What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
When coding the detailed nature of participants, use your personal knowledge about the participants, if you are completely confident of the accuracy of your knowledge, even if the specific information is not in the opinion. For example, if "IBM" is listed as the appellant it could be classified as "clearly national or international in scope" even if the opinion did not indicate the scope of the business. 

Your task concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "federal government (including DC)". Your task is to determine which category of federal government agencies and activities best describes this litigant.

Opinion:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. ELLENVILLE HANDLE WORKS, INC., Respondent.
No. 453, Docket 28689.
United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.
Argued April 30, 1964.
Decided May 4, 1964.
Duane R. Batista, N. L. R. B., Washington, D. C. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin J. Welles, Atty., N. L. R. B., Washington, D. C., on the brief), for petitioner.
Francis B. Conrad, New York City, for respondent.
Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, and MOORE and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
As the record amply supports the Board’s decision which affirmed the Trial Examiner’s Intermediate Report and adopted his findings and conclusions that the respondent had violated §§ 8(a) (1) and 8(a) (3) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., and his recommendation, with one amendment, 142 NLRB No. 92, and as the proposed order is in all respects appropriate, we grant enforcement of the Board’s order

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "federal government (including DC)". Which category of federal government agencies and activities best describes this litigant?

Choices:
cabinet level department
courts or legislative
agency whose first word is "federal"
other agency, beginning with "A" thru "E"
other agency, beginning with "F" thru "N"
other agency, beginning with "O" thru "R"
other agency, beginning with "S" thru "Z"
Distric of Columbia
other, not listed, not able to classify

Answer: 4