alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC OFFERS PUBLIC OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVENE IN 

GE-HITACHI URANIUM ENRICHMENT PLANT APPLICATION 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is offering the public an opportunity to intervene in the 

agency review of an application by GE-Hitachi Global Laser Enrichment, LLC, for a license to 

construct and operate a uranium enrichment plant using laser technology near Wilmington, N.C. 

 In an Order approved Jan. 7 and published Jan. 13 in the Federal Register, the Commission 

also set a 30-month schedule for the staff’s license review and adjudicatory proceedings of the 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. 

 Anyone wishing to become a party to the hearing on the Global Laser Enrichment 

application must demonstrate standing by explaining how they might be affected by the proposed 

facility, and must present admissible contentions regarding specific aspects of the application. 

Guidelines for filing petitions to intervene are spelled out in the Commission’s Order. The deadline 

for filing petitions is March 15. 

 GE-Hitachi submitted its environmental review for the application on Jan. 30, 2009, and 

submitted the remainder of the application June 30. On April 9, the NRC published its notice of 

intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed facility and the opportunity 

for public comment on the environmental factors to be considered in that study. The NRC formally 

docketed the application Aug. 6. 

 The plant would enrich uranium in the fissionable isotope U-235, for use in manufacturing 

nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants. 

 The Commission Order is available on the NRC Web site at the following address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/orders/2010/2010-04cli.pdf. 

Information on the GE-Hitachi application is available at http://www.nrc.gov/materials/fuel-cyclefac/laser.html. 

### 

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 Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 10-011 January 14, 2010
### §20909. Duty to maintain corporate and tax-exempt status

(a) Corporate Status.—The corporation shall maintain its status as a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Washington.

(b) Tax-Exempt Status.—The corporation shall maintain its status as an organization exempt from taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 1 et seq.).

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1291.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 20909(a) | 36:2108(f). | Aug. 10, 1982, Pub. L. 97–234, §§8(f), 15 (1st sentence), 96 Stat. 262, 263. |
| 20909(b) | 36:2114 (1st sentence). | |

Section

In subsection (a), the words "organized and" are omitted as unnecessary.
NRC RENEWS NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY’S 

RESEARCH REACTOR LICENSE FOR AN ADDITIONAL 20 YEARS 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has renewed the operating license for the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) research and test reactor (RTR) for an additional 20 

years. The NIST facility, the largest RTR under NRC oversight, is now licensed until July 2, 2029. 

“This renewal is an important step in our ongoing efforts to resolve a backlog of RTR 

renewal requests,” said Bill Borchardt, the NRC’s Executive Director for Operations. “We’ll 

continue working on that backlog while thoroughly reviewing each application to ensure valuable 

research facilities such as NIST’s operate safely in the future.” 

 NIST submitted an application April 9, 2004 to renew the license for the reactor in 

Gaithersburg, Md., which last received a renewed license in May 1984. The NRC’s Environmental 

Impact Statement for the latest license renewal is available on the NRC Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1873/sr1873.pdf. The agency’s safety 

review for the renewal will be available through the agency’s electronic document database, 

ADAMS, by entering ML090990135 in the ADAMS search engine on the NRC Web site at: 

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

 

 The NRC oversees 32 RTRs, 20 of which are under review for license renewal. NRC 

regulations allow for the reactors’ continued operation while the agency reviews renewal requests. 

More information on research reactors is available on the NRC Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/non-power.html. 

### 

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 Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 09-123 July 6, 2009
§ 890.1029 Deciding a contest after a fact-finding proceeding. ( a ) *Findings shall be accepted.* The debarring official shall accept the presiding official's findings of fact, unless they are arbitrary, capricious, or clearly erroneous. If the debarring official concludes that the factual findings are not acceptable, they may be remanded to the presiding official for additional proceedings in accordance with § 890.1028.
( b ) *Timeframe for final decision.* The debarring official shall issue a final written decision on a contest within 30 days after receiving the presiding official's findings. The debarring official may extend this decision period for good cause.
( c ) *Debarring official's final decision.* ( 1 ) The debarring official shall observe the evidentiary standards and burdens of proof stated in § 890.1024 in reaching a final decision.
( 2 ) In any case where a final decision is made to debar a provider, the debarring official has the discretion to set the period of debarment, subject to the factors identified in §§ 890.1016 through 1021.
( 3 ) The debarring official has the discretion to decide not to impose debarment in any case involving a permissive debarment authority.
( d ) *No further administrative proceedings.* No further administrative proceedings shall be conducted after the debarring official's final decision in a contest involving an additional fact-finding hearing. A provider adversely affected by the debarring official's final decision in a contested case may appeal under 5 U.S.C. 8902a(h)(2) to the appropriate U. S. district court.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1972 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1972

      To suspend temporarily the duty on Cyclic TMP Formal (CTF).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 6, 2003

  Ms. Kaptur introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To suspend temporarily the duty on Cyclic TMP Formal (CTF).

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

SECTION 1. CYCLIC TMP FORMAL (CTF).

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:
      

``    9902.07.06    Cyclic TMP        Free              Free              No change         On or before 12/
                     Formal (CAS No.                                                         31/2006          ''
                     5187-23-5)                                                                                .
                     (provided for
                     in subheading
                     2911.00.50)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
§ 550.1107 Obtaining the services of a hearing official. ( a ) When the debtor does not work for the creditor agency and the creditor agency cannot provide a prompt and appropriate hearing before an administrative law judge or before a hearing official furnished pursuant to another lawful arrangement, the creditor agency may contact an agent of the paying agency designated in appendix A of part 581 of this chapter to arrange for a hearing official, and the paying agency must then cooperate as provided by the FCCS as defined in § 550.1103 and provide a hearing official.
( b ) When the debtor works for the creditor agency, the creditor agency may contact any agent (of another agency) designated in appendix A of part 581 of this chapter to arrange for a hearing official. Agencies must then cooperate as required by the FCCS and provide a hearing official.
( c ) The determination of a hearing official designated under this section is considered to be an official certification regarding the existence and amount of the debt for purposes of executing salary offset under 5 U.S.C. 5514. A creditor agency may make a certification to the Secretary of the Treasury under § 550.1108 or a paying agency under § 550.1109 regarding the existence and amount of the debt based on the certification of a hearing official. If a hearing official determines that a debt may not be collected via salary offset, but the creditor agency finds that the debt is still valid, the creditor agency may still seek collection of the debt through other means, such as offset of other Federal payments, litigation, etc.
[51 FR 16670, May 6, 1986, as amended at 63 FR 72100, Dec. 31, 1998]
EXHIBIT
32.2





ENABLE
HOLDINGS, INC.


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that:





1. The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Enable Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended
September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2. The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Enable Holdings,
Inc.




Date:
      November 20, 2009
                  
                  /s/
      Miguel A. Martinez, Jr.By:
      Miguel A. Martinez, Jr.Chief
      Financial Officer
#### Fred Quell, Respondent, v. Alfred Moylan et al., Appellants.

All concur.
B.C.D. 01-52

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION JUN 0 4 2001

Central Columbiana & Pennsylvania Railway, Inc. (CCPR)

This is a determination ofthe Railroad Retirement Board concerning the

status ofthe Central Columbiana & Pennsylvania Railway, Inc. (CCPR) as

an employer under the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. §231 et seep) and

the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. §351 et seq.).

In Surface Transportation Board (STB) Finance Docket 33818, decided

December 16, 1999, CCPR filed a venfied notice of exemption to lease and

operate 35.7 miles ofrail line from Columbiana County Port Authority

(CCPA) extending from milepost 0.0 at or near Youngstown, Ohio, to

milepost 35.7 at or near Darlington, Pennsylvania.1 According to the STB 

decision, CCPR stated that a tentative agreement has been reached with the

Ohio & Pennsylvania Railroad Company (OHPA) (B.A. No. 2264) that will

allow CCPR to operate over the 35.7 mile line and the portion ofthe

connecting 3-mile segment that is owned by OHPA. CCPR stated that it

hopes to take advantage ofthe existing easements whereby OHPA is 

operating over the portions of the line that it does not own. If unable to do 

so, CCPR stated that it will seek to negotiate agreements with other property

owners so that it will be able to perform railroad operations over the entire

line ofrailroad.

Information regarding CCPR was furnished by Mr. A. William K. Robbins,

Jr., Chief Executive Officer of CCPR. Mr. Robbins reported that CCPR is a

wholly owned subsidiary of Arkansas Shortline Railroads, Inc. (ASRR).

CCPR began operations on March 1, 2001 and has four employees. Mr.

Robbins stated that CCPR is a line haul railroad. CCPR interchanges with

Norfolk Southern Railway Company (B.A. No. 1525) and CSX

Transportation, Inc. (B.A. No. 1524), according to Mr. Robbins.

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 of

the Surface Transportation Board under part A of subtitle IV of

Title 49, United States Code.

1 The Board's Audit and Compliance Section is currently investigating Columbiana County Port Anthoritv.

BA# 2275
Central Columbiana & Pennsylvania Railway, Inc. (CCPR)

Sections 1(a) and 1(b) ofthe Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45

U.S.C. §§ 351 (a) and (b)) contain substantially the same definition as does

section 3231 ofthe Railroad Retirement Tax Act (26 U.S.C.A § 3231).

The evidence ofrecord establishes that CCPR is a rail carrier operating in

interstate commerce. Accordingly, it is determined that the Central

Columbiana & Pennsylvania Railway, Inc. (CCPR) became an employer

within the meaning ofsection l(a)(l)(i) ofthe Railroad Retirement Act (45 

U.S.C. §231(a)(l)(i)) and the corresponding provision ofthe Railroad

Unemployment Insurance Act effective March 1, 2001, the date as of which

it commenced operations.

Cherryl T. Thomas

V. M. Speakman, Jr.
NEW UKRAINIAN CURRENCY

----
#### Felix Hessberg v. Corinne Welsh.

Application granted. Order signed. Present—Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
### §152409. Civil action by Attorney General for equitable relief

The Attorney General may bring a civil action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for appropriate equitable relief if the corporation—

(1) engages or threatens to engage in any act, practice, or policy that is inconsistent with the purposes in section 152402 of this title; or

(2) refuses, fails, or neglects to carry out its obligations under this chapter or threatens to do so.

(Added Pub. L. 106–474, title II, §201(a), Nov. 9, 2000, 114 Stat. 2094.)
§ 839.101 What is the Federal Erroneous Retirement Coverage Corrections Act? ( a ) The Federal Erroneous Retirement Coverage Corrections Act (FERCCA) is Title II of Public Law 106-265, enacted September 19, 2000. The FERCCA addresses the problems created when employees are in the wrong retirement plan for an extended period.
( b ) Generally, you must be in the wrong retirement plan for at least 3 years of service after December 31, 1986, before the FERCCA applies to you. Depending on the type of error, the FERCCA provides: ( 1 ) A choice between retirement plans,
( 2 ) New rules for crediting civilian and military service that was not subject to retirement deductions,
( 3 ) Payment of lost earnings on employee make-up contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan, and
( 4 ) Payment of certain out-of-pocket expenses that are a direct result of a retirement coverage error.
1 July 24 ,	2015

Docket	Operations,	M

- 30 U.S. Department	of	Transportation (DOT) 1200	New	Jersey	Avenue,	SE Room	W12

- 140,	West	Building	Ground	Floor Washington,	D.C.	20590

- 0001

RE: Name	chan ge for	FAA

- 2015

- 1873

Dear	Sir or	Madam :
The	Petition	for	Exemption	in	the	Federal	R e gister FAA

- 2015

- 1873	was	filed	under FP	AeroSolutions,	LLC

. At	the	time	of	filing the	Petition	for	Exemption

, the Articl es	of Organization for	FP	AeroSolutions,	LLC with	the	state	of	North	Dakota	was	pending. To avoid	filing	a “ deceptively	similar ” trade	name,	the	company	filed	the	Articles	of Organization	as	StraightEdge	Aero,	LLC. StraightEdge	Aero,	LLC	has been incorporated	in	the	state	of	North	Dakota.

The	correct	name	of	the	petitioner	is,	in	fact, “ StraightEdge	Aero,	LLC. ” Accordingly, petitioner	respectfully	requests	that	the P etition	for E xemption	be	amended,	and that	all	references	to “ FP	AeroSolutions,	LLC ” be	replaced	with “ StraightEdge	Aero, LLC. ”

If	you	have	any	ques tions	or	require	any	additional	information,	please	do	not hesitate	to contact	me

.

Sincerely,

/s/	Ni cholas	Flom

____________________________________
Nicholas	Flom Managing Partner
, StraightEdge	Aero,	LLC
#### In the Matter of the Probate of the Will of John A. Dobrogowski, Deceased. John W. Dobrogowski, Appellant; Anna Dobrogowski et al., Respondents.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur. (The order denies a motion to examine witnesses before trial.) Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Love, Vaughan and Kimball, JJ.
### §2501. Acceptance of voluntary services and money or property

The President's Committee on Employment of People With Disabilities—

(1) notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, may accept voluntary and uncompensated services; and

(2) may solicit, accept, use, and dispose of any money or property the Committee receives.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1280; Pub. L. 105–354, §1(3), Nov. 3, 1998, 112 Stat. 3239.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2501 | 36:155b. | July 11, 1949, ch. 302, §2, as added Nov. 7, 1988, Pub. L. 100–630, title III, §301(b)(3), 102 Stat. 3316. |

Section

In clause (2), the words "in the name of the Committee", "in furtherance of this resolution", "real, personal, or mixed, tangible or nontangible", and "by gift, devise, bequest, or otherwise" are omitted as unnecessary.

#### Pub. L. 105–354

This amends section 2501(2) of title 36 to reflect a change made by section 413 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–220, Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1241).

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1998—Par. (2). Pub. L. 105–354 inserted "solicit," before "accept,".
#### § 2610.308 Decision.

The adjudicative officer shall issue an initial decision on the application within 30 days after completion of proceedings on the application. The decision shall include written findings and conclusions on the applicant's eligibility and status as a prevailing party, and an explanation of the reasons for any difference between the amount requested and the amount awarded. The decision shall also include, if at issue, findings on whether the Office's position was substantially justified, whether the applicant unduly protracted the proceedings, or whether special circumstances make an award unjust. If the applicant has sought an award against more than one agency, the decision shall allocate responsibility for payment of any award made among the agencies, and shall explain the reasons for the allocation made.
11-349-cr United States v. Bogle

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F OR THE S ECOND C IRCUIT
August Term, 2012 (Argued: February 6, 2013 Decided: May 23, 2013) Docket No. 11-349-cr

U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA , Appellee ,

— v. — G ARY B OGLE , Defendant-Appellant.

B e f o r e:
W ALKER , K ATZMANN , and L YNCH , Circuit Judges

.

__________________ Defendant Gary Bogle challenges his conviction for possessing a firearm and body armor as a convicted felon, arguing that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) violates his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. We hold that § 922(g)(1) does not violate Bogle’s Second Amendment rights, and AFFIRM his conviction.

1N ICHOLAS J. P INTO , New York, New York, for Defendant-Appellant

. T ODD K AMINSKY , Assistant United States Attorney (Jo Ann M. Navickas and Tali Farhadian, Assistant United States Attorneys, on the brief ), for Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney, Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, New York, for Appellee

.

P ER C URIAM : Gary Bogle appeals his conviction for possessing a firearm and body armor as a convicted felon. The relevant facts are set forth in the summary order disposing of the majority of Bogle’s arguments. We write only to address whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment, an issue that we have not yet decided by precedential opinion. Bogle argues that § 922(g)(1), which makes it unlawful for a convicted felon to possess a firearm in or affecting interstate commerce, violates his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Bogle relies on recent Supreme Court opinions developing a more expansive interpretation of the Amendment. But in both of these opinions, the Supreme Court clearly emphasized that recent developments in Second Amendment jurisprudence should not “be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons.” District of Columbia v. Heller , 554 U.S. 570, 626 (2008); see also McDonald v. City of Chicago , 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3047 (2010) (“We made it clear in Heller that our holding did not cast doubt on such longstanding regulatory measures as prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons . . . . We repeat those
2assurances here.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). We therefore join every other circuit to consider the issue in affirming that § 922(g)(1) is a constitutional restriction on the Second Amendment rights of convicted felons. 1
CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

1 See United States v. Moore , 666 F.3d 313, 318-19 (4th Cir. 2012); United States v. Barton , 633 F.3d 168, 175 (3d Cir. 2011); United States v. Joos , 638 F.3d 581, 586 (8th Cir. 2011); United States v. Rozier , 598 F.3d 768, 771 (11th Cir. 2010); United States v. Williams , 616 F.3d 685, 693-94 (7th Cir. 2010); United States v. Vongxay , 594 F.3d 1111, 1115 (9th Cir. 2010); United States v. Carey , 602 F.3d 738, 741 (6th Cir. 2010); United States v. McCane , 573 F.3d 1037, 1047 (10th Cir. 2009); United States v. Anderson , 559 F.3d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 2009). 3
§ 2011.104 Waiver. ( a ) *General.* The Secretary may waive, with respect to individual shipments, any or all of the requirements of this subpart if he or she determines that a waiver will not impair the proper operation of the sugar quota system, that it will not have the effect of modifying the allocation of sugar made pursuant to the provisions of subdivision (b) of additional U.S. Note 5, and that such waiver is justified by unusual, unavoidable, or otherwise appropriate circumstances. Such circumstances include, but are not limited to, loss or destruction of the certificate, unavoidable delays in transmittal of the certificate to the port of entry, and clerical errors in the execution or issuance of the certificate.
( b ) *Request for waiver.* The request for a waiver must be made to the Secretary in writing. The request need not follow any specific format. However, the request should set forth in detail all pertinent information relating to the shipment in question and the basis upon which the waiver should be granted.
( c ) *Issuance of waiver.* The Secretary shall notify, in writing, the applicant for the waiver and the Secretary of the Treasury of any waiver granted under the authority of this section. The Secretary may attach any terms, conditions or limitations to the waiver which he or she determines are appropriate.
[55 FR 40648, Oct. 4, 1990, as amended at 61 FR 26784, May 29, 1996]