alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
June 10, 2015 

Mr. Neil Savage 

Towersource, Inc. 

1875 Old Alabama Road 

Roswell, GA 30076 

Dear Mr. Savage: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your May 18, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

1607), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does 

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division 

Enclosure
May 26, 2015 

MEMORANDUM TO: Mark A. Satorius 

 Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS – SECY-15-0068 – WATTS BAR 

NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 2 – REVIEW STATUS AND 

AUTHORITY OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF 

NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION FOR OPERATING 

LICENSE ISSUANCE 

The Commission has approved the staff's recommendation to grant the Director of the Office of 

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) the authority to issue a full-power operating license effective 

upon issuance to the Tennessee Valley Authority for Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2 if the 

Director of NRR determines that the applicable findings may be made and the proceeding is

uncontested. As the staff noted in SECY-15-0068, if the proceeding is contested, the

regulations of 10 CFR Part 2 will control and may require the Director of NRR to issue, deny, or 

appropriately condition the license in accordance with the presiding officer's initial decision once

that decision becomes effective. 

During these final stages of review and inspection, the NRC staff should maintain its focus on 

transparency and sharing information with the public. 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Ostendorff 

 Commissioner Baran 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCA 

 OPA
§ 301.6 Animals not listed in Fur Products Name Guide. ( a ) All furs are subject to the act and regulations regardless of whether the name of the animal producing the fur appears in the Fur Products Name Guide.
( b ) Where fur is obtained from an animal not listed in the Fur Products Name Guide it shall be designated in the required information by the true English name of the animal or in the absence of a true English name, by the name which properly identifies such animal in the United States.
#### § 1012.6 The news media.

The Agency recognizes that the news media occupy a unique position in informing the public of the Agency's activities. The Commission believes that the inherently public nature of the news media allows their activities to be exempt from the requirements of this part whenever Agency meetings are held with the news media for the purpose of informing them about Agency activities. Such Agency meetings are not exempt in the event that any representative of the news media attempts to influence any Agency employee on a substantial interest matter.
### Part E—Redirection of Nuclear Waste Program
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 69393]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26211]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Compressed Air and Gas Institute

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 20, 2004, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Compressed Air and Gas 
Institute (``CAGI'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
(1) the name and principal place of business of the standards 
development organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards 
development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.
    Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: Compressed 
Air and Gas Institute, Cleveland, OH. The nature and scope of CAGI's 
standards development activities are: Multiple standards for 
compressors, compressor-related testing, air dryers, filters and 
portable air tools, many prepared and updated in coordination with 
other standards organizations, including PNEUROP and the American 
National Standards Institute.

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 04-26211 Filed 11-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
No: II-15-038 June 30, 2015

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

 Joey Ledford 404-997-4416 

 

NRC Names New Deputy Regional Administrator for Construction 

in Atlanta Regional Office 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has named Laura Dudes the Deputy Regional 

Administrator for Construction in the agency’s Region II office in Atlanta. That position has 

responsibility for NRC inspection and oversight activities at new NRC-licensed construction sites 

across the country.

Dudes joined the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1994 as a reactor 

engineer intern. In 1996, she qualified as a reactor inspector in the Division of 

Reactor Safety in the NRC’s Region I office, located in King of Prussia, Pa.,

and served as a regional inspector performing metallurgical and engineering 

inspections. She also served as the resident inspector at Indian Point nuclear 

plant in New York, and the senior resident inspector at the Oyster Creek 

Nuclear Generating Station in New Jersey. 

After returning to the NRC headquarters office in Rockville, Md., in 2002, she served in several 

positions in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, including technical assistant in the Division of 

Inspection Program Management, NRR Enforcement Coordinator and Chief of New Reactor Licensing. 

In 2006, she was selected for the Senior Executive Service program and served as the Deputy Director, 

Division of Engineering in the Office of New Reactors, as the Director, Division of Construction 

Inspection and Operational Programs in the Office of New Reactors, and most recently as the Director, 

Division of Materials Safety, State, Tribal and Rulemaking Programs in the Office of Nuclear Material 

Safety and Safeguards.

Dudes received a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering and a master's degree in 

mechanical engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey. 

Laura Dudes replaces Frederick Brown, who had served as the Region II Deputy Regional 

Administrator for Construction since 2012 and was recently named as a Senior Advisor in the Office of 

the Executive Director for Operations at the NRC’s headquarters office.
### §12335. State plan

#### (a) Submission of plan

The chief executive officer of a State, in order to be eligible for grants from an allotment under section 12337, 12338, or 12339 1 of this title for any fiscal year, shall prepare and submit to the Commissioner a State plan for a 3-year period.

#### (b) Revisions of plan

Each chief executive officer of a State may make annual revisions of the State plan referred to in subsection (a).

#### (c) Content of plan

The chief executive officer of a State shall include within the State plan of that State assurances as required under sections 2 12337, 12338, or 12339 1 of this title, and a description of the proposed multi-year plans of the State for program development and implementation.

#### (d) Type of application

A State may apply for funds under one or more of the following categories:

(1) section 12337 of this title;

(2) sections 12337 and 12338 of this title jointly; or

(3) section 12339 1 of this title.

In the case of each category, the State application and plan shall comply only with the requirements of the appropriate section.

#### (e) Approval of plan

#### (1) In general

The Commissioner shall approve any State plan under sections 12337 and 12338 of this title that the Commissioner determines meets the requirements of such sections.

#### (2) Notice and opportunity to correct deficiencies

The Commissioner shall not make a final determination disapproving any State plan, modifying such plan, or declaring a State to be ineligible to receive funds under sections 12337 and 12338 of this title without previously affording such State reasonable notice and opportunity to correct deficiencies in its application.

(Pub. L. 101–501, title IX, §929, Nov. 3, 1990, 104 Stat. 1270.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 12339 of this title, referred to in subsecs. (a), (c), and (d)(3), was repealed by Pub. L. 103–252, title IV, §401(b)(1), May 18, 1994, 108 Stat. 672.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1990, see section 1001(a) of Pub. L. 101–501, set out as an Effective Date of 1990 Amendment note under section 8621 of this title.

1 See References in Text note below.

2 So in original. Probably should be "section".
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

****

In connection with the Annual Report of North American Natural Gas, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended April 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jim Glavas, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)      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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of all the Company.



JIM GLAVASJim GlavasChief Executive and Chief Financial OfficerJuly 24, 2007






































---
§ 904.270 Record of decision. ( a ) The exclusive record of decision consists of the official transcript of testimony and administrative proceedings; exhibits admitted into evidence; briefs, pleadings, and other documents filed in the administrative proceeding; and descriptions or copies of matters, facts, or documents officially noticed in the administrative proceeding. Any other exhibits and records of any *ex parte* communications will accompany the record of decision.
( b ) The Judge will arrange for appropriate storage of the records of any administrative proceeding, which place of storage need not necessarily be located physically within the Office of Administrative Law Judges.
[71 FR 12448, Mar. 10, 2006, as amended at 87 FR 38939, June 30, 2022]
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Medical International Technology, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Karim Menassa, President and Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | 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 result of operations of the Company.
|   

|\s\ Karim MenassaKarim MenassaPresident and Principal Executive OfficerSeptember 23, 2005
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
No. 15-075 November 16, 2015

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200

NRC, Army Corps of Engineers Complete Environmental Review

of Early Site Permit for Southern New Jersey Location

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia 

District, have issued the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for an Early Site Permit (ESP) 

application from PSEG Power and PSEG Nuclear. The statement concludes environmental impacts

would not preclude the NRC issuing the permit for the site, adjacent to the existing Salem and Hope 

Creek nuclear power plants in Salem County, N.J.

The approximately 1,900-page report, Volumes 1, 2 and 3, documents the NRC staff’s

independent review of PSEG’s application. The review takes into account consultations with federal, 

state, tribal and local agencies and comments received during the public scoping process in November 

2010. The staff also considered comments received on the draft EIS issued in August 2014. The staff

concludes there are no environmentally preferable or obviously superior sites. A printed copy of the 

final EIS will be available at the Salem Free Public Library, 112 W. Broadway in Salem, N.J.

The ESP process allows an applicant to address site-related issues, such as environmental 

impacts, for possible future construction and operation of a nuclear power plant at the site. PSEG 

submitted the application on May 25, 2010. If approved, the permit would be valid for up to 20 years 

while PSEG decides whether to request an NRC license to build and operate a reactor at the site. More 

information on the ESP process is available on the NRC website. 

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will conduct a mandatory hearing on the permit

application. The hearing will determine whether the staff’s environmental review, documented in the 

final EIS, and the safety review, documented in the Final Safety Evaluation Report, support the 

findings necessary to issue the permit.

The final EIS also supports the Army Corps of Engineers review of PSEG’s application for 

activities under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbor Act of 

1899. The Corps will issue a separate record of decision on the work proposed for Corps review and 

authorization.
APPENDIXB 

### FISCAL NOTE FORPROPOSED RULES

Rule Title: 45CSR14 

### - "Permits for Construction and Maior Modification of Maior Stationary Sources of Air Pollution for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration" $4

. , Type ofRule: X Legislative interpretive Procedural ', (* 

## - Agency: Division ofAir Quality +

### -
-- Address: 

### 601 57thStreet SE Charleston,

### WV 25304

Phone Number: 

### 926-0475 Email:



### Fiscal Note Summary Summarize in a clear and concise manner what impact this measure will have on costs and revenues of state government.

No impact above that resulting from currently applicable federal emission standards.



### Fiscal ~ote' Detail Show over-all effect in Item 1 and 

### 2 and, in Item 3, give an explanation of Breakdown by fiscal year, including long-range effect. 

## I FISCAL

### YEAR 

## I

Effect ofProposal

1. Estimated Total Cost Personal Services Current Expenses Repairs & Alterations Assets Equipment Other 2. Estimated Total Revenues 2009 IncreaseDecrease (use "-'I)



### $0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 IncreaseDecrease (use "-")



### $0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fiscal Year (Upon Full Implementation) 

### $0

0 0 0 0 0 0 

### 0Rule Title: 45CSR14 - "Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration"


### 3. Explanation of above estimates (including long-range effect): Please include any increase or decrease in fees inyour estimated total revenues.

Any costs incurred by revision to this rule were included in cost estimates prepared for implementation ofTitle V ofthe Clean Air Act, as amended, under 45CSR30.



### MEMORANDUM Please identify any areas of vagueness, technical defects, reasons the proposed rule would not have a fiscal impact, andlor any special issues not captured elsewhere on this form.

Date: 

# ?\\$%
### §10341. Findings

The Congress finds that—

(1) there is an increasing threat of impairment to the quantity and quality of the Nation's water resources due to, among other things, growing national needs, recurring drought in the Western States, point and nonpoint source pollution, and saltwater intrusion into existing groundwater supplies;

(2) many communities in the United States have water supplies containing high salinity levels or contaminants which pose health risks;

(3) the Nation needs to develop economical processes to treat existing water supplies that are contaminated;

(4) it is necessary to provide for research into new techniques to reclaim waste water and to convert saline and other contaminated waters to a quality suitable for municipal, industrial, agricultural, recreational, and other beneficial uses;

(5) there is very little Federal funding being applied to basic research in the field of treatment of contaminated water through membrane processes; and

(6) the treatment of contaminated water through membrane processes will solve a wide variety of water treatment problems, including compliance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act [33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.] and the Safe Drinking Water Act [42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.].

(Pub. L. 102–490, §2, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3142.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, referred to in par. (6), is act June 30, 1948, ch. 758, as amended generally by Pub. L. 92–500, §2, Oct. 18, 1972, 86 Stat. 816, which is classified generally to chapter 26 (§1251 et seq.) of Title 33, Navigation and Navigable Waters. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1251 of Title 33 and Tables.

The Safe Drinking Water Act, referred to in par. (6), is title XIV of act July 1, 1944, as added Dec. 16, 1974, Pub. L. 93–523, §2(a), 88 Stat. 1660, which is classified generally to subchapter XII (§300f et seq.) of chapter 6A of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 201 of this title and Tables.

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

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 102–490, §1, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3142, provided that: "This Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the 'Membrane Processes Research Act of 1992'."
No. 15-091 December 30, 2015

CONTACT: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200

ASLB to Hold Evidentiary Hearing on Turkey Point Canal Temperature Issue

An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will hold an evidentiary hearing Jan. 11-12 in 

Homestead, Fla., to consider a challenge to license amendments that increase the ultimate heat sink 

water temperature limit for the cooling canal system at the Turkey Point nuclear power plant.

The ASLB is the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s independent body charged with conducting 

adjudicatory hearings and deciding legal challenges to the agency’s licensing and enforcement actions. 

Florida Power & Light Co. (FPL) operates the two-unit Turkey Point plant near Homestead.

The hearing is scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. on Jan. 11 at the Hampton Inn and Suites, 

2855 NE 9th St., in Homestead. It will continue until 5 p.m. on Jan. 12, unless the board finishes 

earlier. 

An intervenor, Citizens Allied for Safe Energy (CASE), filed four proposed contentions 

regarding the license amendments granted to FPL in 2014 that allowed the company to increase the 

ultimate heat sink water temperature for the plant’s external cooling canal system. The ASLB heard 

oral arguments last January on the admissibility of the contentions, and on March 23 granted a hearing 

on one contention. That contention claims the NRC staff’s environmental assessment supporting the 

license amendment did not adequately address the potential impacts of the higher temperature limit on 

migration of highly saline water out of the cooling canals or saltwater intrusion into nearby aquifers. 

The Jan. 11-12 hearing will focus on the merits of this contention.

The evidentiary hearing is open to the public, but the board will only hear testimony and legal 

arguments from witnesses and representatives for CASE, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and 

FPL. As a result, no members of the public will be heard during this proceeding.

However, members of the public may submit written “limited appearance statements,” 

regarding the license amendments and the contention under consideration. These statements, which 

may be considered by the judges, must be submitted no later than Jan. 15 to both the NRC Secretary 

and the chairman of the ASLB by mail at Office of the Secretary, Rulemakings and Adjudications 

Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 and Administrative Judge 

Michael M. Gibson, Chairman, c/o Nicole Pepperl & Jennifer Scro, Board Law Clerks, Mail Stop 

T-3F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. They may also be 

submitted by fax to (301) 415-1101 and (301) 415-5599, or by email to hearingdocket@nrc.gov, 

nicole.pepperl@nrc.gov and jennifer.scro@nrc.gov.
§ 301.32 Fur product containing material other than fur. ( a ) Where a fur product contains a material other than fur the content of which is required to be disclosed on labels under other statutes administered by the Commission, such information may be set out on the same side of the label and in immediate conjunction with the information required under this Act; as for example: 100% Wool Interlining—100% Recycled Wool Trim—Dyed Muskrat Fur Origin: Canada or Body: 100% Cotton Lining: 100% Nylon Collar: Dyed Mouton Lamb Fur Origin: Argentina
( b ) Information which may be desirable or necessary to fully inform the purchaser of other material content of a fur product may be set out on the same side of the label as used for disclosing the information required under the Act and rules and regulations; as for example:
Body—Leather Trim—Dyed Mink
[26 FR 3187, Apr. 14, 1961, as amended at 45 FR 44263, July 1, 1980]