alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC PROPOSES FY 2013 BUDGET TO CONGRESS; 

DETAILED BUDGET JUSTIFICATION REPORT AVAILABLE 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has requested $1.053 billion in its Fiscal Year 2013 

budget proposal to Congress to regulate nuclear power plants and users of nuclear materials to 

protect people and the environment. The largely flat budget represents an increase of $15 

million. However, because the fees the NRC charges licensees are sent directly to the Treasury, 

the net appropriation requested is actually $128 million, which is slightly less than in the 

previous year. 

Included in the budget request is $11 million for the Office of the Inspector General, 

which independently and objectively conducts audits and investigations to ensure the efficiency 

and integrity of NRC programs and to promote cost-effective management.

The budget reflects a decrease of 25 full-time equivalent employees, primarily corporate 

support positions, in comparison to the FY 2012 enacted budget. This is a result of costconscious business solutions being implemented by the agency. The FY 2013 budget funds 3,951 

full-time equivalent employees.

“This is a disciplined budget request that will enable the NRC to continue its vital safety 

and security mission on behalf of the American people,” said NRC Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko. 

The FY 2013 budget breakout includes $809 million for nuclear reactor safety and $232 

million for nuclear materials and waste. At the time the budget was submitted, the NRC was still 

evaluating the impacts of regulatory actions related to the Fukushima nuclear incident and the 

activities are included in the budget figures for operating reactors to maintain continued safety of 

domestic nuclear power plants. 

The detailed NRC Congressional Budget Justification report (NUREG-1100, Vol. 28) 

and budget briefing slides are available on the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1100/v28/. A limited number of hard copies of the report are 

available from opa.resource@nrc.gov . 

###

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: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No. 12-014 February 13, 2012
News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.
NRC CHAIRMAN GREGORY B. JACZKO’S REMARKS ABOUT BRIEFING ON 

AGENCY EEO, DIVERSITY AND SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS 

Note: The NRC Commissioners were briefed today by NRC staff on the status of the agency’s 

equal employment opportunity (EEO), diversity management and small business programs. 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been awarded The Best Place to Work in the 

federal government for the second consecutive timer and recognized recently in The Washingtonian

magazine as a Great Place to Work. Furthermore, our latest Internal Safety Culture survey results 

showed our staff’s high level of engagement and job satisfaction. In addition, we were again named 

Best Diversity Company, a Top Supporter of Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and 

received a green scorecard for our small business accomplishments. 

 The agency has much to be proud of and we are obviously doing great work here. Our staff 

deserves thanks for its hard work and dedication for achieving these accomplishments. 

 

 Today, at this semi-annual briefing, we discussed how we can make further improvements in 

these programs so that we can continue our progress in the EEO, diversity and small business 

programs. The Commission heard from the staff, including the EEO Advisory Committees and 

Small Business and Civil Rights Program Managers, on the challenges, progress and status of the 

agency's equal employment opportunity and diversity management efforts. Discussions covered 

affirmative employment, civil rights, outreach and compliance, and small business employment 

activities. 

 Our employees have done a good job and we are committed to further improvements to 

sustain our success. 

A video and transcript of today’s Commission meeting will be available soon on the NRC 

Web site at: http://video.nrc.gov/ and http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/commission/tr/ , respectively. 

### 

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. 09-188 November 17, 2009
NRC TO DISCUSS POST-FUKUSHIMA “REGULATORY FRAMEWORK”

JUNE 20 IN ROCKVILLE, MD

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with members of the public and other 

interested parties June 20 to discuss the staff’s preliminary approach to implementing one of the 

broadest recommendations of the NRC’s Japan Near-Term Task Force, which examined issues 

raised by the Fukushima nuclear accident in March 2011.

The meeting will be held from 1 to 4:15 p.m. in Room 1-B-13/15 of the NRC’s Executive 

Boulevard Building at 6003 Executive Boulevard in Rockville, Md. NRC staff will explain their

current thinking regarding the Task Force’s Recommendation 1, which calls for “establishing a 

logical, systematic, and coherent regulatory framework for adequate protection that appropriately 

balances defense-in-depth and risk considerations.” The staff is exploring possible alternatives 

on how to revise the NRC’s approach to regulating U.S. nuclear power plants. The agency’s five 

Commissioners directed the staff to provide, by February 2013, options on how to act on

Recommendation 1. 

The public will have the opportunity to ask the NRC staff questions about the 

Recommendation 1 effort during the meeting, which will include a teleconference and webinar. 

Those planning to attend the meeting or who need teleconference and webinar information 

should contact Richard Dudley at 301-415-1116 or richard.dudley@nrc.gov.

The NRC continues to evaluate and act on the lessons learned from Fukushima to ensure 

U.S. nuclear power plants implement appropriate safety enhancements. Following direction from 

the agency’s five Commissioners, the NRC’s activities are being led by a steering committee 

comprised of senior NRC management. The agency has also established the Japan LessonsLearned Project Directorate, a group of more than 20 full-time employees focused exclusively on 

implementing NTTF recommendations and related activities.

###

NOTE: Anyone wishing to take photos or use a camera to record any portion of a NRC meeting should 

contact the Office of Public Affairs beforehand.

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.

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: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No. 12-069 June 7, 2012
### Part B—Electric Motor Vehicle Infrastructure and Support Systems Development Program
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 29, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 136106 Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 136106 

 COA: 279979 

Oakland CC: 05-205251-FH 

COLLIN DENNARD PITTMAN,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 19, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

d0721 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

July 29, 2008 

 Clerk
§ 0.735-48 Administrative appeal. ( a ) Within 30 days after issuance of the initial decision, either party may appeal the initial decision or any portion thereof to the Assistant Secretary. The opposing party shall have 20 days to respond.
( b ) If an appeal is filed, the Assistant Secretary shall issue a final decision which shall be based solely on the record, or portions thereof cited by the parties to limit issues, and the appeal and response. The Assistant Secretary shall also decide whether to impose the proposed sanction or a lesser included sanction.
( c ) If the final decision modifies or reverses the initial decision, it shall state findings of fact and conclusions of law which differ from the initial decision.
### Part I—Programs for Elementary and Secondary School Students

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Part I of subtitle B of title I of the National and Community Service Act of 1990, comprising this part, was originally added to Pub. L. 101–610, title I, subtitle B, by Pub. L. 103–82, title I, §103(a)(2), Sept. 21, 1993, 107 Stat. 825, and amended by Pub. L. 103–382, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3518. Such part is shown herein, however, as having been added by Pub. L. 111–13, title I, §1201, Apr. 21, 2009, 123 Stat. 1467, without reference to such intervening amendments because of the extensive revision of the part's provisions by Pub. L. 111–13.
B.C.D. 01-59

JUL 0 5 2001

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

Western Railroad Association

Railroad Publication Services

Railroad Data Processing Services

Railroad Support Services

This is the determination of the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the

continuing status of Western Railroad Association (WRA) (B.A. No. 7234), Railroad

Publication Services (RPS) (B.A. No. 7533), Railroad Data Processing Services

(RDPS) (B.A. No. 7532) and Railroad Support Services (RSS) (B.A. No. 7531) as 

employers under the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231, et seq.) (RRA) and 

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

was ruled to be an employer under the Acts effective January 1, 1970. RPS, RDPS,

and RSS were all ruled to be railroad employers effective May 1, 1987.

Mr. Clyde V. McIntyre, Director, Marketing Services, CSX Transportation, advised 

the Board, in his letter of April 18, 2001, that he is the chairperson of the 

Administrative Committee, which consists of representatives from BNSF, CN, CP,

CSXT, NS and UP. Mr. McIntyre was responding to the Board’s inquiry concerning 

the status of WRA, RPS, RDPS and RSS as covered employers under the RRA and

RUIA.

Mr. McIntyre reported that WRA ceased operation in 1995, leaving RPS, RDPS and 

RSS in operation until December 31, 2000, at which time RPS, RDPS and RSS

ceased operations.

Based on the above information, it is the determination of the Railroad Retirement

Board that Western Railroad Association ceased to be an employer under the RRA

and RUIA on December 31, 1995, the last day of the year in which it last operated.

It is further determined that Railroad Publication Services, Railroad Data

Processing Services and Railroad Support Services ceased to be employers under

the Acts administered by the Board on December 31, 2000, the day on which each 

entity ceased operations.

BA# 7533
Exhibit 10.1

                     Mid-Wisconsin Financial Services, Inc.
               Incentive Compensation Plan for Executive Officers

      The Incentive Compensation Plan for Executive Officers provides that 80%
of the maximum award for each participant will be based on the achievement by
the Company of targeted levels of consolidated net income and return on average
equity, with the remaining 20% of the maximum award dependent upon the
achievement of personal objectives that are directly related to the specific
duties and job responsibilities of the individual executive. No participant
shall be entitled to an award unless the Targeted level of earnings is
achieved. The Board of Directors has discretion to award participants' payment
under this Plan if Targeted levels of earnings and return on equity are not
achieved.

      Incentive income based upon consolidated net income and return on average
equity can be earned based on the following performance criteria:

<TABLE>
                      Consolidated Net Income**
                      as % of Targeted Consolidated Net Income
<CAPTION>
ROE* As % of
Targeted ROE    90%    92%    96%    100%    104%    108%    110%
<S>             <C>    <C>    <C>     <C>     <C>     <C>    <C>
    93%          0      0      0      20      25      40      50

    95%          0      0      0      30      35      47      60

    97%          0      0     10      40      45      53      70

   100%          0      0     20      50      55      60      80

   104%          0     10     30      52      60      68      90

   108%          0     20     40      55      65      76     100

   110%          0     30     50      60      75      86     100
<FN>
              *Return on average equity
              **Consolidated net income amount includes expense associated with
               the plan
</TABLE>

      The Board has the discretion to set the Targeted level of earnings at an
amount equal to or greater than the budgeted level of consolidated net income
and return on equity for a given year. Also, the Board has discretion to
include or exclude certain transactions from the calculations.
<PAGE>

      The following table sets forth the range of incentive compensation,
expressed as a percentage of base salary that can be earned under the plan.

<TABLE>
Potential Award as a Percentage of Base Salary
<CAPTION>
                              Threshold*       Target              Maximum
<S>                              <C>           <C>                   <C>
President and CEO                9.0%            25%                 50%
Principal Financial Officer      7.2%            20%                 40%
Secretary                        6.3%          17.5%                 35%
Vice President                   4.5%          12.5%                 25%
<FN>
* Assumes achievement of 50% of personal objectives and achievement of base
  financial performance objectives.
</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard C. Brink, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 544]

Motion for reargument denied. Present — Pigott, Jr., PJ., Hurlbutt, Scudder and Green, JJ.
### §41311. Improving Department of Justice data collection on mental illness involved in crime

#### (a) In general

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, on or after the date that is 90 days after the date on which the Attorney General promulgates regulations under subsection (b), any data prepared by, or submitted to, the Attorney General or the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation with respect to the incidences of homicides, law enforcement officers killed, seriously injured, and assaulted, or individuals killed or seriously injured by law enforcement officers shall include data with respect to the involvement of mental illness in such incidences, if any.

#### (b) Regulations

Not later than 90 days after December 13, 2016, the Attorney General shall promulgate or revise regulations as necessary to carry out subsection (a).

(Pub. L. 114–255, div. B, title XIV, §14015, Dec. 13, 2016, 130 Stat. 1306.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified as a note under section 534 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
### §302. Scope of delegation of functions

The authority conferred by this chapter shall apply to any function vested in the President by law if such law does not affirmatively prohibit delegation of the performance of such function as herein provided for, or specifically designate the officer or officers to whom it may be delegated. This chapter shall not be deemed to limit or derogate from any existing or inherent right of the President to delegate the performance of functions vested in him by law, and nothing herein shall be deemed to require express authorization in any case in which such an official would be presumed in law to have acted by authority or direction of the President.

(Added Oct. 31, 1951, ch. 655, §10, 65 Stat. 712.)

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

#### Similar Provisions; Repeal; Saving Clause

For similar provisions contained in prior law, and saving clause in connection therewith, see note preceding section 301 of this title.
§ 9801.207 Fees. ( a ) *No fees for most services.* Services for which fees will not be charged: ( 1 ) The search and review time expended by CIGIE to produce a record;
( 2 ) The first copy of the records provided; and
( 3 ) CIGIE making the records available to be personally reviewed by the requester.
( b ) *Fees for additional copies.* When a requester requests additional copies of records, CIGIE will assess the requester a fee of $.20 per page. CIGIE will bill requester in arrears for such fees, except as follows: ( 1 ) If the total fee for additional copies amounts to more than $25.00, the requester will be notified of the fee amount. Except as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, upon requester's written agreement to pay the assessed fees, CIGIE will provide the additional copies without prepayment of such fees (*i.e.,* payment will be accepted in arrears).
( 2 ) An advance payment before additional copies of the records are made will be required if: ( i ) CIGIE determines that the total fee to be assessed under this section exceeds $250.00. When such a determination is made, the requester will be notified of the determination and will be required to submit an advance payment of an amount up to the total fee. The amount of the advanced payment will be at the sole discretion of CIGIE and will be based, in part, on whether requester has a history of prompt payment of Privacy Act fees. If the required advanced payment is an amount less than the total fee, requester will be required to submit a written agreement to pay any fees not paid in advance; or
( ii ) The requester has previously failed to pay a previously assessed Privacy Act fee in a timely fashion (*i.e.,* within 30 days of the date of the billing). In such cases, the requester will be required to pay the full amount outstanding plus any applicable interest as provided by paragraph (c) of this section and to make an advance payment of the full amount of the determined fee before CIGIE begins to process a new request for additional copies.
( c ) *Interest charges.* For additional copies provided to requester that result in fees assessed, CIGIE will begin levying interest charges on an unpaid balance starting on the 31st day following the day on which the billing was sent. Interest will be assessed at the rate prescribed under 31 U.S.C. 3717 and will accrue from the date of the billing.
( d ) *Payment address.* Payment of fees should be made by either a personal check, bank draft or a money order that is payable to the Department of the Treasury of the United States and mailed or delivered to: Privacy Officer, Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, 1717 H Street NW., Suite 825, Washington, DC 20006.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-00470

IN RE: TONY EPPS,

Movant.

--------------------- Motion for an order authorizing the United States District Court for the Southern

District of Texas to consider a successive habeas corpus application

---------------------- December 15, 1997 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Tony Epps, Texas prisoner # 450886, has moved this court for an order authorizing him to file a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus application in the district court. Epps asserts that his counsel was ineffective because he erroneously informed him that he could receive probation, insisted that he waive his right to jury trial, and caused him to reject the state’s offer of a 45-year sentence. He also contends that the trial court abused its discretion at sentencing by admittingNo. 97-00470 - 2 - evidence that proved elements not charged in the indictment, thus allowing proof of an essential element of the crime on an alternative basis, which he admits is permitted by statute. Epps does not make a prima facie showing that his successive § 2254 habeas corpus application is based on newly discovered evidence or on a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(2). Therefore, Epps’ motion for permission to file a successive § 2254 application is DENIED.