alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Fairchild, Susan [mailto:Fairchild.Susan@epa.gov] 

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 7:42 AM

To: Reeves, David; Okoye, Winifred; Barnett, Keith

Subject: FW: NAIMA Letter on Applicability

Importance: High

Susan Fairchild

Senior Environmental Scientist

(919) 541-5167

USPS Address:

OAQPS/SPPD/MMG

Mail Code D 243-04

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

From: Angus Crane [mailto:acrane@naima.org] 

Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 4:19 PM

To: Fairchild, Susan; Barnett, Keith

Subject: NAIMA Letter on Applicability

Importance: High

Dear Ms. Fairchild:

Please find attached a letter from NAIMA expressing concern about EPA language which seems to 

confuse the applicability of the Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing MACT Standard.

Sincerely,

Angus E. Crane

Executive Vice President, General Counsel

North American Insulation Manufacturers Association

Ph: (703) 684-0084 ext. 123

Fax: (703) 684-0427

Visit NAIMA online at:

www.NAIMA.org

www.PipeInsulation.org
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 18 - 0666

_________________ THOMAS KOOP, III,

Petitioner and Appellant, v. ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to a five - justice panel of this Court. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of r ecord and to the Honorable Kaydee Snipes - Ruiz, Di s trict Judge . For the Court,

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 19 2020

08/19/2020
Case Number: DA 18-0666
§ 171.25 Appeal brief. ( a ) *Time to file.* Any person who has filed a notice of appeal in accordance with the provisions of § 171.23, shall perfect the appeal by filing an appeal brief with the Proceedings Clerk within thirty days after service of the record by the National Futures Association. The Commission may dismiss any appeal for which an appeal brief is not timely filed.
( b ) *Contents.* Each appeal brief submitted to the Commission pursuant to this section shall include, in the order indicated: ( 1 ) A statement of the issues presented for review;
( 2 ) A statement of the case. The statement shall indicate briefly the nature of the case and include a full description of the action being challenged. There shall follow a clear and concise statement of all facts relevant to the consideration of the appeal with appropriate citations to the record;
( 3 ) An argument. The argument shall contain the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented and the reasons supporting those contentions. It shall cite specifically to the relevant authorities and to those parts of the record that support appellant's contentions; and
( 4 ) A conclusion stating the precise relief sought.
( c ) *Length of appeal brief.* Without prior leave of the Commission, the appeal brief may not exceed thirty five pages, exclusive of any table of contents, table of cases, index and appendix containing transcripts of testimony, exhibits, rules, regulations or similar materials.
### §14096. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 14096 was editorially reclassified as section 12556 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
No: I-14-042 December 18, 2014

CONTACT: Diane Screnci 610-337-5330

 Neil Sheehan 610-337-5331

NRC Proposes $3,500 Fine Against Virginia Engineering Company

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed a $3,500 civil penalty for a Fredericksburg, 

Va., engineering firm for failing to obtain required approvals from the NRC prior to performing work 

on numerous occasions in Washington, D.C., and at a U.S. Marine Corps base in Virginia. The work 

involved portable nuclear gauges used for such purposes as measuring the density of soil at 

construction sites.

The enforcement action against Dominion Engineering Associates Inc. is based on an 

investigation conducted by the NRC’s Office of Investigations between April 22, 2013, and Jan. 31, 

2014. 

Virginia is an “Agreement State,” which means that under an agreement with the NRC, it 

oversees the use of nuclear materials within its borders that otherwise would be regulated by the NRC. 

However, such activities performed at federal facilities within Agreement States, as well as at any sites 

in Non-Agreement States or in the District of Columbia, are under the jurisdiction of the NRC. As such, 

those activities must be approved by the NRC under a process known as “reciprocity.”

Dominion Engineering did not adhere to this reciprocity requirement and used portable nuclear 

gauges on approximately 42 occasions between Nov. 19, 2010, and April 17, 2013, in Washington, 

D.C., and at the Marine Corps base in Quantico, Va. The locations in the District of Columbia and the 

base are areas of exclusive federal jurisdiction.

“Dominion Engineering’s failure to file for reciprocity interfered with the NRC’s ability to 

inspect the company’s activities and ensure these gauges were being appropriately used,” NRC Region 

I Administrator Dan Dorman said.

In a letter issued on Aug. 11, 2014, the NRC provided Dominion Engineering the opportunity to 

respond to the apparent violation by attending a predecisional enforcement conference or in writing. 

The company wrote to the NRC on Sept. 1, 2014, to acknowledge that the apparent violation occurred. 

The firm also stated it had implemented several corrective actions. These actions include obtaining a 

non-nuclear gauge to conduct work in areas of exclusive federal jurisdiction and in areas not authorized 

by the company’s Virginia nuclear materials license.
#### § 5.65 Review of initial decision.

Appeals from the initial decision of the Administrative Law Judge or review by the Commission in the absence of an appeal shall be governed by §§ 3.52 and 3.53 of the Commission's Rules of Practice except that oral arguments shall be nonpublic subject to the exceptions stated in § 3.52 of this part.
UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 

IN RESPONSE, PLEASE 

 REFER TO: M151223 

December 23, 2015 

MEMORANDUM FOR: Brooke P. Clark, Director 

Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication 

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

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS – AFFIRMATION SESSION, 10:30 

A.M., WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2015, COMMISSIONERS' 

CONFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, 

ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE) 

I. SECY-15-0144 – Aerotest Operations, Inc. — Application for Indirect License Transfer

The Commission1

 approved a Memorandum and Order responding to the joint demand for 

hearing of Aerotest Operations, Inc. and Nuclear Labyrinth, LLC on the Staff’s denial of the 

license transfer application for the Aerotest Radiograph and Research Reactor. The 

Memorandum and Order remands the license transfer application to the Staff, without prejudice, 

and directs the Staff to provide Aerotest and Nuclear Labyrinth an opportunity to supplement the 

application. 

 

(Subsequently, on December 23, 2015, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

II. SECY-15-0159 – DTE Electric Company (Fermi Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2), Motion to 

Reopen and Propose New Contention Regarding Continued Storage

The Commission1

 approved a Memorandum and Order addressing Beyond Nuclear’s motion to 

reopen the record and propose a new contention regarding the 2014 Continued Storage Rule 

and associated Generic Environmental Impact Statement. The Memorandum and Order denies 

the motion and petition. 

(Subsequently, on December 23, 2015, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Ostendorff 

 Commissioner Baran 

 

1 Section 201 of the Energy Reorganization Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 5841, provides that action of the 

Commission shall be determined by a majority vote of the members present. Chairman Burns and 

Commissioners Svinicki and Baran were present in the Conference Room. Commissioner Ostendorff 

participated in the meeting via speakerphone. 
 EDO 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCAA 

 OCA 

 OIG 

 OPA 

 ODs, RAs, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-14-0072-  Final Rule:  Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (RIN 3150-AJ20).

Accession Number: ML14177A482

Date Released: Thursday, July 24, 2014

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.
    - ML14177A474 - SECY-14-0072: Final Rule:  Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (RIN 3150-AJ20). (9 page(s), 7/21/2014)
    - ML14177A477 - SECY-14-0072-Enclosure 1-Final Rule:  Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (FRN). (87 page(s), 7/21/2014)
    - ML14188B749 - SECY-14-0072-Enclosure 2 - Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel. (1310 page(s), 7/21/2014)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
June 11, 2015

Mr. Paul J. Ginex

74 Saddle Lakes Drive Riverhead, NY 11901

Dear Mr. Ginex:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 29, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015- 2006), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not 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 specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 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 within 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 Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 233 (Monday, December 6, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 70434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26694]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE


Department of the Air Force HQ USAF Scientific Advisory Board

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of the 
forthcoming meeting of the 2004 Science and Technology Quality Review 
Panel. The purpose of the meeting is to allow the Air Force Scientific 
Advisory Board to assess the quality and long-term relevance of Air 
Force Research Laboratory research reviewed in Fall 2004. Because 
classified and contractor-proprietary information will be discussed, 
this meeting will be closed to the public.

DATES: December 10, 2004.

ADDRESSES: 1560 Wilson Blvd, Suite 400, Arlington VA 22209-2404.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Major Kyle Gresham, Air Force 
Scientific Advisory Board Secretariat, 1180 Air Force Pentagon, Rm 
5D982, Washington DC 20330-1180, (703) 697-4808.

Albert T. Bodnar,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-26694 Filed 12-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-05-P
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-16-0097:  Fee Setting Improvements and Fiscal year 2017 Proposed Fee Rule

Accession Number: ML16210A472

Date Released: Monday, August 22, 2016

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.
    - ML16194A365 - SECY-16-0097:  Fee Setting Improvements and Fiscal Year 2017 Proposed Fee Rule (Memo and Enclosures 1 and 2) (8 page(s), 8/15/2016)
    - ML16222A437 - SECY-16-0097:  Fee Setting Improvements and Fiscal Year 2017 Proposed Fee Rule (Enclosure 3) (7 page(s), 8/15/2016)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3779 

To hold accountable Federal departments and agencies that fail to meet 

goals relating to the participation of small business concerns in procurement contracts, to authorize Federal departments and agencies to give 

preference to small business concerns when procuring goods or services, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 18, 2012 

Mr. OWENS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee 

on Small Business, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To hold accountable Federal departments and agencies that 

fail to meet goals relating to the participation of small 

business concerns in procurement contracts, to authorize 

Federal departments and agencies to give preference to 

small business concerns when procuring goods or services, and for other purposes. 

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


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3779 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Business Growth 

3 and Federal Accountability Act of 2012’’. 

4 SEC. 2. SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION IN PROCURE5 MENT CONTRACTS. 

6 (a) CONSEQUENCE FOR FAILURE TO MEET GOAL.— 

7 If a Federal department or agency does not meet a covered 

8 goal with respect to a fiscal year, that department or agen9 cy, in the succeeding fiscal year, may not expend for the 

10 procurement of goods or services an amount that is great11 er than 90 percent of the amount expended for the pro12 curement of goods or services in the fiscal year with re13 spect to which that department or agency did not meet 

14 the covered goal. 

15 (b) PREFERENCE.—To meet a covered goal, the head 

16 of a Federal department or agency may give preference 

17 to a small business concern when procuring goods or serv18 ices. 

19 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following defi20 nitions apply: 

21 (1) COVERED GOAL.—The term ‘‘covered goal’’ 

22 means a goal established by the head of a Federal 

23 department or agency— 

24 (A) under section 15(g) of the Small Busi25 ness Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)); and 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3779 IH

1 (B) relating to the participation of small 

2 business concerns in the procurement contracts 

3 of that department or agency. 

4 (2) SMALL BUSINESS CONCERN.—The term 

5 ‘‘small business concern’’ has the meaning given 

6 that term under section 3(a) of the Small Business 

7 Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)). 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
§ 300.4 Registered identification numbers. ( a ) A registered identification number assigned by the Federal Trade Commission under and in accordance with the provisions of this section may be used upon the stamp, tag, label, or other mark of identification required under the Act to be affixed to a wool product, as and for the name of the person to whom such number has been assigned.
( b ) Any manufacturer of a wool product or person subject to section 3 of the Act with respect to such wool product, residing in the United States, may apply to the Federal Trade Commission for a registered identification number for use by the applicant on the stamp, tag, label, or other mark of identification required under the Act.
( c ) Registered identification numbers shall be used only by the person or firm to whom they are issued, and such numbers are not transferable or assignable. Registered identification numbers shall be subject to cancellation whenever any such number was procured or has been used improperly or contrary to the requirements of the Acts administered by the Federal Trade Commission, and regulations in this part, or when otherwise deemed necessary in the public interest. Registered identification numbers shall be subject to cancellation if the Commission fails to receive prompt notification of any change in name, business address, or legal business status of a person or firm to whom a registered identification number has been assigned, by application duly executed in the form and manner set out in paragraph (e) of this section, reflecting the current name, business address, and legal business status of the person or firm.
( d ) Registered identification numbers assigned under this section may be used on labels required in labeling products subject to the provisions of the Fur Products Labeling Act and Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and numbers previously assigned by the Commission under such Acts may be used as and for the required name in labeling under this Act. When so used by the person or firm to whom assigned, the use of the numbers shall be construed as identifying and binding the applicant as fully and in all respects as though assigned under the specific Act for which it is used.
( e ) Requests for a registered identification number, to update information pertaining to an existing number, or to cancel an existing number shall be made through the Commission's Web site at *https://rn.ftc.gov .* Unless otherwise directed by the Commission or its designee, requests made by other means (including but not limited to email) will not be accepted and approved.
[29 FR 6623, May 21, 1964, as amended at 48 FR 12516, Mar. 25, 1983; 63 FR 7516, Feb. 13, 1998; 63 FR 71582, Dec. 28, 1998; 65 FR 75156, Dec. 1, 2000; 82 FR 43691, Sept. 19, 2017]
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, *v.*Archie Shallenberger, Respondent-Appellant.

(No. 73-20;

Third District

July 31, 1974.

James R. Brodie, of Pekin, for appellant.

Jay H. Janssen, Assistant State’s Attorney, of Pekin, for the People.

*325Mr. JUSTICE STOUDER

delivered the opinion of the court:

Respondent-appellant, Archie Shallenberger, was charged with the violation of probation alleging commission of three offenses of criminal damage to property. The circuit court of Tazewell County after a hearing found the respondent had violated his probation by committing the offenses charged, and as a consequence thereof his probation was extended for a period of 2 years and additional conditions were attached thereto.

This is a related case to that of *People v. Grashoff,*21 Ill.App.3d 282 in that the respondent in the instant case like the defendant in the *Grashoff*case was one of the passengers in a motor vehicle stopped by police officers on April 24, 1972, and the occupants arrested and charged with criminal damage to property. This case was tried separately and. because of its nature was heard by the court without a jury. The evidence adduced was substantially the same as that presented in the *Grashoff*case, and the same errors are urged on this appeal as those considered in the *Grashoff*case. The description of the occurrence, the nature of the evidence, the errors urged on appeal and our consideration thereof are adequately set forth in the *Grashoff*opinion and need not be repeated.

For the reasons stated in the *Grashoff*case which are équally applicable to the errors urged in this case, we hold the court erred in admitting exhibits. Further we hold the evidence is insufficient to support the judgment of the court on the theory of accountability, the basis of the charges against the respondent in the instant case.

For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the circuit court of Tazewell County revoking respondent’s probation and granting him an extended term of probation under different terms and conditions is reversed.

Judgment reversed.

SCOTT, P. J., and DIXON, J., concur.
VVVVVVVV VV

12

4.16 KV Safety Bus A 4.16 KV Safety Bus B

08

EDG A EDG B

17 15 03 05

345 KV

Startup 

Transformer

161 KV

Startup 

Transformer

Swing D/G

VVVVVVVV VV

25 25

Attachment 1

AC Power Distribution System with Y Connection to Safety Buses
No: 14-024 April 1, 2014

CONTACT: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200 

NRC Approves Transfer of Five Nuclear Power Reactor

Operating Licenses from Constellation to Exelon

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved the proposed direct transfer of operating 

licenses from Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC (CENG) subsidiaries to Exelon Generation 

Co. LLC for five commercial nuclear power reactors and three spent fuel storage installations.

Exelon currently owns 50.01 percent of CENG, which is jointly owned with EDF Inc., a 

subsidiary of Electricité de France SA. CENG currently holds the operating licenses for five nuclear 

power reactors at three plant sites – Calvert Cliffs 1 and 2, Nine Mile Point 1 and 2, and R.E. Ginna –

as well as associated independent spent fuel storage installations. EDF will continue to own the 

remaining 49.99 percent of CENG. Long Island Power Authority owns 18 percent of Nine Mile Point 2 

and is not affected by the license transfers. Existing Exelon licenses will not be affected.

The NRC approved the indirect transfer of the licenses in February 2012 when Exelon merged 

with Constellation Energy Group Inc., CENG’s parent company. The current direct transfer allows 

Exelon to integrate the operations of the facilities into its existing nuclear fleet.

The transfer of the licenses will not result in any physical changes to the facilities. The on-site 

organizations and plant staffs, including senior managers, will remain essentially unchanged by the 

license transfers. The NRC staff determined that Exelon meets the agency’s financial and technical 

qualifications requirements and concluded that public health and safety will not be adversely affected 

by the license transfers.
§ 455.3 Window form. ( a ) *Form given to buyer.* Give the buyer of a used vehicle sold by you the window form displayed under § 455.2 containing all of the disclosures required by the Rule and reflecting the warranty coverage agreed upon. If you prefer, you may give the buyer a copy of the original, so long as that copy accurately reflects all of the disclosures required by the Rule and the warranty coverage agreed upon.
( b ) *Incorporated into contract.* The information on the final version of the window form is incorporated into the contract of sale for each used vehicle you sell to a consumer. Information on the window form overrides any contrary provisions in the contract of sale. To inform the consumer of these facts, include the following language conspicuously in each consumer contract of sale:
The information you see on the window form for this vehicle is part of this contract. Information on the window form overrides any contrary provisions in the contract of sale.
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Silberberg Fabric Corporation and Atlanta Woolen Mills Corporation.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals or for reargument denied, with $10 costs. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 959.]