alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID** 

### 07129 **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  

### 07129\07129_ Certification Statement.pdf Plant certification statement 

### 07129\07129_ Completeness Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 07129\07129_ HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted 

### x 07129\07129_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook 

### x 07129\07129_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07129\07129_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07129\07129_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07129\07129_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07129\07129_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07129\Supporting Documents\07129_PartA_shawville_AerialMap1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey



### 07129\Supporting Documents\07129_PartA_shawville_AerialMap2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 07129\Supporting Documents\07129_PartA_shawville_WB_1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 07129\Supporting Documents\07129_PartD_shawville_POND_1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
### §308502. National women's rights history project partnerships network

(a) Grants.—The Secretary may make matching grants and give technical assistance for development of a network of governmental and nongovernmental entities (referred to in this section as the "network"), the purpose of which is to provide interpretive and educational program development of national women's rights history, including historic preservation.

(b) Management of Network.—

(1) In general.—Through a competitive process, the Secretary shall designate a nongovernmental managing entity to manage the network.

(2) Coordination.—The nongovernmental managing entity designated under paragraph (1) shall work in partnership with the Director and State historic preservation offices to coordinate operation of the network.

(c) Cost-Sharing Requirement.—

(1) In general.—The Federal share of the cost of any activity carried out using any assistance made available under this section shall be 50 percent.

(2) State historic preservation offices.—Matching grants for historic preservation specific to the network may be made available through State historic preservation offices.

(d) Authorization of Appropriations.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012 and 2013.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3236.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 308502 | 16 U.S.C. 469m(c). | Pub. L. 111–11, title VII, subtitle B, §7111(c), Mar. 30, 2009, 123 Stat. 1200. |

Section

In subsection (b)(1), the words "nongovernmental managing entity" are substituted for "nongovernmental managing network" for consistency.

In subsection (d), reference to fiscal years 2009 to 2011 is omitted as obsolete.
### §10302. Consulting services for the Department of State

Any consulting service obtained by the Department of State through procurement contract pursuant to section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, shall be limited to those contracts with respect to which expenditures are a matter of public record and available for public inspection, except if otherwise provided under existing law, or under existing Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.

(Added Pub. L. 117–81, div. E, title LIII, §5314(a), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2366.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 117–81, div. E, title LIII, §5314(a), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2366, which directed addition of this section at the end of chapter 103 of title 5, as added by section 10312 of Pub. L. 117–81, was executed by making the addition at the end of chapter 103 as added by section 5312(b) of Pub. L. 117–81, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.
#### PEOPLE ex rel. W. P. DAVIS MACH. CO., Respondent, v. COOPER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March 1, 1905.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of the W. R. Davis Machine Company, against John C. Cooper. No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
# C_2023217EN.01000801.xml

| 20.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/8

---

Notice for the attention of certain entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/512/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine

(2023/C 217/03)

The following information is brought to the attention of entities appearing in Annexes VIII and IX of Decision 2014/512/CFSP (1) and in Annexes XIV and XV of Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 (2), as well as of Russian Direct Investment Fund, entity appearing in Article 4b Decision 2014/512/CFSP and Article 2e of Regulation (EU) No 833/2014.

The Council is considering maintaining the restrictive measures concerning those entities.

The entities concerned are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the information related to the maintaining of restrictive measures by 27 June 2023, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1 |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

---

(1)  OJ L 229, 31.7.2014, p. 13.

(2)  OJ L 229, 31.7.2014, p. 1.

---
#### PEOPLE ex rel. MURPHY, Respondent, v. MAXWELL, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 13, 1903.)

Proceeding by the people, on the relation of Kate M. Murphy, against William H. Maxwell, as city superintendent of schools, etc.

No opinion. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted, questions certified, and order signed.
PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1416-F

EA U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ; PLATE 7
USGS U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ean Coat oulr ons source Ute Stes
EXPLANATION unos, °F
¢ ESTIMATED BLOCK-AVERAGED HEAD— “Gan .
Based on measurements from four or more Cie ain | ” 37
wells per block warssou fed
—soo— LINE OF EQUAL SIMULATED FRESHWATER : W a =
HYDRAULIC HEAD—Interval, in feet, is “ g\\s

variable. Datum is sea level

snbns DEPTH-AVERAGED DISSOLVED-SOLIDS
CONCENTRATION—Eaual to 10,000
milligrams per liter

---— DEPTH-AVERAGED DISSOLVED-SOLIDS
CONCENTRATION—Equal to 35,000
milligrams per liter

97° f

Downdip limit

ee a a _ Z Sue
, LOUISIANA \ > ae j_—
) f S308

a Lets yt J d
Oho a a ae et ty
£ 3,° é=z | | —"| —
° GF 94° 93° 92° \
Te

Edge of Continental Shelf

98° 0) 50 100 150 MILES
K-11
Base from U.S. Geological Survey 0 50 100 150KILOMETERS

Scale 1:2,500,000

PLATE 7H. Estimated block-averaged and simulated 1982 freshwater hydraulic head:
Layer 4, lower Claiborne-upper Wilcox aquifer.

By
Alex K. Williamson and Hayes F. Grubb
2001
### §100706. Integration of study results into management decisions

The Secretary shall take such measures as are necessary to ensure the full and proper utilization of the results of scientific study for System unit management decisions. In each case in which an action undertaken by the Service may cause a significant adverse effect on a System unit resource, the administrative record shall reflect the manner in which System unit resource studies have been considered. The trend in the condition of resources of the System shall be a significant factor in the annual performance evaluation of each superintendent of a System unit.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3106.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 100706 | 16 U.S.C. 5936. | Pub. L. 105–391, title II, §206, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3500. |

Section
### §403. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 403, comprising section 102 of the National Security Act of 1947, act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, was editorially reclassified as section 3023 of this title.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of The Dewey Electronics
Corporation (the "Corporation") on Form 10-Q for the period ended
December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen P. Krill, Treasurer of the
Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS 1350, as adopted pursuant
to SS 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) 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 Corporation.

/s/ Stephen P. Krill
Stephen P. Krill, Treasurer
Date:  February 12, 2010

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to The Dewey Electronics Corporation and will be retained
by The Dewey Electronics Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 903.702 Exemption for coal extraction incidental to the extraction of other minerals.

Part 702 of this chapter, *Exemption for Coal Extraction Incidental to the Extraction of Other Minerals,* applies to any person who conducts coal extraction incidental to the extraction of other minerals for purposes of commercial use or sale.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JAN 21 1998 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. NICK ALFRED OWENS,

Defendant-Appellant. No. 97-6214 (D.C. No. 94-CR-64) (W.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before BRORBY , BARRETT , and BRISCOE , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The c ase is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.1 Because Owens was confined in a penal institution, Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)

governs the timeliness of his notice of appeal. Th at rule measures timeliness from the date a notice is deposited in an instituti on’s internal mail system and specifies the necessary certifications. -2- Nick Owens was convicted by a jury of various drug- related charges. His convictions were affirmed by this court, but th e case was remanded for resentencing because Owens’ role was not that of a leader or organizer. See United States v. Owens , 70 F.3d 1118, 1129, 1132 (10th Cir. 1995). After resentencing, Owens filed a pleading in the d istrict court entitled “Motion for Judgment” in his criminal case in whichhe cited various rules of civil procedure and relied on arguments typically a dvanced by tax protesters. On May 21, 1997, the district court filed an order denying Owens’ motion. That order was entered on the court’s docket on May29, 1997. Owens had ten days after the entry of the order in which to file his notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b). His notice of appeal indicates that it was placed in the mail on June 11, 1997. 1 Because Owens’ notice of appeal was filed more than ten days after the entry of the order app ealed from, this court has no jurisdiction over this appeal. See Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (holding that compliance w ith Rule 4(b) is mandatory and jurisdictional).-3-

Owens’ Motion for Mandate, Motion for Expedited Rul ing, Motion to Vacate Judgment and Release, and Motion to Correct Reversible Errors are denied. This appeal is DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

James E. Barrett Senior Circuit Judge
Exhibit 99.2
                                  ------------

                    CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Quarterly  Report of DynCorp (the "Company") on Form
10-Q as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  I, Patrick C.  FitzPatrick,  as Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, to
the best of my knowledge, that:

          (1) The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a)
     or 15(d) 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 for
     the dates and periods covered by the Report.

     This  certificate is being made for the exclusive  purpose of compliance by
the Chief Financial  Officer of the Company with the requirements of Section 906
pf the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and may not be disclosed,  distributed or used
by any person of for any reason other than as specifically required by law.



August 19, 2002                        /s/  Patrick C. FitzPatrick
                                       ---------------------------
                                       Patrick C. FitzPatrick
                                       Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
                                           Officer

<PAGE>
### §311105. Authorization of appropriations

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this chapter $25,000,000 for each fiscal year, to remain available until expended.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3249; Pub. L. 113–291, div. B, title XXX, §3033(e), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3777.)

#### Amendment Not Shown in Text

This section was derived from section 469n(f) of Title 16, Conservation, which was amended by Pub. L. 113–291, div. B, title XXX, §3033(e), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3777. For applicability of that amendment to this section, see section 6(b) of Pub. L. 113–287, set out as a Transitional and Savings Provisions note preceding section 100101 of this title. Former section 469n(f) of Title 16 was amended by Pub. L. 113–291 by inserting ", except that the amount authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section not appropriated as of the date of enactment of the First State National Historical Park Act shall be reduced by $6,500,000" before period at end.

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 311105 | 16 U.S.C. 469n(f). | Pub. L. 111–11, title VII, subtitle D, §7302(f), Mar. 30, 2009, 123 Stat. 1216. |

Section

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The date of enactment of the First State National Historical Park Act, referred to in Amendment Not Shown in Text note above, probably means the date of enactment of section 3033 of Pub. L. 113–291, which provided for the establishment of the First State National Historical Park and was approved Dec. 19, 2014. See section 410rrr of Title 16, Conservation. No act with the title First State National Historical Park Act has been enacted.
§ 918.10 State regulatory program approval. The Secretary approved the Louisiana regulatory program, as submitted on January 3, 1980, and resubmitted on September 4, 1980, effective October 10, 1980. Copies of the approved program are available at: ( a ) Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Conservation, Injection and Mining Division, 625 N. 4th Street, P.O. Box 94275, Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9275.
( b ) Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Tulsa Field Office, 5100 East Skelly Drive, Suite 470, Tulsa, OK 74135-6548.
[64 FR 20167, Apr. 26, 1999]
### §306111. Environmental impact statement

Nothing in this division shall be construed to—

(1) require the preparation of an environmental impact statement where the statement would not otherwise be required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); or

(2) provide any exemption from any requirement respecting the preparation of an environmental impact statement under that Act.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3227.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 306111 | 16 U.S.C. 470h–2(i). | Pub. L. 89–665, title I, §110(i), as added Pub. L. 96–515, title II, §206, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2997. |

Section

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 91–190, Jan. 1, 1970, 83 Stat. 852, which is classified generally to chapter 55 (§4321 et seq.) of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4321 of Title 42 and Tables.
§ 1605.60 Area. ( a ) The Director of Selective Service shall prescribe the number of area offices to be established and shall define the boundaries thereof.
( b ) The area office shall be an office of record and responsible for all administrative and operational support of the one or more local boards within its jurisdiction.
### §3313. Competitive service; registers of eligibles

The names of applicants who have qualified in examinations for the competitive service shall be entered on appropriate registers or lists of eligibles in the following order—

(1) for scientific and professional positions in GS–9 or higher, in the order of their ratings, including points added under section 3309 of this title; and

(2) for all other positions—

(A) disabled veterans who have a compensable service-connected disability of 10 percent or more, in order of their ratings, including points added under section 3309 of this title; and

(B) remaining applicants, in the order of their ratings, including points added under section 3309 of this title.

The names of preference eligibles shall be entered ahead of others having the same rating.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 420.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 856. | June 27, 1944, 287, §7, 58 Stat. 389.Aug. 14, 1953, ch. 485, §1(b), 67 Stat. 581. |

Statutes at Large

Aug. 14, 1953, ch. 485, §1(b), 67 Stat. 581.

The section is restated for clarity and conciseness. The words "for the competitive service" are added for clarity. Application of this section to the excepted service in the executive branch and to the government of the District of Columbia is carried into section 3320. The words "employment lists" are omitted as included in "appropriate registers or lists of eligibles".

In paragraph (1), the words "in GS–9 or higher" are substituted for "in grade 9 or higher of the General Schedule of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended" in view of the codification of the Act in this title, and, in specific sections 5104 and 5332.

In paragraph (2)(A), the term "disabled veterans" is substituted for "preference eligibles" in view of the definition of "disabled veteran" in section 2108(2).

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.
#### RORK v. CITY OF NEW YORK.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 24, 1905.)

Action by Augusta Rork against the city of New York. G. H. Fletcher, for plaintiff. T. Connoly, for defendant. No opinion. Exceptions overruled, and judgment ordered dismissing complaint, with costs.
### §10306. Poll taxes

#### (a) Congressional finding and declaration of policy against enforced payment of poll taxes as a device to impair voting rights

The Congress finds that the requirement of the payment of a poll tax as a precondition to voting (i) precludes persons of limited means from voting or imposes unreasonable financial hardship upon such persons as a precondition to their exercise of the franchise, (ii) does not bear a reasonable relationship to any legitimate State interest in the conduct of elections, and (iii) in some areas has the purpose or effect of denying persons the right to vote because of race or color. Upon the basis of these findings, Congress declares that the constitutional right of citizens to vote is denied or abridged in some areas by the requirement of the payment of a poll tax as a precondition to voting.

#### (b) Authority of Attorney General to institute actions for relief against enforcement of poll tax requirement

In the exercise of the powers of Congress under section 5 of the fourteenth amendment, section 2 of the fifteenth amendment and section 2 of the twenty-fourth amendment, the Attorney General is authorized and directed to institute forthwith in the name of the United States such actions, including actions against States or political subdivisions, for declaratory judgment or injunctive relief against the enforcement of any requirement of the payment of a poll tax as a precondition to voting, or substitute therefor enacted after November 1, 1964, as will be necessary to implement the declaration of subsection (a) and the purposes of this section.

#### (c) Jurisdiction of three-judge district courts; appeal to Supreme Court

The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction of such actions which shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 28 and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court. It shall be the duty of the judges designated to hear the case to assign the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date, to participate in the hearing and determination thereof, and to cause the case to be in every way expedited.

(Pub. L. 89–110, title I, §10, Aug. 6, 1965, 79 Stat. 442; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 91–285, §2, June 22, 1970, 84 Stat. 314; amended Pub. L. 94–73, title IV, §408, Aug. 6, 1975, 89 Stat. 405.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 1973h of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Amendments

1975—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 94–73, §408(2), (3), inserted reference to section 2 of twenty-fourth amendment.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 94–73, §408(1), struck out subsec. (d) which related to post-payment of poll taxes in event of a judicial declaration of constitutionality.
#### § 1605.53 Designation.

The Director of Selective Service shall assign each local board within a State a specific identifying number by which it shall be known. Such identifying numbers shall be assigned in numerical sequence beginning with the numeral 1.
#### § 57.7054 Starting or moving drill equipment.

Drill operators shall not start or move drilling equipment unless all miners are in the clear.