alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3545 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3545

  To amend title 49, United States Code, to allow additional transit 
    systems greater flexibility with certain public transportation 
                               projects.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 1, 2011

 Mr. Pitts (for himself, Mr. Petri, Mr. Hinojosa, Mr. Holden, and Mr. 
   Ribble) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 49, United States Code, to allow additional transit 
    systems greater flexibility with certain public transportation 
                               projects.

    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 ``Transit System Flexibility 
Protection Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. URBANIZED AREA FORMULA GRANTS.

    Section 5307(b)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) and (F) as 
        subparagraphs (G) and (H), respectively; and
            (2) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
                    ``(E) operating costs, not to exceed 50 percent, of 
                equipment and facilities for use in public 
                transportation systems that operate 75 or fewer buses 
                during peak service hours in an urbanized area with a 
                population of at least 200,000; and
                    ``(F) operating costs not to exceed 25 percent, of 
                equipment and facilities for use in public 
                transportation systems that operate a minimum of 76 
                buses and a maximum of 100 buses during peak service 
                hours in an urbanized area with a population of at 
                least 200,000.''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 1025.63 Written appearances. ( a ) *Filing.* Any person who appears in any proceedings shall file a written notice of appearance with the Secretary or deliver a written notice of appearance to the Presiding Officer at the hearing, stating for whom the appearance is made and the name, address, and telephone number (including area code) of the person making the appearance and the date of the commencement of the appearance. The written appearance shall be made a part of the record.
( b ) *Withdrawal.* Any person who has previously appeared in any proceedings may withdraw his/her appearance by filing a written notice of withdrawal of appearance with the Secretary. The notice of withdrawal of appearance shall state the name, address, and telephone number (including area code) of the person withdrawing the appearance, for whom the appearance was made, and the effective date of the withdrawal of the appearance. Such notice of withdrawal shall be filed within five (5) days of the effective date of the withdrawal of the appearance.
[Civil No. 247.]

#### MOLLIE HERBERT, Appellee, v. PASQUAL NIGRO, Appellant.

APPEAL from the District Court of the First Judicial District in and for the County of Cochise.

Herring & Herring, for Appellant.

James Reilly, for Appellee.

February 11, 1889.

Affirmed,
#### In re SCHULL.

(Opinion filed November 2, 1910.)

On rehearing.

Judgment modified.

For former opinion, see 25 S. D. 602, 127 N. W. 541.

*John B. Hanten,*for petitioner.

WHITING, P. J.

This matter comes before us upon the petition of Charles Schull, asking for a rehearing in the disbarment proceedings in which this court entered an order of suspension, effective commencing June 18, 1910, and continuing six months from such date. The court having carefully considered such petition, and being fully satisfied that there was no error in the decision of the court rendered herein, such petition for rehearing is in all things denied.-

A petition having been presented to this court, signed by the judge of the circuit court of the Third judicial circuit of this state, and by'nearly all the members of the bar of such circuit, the same .being the circuit wherein said Schull resides and where he has- practiced his profession, in which petitioners testify to the good record of this petitioner as state’s attorney in all matters other than the matters for which he was suspended, and this court *354feeling that it is justified in giving great weight to such petition coming from the officers of this court, and believing that good cause exists why leniency should be shown herein, it is the decision of this court that the judgment of this court suspending the petitioner as a member of this bar be and the same is modified, so that such suspension shall expire November 5, 1910.
**Exhibit 32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

 

I, Chene Gardner, Principal Financial and AccountingOfficer of Vican Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form10-Q of the Company;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisannual report; and

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the period presented in this annual report.

 

Date: August 22, 2011

 

/s/ Chene Gardner	

Chene Gardner

Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3486 

To amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act to require States 

receiving funds under section 106 of such Act to have in effect a 

State law providing for a criminal penalty on an individual who fails 

to report witnessing another individual engaging in sexual abuse of 

a child. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 18, 2011 

Ms. BASS of California (for herself, Mr. SCHILLING, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. 

FORTENBERRY, Mr. CARNAHAN, Mr. TOWNS, Ms. WILSON of Florida, 

Mr. LOEBSACK, Ms. CLARKE of New York, and Ms. RICHARDSON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 

to require States receiving funds under section 106 of 

such Act to have in effect a State law providing for 

a criminal penalty on an individual who fails to report 

witnessing another individual engaging in sexual abuse 

of a child. 

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


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3486 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Speak Out to Stop 

3 Child Abuse Act’’ or the ‘‘SOS Child Abuse Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT ON STATES RECEIVING GRANTS FOR 

5 CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT PREVENTION 

6 AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 106(b)(2) of the Child 

8 Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 

9 5106a(b)(2)) is amended— 

10 (1) in subparagraph (F), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

11 the end; 

12 (2) in subparagraph (G), by striking the period 

13 at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

14 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

15 ‘‘(H) an assurance in the form of a certifi16 cation by the Governor of the State that the 

17 State has in effect and is enforcing a State law 

18 providing for a criminal penalty on an indi19 vidual 18 years of age or older who fails to re20 port to a State or local law enforcement official 

21 or child protective services that the individual 

22 has witnessed another individual in the State 

23 engaging in sexual abuse of a child.’’. 

24 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

25 subsection (a) shall take effect on December 31, 2013. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
§ 802.50 Acquisitions of foreign assets. ( a ) The acquisition of assets located outside the United States shall be exempt from the requirements of the act unless the foreign assets the acquiring person would hold as a result of the acquisition generated sales in or into the U.S. exceeding $50 million (as adjusted) during the acquired person's most recent fiscal year.
( b ) Where the foreign assets being acquired exceed the threshold in paragraph (a) of this section, the acquisition nevertheless shall be exempt where: ( 1 ) Both acquiring and acquired persons are foreign;
( 2 ) The aggregate sales of the acquiring and acquired persons in or into the United States are less than $110 million (as adjusted) in their respective most recent fiscal years;
( 3 ) The aggregate total assets of the acquiring and acquired persons located in the United States (other than investment assets, voting or nonvoting securities of another person, and assets included pursuant to § 801.40(d)(2) of this chapter) are less than $110 million (as adjusted); and
( 4 ) The transaction does not meet the criteria of Section 7A(a)(2)(A).
Example to § 802.50: 1. Assume that “A” and “B” are both U.S. persons. “A” proposes selling to “B” a manufacturing plant located abroad. Sales in or into the United States attributable to the plant totaled $13 million in the most recent fiscal year. The transaction is exempt under this paragraph (a) of this section. 2. Sixty days after the transaction in example 1, “A” proposes to sell to “B” a second manufacturing plant located abroad; sales in or into the United States attributable to this plant, when combined with the sales into the United States of the first plant, totaled in excess of $50 million (as adjusted) in the most recent fiscal year. Since “B” would be acquiring the second plant within 180 days of the first plant, both plants would be considered assets of “A” held by “B” as a result of the second acquisition (see § 801.13(b)(2) of this chapter). Since the total sales in or into the United States exceed $50 million (as adjusted), the acquisition of the second plant would not be exempt under this paragraph (a) of this section. 3. Assume that “A” and “B” are foreign persons with aggregate sales in or into the United States of in excess of $110 million (as adjusted). If “A” acquires only foreign assets of “B,” and if those assets generated $50 million (as adjusted) or less in sales in or into the United States, the transaction is exempt. 4. Assume that “A” and “B” are foreign persons with aggregate sales in or into the United States and assets located in the United Sates of less than $110 million (as adjusted). If “A” acquires only foreign assets of “B,” and those assets generated in excess of $50 million (as adjusted) in sales in or into the United States during the most recent fiscal year, the transaction is exempt from reporting if the assets are valued at $200 million (as adjusted) or less, but is reportable if valued at greater than $200 million (as adjusted).
[67 FR 11903, Mar. 18, 2002, as amended at 70 FR 4995, Jan. 31, 2005]
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-14-0148:  Implementation Plan For Public Engagement Coordinator Position In Response To Staff Requirements Memorandum, SECY-14-0078.

Accession Number: ML14357A366

Date Released: Friday, January 16, 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.
    - ML14357A520 - SECY-14-0148:  Implementation Plan for "Public Engagement Coordinator" Position in Response to Staff Requirements Memorandum - SECY-14-0078 (8 page(s), 12/31/2014)
    - ML14357A371 - SECY-14-0148:  Enclosure 1 - Public Engagement Coordinator (Process for Enteractions) (1 page(s), 12/31/2014)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-15-0124:  Status of the Accident Sequence Precursor Program and the Standardized Plant Analysis Risk Models

Accession Number: ML15187A434

Date Released: Thursday, October 22, 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.
    - ML15188A101 - SECY-15-0124:  Status of the Accident Sequence Precursor Program and the Standardized Plant Analysis Risk Models (8 page(s), 10/5/2015)
    - ML15188A104 - SECY-15-0124:  Enclosure 1 -  Results, Trends, and Insights of the Accident Sequence Precursor Program (16 page(s), 10/5/2015)
    - ML15188A106 - SECY-15-0124:  Enclosure 2 - Status of the Standardized Plant Analysis Risk Models (7 page(s), 10/5/2015)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
Argued and submitted December 23,1999,

appeal dismissed December 6, 2000

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*CYNTHIA ANN PHILLIPS, *Appellant.*

(871035434; CA A101763)

15 P3d 100

Irene B. Taylor, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was David E. Groom, Public Defender.

Ann Kelley, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Deits, Chief Judge, and Armstrong, Judge.

*286ARMSTRONG, J.

*287ARMSTRONG, J.

Defendant appeals from an order that terminated her probation but that directed entry of a judgment for the unpaid balance of restitution that she had been ordered to pay as part of her original sentence. We conclude that we do not have jurisdiction of her appeal.

A jury convicted defendant of five counts of first-degree forgery. The court suspended imposition of sentence on those convictions and placed defendant on probation for five years on each count. As a condition of probation, the court ordered defendant to pay restitution in a different amount on each count. In addition, the court separately ordered payment of restitution as follows:

> “IT IS FURTHER ADJUDGED that on Counts 1,2, 3,4 and 5, defendant pay restitution in the total amount of $2,405.44 to the Benjamin Franklin Savings and Loan at the rate of $60 per month beginning January 1, 1990, payable through the Office of the Court Administrator of the Circuit Court for Multnomah County.”

Defendant’s probation expired on January 24, 1998. The court entered the challenged order almost two months later.

Defendant contends that the order modified the terms of her probation and that the court lacked the authority to do that after the probation period expired. Were she correct about her characterization of the order, ORS 138.053(l)(d) would give us jurisdiction of her appeal from it.1 However, the challenged order did not modify a condition of defendant’s probation. It terminated her probation and directed entry of a judgment for the outstanding balance of defendant’s restitution obligation. The original sentencing judgment ordered defendant to pay restitution separately *288from the requirement that she pay restitution as a condition of probation. The order at issue is based on the requirement to pay restitution rather than on the requirement to do so as a condition of probation, so ORS 138.053(l)(d) does not give us jurisdiction over defendant’s appeal from the order. No other provision of ORS chapter 138 gives us jurisdiction over the appeal, so we dismiss it.

Appeal dismissed.

1

 ORS 138.053(1 Kd) provides that a

> “judgment or order of a court, if the order is imposed after judgment, is subject to ORS 138.040 and 138.0501", which grant the Court of Appeals jurisdiction over appeals by defendants in criminal cases,] if this disposition includes any of the following:

> “(d) Imposes or modifies a condition of probation or of sentence suspension.”
#### § 301.25 Name required to appear on labels and invoices.

The name required by the act to be used on labels and invoices shall be the full name under which the person is doing business, and no trade-mark, trade name nor other name which does not constitute such full name shall be used in lieu thereof.
ex10-8.htm


    EXHIBIT
      10.8

    


    


    NATIONAL
      PENN BANCSHARES, INC. CAPITAL ACCUMULATION PLAN

    (Amended
      and Restated Effective January 1, 1997)

    


    (Revised
      2001)

    


    Amendment
      No. 16

    


    National
      Penn Bancshares, Inc. (the
      "Company") adopted the National Penn Bancshares, Inc. Capital Accumulation
      Plan
      (Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 1997) (Revised 2001)(the "Plan")
      for
      the benefit of certain of its Employees (as defined in the Plan) and its
      subsidiaries' Employees. The Company subsequently amended the Plan by Amendment
      Nos. 1-15 thereto.

    


    The
      Company hereby amends the Plan as hereinafter set forth.

    


    1.           The
      Resources for Retirement, Inc. 401(k) Plan and the Nittany Bank 401(k) Profit
      Sharing Plan shall be merged with and into this Plan.  Those plans are
      hereafter together referred to as the “Transferee Plans”.

    


    2.           All
      accounts transferred to this Plan from the Transferee Plans shall be
      administered and held in accordance with this Plan, except as hereinafter set
      forth.  This Plan shall preserve all “benefits, rights and features”
that are protected by Section 411(d)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code appurtenant
      to accounts transferred to this Plan   from the
      Transferee.  Separate accounts reflecting the transferred amounts
      shall be maintained to the extent necessary to carry out this
      requirement.  The transferred account of a participant in the
      Resources for Retirement, Inc. 401(k) Plan shall be fully vested without regard
      to length of service upon attainment of age 60.

    


    3.           Neither
      the accrued benefit nor the nonforfeitable interest of any participant in a
      Transferee Plan shall be reduced as a result of such transfer other than as
      a
      result of investment performance or proper charge of Plan expenses.

    


    4.           The
      transfers shall comply with the requirements of Section 414(1) of the Internal
      Revenue Code and the corresponding provisions of this Plan.

    


    Executed
      this 7th day of
      March,
      2007.

    


    


    
      	
              Attest:

            	
              NATIONAL
                PENN BANCSHARES, INC.

            
	 	 
	
              By:  /s/  Donna
                L. Wetzel

            	
              By:  /s/
                Earl Houseknecht

            
	
                      Senior
                Vice President-HR

            	 


    

    
41
      of 45
No: 14-063 September 26, 2014

CONTACT: Dave McIntyre, 301-415-8200 

NRC, Chicago Bridge & Iron Agree On Actions

To Enhance Welder Training Requirements

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Chicago Bridge & Iron (CB&I) have agreed on 

several enhancements to a 2013 Confirmatory Order on the company’s commitments to improve its 

focus on nuclear safety requirements that affect its work. 

The settlement, as with the original Confirmatory Order, was reached through the agency’s 

alternative dispute resolution process. The latest action resolves two apparent violations identified by 

the NRC in a February 2014 letter to CB&I regarding deliberate misconduct during welder 

qualification training at CB&I’s facility in Lake Charles, La.

Through mediation, the company agreed to take several measures to enhance the understanding 

of NRC requirements and the significance of willful violations for all company employees, including 

contractors and subcontractors, involved in NRC-regulated activities. These measures include 

improving quality control and processing for welding products; enhancing new employee training to 

highlight the errors behind the recent violations; and enhancing CB&I’s nuclear safety culture 

monitoring program based on lessons from the recent violations. The mediation process also 

documented how CB&I self-reported some of the issues and promptly fired the employees that 

committed the violations.

“The NRC pursued the mediation process with Chicago Bridge & Iron because we were able to 

get commitments for a broader range of corrective actions from the company in addressing the 

underlying issues,” said Patricia Holahan, acting director of NRC’s Office of Enforcement. 

The revised Order is available in the NRC’s electronic document database, ADAMS, under 

accession number ML14248A445. NRC inspectors will continue to periodically inspect the company’s 

work practices to ensure that the company properly implements the required actions. The NRC will 

evaluate any future apparent violations with similar root causes to those described in the Confirmatory 

Order and will take additional enforcement actions as outlined in the order.