alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 96-103 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, July 18, 1996)

NRC PREHEARING CONFERENCE SCHEDULED

FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR STATION

An NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has scheduled a

prehearing conference August 7 in Rockville, Maryland, in a

licensing proceeding concerning a request by General Public

Utility (GPU) to amend its license for the Oyster Creek nuclear

generating station near Toms River, New Jersey.

The conference, which is open to the public, will begin at

9:30 a.m. in Room 3B45, Third Floor, of the NRC Two White Flint

North Building at 11545 Rockville Pike.

GPU has requested a change to Oyster Creek's license that

would allow handling loads greater than the weight of one fuel

assembly over irradiated fuel in the plant's spent fuel storage

area.

A request for a hearing on the license change has been filed

by Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Oyster Creek Nuclear

Watch and Citizens Awareness Network, Inc.

Participants at the conference will discuss the issues of

petitioners' standing to intervene in the proceeding and the

admissibility of their contentions.

Members of the Licensing Board are the following

Administrative Judges from the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board Panel: G. Paul Bollwerk, III, chairman; Dr. Charles N.

Kelber and Dr. Peter S. Lam.

#
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                     6489491
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                              4937512
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                 170846
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          13725844
<PP&E>                                     7783651
<DEPRECIATION>                             6673334
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            15276693
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      7070370
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                     97991
<OTHER-SE>                                 8030113
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              15276693
<SALES>                                   15841823
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          20052633
<CGS>                                      2586700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              3866073
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          14970089
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          111455
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            1327926
<INCOME-TAX>                                 60577
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        1267349
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               1267349
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .12


</TABLE>
0-cr-06218-NCR Document 2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/11/2000 Pa
0-cr-06218-NCR Document 2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/11/2000 Pa
#### Robert Joseph SLAVEK, Petitioner—Appellant, v. George HINKLE, Warden Greensville Correctional Center, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 05-6433.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 28, 2005.

Decided: Feb. 24, 2006.

Robert Joseph Slavek, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Bidwell Theisen, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Robert Joseph Slavek seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Slavek has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Slavek’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
Order entered April 2 2 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 15 - 00589 - CV ESTATE OF ALAN MORGA N HUMPHREY, DECEASED

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PR - 13 - 2943 - 3



### O RDER We GRANT appellant’s April 19, 2016 unopposed motion for extension of time to file reply brief and ORDER the brief be filed no later than May 18, 2016

. /s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Miami Division

CASE NO. 1:20-cv-22667-RNS

FONTAINEBLEAU FLORIDA HOTEL, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE SOUTH FLORIDA HOTEL AND CULINARY EMPLOYEES 

WELFARE FUND

and

UNITE HERE, LOCAL 355,

Defendants.

UNITE HERE, LOCAL 355,

and

WENDI WALSH, et al.,

as Trustees of the

THE SOUTH FLORIDA HOTEL AND CULINARY EMPLOYEES 

WELFARE FUND,

Counter Plaintiffs,

v. 

FONTAINEBLEAU FLORIDA HOTEL, LLC,

Counter Defendant. 

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs WENDI WALSH et al., notify the Court that all parties

(the Trustees, Local 355, and Fontainebleau Florida Hotel) have reached a settlement in this 

pending litigation. All Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs will file their dismissal fully resolving this 

case within fourteen (14) calendar days unless the Court otherwise directs. 

Case 1:20-cv-22667-RNS Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/26/2021 Page 1 of 2
Dated March 26, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

_____________________________

D. Marcus Braswell, Jr. (146160)

mbraswell@sugarmansusskind.com

SUGARMAN & SUSSKIND, P.A.

100 Miracle Mile, Suite 300

Coral Gables, FL 33134

Tel. (305) 529-2801

Fax. (305) 447-8115

Attorneys for Defendant Fund and Counter Plaintiffs Trustees

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on March 26, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of 

Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing is being served this day on all parties 

and/or counsel of record identified on the below Service List, either via transmission of Notice of 

Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or 

parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

By: /s/ D. Marcus Braswell, Jr.

D. MARCUS BRASWELL, JR.

SERVICE LIST

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.

Russell S. Buhite, FL 0831085

Russell.Buhite@ogletree.com

Charles E. Engeman (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

Charles.Engeman@ogletree.com

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 5150

Seattle, WA 98101

Telephone: 206-693-7057

Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter Defendant

Kristin L. Martin

McCRACKEN, STEMERMAN & HOLSBERRY, LLP

595 Market Street, Suite 800

San Francisco, CA 94105

Tel: 415-597-7200 | Fax: 415-597-7201

Email: klm@msh.law

Attorneys for Local 355

Case 1:20-cv-22667-RNS Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/26/2021 Page 2 of 2
HomeAbout NRCHow We Regulate

# Assessment of Performance

NRC uses inspector findings together with objective performance indicators to assess the performance of nuclear facilities.

The assessment process allows the NRC to integrate various information sources relevant to licensee safety performance, make objective conclusions regarding their significance, take actions based on these conclusions in a predictable manner, and effectively communicate these results to the licensees and to the public.

For more on these topics see:
        - Operating Reactors Oversight
        - Fuel Cycle Facility Oversight

 

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Rulemaking
          - Guidance Development
          - Generic Communications Program
          - Standards Development
          - Licensing
          - Certification
          - Inspection
          - Assessment of Performance for Operating Facilities
          - Enforcement
          - Investigations
          - Allegations
          - Events Assessment
          - Generic Issues
          - Research
          - Risk Assessment
          - Performance Assessment for Waste Disposal and Decommissioning
          - Advisory Activities
          - CRGR Reviews
          - Adjudications (Hearings)
          - NMSS Center of Expertise

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,778

EX PARTE ANAIS ESPINOSA, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. A14705-0211 IN THE 64 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

TH

FROM HALE COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleaded guilty to forgery of a

financial instrument, and originallyreceived deferred adjudication communitysupervision. Her guilt

was later adjudicated and she was sentenced to eighteen months’ state jail imprisonment. She

attempted to appeal her conviction, but notice of appeal was untimely filed and the appeal was

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 

Applicant contends, inter alia, that her plea was involuntary, that she received ineffective of
2

counsel at the original plea, and that she was denied her right to appeal after adjudication because

of adjudication counsel’s erroneous advice. We remanded this application to the trial court for

findings of fact and conclusions of law.

The trial court conducted a habeas hearing, at which the court heard testimony and received

evidence. Based on the evidence adduced at the hearing, the trial court determined that the trial court

lacked jurisdiction to accept Applicant’s original plea, because Applicant was a juvenile at the time

of the offense. The trial court concludes that Applicant’s counsel at the original plea was ineffective

for failing to investigate and discover that Applicant was a juvenile, and to advise her that she was

not subject to the jurisdiction of the criminal court. The trial court finds that Applicant would not

have pleaded guilty to the charge had she known that she was not subject to the jurisdiction of the

criminal court. The trial court also concludes that Applicant was denied her right to appeal because

her counsel at adjudication failed to properly file a motion for new trial, and thereafter advised

Applicant incorrectly regarding the deadline for filing notice of appeal. Applicant is entitled to

relief. Ex parte Huerta, 692 S.W.2d 681 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985).

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. A14705-0211 in the 64 Judicial District th

Court of Hale County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Hale

County to answer the charges as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any necessary

bench warrant within 10 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies ofthis opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: April 25, 2012

Do Not Publish
#### In the Matter of William Ward, as President of New York Typographical Union No. 6, et al., Appellants, against Stephen G. Kelley, as Supervisor of the City Record, Respondent.

Mo opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.; Martin, P. J., dissents and votes to reverse and grant the motion.
No: IV-24-003 January 12, 2024 

CONTACT: Victor Dricks, 817-200-1128 

NRC Proposes $35,000 Civil Penalty to Radiation Solutions

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed a $35,000 civil penalty against Radiation 

Solutions of Sugar City, Idaho, for two violations of NRC requirements associated with its use of 

radioactive materials.

Under its NRC license, Radiation Solutions is authorized to install, repair and provide other 

types of services on devices that contain radioactive material.

One of the proposed violations involves the company’s failure to confine radioactive 

materials to the locations and purposes authorized in their licenses. The other violation involves 

deliberate misconduct by a company official who permitted Radiation Solutions to take possession 

of radioactive materials not authorized in its license. 

The violations had no adverse impact on the health and safety of the public.

Details of the apparent violations were documented in an October 2023 inspection report. 

The company responded to the NRC during a pre-decisional enforcement conference in 

December 2023.

The NRC made its enforcement decision after reviewing the circumstances surrounding the 

apparent violations and considering any actions the company may have taken to comply with NRC 

regulations. 

The company has 30 days to pay the fine, dispute it, or request involvement from a neutral 

third-party mediator to resolve the issue.
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to this park navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to this park information section
Skip to the footer section






National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Yellowstone
National Park
ID, MT, WY


Info
Alerts
Maps
Calendar
Fees


Alerts In Effect Dismiss
 more information on current conditions...
 Dismiss View all alerts


Contact Us
  Audio Postcard - Songbird Sunrise
 Sunrays rising over a forested landscape.Sunrise in Yellowstone NPS / Neal Herbert

Songbird Sunrise
A Savannah sparrow’s sweet warble rings out among the songs of Common Yellowthroat, American Robins, and other songbirds.
Credit / Author:
NPS & MSU Acoustic Atlas / Jennifer Jerrett
Date created:
10/14/2020
Audio Transcript
(Bird chirping)  A Savannah Sparrow adds its voice to the chorus of birdsong in the Lower Slough Creek Valley.(Bird chirping)For Yellowstone National Park, I'm Savannah Smith.

More Information
Sunset on Lamar River & ValleyPhoto Archives
Over 8,000 archived photos covering a variety of Yellowstone topics.
A yellow-breasted bird with black markings calls out as it stands on a stickBirds
About 150 species build their nests and fledge their young in Yellowstone.
An eared grebe near Mammoth Hot SpringsSound Library
Immerse yourself in the aural splendor of Yellowstone.
 Last updated: April 16, 2020
 Park footer Contact Info Mailing Address: PO Box 168
Yellowstone National Park,
WY
82190-0168
 Phone: 307-344-7381 Contact Us
 Tools FAQ
Site Index
Español
 Stay Connected


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
### **CHAPTER 157—SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD ORDERS; ENFORCEMENT AND REVIEW**

Sec.
2321.
Judicial review of Board's orders and decisions; procedure generally; process.
2322.
United States as party.
2323.
Duties of Attorney General; intervenors.
[2324, 2325. Repealed.]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1995**—Pub. L. 104–88, title III, §305(c)(1)(A), (E), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 944, 945, substituted "SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD" for "INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION" in chapter heading and "Board's" for "Commission's" in item 2321.

**1975**—Pub. L. 93–584, §8, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1918, substituted "Judicial Review of Commission's orders and decisions; procedure generally; process" for "Procedure generally; process" in item 2321 and struck out item 2324 "Stay of Commission's order" and item 2325 "Injunction; three-judge court required".
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 17

- 11419 Non

- Argument Calendar

___________ _____________ D.C. Docket No. 3:11

- cv
- 00 143

- CDL

RENASANT BANK INC.,
Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

versus
EARTH RESOURCES OF FRANKLIN COUNTY LLC , JOHN F. SMITHGALL,
De fendant s
- Appellants

.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia

________________________ ( September 6, 2017 )
Before WILSON , MARTIN , and ANDERSON , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 17-11419 Date Filed: 09/06/2017 Page: 1 of 22 Renasant Bank sued EarthResourc es of Franklin County and John F. Smithgall to enforce a promissory note and personal guaranty . The district court
entered judgment against EarthResources and Smithgall in 2013, and our court
affirmed. Renasant Bank, Inc. v. Earth Res. of Franklin Cty., LLC , 537 F. App’ x 889 (11th Cir. 2013) (per curiam) . In 2017 , EarthResources and Smithgall, pursuant to Rule 60 (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, filed with the
district court a motion for relief from final judgment and a motion to reopen
discov ery. The di strict court denied the motions. EarthResources and Smithgall now appeal, arguing that the district court abused its discretion in denying the motions. A fter careful consideration of the record and the parties’ briefs, however, we find no re versible error. EarthResources and Smithgall have not “demonstrate[d] a justification so compelling that the district court was required to vacate its ” judgment. See Cano
v. Baker , 435 F.3d 1337, 1342 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks omitted) (discussing the “heavy” burden a party has on appeal when it is challenging a district court’s denial of Rule 60(b) relief)

. AFFIRMED. 1

1 Ren a sant’s motion for damages and costs for frivolous appeal is DENIED

. Case: 17-11419 Date Filed: 09/06/2017 Page: 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Harold J. McCarthy, Respondent, against Colonial Life Insurance Company et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

All concur.
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to the footer section






National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Spanish Missions/Misiones Españolas





Contact Us
  Santa Clara Mission Church -- Spanish Colonial Missions of the Southwest Travel Itinerary
 Página en español
 Santa Clara Mission Church **Santa Clara Mission Church
Santa Clara Pueblo**Coordinates:35.971111, -106.089167#TravelSpanishMissionsDiscover Our Shared HeritageSpanish Colonial Missions of the Southwest Travel Itinerary
 Santa Clara Mission ChurchSanta Clara Pueblo c. 1871-1907. Courtesy of the National Archives. ARC ID: 523835.
 Santa Clara Mission ChurchTwo women, c. 1905 tending a fire pit, Santa Clara Pueblo, New Mexico. Photo by Edward S. Curtis, 1868-1952. Courtesy of the Library of Congress. Allies and Enemies
 Santa Clara Mission ChurchPlan view of the cruciform church, 1972. By James Lamsam, from HABS. Courtesy of the Library of Congress. Santa Clara Pueblo Church
 Santa Clara Mission ChurchModern Santa Clara Pueblo Catholic Church. Photo by Jeff Hart. Courtesy of Flickr Creative Commons What you can see today
 **Plan Your Visit**
 **Santa Clara Pueblo is located on NM 30, two miles south of Española, NM.  From US 84 / US 285 turn west onto Santa Clara Bridge Rd. and then turn left heading south on NM 30 the Los Alamos Highway. From NM 30, turn left onto Rose Rd, make a right onto Kee St. and follow it to the mission church, which will be on the left. Cameras are allowed only with a permit. The pueblo can be visited daily from dawn to dusk. Please call 505-753-7326 for further information.****Santa Clara Pueblo** **is featured in the National Park Service** ***American Southwest Travel Itinerary*****.****Santa Clara Pueblo is listed in the National Register of Historic Places and has been documented in the National Park Service’s** **Historic American Buildings Survey****.**
 Discover our Shared Heritage Travel Itinerary Program Frequently Asked Questions
 **^TOP**
 Last updated: April 15, 2016
 Tools Site Index


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Paddling Grinder's Ferry to Gilbert

Buffalo National River
EXHIBIT 23

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 33-51116, 33-39557, 33-39566, 333-17843) pertaining to the Kaiser Steel Resources, Inc. 1992 Stock Option Plan, the Kaiser Steel Resources, Inc. 1989 Officer Bonus Program, the Amended,
Restated and Substituted Kaiser Steel Resources, Inc. 1989 Stock Plan, and the Kaiser Ventures Inc. 1995 Stock Plan, as amended, respectively, of our report dated March 27, 2009 with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule
of Kaiser Ventures LLC and Subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2008.

|                  
|------------------
|                  
|/s/ Moss Adams LLP
|                  
|Irvine, California
|March 27, 2009