alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Record of Contacts

FDMS Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 6544

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?

Organization Person Contacted Date Response

National Business Aircraft Association Eli Cotti 10/1/14

---

Regional Air line Association 10/1/14

---

Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Robert Hackman 10/1/14

---

ATA Robert Ireland 10/1/14

---
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Lawrence Condon, Appellant, against J. Vernel Jackson, as Warden of Clinton Prison, Respondent.

Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ.
### §13602. Compliance with criteria for occupancy as requirement for tenancy

In selecting tenants for occupancy of units in federally assisted housing, an owner of such housing shall utilize the criteria for occupancy in federally assisted housing established by the Secretary, by regulation, under section 13603 of this title. If an owner determines that an applicant for occupancy in the housing does not meet such criteria, the owner may deny such applicant occupancy.

(Pub. L. 102–550, title VI, §642, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3821.)
#### Frank E. Nash, Doing Business under the Name of Frank E. Nash Fence Company, Respondent, v. Frank Mennen, as President of Local 580 of the International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers, et al., Appellants.

Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 609.]
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 231 (Thursday, December 2, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 70121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26563]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1359]


Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 72; Indianapolis, IN

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 
18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board 
(the Board) adopts the following Order:
    Whereas, the Indianapolis Airport Authority, grantee of Foreign-
Trade Zone 72, submitted an application to the Board for authority to 
expand FTZ 72 to include four additional sites at locations in Madison, 
Marion and Hendricks Counties, Indiana, within the Indianapolis Customs 
port of entry (FTZ Docket 45-2003; filed 9/10/03);
    Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the Federal 
Register (68 FR 54717, 9/18/03) and the application has been processed 
pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the 
public interest;
    Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders:
    The application to expand FTZ 72 is approved, subject to the Act 
and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28, and further 
subject to the Board's standard 2,000-acre activation limit for the 
overall zone project.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 18th day of November, 2004.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
[FR Doc. 04-26563 Filed 12-1-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
# L_2022246EN.01007901.xml

| 22.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 246/79 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 246/79

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 130/2022

of 29 April 2022

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2022/1574]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

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

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/135 of 31 January 2022 amending Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the use of Methyl-N-methylanthranilate in cosmetic products (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/135 of 31 January 2022 amending Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the use of Methyl-N-methylanthranilate in cosmetic products (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

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

(2)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 1a (Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Chapter XVI of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘- | 32022 R 0135: Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/135 of 31 January 2022 (OJ L 22, 1.2.2022, p. 2).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘-

32022 R 0135: Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/135 of 31 January 2022 (OJ L 22, 1.2.2022, p. 2).’

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EU) 2022/135 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 30 April 2022, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*).

Article 4

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

Done at Brussels, 29 April 2022.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Nicolas VON LINGEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 22, 1.2.2022, p. 2.

1

(*)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*

---
#### In the Matter of Edmund M. Balducci, Respondent, against Joseph D. McGoldrick, as State Rent Administrator, Appellant.

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the State Rent Administrator granting the landlord’s application for a certificate of eviction, the administrator appeals from an order vacating his determination and revoking the certificate. Order reversed on the law, without costs, and the petition dismissed, without costs. The landlord occupies the first floor apartment of a three-family house. His daughter and her family occupy a four-room apartment on the second floor and the petitioner occupies the third apartment, also a four-room one on the second floor. The State Rent Administrator found that the daughter and her family were inadequately housed in their second floor apartment, and that good faith and compelling necessity had been established. In his protest to the State Rent Administrator, the petitioner had conceded that there was an existence of compelling necessity for the daughter and her family to obtain more space but contended that additional space was available in the landlord’s apartment. Neither the landlord nor his daughter occupied their apartments as the result of the issuance of a previous certificate. Special Term held that there was no authority for the eviction of a tenant to enable the landlord to recapture two apartments for one member of his family. In our opinion, the State Residential Rent Law and the Rent and Eviction Regulations do not prohibit the grant of a certificate of eviction for the purpose of making an additional apartment available for the use of a member of the landlord’s immediate family under the circumstances stated. (State Residential Rent Law, § 5, subd. 2, par. [a]; State Rent and Eviction Regulations, § 55, subd. 1; *Matter of Spadaro*v. *McGoldrick,*278 App. Div. 668.) The record contains adequate evidence to support appellant’s determination that the landlord’s application was made in good faith. Section 57 of the State Rent and Eviction Regulations in nowise limits the power and obligation of the commission to issue a certificate pursuant to the afore-mentioned statute and regulation when good faith and compelling necessity are shown. The certificate was granted only after an investigation by the appellant of the space available in the landlord’s apartment, and the finding that there was compelling necessity to obtain the petitioner’s apartment could rest on the facts stated as to the persons actually residing in the landlord’s apartment and the number of persons in the daughter’s apartment. Nolan, P. J., Adel, MaeCrate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 230 (Wednesday, December 1, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 69896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26435]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by January 
3, 2005.
    Title, Form, and OMB Number: Freight carrier Registration Program 
(FCR); SDDC Form 410; OMB Control Number 0702-0121.
    Type of Request: New.
    Number of Respondents: 430.
    Responses per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 430.
    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 108.
    Needs and Uses: The FCRP is designed to protect the interest of the 
government and to ensure that the Department of Defense deals with 
responsible carriers having the capability to provide quality and 
dependable service. Information is vital in determining capability to 
perform quality service transporting DoD freight. Carriers will furnish 
SDDC with information to assist in determining through other public 
records whether the company and its officers are responsible 
contractors.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Respondents Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jacqueline Zeiher. Written comments and 
recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent 
to Ms. Zeiher at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for 
DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings. Written requests for 
copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. 
Toppings, WHS/ESCD/Information Management Division, 1225 South Clark 
Street, Suite 504, Arlington, VA 22202-4326.

    Dated: November 22, 2004.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-26435 Filed 11-30-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
No: II-16-012 March 24, 2016

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416

NRC Schedules Open House to Discuss Agency’s Assessment of Oconee Nuclear Plant

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials have scheduled an open house for Thursday, March 31,

to provide information on the agency’s assessment of the Oconee nuclear plant during 2015. 

The Oconee plant is located near Seneca, S.C., about 30 miles west of Greenville. It is operated 

by Duke Energy.

The open house, which will include informational posters, is scheduled from 5:30 p.m. to 

6:30 p.m. in the Oconee World of Energy, 7812 Rochester Highway, in Seneca.

NRC resident inspectors and other staff members will be available to answer questions on the 

safety performance and regulatory oversight of the three Oconee units, as well as highlights of NRC

inspections. 

“We invite the public to visit with us and find out what we’re doing to ensure Oconee and other 

nuclear plants are operated safely,” said NRC Region II Administrator Cathy Haney. “These annual 

meetings offer an opportunity for everyone, and especially people who live near the plant, to learn 

about our inspection and oversight programs.”

The NRC’s annual assessment letter to plant officials addressing 2015 Oconee plant performance 

will serve as the main focus of the open house, but NRC staff members will be available to answer 

other questions about the NRC’s role at the plant.

The NRC review concluded that Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3 operated in a manner that preserved 

public health and safety and protected the environment in 2015. Because of that performance, the three

units will continue to receive the detailed routine or baseline inspections this year that all nuclear power 

plants receive.

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess plant 

performance. The colors start with green, which has very low safety significance, and then progress to 

white, yellow or red, based on the significance of the issues. All inspection findings and performance 

indicators for Oconee were green in 2015.

Current performance information for Unit 1, Unit 2 and Unit 3, as well as more detailed 

information about NRC inspection and oversight is available on the NRC website, www.nrc.gov.
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - Teryl Resources Corp. - Exhibit 4.4







Exhibit 4.4 

AGREEMENT 

THIS AGREEMENT is dated for reference the 5th day
  of March, 2002. 

BETWEEN: 

LINUXWIZARDRY SYSTEMS, INC. 

  #120, 3011 Viking Way 

  Richmond, BC V6V 1W1 

("Linux") 

OF THE FIRST PART 

AND: 

TERYL RESOURCES CORP. 

  #120, 3011 Viking Way 

  Richmond, BC V6V 1W1 

("Teryl") 

OF THE SECOND PART 

WHEREAS: 


	A. 	 Linux owns a 50% interest in 30 claims
        in Fairbanks, Alaska called the Fish Creek Claims;

	 	 
	B. 	 Teryl agrees to joint venture the Fish
        Creek Claims;



NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual covenants
  and conditions set forth herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 

	1. 	 200,000 treasury shares of Teryl upon
        signing and approval by the regulatory bodies.

	 	 
	2. 	 Linux will hold a 5% net royalty interest
        until $200,000 U.S. has been received or Teryl pays a payment of $500,000
        U.S. within one year after production of the Fish Creek Claims.

	 	 
	3. 	 Teryl agrees to expend $500,000 U.S.
        within three years from the date of this Agreement.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed
  this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. 

	LINUXWIZARDRY SYSTEMS, INC. 	 	TERYL RESOURCES CORP. 
	  	 	  
	  	 	  
	/s/
      John Robertson 	 	/s/
      John Robertson 
	Signature 	 	Signature 
	  	 	  
	John
      Robertson 	 	John Robertson 
	Print Name 	 	Print Name 
	  	 	  
	President
      	 	President 
	Title 	 	Title
### §10246. Monitored retrievable storage

#### (a) Construction and operation

Upon enactment of legislation to implement an agreement negotiated under section 10243(a) of this title to site a monitored retrievable storage facility, the Secretary shall construct and operate such facility as part of an integrated nuclear waste management system in accordance with the terms and conditions of such agreement.

#### (b) Financial assistance

The Secretary may make grants to any State, Indian tribe, or affected unit of local government to assess the feasibility of siting a monitored retrievable storage facility under this section at a site under the jurisdiction of such State, tribe, or affected unit of local government.

(Pub. L. 97–425, title IV, §406, as added Pub. L. 100–202, §101(d) [title III], Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1329–104, 1329–121; Pub. L. 100–203, title V, §5041, Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–246.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 100–202 and Pub. L. 100–203 added identical sections.
November 5, 2015

Dear Mr. Constine:

This letter is to inform y ou that the following informati on is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA

− 2015

− 3274). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft make(s), model(s) , and type(s) (i.e., fixed-wing, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operati on. The description(s) should include the maximum weight (including pa yload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual(s).

 Your petition references the material(s) list ed below, however the material(s) was/were not submitted for the record. Please provide a copy of the following referenced
materials:

o Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM)

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information desc ribed above by 11/19/15. If we do not receive the information, we will close the doc ket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,
/s/
Brenda Robeson Program Analyst
IN RESPONSE, PLEASE 

 REFER TO: M150521A 

May 21, 2015 

MEMORANDUM FOR: Margaret M. Doane 

 General Counsel 

 

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

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS - AFFIRMATION SESSION, 8:55 A.M., 

THURSDAY, MAY 21, 2015, COMMISSIONERS' CONFERENCE 

ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 

(OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE) 

I. SECY-15-0028 – Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Diablo Canyon Power Plant, 

Units 1 and 2), Petition to Intervene and Request for Hearing by Friends of the Earth

The Commission (with Commissioner Svinicki dissenting in part) approved a Memorandum and 

Order responding to a request for a hearing by Friends of the Earth on an asserted de facto

amendment of Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s operating licenses for the Diablo Canyon 

Power Plant, related to new seismic information and analysis. The Memorandum and Order 

denies the hearing request in part and refers the request in part to the Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board Panel and in part to the Executive Director for Operations for disposition under 

10 C.F.R. § 2.206. 

(Subsequently, on May 21, 2015, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Ostendorff 

 Commissioner Baran 

 EDO 

 CFO 

 OCAA 

 OCA 

 OIG 

 OPA 

 Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR
No: 15-052 August 17, 2015

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200

NRC, DOE to Host Advanced Reactor Workshop Sept. 1-2 in Bethesda

The NRC and Department of Energy (DOE) are holding a workshop on innovative reactor 

technologies Sept. 1-2 in Bethesda, Md. The workshop will explore options for increased efficiency, 

from both a technical and regulatory perspective, for safely developing and deploying advanced nonlight water reactors.

The workshop is open to the public and will begin at 8:30 a.m. Tuesday, Sept. 1, at the Bethesda 

North Marriott, 5701 Marinelli Road in Bethesda. NRC and DOE staff will discuss advanced nuclear 

reactor concepts with participants including reactor design vendors, electric utilities, public interest 

groups and other federal agencies. The discussions will cover both near- and longer-term opportunities 

to test, demonstrate, and build prototype non-light water reactors while establishing appropriate 

licensing processes.

Workshop topics include:

 Clarifying roles and responsibilities;

 Reaching common understanding of terminology;

 Outlining existing regulations, policies and guidance, as well as existing support for 

advanced reactor development, and;

 Identifying potential challenges, information gaps and critical needs.

The workshop will include presentations as well as structured and open discussions, using a 

facilitator. NRC and DOE staff expect future workshops will build on these discussions.
### §3105. New contracts and grants and merit-based selection procedures

(a) Congressional Policy.—It is the policy of Congress that—

(1) an executive agency should not be required by legislation to award—

(A) a new contract to a specific non-Federal Government entity; or

(B) a new grant for research, development, test, or evaluation to a non-Federal Government entity; and

(2) a program, project, or technology identified in legislation be procured or awarded through merit-based selection procedures.

(b) New Contract and New Grant Described.—For purposes of this section—

(1) a contract is a new contract unless the work provided for in the contract is a continuation of the work performed by the specified entity under a prior contract; and

(2) a grant is a new grant unless the work provided for in the grant is a continuation of the work performed by the specified entity under a prior grant.

(c) Requirements for Awarding New Contract or New Grant.—A provision of law may not be construed as requiring a new contract or a new grant to be awarded to a specified non-Federal Government entity unless the provision of law specifically—

(1) refers to this section;

(2) identifies the particular non-Federal Government entity involved; and

(3) states that the award to that entity is required by the provision of law in contravention of the policy set forth in subsection (a).

(d) Exception.—This section does not apply to a contract or grant that calls on the National Academy of Sciences to investigate, examine, or experiment on a subject of science or art of significance to an executive agency and to report on those matters to Congress or an agency of the Federal Government.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3744.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3105(a) | 41:253(i)(1). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, §303(i), as added Pub. L. 103–355, title VII, §7203(b)(1)(B), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3380; Pub. L. 104–106, title XLI, §4101(b)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 642. |
| | 41:266(a). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, §316, as added Pub. L. 103–355, title VII, §7203(b)(2), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3381; Pub. L. 104–106, title XLIII, §4321(e)(9), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 675. |
| 3105(b) | 41:253(i)(3). | |
| | 41:266(c). | |
| 3105(c) | 41:253(i)(2). | |
| | 41:266(b). | |
| 3105(d) | 41:253(i)(4). | |
| | 41:266(d). | |

Section
May 15, 2013

*** FOR THE RECORD***

Facts on Story on Stock Ownership by Commissioner Ostendorff

A recent Huffington Post article discussed Commissioner William Ostendorff’s previous 

ownership of Honeywell stock. Here are relevant facts: Commissioner Ostendorff acquired 300 shares 

of Honeywell stock on May 22, 2009, for $9.831. This was prior to his being nominated by President 

Obama for a seat on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and almost a year before he joined the 

Commission in April 2010. This stock was included on his personal financial disclosure form as part of 

the Senate confirmation process and on his annual financial disclosure statements (2010, 2011, 2012), 

which are reviewed by the NRC Office of General Counsel. The NRC has a comprehensive list of 

prohibited securities that covered employees cannot own. Honeywell is not one of them. Commissioner 

Ostendorff sold those 300 shares of Honeywell on July 26, 2012 for $17,331 and filed the required 

STOCK Act notification (SF 278-T, Periodic Transaction Report) on August 6, 2012. He no longer 

holds any Honeywell stock. During his term, the only Honeywell issue that has come before the 

Commission has been an appeal of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) decision on the 

treatment of decommissioning financial assurance requirements. This issue was presented to the 

Commission as a voting matter on September 7, 2012, and Commissioner Ostendorff voted to affirm 

the ASLB decision on October 5, 2012, months after he had divested himself of the stock. 

In response to this issue, the General Counsel has informed Commissioner Ostendorff that he is 

in compliance with all ethics laws and regulations.
#### § 1507.11 Party poppers.

Party poppers (also known by other names such as “Champagne Party Poppers,” and “Party Surprise Poppers,”) shall not contain more than 0.25 grains of pyrotechnic composition. Such devices may contain soft paper or cloth inserts provided any such inserts do not ignite during normal operation.