alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §10107. Applicability to atomic energy defense activities

#### (a) Atomic energy defense activities

Subject to the provisions of subsection (c), the provisions of this chapter shall not apply with respect to any atomic energy defense activity or to any facility used in connection with any such activity.

#### (b) Evaluation by President

(1) Not later than 2 years after January 7, 1983, the President shall evaluate the use of disposal capacity at one or more repositories to be developed under part A of subchapter I for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste resulting from atomic energy defense activities. Such evaluation shall take into consideration factors relating to cost efficiency, health and safety, regulation, transportation, public acceptability, and national security.

(2) Unless the President finds, after conducting the evaluation required in paragraph (1), that the development of a repository for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste resulting from atomic energy defense activities only is required, taking into account all of the factors described in such subsection, the Secretary shall proceed promptly with arrangement for the use of one or more of the repositories to be developed under part A of subchapter I for the disposal of such waste. Such arrangements shall include the allocation of costs of developing, constructing, and operating this repository or repositories. The costs resulting from permanent disposal of high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy defense activities shall be paid by the Federal Government, into the special account established under section 10222 of this title.

(3) Any repository for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste resulting from atomic energy defense activities only shall (A) be subject to licensing under section 5842 of this title; and (B) comply with all requirements of the Commission for the siting, development, construction, and operation of a repository.

#### (c) Applicability to certain repositories

The provisions of this chapter shall apply with respect to any repository not used exclusively for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel resulting from atomic energy defense activities, research and development activities of the Secretary, or both.

(Pub. L. 97–425, §8, Jan. 7, 1983, 96 Stat. 2205.)
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OFCRIMINAL APPEALS OFTEXAS

P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 7£7JJ

PENALTY FOP?, |H£^h3e& 02 ir

2/9/2015 PIRIIVATE USi -,- '< (fi3ijjl!i£& 0005557458 febT3~2015

QMITU Mill 1iaiwi ncunu t r*i. tf +Ws^SMzSP MAILED FROM ZIP CODE 78 701 — SMITH, WILLIAM DENON Tr. Ct. No. 13R12-13530-CR(1) WR-82,855-02

On this day, the application for-11 07 Writof Habeas Corpus has been received

and presented to the Court. ,*^ - \£v#

Abel Acosta, Clerk

WILLIAM DENON SMITH

)C# 1928399

tfh^.
1.
    
    The name of the limited partnership is SALOMON SMITH BARNEY ORION FUTURES FUND L.P.If applicable, the original name under which it was formed is2.
    
    The Certificate of Limited Partnership was filed by the Department of State on 3/22/99.3.
    
    The address of CT Corporation System as the registered agent of said limited partnership is
hereby changed from CT CORPORATION SYSTEM, 1633 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, NY 10019 to 111 Eighth
Avenue, New York, New York 10011.4.
    
    Notice of the above changes was mailed to the limited partnership by CT Corporation System
not less than 30 days prior to the date of delivery to the Department of State and such
limited partnership has not objected thereto.5.
    
    CT Corporation System is the registered agent of such limited partnership.
 CT CORPORATION SYSTEMBy:
    /s/ Kenneth J. UvaKenneth J. UvaVice President
No. IV-11-046

Contact: Victor Dricks (817) 860-8128

 Lara Uselding (817) 276-6519

 

 October 21, 2011 

 E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

NRC TO MEET WITH WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OFFICIALS

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with officials from the Wolf Creek 

Nuclear Operating Corp. on Nov. 9 to discuss initiatives being implemented to improve 

performance of the Wolf Creek nuclear plant near Burlington, Kansas.

The meeting, which is open to public observation, will begin at 8 a.m. in the NRC Region 

IV office at 612 E. Lamar Blvd., in Arlington, Texas. 

Conferees will discuss the status of actions being taken to strengthen performance in the 

areas of problem identification and resolution and human performance.

A phone bridge is available to members of the public by calling 1-800-952-9677 and 

asking to be transferred to the meeting. Members of the NRC staff will be available to answer 

questions from members of the public after the business portion of the meeting.

###

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 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
### §1320d–7. Effect on State law

#### (a) General effect

#### (1) General rule

Except as provided in paragraph (2), a provision or requirement under this part, or a standard or implementation specification adopted or established under sections 1320d–1 through 1320d–3 of this title, shall supersede any contrary provision of State law, including a provision of State law that requires medical or health plan records (including billing information) to be maintained or transmitted in written rather than electronic form.

#### (2) Exceptions

A provision or requirement under this part, or a standard or implementation specification adopted or established under sections 1320d–1 through 1320d–3 of this title, shall not supersede a contrary provision of State law, if the provision of State law—

(A) is a provision the Secretary determines—

(i) is necessary—

(I) to prevent fraud and abuse;

(II) to ensure appropriate State regulation of insurance and health plans;

(III) for State reporting on health care delivery or costs; or

(IV) for other purposes; or

(ii) addresses controlled substances; or

(B) subject to section 264(c)(2) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, relates to the privacy of individually identifiable health information.

#### (b) Public health

Nothing in this part shall be construed to invalidate or limit the authority, power, or procedures established under any law providing for the reporting of disease or injury, child abuse, birth, or death, public health surveillance, or public health investigation or intervention.

#### (c) State regulatory reporting

Nothing in this part shall limit the ability of a State to require a health plan to report, or to provide access to, information for management audits, financial audits, program monitoring and evaluation, facility licensure or certification, or individual licensure or certification.

(Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XI, §1178, as added Pub. L. 104–191, title II, §262(a), Aug. 21, 1996, 110 Stat. 2029.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 264(c)(2) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, referred to in subsec. (a)(2)(B), is section 264(c)(2) of Pub. L. 104–191, which is set out as a note under section 1320d–2 of this title.
#### § 1109.13 Component part testing for phthalates in children's toys and child care articles.

A certifier may rely on component part testing of appropriate component parts of a children's toy or child care article for phthalate content provided that the requirements in § 1109.5 are met, and the determination of which, if any, parts are inaccessible pursuant to section 108(d) of the CPSIA and part 1199 of this chapter is based on an evaluation of the finished product.

[80 FR 61732, Oct. 14, 2015]
Regulatory Evaluation 

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD 

Adell he II'Ork hours. parts <:osl, and number (?f U.S. regista £'d producl.\ to th£' taMe below. When you are 

[t11ished. click on1he ··Update Field\· ., hull on ro awomatico//y .fl/1 i11the totals. 

Update Fields I 

Estimated Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

(e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor + u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

Work Package I - 14.25 II Replace part 

Work Package 2 - ~ I 

Replace part 14.25 II 

Work Package 3 - ' 

Replace part 14.25 II 

Work Package 4 -

Replace 14.25 II part 

Work Package 5 - 14.25 . - Replace II part 

Work Package 6 -

Replace 14.25 II part 

Work Package 7 - I 

Replace part 14.25 II 

Work Package 8 - 14.25 - Replace II part 

I 

d 

ll \1 . 

The known number of products in compliance: '\.; mb~r 

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $106,590 

Costs covered unde r warranty (if known) $\ \' arr.m t ~ 

On-Condition Costs: • 
Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

testing, and close- replacement) up) 

Inspection I '• Jd 

l 

I 

I 

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): 

Executive Order 12866: 

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action"? -

YES* 0 NO IZI 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? • 

YES* 0 NO IZI 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer. G 

YES 0 NO IZl 

Explanation: 

lntt·astate Aviation in Alaska: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? -

YES* 0 NO IZl 

*Explanation:
#### Greco Realty Corp. v. Mortgagee Investors Corporation.

Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Callahan and Shientag, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 562.]
#### John A. Creighton, administrator of the estate of Edward Creighton, plaintiff in error, v. J. L. Newton, G. *W.*Forbes, and others, defendants in error.

1. Practice: motion for new trial. To obtain the review of a case in the supreme court, a party dissatisfied with either the verdict or judgment in such case, must file the proper motion and in this way present the questions of law fairly and fully to the court below.

2. Pleading: replevin. Under the statute, upon a plea of general denial, in actions of replevin, the defendant may have affirmative relief in damages.

*101Error from the district court of Douglas county. Tried below before Lake, Oh. J.

*G. A. Baldwin*and *E.*Waheley, for plaintiff in error.

*George W. Boone,*for defendants in error.

Gantt, J.

This is an action of replevin, brought by plaintiff in error against the defendants. Defendant Forbes, pleaded a general denial, and defendant J. L. Newton pleaded specially. The verdict of the jury is, substantially, that the plaintiff was entitled to the property, subject, however, to a lien thereon by defendant Forbes, and the jury found the amount of the lien to be $546.35. No motion was filed by the plaintiff in respect to the verdict or judgment, in the court below; but, after judgment was rendered, he excepted to the judgment in favor of defendant Forbes, for the amount of his lien on the property. This exception certainly goes to the finding of the jury as being either irregular or void, or as not being supported by the evidence; but the record contains no evidence in the case, preserved by a bill of exceptions. In *Singleton v. Boyle,*4 Neb., 415, it is said that “the findings and judgment of a court of record will always be presumed to rest upon sufficient evidence, unless the contrary be clearly shown from the record.”

The rule is well settled that “ before a party is entitled to be heard in this court, he must have exhausted his remedy in the court below.” If he is dissatisfied with the verdict or judgment, he must by motion present the questions of law fairly and fully to the court below, and as no such course has been taken by the plaintiff in the court below, the judgment must be affirmed. *The Midland, Pacific R. R. Co. v. McCartney,*1 Neb., 404. *Mills*
      *102
      *v.*Miller, 2 Neb., 299. *Cropsey v.*Wiggenhorn, 3 Neb., 108.

It may, however, in answer to the main question raised in the case, be observed, that nnder the statute upon the plea of a general denial, in an action of replevin, the defendant may have such affirmative relief in damages as may be right and proper under the evidence, and therefore it is unnecessary to amend the answer of defendant Forbes. *School District v.*Shoemaker, *ante,*p. 36.

Judgment aeeirmed.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# VR-SECY-14-0127: Final Rule, Petition for Rulemaking Process, Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 2 (RIN 3150-AI30).

Accession Number: ML15226A391

Date Released: Friday, August 14, 2015

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML15226A393 - VR-SECY-14-0127: Final Rule, Petition for Rulemaking Process, Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 2 (RIN 3150-AI30). Part 1 of 2. (60 page(s), 8/13/2015)
    - ML15226A392 - VR-SECY-14-0127: Final Rule, Petition for Rulemaking Process, Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 2 (RIN 3150-AI30). Part 2 of 2. (129 page(s), 8/13/2015)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
### §13264. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for carrying out this subchapter $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1993 through 1997, and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 1998 through 2000.

(Pub. L. 102–486, title V, §515, formerly §514, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 2899; renumbered §515, Pub. L. 109–58, title VII, §703(a)(1), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 815.)
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

________________________

No. 07-13-0055-CR 

No. 07-13-0056-CR 

No. 07-13-0057-CR 

________________________

DAVID BENNARD WICKERSON, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

 

On Appeal from the 108th District Court 

 Potter County, Texas 

Trial Court Nos. 62,326-E, 62,317-E and 62,388-E, Honorable Douglas Woodburn, Presiding 

 

March 13, 2013 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. 

Appellant, David Bennard Wickerson, appeals his convictions for aggravated 

assault with a deadly weapon, tampering with physical evidence and possession of a 

controlled substance. The certification of right to appeal executed by the trial court in 

each case states that this Ais a plea bargain case and the defendant has NO right of 

appeal@ and Athe defendant has waived the right of appeal.@ This circumstance was 
2

brought to the attention of appellant and opportunity was granted him to obtain an 

amended certification entitling him to appeal each case. No such certification was 

received within the time we allotted. Having received no amended certification, we 

dismiss the appeals per Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d).

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
### Part E—Federal and State Procurement
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3503 

To amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to make Public Company 

Accounting Oversight Board disciplinary proceedings open to the public. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 18, 2011 

Mr. WESTMORELAND introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to make Public 

Company Accounting Oversight Board disciplinary proceedings open to the public. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PUBLIC PROCEEDINGS. 

4 Section 105 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (15 

5 U.S.C. 7215) is amended— 

6 (1) by amending subsection (c)(2) to read as 

7 follows: 

8 ‘‘(2) PUBLIC HEARINGS.—Hearings under this 

9 section shall be public unless the Board, on its own 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3503 IH

1 motion or after considering the motion of a party, 

2 orders otherwise.’’; and 

3 (2) in subsection (d)(1)(C), by striking ‘‘(once 

4 any stay on the imposition of such sanction has been 

5 lifted)’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-13-00247-CV

IN RE BETTY PARKER ROWLEY

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Petition denied

Opinion delivered and filed August 15, 2013

[OT06]
No. II-09-031 May 27, 2009 

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

 Joey Ledford (404) 562-4416 

NRC SCHEDULES MEETING TO DISCUSS 

2008 PERFORMANCE OF HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a meeting for Tuesday, 

June 2, to discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance during 2008 at the Harris 

nuclear power plant. The plant, operated by Progress Energy, is near New Hill, N.C. about 20 

miles southwest of Raleigh. 

The meeting will begin with an informal open house at 5 p.m. During the open house, 

NRC staff will be available to answer questions on the safety performance of the Harris plant, as 

well as the NRC role in ensuring safe plant operation. 

The open house is scheduled to run from 5-6:45 and will be followed by a brief 

presentation at 7 p.m. After the presentation, there will also be a question and answer session. 

The open house and presentation will be in the Holly Springs Cultural Center, 300 West 

Ballentine Street in Holly Springs. 

 “Throughout the year, we inspect and review the performance of the Harris plant and all 

commercial nuclear plants,” NRC Region II Administrator Luis Reyes said. “We issue several 

inspection reports during the year and an overall annual assessment. This open house allows us 

to discuss that assessment with local officials and people near the plant, and answer any 

questions they may have.” 

A letter sent from the NRC Region II office to plant officials addresses the performance 

of the plant during 2008 and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on 

the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/har_2008q4.pdf. 

The NRC found that the Harris plant met all NRC safety objectives during 2008, and 

performance was at a level that resulted in no additional NRC oversight. So far in 2009 and for 

the remainder of this year, the NRC continues to conduct the very detailed inspections required 

at those plants operating well. Those inspections are conducted by NRC resident inspectors 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II 

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303 

Web Site: www.nrc.gov 
assigned to the site supplemented by more specific inspections completed by region-based NRC 

inspectors. In addition to the detailed routine inspections, the agency will complete some generic 

inspections including operator licensing examinations, emergency response, fire protection and 

ground water protection at Harris in 2009. 

Current performance information for the Harris plant is available on the NRC web site at: 

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/HAR1/har1_chart.html. 

### 

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.16

AMENDMENT TO
STRATOS LIGHTWAVE, INC.SEVERANCE PLAN

The Stratos Lightwave, Inc. Severance Plan (the Plan) is amended in the
following respects, effective as of July 1, 2003:



| | 1. |  | Section 2(d)(iii) of the Plan is amended to read as follows:
| | -- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------



| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (iii) The consummation of a merger or consolidation of the
Company with any other corporation, other than a merger or
consolidation which would result in the Companys voting securities
outstanding immediately prior thereto continuing to represent (either
by remaining outstanding or by being converted into voting securities
of the surviving entity or its parent) at least sixty percent (60%) of
the total voting power represented by the Companys voting securities
or such surviving entity or its parent outstanding immediately after
such merger or consolidation; or



| | 2. |  | the following new Section 3(e) is added immediately after
Section 3(d):
| | -- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------



| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (e) Restricted to Employees Employed At Time of Change of
Control. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, an Eligible
Employee shall not be eligible for any benefits hereunder with respect
to a Change of Control unless he or she was an employee of the Company
immediately prior to the Change of Control.
### §10370. Effect

#### (a) In general

Nothing in this chapter supersedes or limits any existing authority provided, or responsibility conferred, by any provision of law.

#### (b) Effect on State water law

#### (1) In general

Nothing in this chapter preempts or affects any—

(A) State water law; or

(B) interstate compact governing water.

#### (2) Compliance required

The Secretary shall comply with applicable State water laws in carrying out this chapter.

(Pub. L. 111–11, title IX, §9510, Mar. 30, 2009, 123 Stat. 1346.)