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

/ / MIK

E SIMPSO N SECOH O asTRiCT , IDAH O WASHlMRTfl M omCE : 231 2 RAvmiR N HOUS E OFRC G SUILDIN Q WASHINCTON,DC2C51 5 (202)225-663 1 FAX : t202 ) 229-621 6 DISTRIC TQFRCE : 802 WEST

T BANMOC

K STREET , SUIT

E60 0 BotsE , I D 8370 2 1208 1 334-195 3 FAX ; 1208 ) 334-953 3 •*f* m .ho u M.gov/* ! mps o n 

## CONGRES S O FTH EUNITE D STATE S HOUS EO FREPRESENTATIVES
Th e Honorabl e Ra

yLaHoo d Secretar yo f Transportatio n U S Departmen t o f Transportatio n 40 0 7 * Stree t S

W Washington , D

C 2059 0 Dea rSecretar

yLaHood ; SUSCOUMITTEES : IHTIMOn , EmiMMMEfn
. AM Q RtUtT fo ACENOi a
ENERO V AN D WATc n OcvELapuew T COMMITTE E O N BUDGE T

C 3



### > o C O I a m writin g i n support o f a n applicatio n submitte d byth e Idah o Falls , Idah o Regiona l Airpor t fo rgran t fund s unde rth e Smal l CommunityAi rService Developmen t Gran t Program
. O n August 22 , Idah o Fall s los t service fro m Horizo n Air , connectin g passenger s t o Boise , Portland , Seattle , Spokan e an d Norther n California
. Thi s discontinuanc e o f servic e wa s a facto ro f Interna l airlin e reconfiguratio n an d no t a lack o f deman d I n th e area . Th e \oca \ Idah o Fail s busines s community , doin g busines s mostl yi n th e Northwes t region , reJie s o n westboun d service
. Idah o Fall s i s hom e t o th e Departmen t o f EnergyIdah o Nationa l Laborator yan d managin g companies
. Idah o Fall s i s als o a gatewaycommunit yt o th e nearb yYellowston e an d Gran d Teto n Nationa l Parks
. Travele rus e estimate s sho wmor e tha n 400,00 0 fo rth e Easter n Idah o Regio n an d th e nearest hu b airpor t I s ove ra thre e hou rdrive
. Th e Cit yo f Idah o Fall s has Identifie d tw o o rthre e ai rcarriers tha t ma yb e abl e t o provid e westboun d service fo rth e region
. I f successfu l i n obtainin g th e requeste d gran t funds , th e Cit ywil l b e abl e t o approac h thos e airline s i n revenu e guarantees , cos t reductions , introductoryfare s an d extensiv e advertisin g t o initiat e th e start u p o f ne wservic e t o th e region
. A s a residen t o f Idah o Fall s I full yunderstan d an d appreciat e th e importanc e o f westboun d commercia l Servic e t o th e busines s communit yan d citizen s o f th e regio n an d I urg e th e Departmen t o f Transportatio n t o giv e thi s proposa l consideration
. Sincerely ,

Mik e Simpso n Membe ro f Congress
# C_2007095EN.01004901.xml

| 28.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/49

---

Action brought on 23 February 2007 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-60/07)

(2007/C 95/98)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Muñoz Pérez)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul Commission Decision 2006/932/EC of 14 December 2006 excluding from Community financing certain expenditures incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), in so far as it relates to the subject-matter of this action; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Commission Decision 2006/932/EC of 14 December 2006 excluding from Community financing certain expenditures incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), in so far as it relates to the subject-matter of this action;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Kingdom of Spain challenges the contested Decision, in so far as it provides for a financial correction in respect of the failure to meet environmental conditions in the withdrawals of fruit and vegetables for animal feed in the Valencian Community during the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003, in the amounts of EUR 2 858 447,88, EUR 4 357 238,89 and EUR 3 679 878,76 respectively.

In support of its claim, the applicant alleges:

| — | Non-existence of the irregularities complained of by the Commission, since the relevant rules of the Valencian Community did not give rise to a parallel system of biodegradation. |
| --- | --- |

—

Non-existence of the irregularities complained of by the Commission, since the relevant rules of the Valencian Community did not give rise to a parallel system of biodegradation.

| — | Breach of the principle of proportionality by the financial correction made, in so far as, the Commission did not establish the real amount of the financial risk that the supposed irregularities found entailed for the EAGGF; and secondly, the controls carried out by the Spanish authorities with regard to the withdrawal of products for animal feed were far superior to those required by the Community rules. |
| --- | --- |

—

Breach of the principle of proportionality by the financial correction made, in so far as, the Commission did not establish the real amount of the financial risk that the supposed irregularities found entailed for the EAGGF; and secondly, the controls carried out by the Spanish authorities with regard to the withdrawal of products for animal feed were far superior to those required by the Community rules.

| — | In the alternative, partial lack of basis for the financial correction applied. |
| --- | --- |

—

In the alternative, partial lack of basis for the financial correction applied.

---
CERTIFICATIONS Pursuant to Section 302




I, Luke Zouvas , certify that:




1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Oasis Entertainments Fourth Movie Project Inc. ;




2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 this quarterly report;




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




4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:




a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;




b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and




c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;




5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and




b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and




6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.








Date: May 14, 2003








/s/Luke Zouvas


Luke Zouvas


Custodian
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.

STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT

USDA Extends Foreclosure and Eviction Relief on Single Family Housing Direct Loans

WASHINGTON, June 23, 2020 – U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Deputy Under Secretary for Rural 

Development Bette Brand today announced USDA extended foreclosure and eviction moratorium for all Single

Family Housing Direct Home Loans through Aug. 31, 2020.

The moratorium applies to:

• Initiation of foreclosures or completion of foreclosures in process, excluding vacant and abandoned

properties. 

• Evictions of borrowers from properties bought with a USDA direct home loan. 

For more information on USDA Rural Development’s actions to support customers directly impacted by 

COVID-19 visit www.rd.usda.gov/coronavirus. 

###
### SUBCHAPTER VI—ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFERS
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 526 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 526

    To withdraw certain Bureau of Land Management land from mineral 
                              development.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 14, 2019

Mr. Heinrich (for himself and Mr. Udall) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To withdraw certain Bureau of Land Management land from mineral 
                              development.

    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 ``Buffalo Tract Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. WITHDRAWAL.

    (a) In General.--Subject to valid existing rights, the Bureau of 
Land Management land described in subsection (b) is withdrawn from all 
forms of mineral development under all laws pertaining to mineral 
leasing or mineral materials, including locatable minerals.
    (b) BLM Land Described.--The Bureau of Land Management land 
referred to in subsection (a) is the land identified as ``Tract A'', 
``Tract B'', ``Tract C'', and ``Tract D'' on the map entitled 
``Placitas, New Mexico Area Map'' and dated March 11, 2016.
    (c) Disposal of Surface Estate.--
            (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), nothing in this 
        section prohibits the disposal of the surface estate of the 
        Bureau of Land Management land described in subsection (b) 
        under--
                    (A) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 
                1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); or
                    (B) the Act of June 14, 1926 (commonly known as the 
                ``Recreation and Public Purposes Act'') (43 U.S.C. 869 
                et seq.).
            (2) Ownership of mineral estate.--Any disposal of the 
        surface estate of the Bureau of Land Management land described 
        in subsection (b) shall be subject to the condition that the 
        mineral estate of that land shall remain under the ownership of 
        the Bureau of Land Management, subject to the withdrawal 
        described in subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```
#### § 590.413 Form of official identification symbol and inspection mark.

The shield set forth in Figure 1 of this section containing the letters “USDA” must be the official identification symbol used in connection with egg products to denote that the official plant receives official inspection service. The inspection mark used on containers of edible egg products is set forth in Figure 1 of this section, except that the plant number may be preceded by the letter “G” in lieu of the word plant. The plant number may also be omitted from the official mark if applied on the container's principal display panel or other prominent location and preceded by the letter “G.”[[76](#590.413-footnote-76)]

[![](https://img.federalregister.gov/ER29OC20.000/ER29OC20.000_large.png)](https://img.federalregister.gov/ER29OC20.000/ER29OC20.000_original_size.png)

[[85 FR 68677](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/85-FR-68677), Oct. 29, 2020]

###### Footnotes - [590.413](/on/2024-07-03/title-9/section-590.413)

[[76](#590.413-footref-76)] The number “42” is given as an example only. The plant number of the official plant where the product was inspected must be shown on each label.
#### § 50.19 Report of salvage proceeds.

A report of the salvage derived from the sale of each animal for which a claim for payment is made under this subpart must be made on a salvage form acceptable to APHIS that must be signed by the purchaser or by the selling agent handling the animals. If the cattle are sold by the pound, the salvage form must show the weight, price per pound, gross receipts, expenses if any, and net proceeds. If the cattle are not sold on a per-pound basis, the net purchase price of each animal must be stated on the salvage form and an explanation showing how the amount was arrived at must be submitted. In the event the animals are not disposed of through regular slaughterers or through selling agents, the owner must furnish, in lieu of the salvage form, an affidavit showing the amount of salvage obtained by him or her and must certify that such amount is all he or she has received or will receive as salvage for the animals. The original of the salvage form or the affidavit of the owner must be furnished to the veterinarian in charge within 3 months of destruction of the animals, if such document is not already in his or her possession. Disposal of cattle by burial, incineration, or other means must be supervised by an APHIS or State representative, who will prepare and transmit to the veterinarian in charge a report identifying the animals and showing their disposition, or be documented by an affidavit of the owner that identifies the animals and describes their disposition. The owner must provide a copy of the affidavit to the veterinarian in charge within 3 months of destruction of the animals. The salvage form, disposal certificate, or affidavit will be for information purposes only and will have no effect on the amount of any payment due.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0193)
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-11258

Conference Calendar

 

L. T. RUNELS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

D.L. KEESEE, 

Sheriff of Lubbock County Texas,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:97-CV-262-C

- - - - - - - - - -

August 18, 1998

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

L.T. Runels, Texas prisoner # 707445, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as malicious and

repetitive pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Runels argues on appeal

that, being a layman in the law, his first filing of this § 1983

action was dismissed without prejudice because he did not know

what to file or how to file. He alleges that he was assisted by

a writ writer in filing this second suit to correct the errors of
No. 97-11258

-2-

the first suit. He states that in this second filing, he has

clearly shown a constitutional violation.

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion

and find no reversible error. Runels v. Keesee, No. 5:97-CV-262-

C (N.D. Tex. Oct. 15, 1997). Contrary to appellant’s assertion,

the record of the prior action shows that the suit was dismissed

with prejudice as frivolous. We further find that Runels’ appeal

is without arguable merit, and we DISMISS IT AS FRIVOLOUS. See

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R.

42.2.

Runels is hereby put on notice that the dismissal of this

appeal as frivolous constitutes his third strike under the PLRA

and that he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal

filed while he is in prison unless he “is under imminent danger

of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Adepegba v.

Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1997).

APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Safety Evaluation Report Related to the License Renewal of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 (NUREG-1856)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1856            - Cover – Chapter 2 (PDF 14.0 MB)
          - Chapter 3 – End (PDF 35.5 MB) 

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**March 2006**Date Published:**June 2006

Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This safety evaluation report (SER) documents the technical review of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP), Units 1 and 2, license renewal application (LRA) by the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (the staff). By letter dated October 18, 2004, Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L or the applicant) submitted the LRA for BSEP in accordance with Title 10, Part 54, of the*Code of Federal Regulations* (10 CFR Part 54). CP&L is requesting renewal of the operating licenses for BSEP Units 1 and 2, (Facility Operating License Numbers DPR-71 and DPR-62, respectively) for a period of 20 years beyond the current expiration dates of midnight September 8, 2016, for Unit I and midnight December 27, 2014, for Unit 2.

The BSEP units are located south of Wilmington, NC, at the mouth of the Cape Fear River in Brunswick County, NC, and two miles north of Southport, NC. The NRC issued the construction permits for Units 1 and 2 on February 7, 1970. The NRC issued the operating licenses for Unit 1 on November 12,1976; and for Unit 2 on December 27, 1974. Units 1 and 2 are boiling water reactors (BWRs) with primary containments of the BWR Mark I design. Each unit has a nuclear steam supply system that is supplied by General Electric (GE) Nuclear Energy Company. The balance of the plant was originally designed and constructed by Brown & Root with the assistance of its agent, United Engineers & Constructors. Each unit operates at a licensed power output of 2923 megawatt thermal (Mwt), with a gross electrical output of approximately 1007 megawatt electric (Mwe).

This SER presents the status of the staffs review of information submitted to the NRC through December 6, 2005, the cutoff date for consideration in the SER. The staff will present its final conclusion on the review of the BSEP application in its update to this SER.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
ACTIO N 

Pettiford, Marie (OST) 

SlO-110120-006 

CONTROL NO 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Alaskan Sourdough Lodge, LLC. [info@akgetaway.com] 

Wednesday, January 19, 2011 3:32 PM 

LaHood, Ray (OST) 

Ak Sourdough lodge, lie Ak EAS letter.doc 

"U 

en 

o o o 

hik»i 

Alaskan Sourdough Lodge, LLC 

P.O. Box 1062 

1104 Peninsula St. 

Wrangell, Alaska 99929 

800-874-3613 

907-874-3613 

907-874-3455 Fax 

Email: info@akgetawav.com 

Web: www.akgetawav.com 

Sole Member: Bruce E. Harding 

January 20, 2011 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Re: Continuation of Alaska Airlines' Essential Air Service at Cordova. Gustavus. Petersburg. Wrangell. and 

Yakutat. Alaska. Docket OST-1998-4899 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

This letter is to express strong support for the selection of Alaska Airlines to continue to provide essential air 

service to our community. 

Alaska's current pattern of service - using jet aircraft - meets crucial needs that would be difficult, if not 

impossible, to meet with any other type of service or aircraft type: 
I am the owner of the Alaskan Sourdough Lodge , LLC, which has been a family business in Wrangell since 

1984. Access creates opportunity and with the daily jet service Alaska Airlines provides gives my business and 

our community the ability to create jobs and maintain a quality of life for young and old alike. A very large 

percentage, 75%, of our guest travel to Wrangell on Alaska Airlines. Without this service, we could not keep 

our doors open. We employed five persons last season, not counting my wife and myself. 

Wrangell has been hit hard by the current economic down turn and in past years, the loss of the timber industry 

in Southeast Alaska. Fishing, marine repair and tourism are the only industries we have to create new jobs and 

or to maintain our current work force. Alaska Airlines service provides us with the ability to help pay our way 

with revenues generated by our current economic stability. 

For these reasons, we respectfully urge DOT to select Alaska Airlines to continue to provide essential air 

service to Southeast Alaska, as the airline has successfully done for more than thirty years. 

Sincerely, 

Bruce E. Harding 

Alaskan Sourdough Lodge, LLC 

Sole Member 

cc: Susan Kurland, Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs 

Dennis DeVany, Chief, EAS and Domestic Analysis 

The Honorable Sean Parnell, Governor, State of Alaska 

Marc A. Luiken, Commissioner, Alaska State Department of Transportation and Public Facilities