alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### **CHAPTER 144—DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ASSISTANCE AND BILL OF RIGHTS**

#### SUBCHAPTER I—PROGRAMS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

#### Part A—General Provisions

Sec.
15001.
Findings, purposes, and policy.
15002.
Definitions.
15003.
Records and audits.
15004.
Responsibilities of the Secretary.
15005.
Reports of the Secretary.
15006.
State control of operations.
15007.
Employment of individuals with disabilities.
15008.
Construction.
15009.
Rights of individuals with developmental disabilities.

#### Part B—Federal Assistance to State Councils on Developmental Disabilities

15021.
Purpose.
15022.
State allotments.
15023.
Payments to the States for planning, administration, and services.
15024.
State plan.
15025.
State Councils on Developmental Disabilities and designated State agencies.
15026.
Federal and non-Federal share.
15027.
Withholding of payments for planning, administration, and services.
15028.
Appeals by States.
15029.
Authorization of appropriations.

#### Part C—Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights

15041.
Purpose.
15042.
Allotments and payments.
15043.
System required.
15044.
Administration.
15045.
Authorization of appropriations.

#### Part D—National Network of University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities Education, Research, and Service

15061.
Grant authority.
15062.
Grant awards.
15063.
Purpose and scope of activities.
15064.
Applications.
15065.
Definition.
15066.
Authorization of appropriations.

#### Part E—Projects of National Significance

15081.
Purpose.
15082.
Grant authority.
15083.
Authorization of appropriations.

#### SUBCHAPTER II—FAMILY SUPPORT

15091.
Findings, purposes, and policy.
15092.
Definitions and special rule.
15093.
Grants to States.
15094.
Application.
15095.
Designation of the lead entity.
15096.
Authorized activities.
15097.
Reporting.
15098.
Technical assistance.
15099.
Evaluation.
15100.
Projects of national significance.
15101.
Authorization of appropriations.

#### SUBCHAPTER III—PROGRAM FOR DIRECT SUPPORT WORKERS WHO ASSIST INDIVIDUALS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

15111.
Findings.
15112.
Definitions.
15113.
Reaching up scholarship program.
15114.
Staff development curriculum authorization.
15115.
Authorization of appropriations.
### §1317. Appointment of the Administrator and Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

(a) The Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services shall be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

(b)(1) There is established in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services the position of Chief Actuary. The Chief Actuary shall be appointed by, and in direct line of authority to, the Administrator of such Centers. The Chief Actuary shall be appointed from among individuals who have demonstrated, by their education and experience, superior expertise in the actuarial sciences. The Chief Actuary shall exercise such duties as are appropriate for the office of the Chief Actuary and in accordance with professional standards of actuarial independence. The Chief Actuary may be removed only for cause.

(2) The Chief Actuary shall be compensated at the highest rate of basic pay for the Senior Executive Service under section 5382(b) of title 5.

(3) In the office of the Chief Actuary there shall be an actuary whose duties relate exclusively to the programs under parts C and D of subchapter XVIII and related provisions of such subchapter.

(Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XI, §1117, as added Pub. L. 98–369, div. B, title III, §2332(a), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1088; amended Pub. L. 105–33, title IV, §4643, Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 487; Pub. L. 108–173, title IX, §900(c), (e)(1)(A), Dec. 8, 2003, 117 Stat. 2370.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 1317, act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XI, §1117, as added July 30, 1965, Pub. L. 89–97, title IV, §405, 79 Stat. 420; amended Jan. 2, 1968, Pub. L. 90–248, title II, §§221(a)–(c), 241(c)(6), 81 Stat. 899, 917, related to maintenance of State public assistance expenditures, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 90–248, title II, §221(d), Jan. 2, 1968, 81 Stat. 900, eff. July 1, 1968.

#### Amendments

2003—Pub. L. 108–173, §900(e)(1)(A)(i), substituted "Appointment of the Administrator and Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services" for "Appointment of Administrator and Chief Actuary of Health Care Financing Administration" in section catchline.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 108–173, §900(e)(1)(A)(ii), substituted "Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services" for "Health Care Financing Administration".

Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 108–173, §900(e)(1)(A)(iii), substituted "Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services" for "Health Care Financing Administration" and "such Centers" for "such Administration".

Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 108–173, §900(c), added par. (3).

1997—Pub. L. 105–33 amended section catchline, designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), and added subsec. (b).

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

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 98–369, div. B, title III, §2332(c), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1089, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [enacting this section and amending section 5315 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees] shall apply to appointments made after the date of the enactment of this Act [July 18, 1984]."
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 08, 2019.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, August 08, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A19D0565. DEBORAH L. BEACHAM v. CHARLES W. BEACHAM.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

1613082
No. IV-10-035 

Contact: Victor Dricks: (817) 860-8128 

 Lara Uselding: (817) 276-6519 

 

 October 7, 2010 

 E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING WITH ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will conduct a meeting with Entergy 

Operations officials on Oct. 18 to discuss planned upgrades to an emergency diesel generator 

and certain air conditioning systems at the River Bend Nuclear Station. River Bend is located 24 

miles northwest of Baton Rouge, La. 

The meeting, which will be open to public observation, will begin at 2:30 p.m. CST in 

the 

NRC’s Region IV office at 612 East Lamar Blvd, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas. Members of the 

public will have an opportunity to ask questions of the NRC staff before the meeting concludes. 

Entergy officials requested the meeting to update the NRC on two plant systems with 

past 

performance issues. Following an assessment of vibrations associated with the emergency diesel 

generators, the licensee is in the process of implementing corrective measures. The generators 

supply power to key plant safety systems if off-site power is lost. The licensee will also discuss 

an upgrade of the electronic controls in the air conditioning units which are used to maintain 

constant temperatures in the control building.

### 

 NRC news releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: 

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

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

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400 

 Arlington, TX 76011-4125 

Telephone: (817) 860-8128
Exhibit 10.1


SECOND AMENDMENT
TO CONFIDENTIAL LICENSE AGREEMENT

FOR GAME BOY ADVANCE


THIS
SECOND AMENDMENT (“Second Amendment”) amends that certain Confidential License
Agreement for Game Boy Advance dated July 18, 2001 between Nintendo of America
Inc. (“Nintendo”) and THQ Inc. (“Licensee”) (“Agreement”).


RECITALS


WHEREAS,
Nintendo and Licensee entered into the Agreement;


WHEREAS,
the Agreement (as Amended) currently expires on July 18, 2007, and the parties
now desire to extend the Term (as such term is defined in the Agreement) of the
Agreement as set forth below.


AMENDMENT


NOW,
THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:


1.                                       The definition of “Term” as set forth in
Section 2.20 of the Original Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:


“‘Term’ means eight (8) years from the Effective Date.”


2.                                       The Term of the Agreement shall now expire on
July 18, 2009.


3.                                       All other terms and conditions of the
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.  This Second Amendment may be signed in
counterparts, which together shall constitute one original Second Amendment.


Signatures provided by facsimile shall be the
equivalent of originals.


This Second Amendment shall
be effective as of April 9, 2007.


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have entered into this Second Amendment.


	
  NINTENDO:

  	
   

  	
  LICENSEE:

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Nintendo of America Inc.

  	
   

  	
  THQ Inc.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Name: James R. Cannataro

  	
   

  	
  Name: Kelly Flock

  
	
  Its: EVP; Administration

  	
   

  	
  Its: EVP; Worldwide Publishing
**Exhibit      32.2**

**Certification**

**Pursuant      to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the**

**United      States Code as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906**

**of      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

|  | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),                as                applicable, 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. |
|--|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:      |   | /s/ Robert F. Kendall                               |
|------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|
| December 9, 2005 |   | Name: Robert F. Kendall, CPA                             |
|             |   | Title:  Chief              Financial Officer        |
|             |   | (principal                financial officer)   |

----
#### § 1610.32 General requirements.

No article of wearing apparel or fabric subject to the Act and regulations shall be marketed or handled if such article or fabric, when tested according to the procedures prescribed in section 4(a) of the Act (16 CFR 1609), is so highly flammable as to be dangerous when worn by individuals.
No: 15-021 March 26, 2015

CONTACT: Maureen Conley, 301-415-8200 

NRC Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Changes 

to Regulations on Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission seeks public comment on proposed amendments to its 

regulations governing the disposal of low-level radioactive waste. The amendments would require 

licensees to update their technical analyses and conduct new analyses to demonstrate their facilities’ 

ability to dispose of long-lived low-level waste.

The amendments, in a proposed rule published March 26 in the Federal Register, are designed 

to ensure safe disposal of certain low-level wastes that were not considered when the regulations were 

originally written in the 1980s. The proposed rule would require licensees to:

• Update their site-specific technical analysis to include a performance assessment covering 

10,000 years; 

• Conduct a new site-specific technical analysis for the protection of inadvertent intruders over 

10,000 years; 

• Conduct a new performance analysis beyond 10,000 years for certain long-lived low-level 

wastes if the site were to dispose of them; and 

• Revise the application for closure to include updates to the technical analysis. 

The proposed rule would also add a new requirement to develop criteria for the acceptance of 

low-level waste for disposal based either on the results of these technical analyses or on the existing 

waste classification requirements. 

This rule would affect low-level waste disposal licensees or license applicants that are regulated 

by the NRC or the Agreement States (the 37 states that regulate radioactive materials under agreements 

with the NRC).

The proposed rule anticipates a need to dispose of large quantities of depleted uranium from 

newly licensed uranium enrichment facilities. Depleted uranium actually becomes more radioactive as 

it decays over centuries, and the current regulations did not anticipate large quantities of it being 

disposed of commercially as Class A low-level waste (the least radioactive classification). In addition, 

the industry anticipates blending some Class A waste with more-radioactive Class B and Class C 

wastes that currently lack a disposal path. Blending could create large quantities of Class A waste near
Page | 2

the upper classification limit of radioactivity. The current regulations anticipated only a small 

amount of waste near the upper limit.

Comments will be accepted until July 24. They may be submitted over the federal 

government’s rulemaking website, www.regulations.gov, using Docket ID NRC-2011-0012. They may 

also be faxed to 301-415-1101; emailed to Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov; or mailed to Secretary, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff.
NO. 07-11-0111-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B JANUARY 17, 2012

BRYAN KEITH JERRELL, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________ ___________ FROM THE 320TH DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY; NO. 50,264-D; HONORABLE DON R. EMERSON, PRESIDING

Memorandum Opinion

Before QUINN, C.J., a nd CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Appellant Bryan Keith Je rrell was adjudicated guilty of indecency with a child by exposure after pleading true to allegations he violated his probation, and he was sentenced to four years incarcer ation in the Department of Cr iminal Justice. He argues that 1) his punishment is cruel and unusual because he is mentally retarded, and 2) there is no evidence to support an order to pay attorney’s fees. We modify the judgment and, as modifi ed, affirm it.2 Cruel and Unusual Punishment In his first issue, appellant contends that sentencing him to incarceration in an adult prison when he functions at the level of a seven-year-old constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Appellant did not raise this issue to the trial court. 1 The failure to

do so waives the issue. Ham v. State, No. 07-09-00331-CR, 2011 Tex. App. L EXIS 8572, at *15 (Tex. App.–Amarillo October 27, 2011, no pet.). Imposition of Attorney’s Fees as Costs In his other issue, appellant claims the trial court e rred in ordering him to pay costs which included attorney’s fees because there is no evidence t hat he is capable of paying them. Appellant was ordered to pay cost s in the judgment, and the clerk’s bill of costs included $600 in attorney ’s fees. The record shows that appellant had appointed

counsel for trial and that he had no means to pay an attorney on appeal. When the

record does not show that t he defendant is financially capable of paying attorney’s fees, the trial court errs in ordering reimbursement in the judgment. See Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552, 556-57 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010). Accordingly, we modify the judgment to delete any obligation to pay attorney’s fees in the amount of $600 and, as modified, affirm it.

Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish.

1 In his motion for new trial, appellant alleged that his mental functioning rendered him unable to intelligently enter a plea and made him incompetent fo r trial and that he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel due to his trial counsel’s failure to raise those issues.
#### § 308.6 Access to information.

Any common carrier that provides telecommunication services to any provider of pay-per-call services shall make available to the Commission, upon written request, any records and financial information maintained by such carrier relating to the arrangements (other than for the provision of local exchange service) between such carrier and any provider of pay-per-call services.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

Order 

October 4, 2012

145367-70

WHEELER ESTATE,

Petitioner-Appellee,

v SC: 145367

COA: 302251

Mich Tax Tribunal: 00-343771

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Respondent-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

NICHOLAS HUZELLA and LISA J. HUZELLA,

Petitioners-Appellees,

v SC: 145368

COA: 302259

Mich Tax Tribunal: 00-343772

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Respondent-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

PATRICK WRIGHT and MICHAELON 

WRIGHT,

Petitioners-Appellees,

v SC: 145369

COA: 302261

Mich Tax Tribunal: 00-343774

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Respondent-Appellant.

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

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

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

October 4, 2012

p0927

2

THOMAS R. WHEELER and PATSY 

WHEELER,

Petitioners-Appellees,

v SC: 145370

COA: 302262

Mich Tax Tribunal: 00-343775

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Respondent-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 31, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED.

We further ORDER that this case be argued and submitted to the Court together 

with the cases of Tad Malpass v Department of Treasury (Docket Nos. 144430-2), at 

such future session of the Court as the cases are ready for submission. 

The Taxation Section of the State Bar of Michigan is invited to file a brief amicus 

curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in 

this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3378 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, as the ‘‘Elizabeth L. Kinnunen 

Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 4, 2011 

Mr. BENISHEK (for himself, Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan, Mr. CAMP, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. UPTON, Mr. WALBERG, Mr. ROGERS of Michigan, Mr. CLARKE

of Michigan, and Mr. MCCOTTER) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, as 

the ‘‘Elizabeth L. Kinnunen Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ELIZABETH L. KINNUNEN POST OFFICE BUILD4 ING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, 

7 Michigan, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Eliza8 beth L. Kinnunen Post Office Building’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3378 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Elizabeth L. 

5 Kinnunen Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
July 30 , 2015

Mr. D avid Shear

Eagle Digital Imaging, Inc.

435 NW 5 th Street, Suite B

Corvallis, OR 97330

Dear Mr. Shear :

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

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your May 1 4 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 1591 ), but

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does no t 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 reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how i t would

benefit the public as a whole.

 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 w ithin 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 No t Hear From You

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

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

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure