2 ML091630533 

LaSalle Unit 1 ML091600496 

LaSalle Unit 2 ML091600530 

Nine Mile Point Unit 1 ML091590134 

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 ML091590160 

Palisades ML091550675 

Point Beach Unit 1 ML091550697 

Point Beach Unit 2 ML091550701 

River Bend ML091540293 

Sequoyah Unit 1 ML091670153 

Sequoyah Unit 2 ML091670117 

Vermont Yankee ML091550583 

Waterford ML091550692 

Watts Bar Unit 1 ML091530187 

 

### 

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.
### §385. Effect of international design application

An international design application designating the United States shall have the effect, for all purposes, from its filing date determined in accordance with section 384, of an application for patent filed in the Patent and Trademark Office pursuant to chapter 16.

(Added Pub. L. 112–211, title I, §101(a), Dec. 18, 2012, 126 Stat. 1529.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective on the later of the date that is 1 year after Dec. 18, 2012, or the date that the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs enters into force with respect to the United States (May 13, 2015), and applicable only to certain applications filed on and after that effective date and patents issuing thereon, see section 103 of Pub. L. 112–211, set out as an Effective Date of 2012 Amendment note under section 100 of this title.
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, FOURTEENTH DISTRICT, AT HOUSTON

No. 14-14-00362-CV

Karen Guishard

v.

Money Management International, Inc./Consumer Credit Counseling Services

(No. 13-DCV-209271 IN 268TH DISTRICT COURT OF FORT BEND COUNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

FILING

STATEWIDE EFILING

CLK RECORD

$175.00

$20.00

$79.00

06/27/2014

06/27/2014

06/03/2014

E-PAID

E-PAID

PAID

ANT

ANT

ANT

The costs incurred on appeal to the Fourteenth Court of Appeals Houston, Texas 

are $274.00.

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE, CLERK OF THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF 

APPEALS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing 

is a true and correct copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 

FOURTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the 

above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness 

my hand and the Seal of the COURT 

OF APPEALS for the Fourteenth District 

of Texas, November 6, 2015.
### §70707. Misnomer not to affect transfer of property

A misnomer of the corporation does not affect any transfer of property to or from the corporation.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1355.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 70707 | 36:4405. | June 6, 1900, ch. 806, §5, 31 Stat. 663. |

Section

In this section, the word "affect" is substituted for "defeat or annul", and the words "transfer of property" are substituted for "grant, donation, gift, devise, or bequest", to eliminate unnecessary words.
### §152106. Powers

The corporation has only the powers provided in its bylaws and articles of incorporation filed in each State in which it is incorporated.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1411.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 152106 | 36:4102. | Nov. 14, 1988, Pub. L. 100–655, §102, 102 Stat. 3849. |

Section

The words "and subject to the laws of such State or States" are omitted as unnecessary.
### §12373. Cooperation in developing programs in making grants under this part

The State Justice Institute shall ensure that model programs carried out pursuant to grants made under this part are developed with the participation of law enforcement officials, public and private nonprofit victim advocates, including national, State, tribal, and local domestic violence and sexual assault programs and coalitions, legal experts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and recognized experts on gender bias in the courts.

(Pub. L. 103–322, title IV, §40413, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1944; Pub. L. 106–386, div. B, title IV, §1406(c)(1), Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1516.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 13993 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Amendments

2000—Pub. L. 106–386 inserted ", including national, State, tribal, and local domestic violence and sexual assault programs and coalitions" after "victim advocates".
#### Brian E. WATKINS, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO, a public entity; Edward Clark, Officer Edward Clark, an individual; Richard Bulette, Officer Richard Bulette, an individual, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 00-57098.

D.C. No. CV-99-00789-NAJ.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted May 9, 2002.

Decided May 23, 2002.

Before KLEINFELD and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and BOLTON,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Susan Ritchie Bolton, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 49(a), if, in preparing the special verdict form, the trial “court omits any issue of fact raised by the pleadings or by the evidence, each party waives the right to a trial by jury of the issue so omitted unless before the jury retires the party demands its submission to the jury.” On the special verdict form sent to the jury in this case, if the jury did not find the defendants’ actions to be a legal cause of injury to Watkins (as it did not), it was not allowed to reach the issues of damages or the issue of malice or reckless disregard. Because Watkins did not object to the special verdict form before the jury retired to consider its verdict, Watkins waived his right to a jury finding on recklessness or maliciousness (a precursor to punitive damages) if the jury found a violation of federal or state law but no *602legal cause of damages.1

Watkins’s argument that he pressed his request for punitive damages at the post-verdict sidebar does not on its face satisfy Rule 49, because the jury had already retired, deliberated, and returned its verdict. Even if we assume, for purposes of discussion, that the waiver could be withdrawn under Rule 49 because the court was obligated to impose a nominal damages award and the jury had not yet retired to deliberate on punitive damages, the sidebar does not demonstrate that Watkins preserved the issue before the jury was discharged. The court articulated its understanding that the positive verdict was on a state cause of action, for which proximate causation of actual damages had to be proved, not a federal constitutional claim, and Watkins did not argue otherwise.

Watkins’s reliance on *Pierce v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.**2***is also misplaced. In that case, the jury’s answers to the special verdict were inconsistent with one another.3 Here, there is no inconsistency—the problem is with the wording of the special verdict form.4

We also hold that the district court’s denial of attorney’s fees was properly within its discretion.5

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. *See, for example, Pau v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co.,*928 F.2d 880, 891 (9th Cir.1991).

2

. 823 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir.1987).

3

. *Id.*at 1369.

4

. *See also Saman v. Robbins,*173 F.3d 1150, 1155 n. 5 (9th Cir.1999).

5

. *See Romberg v. Nichols,*48 F.3d 453, 455 (9th Cir.1995) (citing *Farrar v. Hobby,*506 U.S. 103, 115, 113 S.Ct. 566, 121 L.Ed.2d 494 (1992)).
### §21502. Purpose

The purpose of the corporation is to maintain a hospital in the vicinity of Paris, France, to provide medical and surgical care to citizens of the United States.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1295.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 21502 | 36:4903 (words before 8th comma less "gratuitously or otherwise"). | Jan. 30, 1913, ch. 21, §3 (words before 8th comma less "gratuitously or otherwise"), 37 Stat. 654. |

Section

The word "maintain" is substituted for "establish, maintain, and conduct" to eliminate executed and unnecessary words. The word "aid" is omitted as included in "care".
§ 831.2208 Partial deferred payment of the lump-sum credit if annuity commences after December 2, 1989, and before October 1, 1995. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, if the annuity of a retiree commences after December 2, 1989, and before October 1, 1994, the lump-sum credit payable under § 831.2204 is payable to the individual, or his or her survivors, according to the following schedule: ( 1 ) Fifty percent of the lump-sum credit is payable at the time of retirement, and
( 2 ) Fifty percent is payable, with interest determined under section 8334(e)(3) of title 5, United States Code, 1 year after the time of retirement, except if the payment date of the amount specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section was after December 4, 1989, payment with interest will be made in the calendar year following the calendar year in which the payment specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section was made.
( b ) If a retiree whose annuity commences after December 2, 1989, and before October 1, 1994, and who is otherwise entitled to a computation under this subpart, dies before the date of final adjudication, that individual is subject to § 831.2203 (f) or (g), but the lump-sum credit will be paid in accordance with the schedule in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) ( 1 ) A retiree is exempt from the deferred payment schedule under paragraph (a) of this section if the individual meets the conditions, and fulfills the requirements, described in § 831.2207(c).
( 2 ) ( i ) A retiree who is exempt from the deferred payment schedule may waive that exemption by notifying OPM, in writing, on or before the date he or she elects to receive the alternative form of annuity.
( ii ) Paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section does not apply to an individual whose annuity commences after December 1, 1990, if that individual's eligibility to elect an alternative form of annuity is pursuant to § 831.2203(h)(1)(i)(A).
( iii ) A waiver under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section cannot be revoked.
[56 FR 6551, Feb. 19, 1991, as amended at 56 FR 43865, Sept. 5, 1991; 60 FR 54587, Oct. 25, 1995]
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 4.205

                                                               State of Delaware
                                                              Secretary of State
                                                        Division of Corporations
                                                   Delivered 02:56 PM 01/07/2004
                                          PM 01/07/2004 - 3749435 FILE I 0010843



                            CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION

                                       OF

                         WATERSIDE-MARISSA DEVELOPMENT

         1. The name of the limited liability company is:

                      WATERSIDE-MARISSA DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C.

         2. The address of its registered office in the State of Delaware is
Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, in the City of Wilmington, County
of New Castle. The name of its registered agent at such address is The
Corporation Trust Company.


         3. This Certificate of formation shall be effective on January 8,
2004.


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate of
Formation of WATERSIDE-MARISSA DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. this 7th day of January,
2004.


                                                   /s/ TERRY L. BETHEL
                                                   Terry L. BETHEL
SERVED FEBRUARY 2, 2010 DEPf 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 


OFFICE OF HEARINGS 


WASHINGTON, DC 


IN THE MA TIER OF 

SIERRA WEST A VIONICS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. CP09WP0003 

(Civil Penalty Case) 

DMS No. FAA-2009-0073 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

On January 28,2009, the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter referred to 

as "Complainant") filed a Complaint. On January 13,2009, Respondent Sierra West 

Avionics, Inc. (hereinafter "Respondent") had requested a hearing. On February 1, 2010, 

Respondent withdrew its Request for Hearing, citing settlement. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At anytime before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shan dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." , 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal of Request for Hearing having been 

read and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. 	 Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing be and is hereby 


granted; and ' 


2. 	 This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

li'" 
2 

SO ORDERED. 

nl ("In/' r Vh(.Lf..,e,-"~"} c .. l...:r'D~'~ov(..~ 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
-

FAA Docket No. CP09WP0003 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COpy 

Federal Aviation Administration 


800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 


Washington, DC 20591 


Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430, 


Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl 0001 

ONE COpy 

Jonathan S. Morse 

The Morse Law Group 

'2800 28th Street, Suite 130 

Santa Monica, CA 90405-6213 

TEL: (310) 396-0700 

FAX: (310) 396-0900 

Theodore P. Byrne, Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office ofRegional Counsel 

Western· Pacific Region, A WP· 7 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

TEL: (310) 725·7112 

FAX: (310) 725·6816 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.B. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: (202) 366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

(202) 366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
### §151308. Service of process

The corporation shall have a designated agent to receive service of process for the corporation.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1401.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 151308 | 36:5203(a)(4). | Oct. 26, 1992, Pub. L. 102–522, title II, §204(a)(4), 106 Stat. 3419. |

Section

The words "at all times" are omitted as unnecessary and for consistency in the revised title. The word "have" is substituted for "maintain" for consistency in the revised title.
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2019097EN.01001301.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 97/13 |

---

DECISION No 65/2018 OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON MUTUAL RECOGNITION BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

of 20 March 2019

related to the listing of Conformity Assessment Bodies under the Sectoral Annex for Telecommunication Equipment and the Sectoral Annex for Electromagnetic Compatibility [2019/558]

THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and the United States of America and in particular Articles 7 and 14;

Whereas the Joint Committee is to take a decision to list a Conformity Assessment Body or Bodies under a Sectoral Annex,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 1. | The Conformity Assessment Body in Attachment A is added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under column ‘US access to the EC market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex for Telecommunication Equipment. |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2. | The Conformity Assessment Body in Attachment B is added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under column ‘US access to the EC market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex for Electromagnetic Compatibility. |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 3. | The specific scope of listing, in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures, of the Conformity Assessment Body indicated in Attachment A and Attachment B has been agreed by the Parties and will be maintained by them. |

This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by representatives of the Joint Committee who are authorized to act on behalf of the Parties for purposes of amending the Agreement. This Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.

On behalf of the United States of America

James C. SANFORD

Signed in Washington, on 21 February 2019

On behalf of the European Union

Ignacio IRUARRIZAGA

Signed in Brussels, on 20 March 2019

---

ATTACHMENT A

US Conformity Assessment Body added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under column ‘US access to the EC market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex for Telecommunication Equipment

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | --- | | PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc. | | 7185 Oakland Mills Road | | Columbia, Maryland 21046 | | United States | |

---

ATTACHMENT B

US Conformity Assessment Body added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under column ‘US access to the EC market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex for Electromagnetic Compatibility

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | --- | | PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc. | | 7185 Oakland Mills Road | | Columbia, Maryland 21046 | | United States | |

---
B.C.D. 02-68

OCT 0 1 2002

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

S&L Railroad, LLC

Sidney & Lowe Railroad, Inc. (B.A. No. 3765)

This is a determination ofthe Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status of

S&L Railroad, LLC (S&L) and the continuing status of Sidney & Lowe Railroad, 

Inc. (SLR), B.A. No. 3765, as employers under the Railroad Retirement Act (45

U.S.C. § 231 et seg.) (RRA) and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45

U.S.C. § 351 et seg.) (RUIA). SLR was ruled to be an employer under the RRA

and RUIA effective July 29, 1982.

According to Mr. Laine Spruiell, Vice President and Controller of Progress Rail

Services, the parent company of SLR, effective July 29, 2002, S&L acquired all of

the assets and liabilities ofthe Sidney and Lowe Railroad, Inc. (SLR). S&L is

continuing the operations of SLR and will continue to use the trade name, Sidney

& Lowe Railroad. In Surface Transportation Board (STB) Finance Docket No.

34228, service date August 8, 2002, S&L filed a notice of exemption to acquire 

from Progress Rail Services Corporation and operate approximately 11 miles ofrail

line and connecting track known as the Sidney & Lowe Railroad Line extending

from milepost 0 at Huntsman, NE, where it connects with a rail line ofthe 

Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BA 1621), to milepost 10 at

Brownson, NE, where it connects with a rail line ofthe Union Pacific Railroad 

Company (BA 1713). Both the Burlington Northern Santa Fe and the Union

Pacific are employers under the Acts engaged in interstate rail transportation.

According to the STB decision, S&L will qualify as a Class III rail carrier and its

annual revenues will not exceed $5 million annually.

Section 1(a)(1) ofthe Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231(a)(1)), insofar as

relevant here, defines a covered employer as:

(i) any carrier by railroad subject to the jurisdiction ofthe Surface

Transportation Board under Part A ofsubtitle IV oftitle 49, United States

Code;

Section 1 ofthe RUIA contains essentially the same definition, as does section 3231

ofthe Railroad Retirement Tax Act.

BA# 3765 .1
-2-

S&L Railroad, LLC

Sidney & Lowe Railroad, Inc. (B.A. No. 3765)

The evidence ofrecord establishes that S&L Railroad, LLC is a rail carrier

operating in interstate commerce. Accordingly, it is determined that S&L Railroad,

LLC became an employer within the meaning ofsection l(a)(l)(i) ofthe Railroad ’

Retirement Act and the corresponding provision oftheRailroad Unemployment

Insurance Act effective July 29, 2002. The Board also finds that the Sidney &

Lowe Railroad, Inc. ceased being an employer under the RRA and RUIA effective

that same date.

Original signed by:

Cherry1 T. Thomas

V. M. Speakman, Jr.

Jerome F. Kever
### §220309. Duty to maintain corporate status

The corporation shall maintain its status as a corporation incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia or a State.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1465.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 220309 | 36:1216 (last sentence). | Oct. 20, 1978, Pub. L. 95–493, §16 (last sentence), 92 Stat. 1647. |

Section

The word "retain" is omitted as unnecessary.