alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §4110B. Coordination and nonduplication

In carrying out this chapter, the Secretary shall require that an appropriate administrative entity in each State enter into an agreement with the Secretary regarding the implementation of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act that includes the descriptions described in sections 102(b)(2)(B)(ii) and 103(b)(3)(A) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and a description of how the State board will carry out the activities described in section 101(d)(3)(F) of such Act.

(Added Pub. L. 105–220, title III, §322, Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1087; amended Pub. L. 109–233, title V, §503(13), June 15, 2006, 120 Stat. 417; Pub. L. 113–128, title V, §512(gg)(4), July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1719.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 113–128, July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1425, which enacted chapter 32 (§3101 et seq.) of Title 29, Labor, repealed chapter 30 (§2801 et seq.) of Title 29 and chapter 73 (§9201 et seq.) of Title 20, Education, and made amendments to numerous other sections and notes in the Code. Sections 101(d)(3)(F), 102(b)(2)(B)(ii), and 103(b)(3)(A) of the Act are classified to sections 3111(d)(3)(F), 3112(b)(2)(B)(ii), and 3113(b)(3)(A), respectively, of Title 29. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3101 of Title 29 and Tables.

#### Amendments

2014—Pub. L. 113–128 substituted "enter into an agreement with the Secretary regarding the implementation of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act that includes the descriptions described in sections 102(b)(2)(B)(ii) and 103(b)(3)(A) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and a description of how the State board will carry out the activities described in section 101(d)(3)(F) of such Act" for "enter into an agreement with the Secretary regarding the implementation of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 that includes the description and information described in paragraphs (8) and (14) of section 112(b) of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2822(b))".

2006—Pub. L. 109–233 substituted "implementation of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998" for "implementation of this Act" and inserted "(29 U.S.C. 2822(b))" before period at end.

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

#### Effective Date of 2014 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 113–128 effective on the first day of the first full program year after July 22, 2014 (July 1, 2015), see section 506 of Pub. L. 113–128, set out as an Effective Date note under section 3101 of Title 29, Labor.
No. IV-11-035

Contact: Victor Dricks (817) 860-8128

 Lara Uselding (817) 276-6519

 

 July 19, 2011 

 E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

NRC CITES FORT CALHOUN NUCLEAR PLANT FOR INSPECTION FINDING OF 

LOW TO MODERATE SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE

The Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant will receive additional oversight from the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission because of problems associated with the reactor protection system at the 

plant. Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) operates the plant, located 19 miles north of Omaha.

During a scheduled test on June 14, 2010, one of four electrical contacts failed in a 

system used to “trip” or automatically shut down the reactor. The condition appears to have 

existed for 63 days before it was discovered. The failure did not pose a danger to public health or 

safety, because other means existed to perform that safety function if necessary. OPPD has 

replaced the defective electrical component.

The NRC evaluates performance at nuclear power plants with a color coded process 

which classifies regulatory findings as either green, white, yellow or red, in order of increasing 

safety significance. The NRC preliminarily determined that the violation was “yellow,” meaning 

it has substantial safety significance.

NRC staff held a regulatory conference with OPPD officials on June 2, during which 

licensee representatives discussed the inspection finding. After consideration of information 

presented at the conference, the NRC staff has characterized the inspection as “white,” meaning 

it has low to moderate safety significance. The NRC will conduct a supplemental inspection at a 

future date to evaluate the licensee’s corrective actions.

The NRC inspection report is available through the agency’s electronic reading room at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and ML111260664. Help in accessing these 

documents is available from the NRC Public Document Room staff by calling 1-800-397-4209.

###

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 website.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region IV

 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400

 Arlington, TX 76011-4125

Telephone: (817) 860-8128

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov
July 16, 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ANTONIO SEPEDA , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00443

- CV V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

_______________ _________________ This cause, an appeal from the order of dismissal signed May 20, 2014, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED

. We furt her order this decision certified below for observance.
§ 2004.8 What can I do if I am dissatisfied with USTR's response to my FOIA request? ( a ) *How do I make an appeal?* — ( 1 ) *What can I appeal?* You can appeal any adverse determination in writing to our FOIA Appeals Committee within ninety calendar days after the date of our response. Examples of adverse determinations are provided in § 2004.7(d). You should specify the records that are the subject of your appeal and explain why the Committee should sustain the appeal.
( 2 ) *Where do I send my appeal?* To avoid mail delivery delays caused by heighted security, we strongly suggest that you email any appeal to *FOIA@ustr.eop.gov .* Our mailing address is: FOIA Office, Office of the United States Trade Representative, Anacostia Naval Annex, Building 410/Door 123, 250 Murray Lane SW., Washington DC 20509. To make sure that the FOIA Office receives your appeal without delay, you should include the notation “Freedom of Information Act Appeal” and the individualized tracking number in the subject line of your email or on the front of your envelope and also at the beginning of your appeal.
( b ) *Who will decide your appeal?* ( 1 ) The FOIA Appeals Committee or designee will act on all appeals under this section.
( 2 ) We ordinarily will not adjudicate an appeal if the request becomes a matter of FOIA litigation.
( 3 ) On receipt of any appeal involving classified information, the FOIA Appeals Committee must take appropriate action to ensure compliance with applicable classification rules.
( c ) *Decisions on appeals.* The FOIA Appeals Committee will notify you of its appeal decision in writing within twenty days from the date it receives the appeal. A decision that upholds the FOIA Office's determination in whole or in part will identify the reasons for the affirmance, including any FOIA exemptions applied, and notify you of your statutory right to seek judicial review. The notice also will inform you of the dispute resolution services offered by OGIS as a non-exclusive alternative to litigation. If the FOIA Appeals Committee remands or modifies the original response, the FOIA Office will further process the request in accordance with the appeal determination and will respond directly to you.
( d ) *When appeal is required.* Before seeking review by a court of an adverse determination, you generally first must submit a timely administrative appeal under this section.
[81 FR 89846, Dec. 13, 2016, as amended at 82 FR 18985, Apr. 25, 2017]
### §10. Sealing and endorsing certificates

The electors shall seal up the certificates of votes so made by them, together with the annexed certificates of ascertainment of appointment of electors, and certify upon each that the lists of all the votes of such State given for President, and of all the votes given for Vice President, are contained therein.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 644, 62 Stat. 674; Pub. L. 117–328, div. P, title I, §106(b), Dec. 29, 2022, 136 Stat. 5236.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2022—Pub. L. 117–328 substituted "the certificates of votes so made by them, together with the annexed certificates of ascertainment of appointment of electors" for "the certificates so made by them".
CONFIRMING  A  LETTER  OF  CREDIT FROM  A  RUSSIAN  BANK

----

**October 1997
by Oleg S. Popov
Expanding economic ties between the United States and Russia, together with Russia's need torebuild its manufacturing base, offer many business opportunities for U.S. exporters.  Financingtransactions that build on these opportunities can be problematic, however, due to the significanteconomic and financial uncertainty associated with doing business in Russia.  Financial uncertaintyfor most foreign exports can be substantially reduced, however, by the right choice of tradefinance instruments, such as the confirmed letter of credit.
While the least risky form of payment for the exporter is cash in advance in hard currency fromthe Russian importer, this is often not an option (see BISNIS Bulletin, February 1997, Page 6). One way for the U.S. exporter both to preserve a transaction and assure payment is to use aconfirmed letter of credit facility.  With a letter of credit, or L/C, the U.S. exporter's Russianbuyer applies to a Russian bank to open a letter of credit.  If the Russian bank ("issuing" bank)accepts the application, it opens the L/C and sends it to a U.S. bank.  Upon receipt of the letter ofcredit, the U.S. bank ("advising" or "confirming" bank) advises the U.S. exporter of the existenceof the letter of credit without necessarily adding its confirmation.
**What Is Confirmation?****
99–008

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 107–344

WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT

TO THE SAME DAY CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE

DECEMBER 19 (legislative day, DECEMBER 18), 2001.—Referred to the House

Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. REYNOLDS, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H. Res. 319]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 319, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a twothirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from

the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the

Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver to any special rule

reported on the legislative day of Wednesday, December 19, 2001,

providing for the consideration or disposition of a bill to provide tax

incentives for economic recovery, any amendment thereto, any conference report thereon, or any amendment reported in disagreement from a conference thereon.

Æ
# L_2023078EN.01003901.xml

| 16.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 78/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 78/39

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 89/2020

of 18 June 2020

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2023/538]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (“the EEA Agreement”), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/666 of 18 May 2020 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 920/2013 as regards the renewal of designations and the surveillance and monitoring of notified bodies (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/666 of 18 May 2020 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 920/2013 as regards the renewal of designations and the surveillance and monitoring of notified bodies (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is added in point 10 (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 920/2013) of Chapter XXX of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

‘, as amended by:

| — | 32020 R 0666: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/666 of 18 May 2020 (OJ L 156, 19.5.2020, p. 2).’ |
| --- | --- |

—

32020 R 0666: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/666 of 18 May 2020 (OJ L 156, 19.5.2020, p. 2).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/666 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 18 June 2020, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 18 June 2020.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Clara GANSLANDT

---

(1)  
  OJ L 156, 19.5.2020, p. 2.

1

(*)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*

---
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-10982

Summary Calendar 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff–Appellee, 

versus 

JOSE GUADALUPE GUERRERO-RODRIGUEZ, 

 Also Known as Jesus Lopez Cabral, 

Defendant–Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas 

USDC No. 4:16-CR-17-1 

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Guerrero-Rodriguez appeals the above-guidelines sentence imposed 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 17, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-10982 Document: 00514075419 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/17/2017
No. 16-10982

2 

for illegal reentry after deportation. He challenges the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, which we review for an abuse of discretion. Gall v. United 

States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). “A non-Guidelines sentence unreasonably fails 

to reflect the statutory sentencing factors set forth in [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) 

where it (1) does not account for a factor that should have received significant 

weight, (2) gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or 

(3) represents a clear error of judgment in balancing the sentencing factors.” 

United States v. Diehl, 775 F.3d 714, 724 (5th Cir. 2015). “[R]eview for substantive reasonableness is highly deferential.” Id. (internal quotation marks and 

citations omitted). 

The court based the sentence on permissible statutory factors. In 

essence, Guerrero-Rodriguez is requesting that this court reweigh the 

§ 3553(a) factors, which is not within the scope of our review. See Gall, 

552 U.S. at 51. There is no indication that the district court gave improper 

weight to Guerrero-Rodriguez’s extensive history of immigration violations or 

any mitigating factors. See United States v. Lopez-Velasquez, 526 F.3d 804,

807 (5th Cir. 2008). Likewise, the degree of the upward variance does not 

render the sentence substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Key, 

599 F.3d 469, 475-76 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Brantley, 537 F.3d 347, 

348–50 (5th Cir. 2008). 

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 16-10982 Document: 00514075419 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/17/2017
1/4/13 page of 

POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT 

 Chemical ID: P-13-0072 Reviewer: Tobias/SS 

 

 

Results Table: Dose, Concentration, and Days Exceeded Results Summary 

Exposure Scenario1 Water Landfill Stack Air Fugitive Air 

Drinking Water Fish Ingestion 

ADR LADD ADR LADD 7Q104 

CC = 1 

PDM 

Days 

Exceede

d 

LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD 

Release 

activity(ies)2; 

exposure 

calculation(s)3 

mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day μg/l # Days mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day 

max acute eco --- --- --- --- 1.60E+00 --- --- --- --- --- --- 

1 Exposure scenario titles consist of release activity followed by exposure calculation abbreviation. 

2 Release activities are from engineering report's Manufacturing (Mfg), Processing (Proc) and Use release 

activity labels. 

 Multiple release activities are combined in one exposure scenario if their releases occur at same location. 

3 Exposure calculations are Acute Dose Rate (ADR), Lifetime Average Daily Dose (LADD), and 

Probabilistic Dilution 

 Model (PDM). There may be one, two, or all three exposure calculations per exposure scenario. 

 CC is the aquatic concentration of concern. 

4 This column displays concentration values for the 7Q10 streamflow, which is defined as the average daily 

streamflow 

 of the seven consecutive days of lowest flow within a ten year period. 

Remarks: 

Fate test recommendations?: (default is NA)
1/4/13 page of 

 POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT 

Chemical ID: P-13-0072 Assessor: Tobias/SS 

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES 

 Scenario#:1 Number of Release Sites: 

 Release Activity: Max ADR 

 Release Description: WATER LANDFILL 

Non-sludge/Sludge 

STACK FUGITIVE 

Total Releases: 

 (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) 

 

 Non-sludge/Sludge 

Release Days/yr: 

Per Site Release: 

 (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) 

Remarks: 
1/4/13 page of 

POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT 

 Chemical ID: P-13-0072 

SIC-CODE BASED HUMAN AND AQUATIC EXPOSURES TO SURFACE WATER RELEASES 

SCENARIO #: 1 Number of Sites: RELEASE ACTIVITY: Max 

ADR 

SIC-CODE DESCRIPTION: POTW's (All facilities) 

SIC-CODE (S): 4952 EXPOSED POPULATION: Adult 

WWT 

REMOVAL 

(%) 

RELEASE 

DAYS 

PRETREATMENT 

RELEASE 

(kg/site/day) 

POSTTREATMENT 

RELEASE 

(kg/site/day) 

DWT 

(%) BCF 

(L/kg) 

 0.00 0.00 

AQUATIC EXPOSURE ESTIMATES - SURFACE WATER 

PLANT 

TYPE 

% ILE 

FACILITY 

STREAM FLOW (MLD) STREAM CONC. (μg/l) 

Harmonic 

Mean 30Q5 7Q10 1Q10 

Harmonic 

Mean 30Q5 7Q10 1Q10 

ALL 50 125.56 44.02 26.80 22.53 1.35E-02 3.86E-02 6.34E-02 7.55E-02

ALL 10 11.11 1.94 1.06 0.96 0.15 0.88 1.60 1.77 

DRINKING WATER AND FISH INGESTION EXPOSURE ESTIMATES 

Exposure Units 

Drinking Water Results Drinking 

Water Units Fish Ingestion Results 

Fish 

Ingestion 

Units 

50% 10% 50% 10% 

Cancer 

LADDpot 2.89E-10 3.27E-09 mg/kg/day 0.00 0.00 mg/kg/day 

LADCpot 1.48E-08 1.68E-07 mg/L 0.00 0.00 mg/kg 

Acute 

ADRpot 3.23E-06 7.32E-05 mg/kg/day 0.00 0.00 mg/kg/day 

SIC Code Comments:
§ 723.110 Self-evaluation. ( a ) The agency shall, by September 6, 1989, evaluate its current policies and practices, and the effects thereof, that do not or may not meet the requirements of this regulation and, to the extent modification of any such policies and practices is required, the agency shall proceed to make the necessary modifications.
( b ) The agency shall provide an opportunity to interested persons, including individuals with handicaps or organizations representing individuals with handicaps, to participate in the self-evaluation process by submitting comments (both oral and written).
( c ) The agency shall, for at least three years following completion of the self-evaluation, maintain on file and make available for public inspection: ( 1 ) A description of areas examined and any problems identified; and
( 2 ) A description of any modifications made.
No. IV-10-037 

Contact: Victor Dricks: (817) 860-8128 

 Lara Uselding: (817) 276-6519 

 

November 19, 2010

E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING WITH 

WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of the 

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Co. on Nov. 29, to discuss initiatives to improve performance at 

the Wolf Creek nuclear power plant near Burlington, Kan. 

 The meeting, which will be open to public observation, will begin at 1 p.m. in the NRC’s 

Region IV office, 612 E. Lamar Blvd, Arlington, Texas. 

 Company officials will brief NRC staff on efforts to improve performance in the area of 

problem identification and resolution. 

Observers will have an opportunity to ask questions of the NRC staff before the meeting 

is adjourned. Members of the public can listen to the meeting by calling 1-800-952-9677, and 

requesting to be connected to a phone bridge. 

 ### 

NRC 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.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400 

 Arlington, TX 76011-4125 

Telephone: (817) 860-8128
### §153707. Restrictions

(a) Stock and Dividends.—The corporation may not issue stock or declare or pay a dividend.

(b) Political Activities.—The corporation or an officer or agent as such may not contribute to, support, or assist a political party or candidate for public office.

(c) Distribution of Income or Assets.—The income or assets of the corporation may not inure to the benefit of, or be distributed to, an officer or member during the life of the corporation or on its dissolution or final liquidation. This subsection does not prevent the payment of reasonable compensation to an officer or reimbursement for actual necessary expenses in amounts approved by the council of administration of the corporation.

(d) Loans.—The corporation may not make a loan or advance to an officer or member of the corporation. Members of the council of administration who vote for or assent to making a loan or advance to an officer or member, and officers who participate in making the loan or advance, are jointly and severally liable to the corporation for the amount of the loan or advance until it is repaid.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1429.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 153707(a) | 36:1013. | Sept. 7, 1962, Pub. L. 87–650, §§10, 11, 13, 76 Stat. 504, 505. |
| 153707(b) | 36:1011. | |
| 153707(c) | 36:1010(a). | |
| 153707(d) | 36:1010(b). | |

Section

In subsection (a), the words "any shares of" are omitted as unnecessary.

In subsection (c), the words "inure to the benefit of" are substituted for "inure to" for consistency in the revised title.

In subsection (d), the words "or advance" are added in 2 places for consistency in the subsection. In the first sentence, the words "or member" are added for consistency in the subsection.
#### § 30.27 Return of exported cargo to the United States prior to reaching its final destination.

When goods reported as exported from the United States are not exported or are returned without having been entered into a foreign destination, the filer shall cancel the EEI.
# L_2020277EN.01000101.xml

| 26.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 277/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 277/1

---

Information concerning the entry into force of the Common Aviation Area Agreement between the European Union and its Member States and the Republic of Moldova

The Common Aviation Area Agreement between the European Union and its Member States and the Republic of Moldova signed in Brussels on 26 June 2012, entered into force on 2 August 2020, in accordance with Article 29(1) of the Agreement, as the last notification was deposited on 2 July 2020.

---