alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1500.214 Examinations and investigations; samples. When any officer or employee of the Commission collects a sample of a hazardous substance for analysis under the act, the sample shall be designated as an official sample if records or other evidence is obtained by him or any other officer or employee of the Commission indicating that the shipment or other lot of the article from which such sample was collected was introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce, or was in or was received in interstate commerce, or was manufactured within a Territory not organized with a legislative body. Only samples so designated by an officer or employee of the Commission shall be considered to be official samples: ( a ) For the purpose of determining whether or not a sample is collected for analysis, the term “analysis” includes examinations and tests.
( b ) The owner of a hazardous substance of which an official sample is collected is the person who owns the shipment or other lot of the article from which the sample is collected.
§ 1027.6 Written decision. ( a ) The hearing official shall issue a final written opinion no later than 60 days after the filing of the petition.
( b ) The written opinion will include: A statement of the facts presented to demonstrate the nature and origin of the alleged debt; the hearing official's analysis, findings, and conclusions; the amount and validity of the debt; and the repayment schedule.
### §11047. Exemption

Except as provided in section 11004 of this title, this chapter does not apply to the transportation, including the storage incident to such transportation, of any substance or chemical subject to the requirements of this chapter, including the transportation and distribution of natural gas.

(Pub. L. 99–499, title III, §327, Oct. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 1757.)
1 Pursuant to 5 TH 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. -1- United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED March 16, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

04-60879 Summary Calendar

COASTAL CARGO AND INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Petitioners,
Versus JOSEPH FLOWERS AND DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Respondents.

Appeal from the United States Department of Labor

Benefits Review Board BRB No. 03-0817

Before DAVIS, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: 1 Petitioner appeals an award of attorney’s fees by the Benefits Review Board in the amount of $4,515.00 to the claimant pursuant to section 28(a) of the Longshore a nd Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. 33 U.S.C. § 928(a). Respondents seek an additional $937.50 in fees for prosecuting this appeal. For essentially the reasons-2-

stated in the Benefits Review Board’s decision, we AFFIRM the award of $4,515.00. We award an additional $937.50 to claimant for the fees and costs incu rred in prosecuting this appeal. This is the amount claimant requests and petitioners have not challenged its reasonableness.
No: 14-069 October 16, 2014

CONTACT: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200 

NRC Staff Issues Volume 3 of Yucca Mountain Safety Evaluation Report

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has published Volume 3 of its safety evaluation 

report on the proposed underground geologic nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev.

Volume 3 covers the period after a repository at Yucca Mountain would be permanently closed

should NRC authorize construction following completion of the remaining steps in the licensing 

process. Volume 3 contains the staff’s finding that the Department of Energy’s repository design meets 

the requirements that apply after the repository is permanently closed, including but not limited to the 

post-closure performance objectives in NRC’s regulations (in 10 CFR Part 63, Subpart E). These 

performance objectives include the requirement that the repository be composed of multiple barriers to 

isolate radioactivity from the environment. The staff also found the proposed repository design meets

the NRC’s limits or standards (in 10 CFR Part 63, Subpart L) for individual protection, human intrusion 

and groundwater protection.

The Department of Energy submitted its Yucca Mountain application in June 2008. The NRC 

staff published Volume 1 (General Information) of the safety evaluation report in August 2010. After 

DOE moved to withdraw the application and Congress stopped appropriating funds for the NRC’s 

review, the agency closed out its application review and published three technical evaluation reports 

containing the staff’s technical analyses to that point but no regulatory conclusions. The adjudication of 

nearly 300 contentions filed by various parties contesting the application was also suspended in 

September 2011.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered the NRC in August 

2013 to resume the licensing process using currently available funding appropriated from the Nuclear 

Waste Fund. That court order led to today’s publication of Volume 3. The staff expects to publish 

volumes 2 (Repository Safety Before Permanent Closure), 4 (Administrative and Programmatic 

Requirements) and 5 (License Specifications) by January 2015, as they are completed.

Publication of Volume 3 does not signal whether the NRC might authorize construction of the 

repository. A final licensing decision, should funds beyond those currently available be appropriated,

could come only after completion of the safety evaluation report, a supplement to the Department of 

Energy’s environmental impact statement, hearings on contentions in the adjudication, and 

Commission review.

NUREG 1949, Safety Evaluation Report Related to Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes 

in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, Volume 3, is now publicly available in the 
Page | 2

NRC’s ADAMS online database as ML14288A121. More information on the Yucca Mountain 

licensing process is available on the NRC website.
#### In the Matter of John J. Robinson et al., Appellants, against Joseph A. McNamara et al., Constituting the Municipal Civil Service Commission of the City of New York, Respondents.

No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
§ 783.4 Deadlines for submission of reports and amendments. Reports and amendments required under this part must be postmarked by the appropriate date identified in supplement no. 1 to this part 783. Required reports and amendments include those identified in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section. ( a ) *Initial Report:* Submitted by a location that commenced one or more of the civil nuclear fuel cycle-related activities described in § 783.1(a) of the APR during the previous calendar year, but that has not yet reported such activities to BIS. However, *Initial Reports* that are submitted to BIS during calendar year 2008 must describe only those activities in which you are engaged as of October 31, 2008, *except that* the description of activities involving uranium hard-rock mines must include any such mines that were closed down during calendar year 2008 (up to and including October 31, 2008), as well as mines that were in either operating or suspended status on October 31, 2008 (see § 783.1(a)(3)(i) of the APR).
( b ) *Annual Update Report:* Submitted by a reportable location—this report describes changes to previously reported (i.e., declared) activities and any other reportable civil nuclear fuel cycle-related activities that took place at the location during the previous calendar year.
( c ) *No Changes Report:* Submitted by a reportable location, in lieu of an *Annual Update Report,* when there are no updates or changes to any information, excluding the certifying official and dates signed and submitted, since the previous report submitted by that location.
( d ) *Import Confirmation Report:* Submitted in response to a written notification from BIS, following a specific request by the IAEA.
( e ) *Supplemental Information Report:* Submitted in response to a written notification from BIS, following a specific request by the IAEA.
( f ) *Amended Report:* Submitted by a reportable location to report certain changes affecting the location's most recent *Initial Report* or *Annual Update Report.*
§ 1018.23 Designated Commission employee. ( a ) The Chairman shall designate a member of the Commission or other Commission officer or employee to chair or attend each meeting of each advisory committee.
( b ) Unless otherwise provided in the statute creating a statutory advisory committee, the committee normally will be chaired, on a rotating basis, by a member of the Commission.
( c ) No advisory committee shall conduct any meeting in the absence of the officer or employee designated under paragraph (a) of this section.
( d ) The officer or employee designated under paragraph (a) of this section is authorized to adjourn any advisory committee meeting whenever he or she determines adjournment to be in the public interest.
Order filed October 14, 2021 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-21-00072-CV

____________

GIOVANNY LAGUAN, Appellant

V.

WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., NOT IN ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, 

BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE FOR MFRA TRUST 2014-2, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 20-CCV-068157

O R D E R

Appellant’s brief was due September 23, 2021. No brief or motion for 

extension of time has been filed. 

Unless appellant files a brief with this court on or before November 15, 

2021, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 

42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Jewell, Spain, and Wilson.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3488 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3488

   To prohibit foreign assistance to countries with a gross domestic 
                 product of $1,500,000,000,000 or more.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 18, 2011

Mr. Bucshon (for himself and Mr. Landry) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To prohibit foreign assistance to countries with a gross domestic 
                 product of $1,500,000,000,000 or more.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Invest in America First Act of 
2011''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON FOREIGN ASSISTANCE TO COUNTRIES WITH A GDP OF 
              $1,500,000,000,000 OR MORE.

    (a) Prohibition.--
            (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
        assistance may not provided under any provision of law to a 
        country with a GDP of $1,500,000,000,000 or more.
            (2) Exception.--The prohibition on assistance under 
        paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to military 
        assistance, security assistance, or humanitarian assistance.
    (b) Definitions.--In this Act--
            (1) the term ``GDP'' means, with respect to a country, the 
        gross domestic product of the country on a purchasing power 
        parity (PPP) basis divided by the population of the country, as 
        determined by the most recent publication of the Central 
        Intelligence Agency's The World Factbook; and
            (2) the term ``humanitarian assistance''--
                    (A) means assistance, provided on such terms and 
                conditions as the President may determine, for the 
                relief and rehabilitation of victims of natural and 
                manmade disasters, including food, water, medicine, 
                clothing, and shelter; and
                    (B) does not include direct financial assistance 
                for the purposes described in subparagraph (A).
                                 <all>
```
----

|                                                                                         |    | Three months ended March 31,2011 |   |    | Three months ended March 31,2010 |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                                         |         |                                                 |
| Income available to common shareholders                                                      |    | $                                                    | 1,921  |    |                                            | $      | 718 |    |
|                                                                                         |         |                                                 |
| Weighted average shares outstanding                                                          |    |                                                 | 9,393  |    |                                            |   | 4,662 |    |
|                                                                                         |         |                                                 |
| Basic earnings per share                                                                     |    | $                                                    | 0.20   |    |                                            | $      | 0.15 |    |
|                                                                                         |         |                                                 |
| Income for diluted earnings per share                                                        |    | $                                                    | 1,921  |    |                                            | $      | 718 |    |
|                                                                                         |         |                                                 |
| Total weighted average common shares and equivalents outstanding for diluted computation (1) |    |                                                 | 9,413  |    |                                            |   | 4,678 |    |
|                                                                                         |         |                                                 |
| Diluted earnings per share                                                                   |    | $                                                    | 0.20   |    |                                            | $      | 0.15 |    |

----
### Part A—Supporting Early-Career Researchers
Harvest found in ~/gpo151491
§ 1631.3 General requirements. ( a ) *Summary of test method.* This method involves the exposure of each of eight conditioned, replicate specimens of a small carpet or rug to a standard igniting source in a draft-protected environment and measurement of the proximity of the charred portion to the edge of the hole in the prescribed flattening frame.
( b ) *Test criterion.* A specimen passes the test if the charred portion does not extend to within 2.54 cm. (1.0 in.) of the edge of the hole in the flattening frame at any point.
( c ) *Acceptance criterion.* At least seven of the eight specimens shall meet the test criterion in order to conform with this Standard.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Tally Ho Ventures, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned, Peter J.
      Smith, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his
      knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 results of operations of the Company.





Date:
      May
      1, 2006





/s/
      Peter J. Smith


Peter
      J.
      Smith, Principal Executive Officer





This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended.
#### § 303.28 Products contained in packages.

When textile products are marketed and delivered in a package which is intended to remain unbroken and intact until after delivery to the ultimate consumer, each textile product in the package, except hosiery, and the package shall be labeled with the required information. If the package is transparent to the extent it allows for a clear reading of the required information on the textile product, the package is not required to be labeled.

[50 FR 15107, Apr. 17, 1985]
#### § 1203.40 Effective date.

This subpart is effective March 10, 1999, and applies to bicycle helmets manufactured after that date.
### SUBCHAPTER XXI—RESEARCH WITH RESPECT TO ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROME

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior subchapter XXI (§300cc et seq.), comprised of title XXIII of the Public Health Service Act, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, 2301–2316, was renumbered title XXV, §§2501–2514, of the Public Health Service Act, and transferred to subchapter XXV (§300aaa et seq.) of this chapter, renumbered title XXVI, §§2601–2614, of the Public Health Service Act, renumbered title XXVII, §§2701–2714, of the Public Health Service Act, and renumbered title II, part B, §§231–244, of the Public Health Service Act, and transferred to part B (§238 et seq.) of subchapter I of this chapter.
#### In the Matter of Jose De Santiago, Petitioner, against John F. O’Connell et al., Individually and as Members of the State Liquor Authority, Respondents.

— Determination unanimously confirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondents. Fo opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Bergan, JJ. [See *post,*p. 866.]
No: 14-078 November 6, 2014

CONTACT: Maureen Conley, 301-415-8200 

NRC Renews License for Crow Butte Uranium Recovery Facility

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has renewed Crow Butte Resources Inc.’s license to 

operate an in situ uranium recovery facility in Crawford, Neb., for an additional 10 years. The license 

now has an expiration date of Nov. 5, 2024. 

NRC staff reviewed both the technical/safety and environmental aspects of the proposed 

renewal. A Safety Evaluation Report published in August 2014 found the facility could continue to 

operate safely. An Environmental Assessment published in the Oct. 30 Federal Register found there 

would be no significant environmental impact from continuing operation for another 10 years.
### §30501. Definition

For purposes of this chapter, "Armed Forces" includes the United States Army, United States Navy, United States Marines, United States Air Force, United States Coast Guard, National Guard, United States Army Reserves, United States Navy Reserves, United States Marine Reserves, United States Air Force Reserves, United States Coast Guard Reserves, United States Naval Militia, merchant marines, and armed home guards who have served on active duty.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1319.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 30501 | 36:945 (last sentence). | July 14, 1960, Pub. L. 86–653, §5 (last sentence), 74 Stat. 516. |

Section

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

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darrell L. Taylor, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 545]

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied. Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Gorski, Martoche, Smith and Green, JJ.
#### § 1028.113 Suspension or termination of IRB approval of research.

An IRB shall have authority to suspend or terminate approval of research that is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB's requirements or that has been associated with unexpected serious harm to subjects. Any suspension or termination of approval shall include a statement of the reasons for the IRB's action and shall be reported promptly to the investigator, appropriate institutional officials, and the department or agency head.
#### Gulf Underwriters Insurance Company, Appellant, v Verizon Communications, Inc., Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 8]

*710Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered November 30, 2005, which granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stay the instant proceedings for 60 days, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and defendant’s motion denied.

After settling two intellectual property claims with its primary carrier, nonparty American International Specialty Lines Insurance Company, Verizon sought excess coverage from plaintiff, which disclaimed and commenced the instant proceeding for a declaratory judgment of noncoverage. Verizon moved to compel arbitration pursuant to the arbitration clause in the primary carrier’s policy, by which plaintiff is bound by operation of its excess coverage policy.

Although the IAS court agreed that Verizon’s agreement with the primary carrier only required arbitration of claims by the insured against the insurer, the court nevertheless determined that plaintiff excess insurer’s declaratory judgment action is, in reality, a coverage dispute, and therefore “clearly arbitrable pursuant to the policies.” We disagree and reverse.

A party cannot be forced to an arbitration to which it has not agreed, and any arbitration agreement must reflect a clear and unequivocal manifestation of an intention to arbitrate *(see Mionis v Bank Julius Baer & Co.,*301 AD2d 104, 109 [2002]). The arbitration clause in this case is unambiguous in providing that “[n]o action shall lie against [the insurer] unless as a condition precedent” the matter is first submitted to arbitration. Since Verizon is not the insurer, there is no arbitration requirement which conditions plaintiffs ability to seek judicial review. Had Verizon desired to require arbitration of claims by the insurers, it could have bargained for an arbitration clause in its contracts with the primary or excess insurers. It did not, and the IAS court was not free to rewrite the limited arbitration clause. We have reviewed the other arguments raised by Verizon and find them to be without merit. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Saxe, Friedman, Williams and Malone, JJ.