alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FILED AS
PART OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      13,621,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               18,958,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,281,000
<INVENTORY>                                 11,217,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            47,243,000
<PP&E>                                      15,230,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,415,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              53,853,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,349,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        87,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  49,417,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                53,853,000
<SALES>                                     16,352,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,352,000
<CGS>                                       15,518,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,518,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,991,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (73,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,935,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,377,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,558,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,558,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)
        

</TABLE>
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. 00-005

January 4, 2000

NRC’s ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS

SCHEDULES MEETING JANUARY 20

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

has scheduled a meeting of its subcommittee on plant operations on January 20 in Rockville,

Maryland.

The subcommittee will discuss the revised reactor oversight process, including the

updated significance determination process and plant performance indicators.

The meeting, which is open to the public, will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s

Two White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike, starting at 8:30 a.m.

Those who seek additional information or schedule updates about the meeting should

contact Mike Markley, at 301-415-6885.

Other aspects of the meeting will be described in an upcoming edition of the Federal

Register. ACRS meeting notices, transcripts and letter reports are available on the internet, at

http://www.nrc.gov/ACRSACNW.

###
###### Editorial Note on Part 134

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 134.1311 Will the Judge permit discovery and oral hearings?

Discovery will not be permitted, and oral hearings will not be held.
#### Oscar Bloom, Respondent, v. Selglo Corporation, Appellant.

Order unanimously modified by directing that the proposed ease on appeal include those portions of the summation of the attorney for the plaintiff to which objection was made by the attorney for the defendant and as so modified affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant. No opinion. Settle order on notice. Present — Glennon, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
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. 98-206 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, November 12, 1998)

NRC MAKES AVAILABLE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON CLEANUP CRITERIA

FOR WEST VALLEY SITE IN NEW YORK

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is making available staff recommendations on

proposed criteria for residual radiation levels that would be permitted after cleanup of a site in

West Valley, New York.

The Commission is presently reviewing these recommendations. The staff will brief the

Commission on its suggestions at a public meeting to be announced later.

The West Valley site is currently being decommissioned and decontaminated by the

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the New York State Energy Research and Development

Administration (NYSERDA).

It was formerly used by Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) to reprocess spent nuclear fuel,

and is the location of the only commercial spent fuel reprocessing plant that has operated in the

United States. Reprocessing involves extracting usable uranium or plutonium from irradiated

reactor fuel so that it can be re-used.

The West Valley Demonstration Project Act, enacted by Congress in 1980, authorizes

DOE, in cooperation with NYSERDA, to carry out a liquid-high-level-waste management

demonstration project that includes decommissioning. NRC responsibilities under the Act

include issuing decontamination and decommissioning criteria for DOE activities at the site.

Details of the NRC staff’s recommended decommissioning criteria for the site are

contained in a paper, SECY-98-251, “Decommissioning Criteria for West Valley.” The paper

will be available at NRC public document rooms located at 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. and at the Buffalo and Erie County Public Library, Science and Technology Department,

Lafayette Square, Buffalo, New York. In addition, electronic copies will be available through an

NRC web site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/COMMISSION/SECYS/index.html.

The NRC staff paper also identifies regulatory alternatives for potential long-term control

of the site.

Once the Commission decides on proposed criteria, the criteria will be included in

environmental impact statement for decommissioning of the site that is being prepared jointly

by DOE and NYSERDA and will be issued for public comment. The NRC will be a cooperating

federal agency for the environmental impact statement, as permitted by the National

Environmental Policy Act.
###
Exhibit 32.1

                            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 Annual Report of Entertainment Is Us, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Noriyuki Kanayama, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Entertainment Is Us, Inc, Inc. and will be retained by Entertainment
Is Us, Inc, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

January 13, 2006




                     /s/ Noriyuki Kanayama
                     ----------------------
                     Noriyuki Kanayama
                     Chief Executive Officer
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. 99-268

December 23, 1999

NRC FINDS NO OUTSTANDING Y2K PROBLEMS AT NUCLEAR PLANTS

UNDERGOING DECOMMISSIONING

The NRC has completed follow-up onsite reviews of selected nuclear power plants

undergoing decommissioning and found no problems with their Y2K program activities.

The primary Year 2000 (Y2K)-related health and safety concern at plants that no longer

generate power and are being decommissioned is to assure sufficient cooling and shielding of the

spent fuel in water-filled spent fuel pools. Currently, there are 19 permanently shut down nuclear

power plants, 14 of which have spent fuel remaining on site.

Starting in early December, NRC reviewed those six facilities that have been shut down

in the last four years and thus have the highest level of heat generated from the natural decay of

spent fuel. The plants are: Maine Yankee, Millstone 1, Haddam Neck, Big Rock Point, and Zion

Units 1 and 2. Reviews covered management controls, staffing, system and component repairs or

replacements, and plans for responding to any unexpected event. The remaining eight plants

(shut down for more than four years) have spent fuel that generates relatively low levels of heat

and can remain in a safe state for three to four weeks, if there is an interruption in the cooling

system.

Early this year, the NRC staff contacted all decommissioning reactor licensees and

determined that they were addressing Y2K readiness, but no onsite reviews of Y2K activities

were conducted. The likelihood of Y2K-related problems causing hazardous conditions at a

nuclear power plant undergoing decommissioning is relatively low because heat loads are low,

procedures are in place to respond to off-normal situations, and systems in the plant are mostly

analog and unaffected by Y2K computer issues. Nevertheless, computer-based systems may be

used for some applications such as security, health physics monitoring, or record keeping and

such systems could be impacted by a Y2K problem.

To provide added assurance of confidence in the safety of these facilities, the NRC

decided to review a selected group of nuclear power plants being decommissioned. NRC

reviews confirmed that the licensees for these facilities have adequately addressed Y2K computer

issues.

Results of these reviews will be included in the next periodic inspection report for each

site and will be available to the public.
#
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. 98-223 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, December 18, 1998)

NRC ISSUES REPORT ON WASTE BURIAL CHARGES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a report on waste burial charges that

nuclear power plant licensees can use to make the required annual adjustment of their

decommissioning cost estimates. Licensees now have the option of using waste processing

vendors for the disposal of most of their decommissioning waste.

Copies of the report, Revision 8 to NUREG-1307, “Report on Waste Burial Charges,”

are available for purchase from the Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington,

D.C. 20402-9328 (telephone: 202/512-1800), or from the National Technical Information

Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Va. 22161.

Copies are also available for review and copying for a fee at the NRC Public Document

Room, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20555 (telephone: 202/634-3273).

###
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. 98-146 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Tuesday, August 18, 1998)

NRC ISSUES LICENSE TO U.S. AIR FORCE FOR RESEARCH REACTOR

AT MCCLELLAN AIR FORCE BASE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a license to the U.S. Air Force

to operate the existing nuclear research reactor at McClellan Air Force Base in

Sacramento, California.

The Air Force has operated the General Atomics TRIGA reactor under its own

authority since 1990, but decided to seek an NRC license.

The license is valid for 20 years. It authorizes the reactor to operate at a thermal

power level of 2.3 megawatts.

The facility was originally designed to perform neutron radiography of aircraft

components to detect low-level corrosion and hidden defects. Its use has expanded to

include irradiations of silicon for use in the semiconductor industry. The reactor also

supports many university research and development programs, including a medical

research project that will carry out boron neutron capture therapy for treating cancer

patients.

The Air Force submitted its license application in October 1996. The NRC last

October published a Federal Register notice offering an opportunity to request a

hearing on the application, but no hearing requests were received.

The NRC review of the application found that there is reasonable assurance that

the activities authorized by the license will be conducted without endangering public

health and safety and in compliance with the Commission’s regulations.

###
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
136619 & (16)(17) Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. LAWRENCE M. CLARKE, INC., Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices

v SC: 136619 COA: 285567 Monroe CC: 07-022716-CZ RICHCO CONSTRUCTION, INC., RONALD J. RICHARDS, JR., and THOMAS A. RICHARDS, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion fo r immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the May 27, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1) , in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we
REMAND this case to the Cour t of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted. The motion for stay pendin g appeal is DENIED.

t0624 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 27, 2008

Clerk
Exhibit 23.1

                      Consent of Independent Registered
                           Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-32386 and No. 333-116163 on Form S-8 of Timberland Bancorp, Inc. of our
report dated December 10, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Timberland Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary (collectively,
"Timberland") included in Timberland's Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended September 30, 2010.

/s/ Delap LLP

Lake Oswego, Oregon
December 10, 2010

<PAGE>
Exhibit
32.3





CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Ener1, Inc., a Florida corporation (the
Company), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Robert R. Kamischke, Chief
Accounting Officer and Vice President of Finance of the Company, does hereby
certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350),
that to his 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
      Company.





/s/ Robert R. KamischkeRobert
      R. KamischkeChief
      Accounting Officer and Vice President of Finance(Duly
      Authorized Principal Accounting Officer and Duly Authorized
      Officer)





November
4, 2010





[A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Ener1, Inc. and will be retained by Ener1, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
#### Edward D. TALBERT, Appellant v. Hazel P. TALBERT, Appellee.

No. 12574.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued May 17, 1955.

Decided May 26, 1955.

Mr. Clarence G. Pechacek, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Joseph A. Rafferty, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. Arthur J. Hilland, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Thomas N. Kindness, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellee.

Before PRETTYMAN, BAZELON and BASTIAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This was an action for absolute divorce on the ground of voluntary separation from bed and board for five consecutive years without cohabitation.1 The District Court, after hearing conflicting testimony, found as a fact that the parties were not voluntarily separated from bed and board without cohabitation for the five years next preceding the filing of the complaint. There was ample evidence to support this finding.

Affirmed.

1

. 31 Stat. 1345 (1901), as amended, 49 Stat. 539 (1935), D.C.Code § 16-403 (1951).
§ 123.13 What happens if my loan application is denied? ( a ) If SBA denies your loan application, SBA will notify you in writing and set forth the specific reasons for the denial. Any applicant whose request for a loan is declined for reasons other than size (not being a small business) has the right to present information to overcome the reason or reasons for the decline and to request reconsideration in writing.
( b ) Any decline due to size can only be appealed as set forth in part 121 of this chapter.
( c ) Any request for reconsideration must be received by SBA's Disaster Assistance Processing and Disbursement Center (DAPDC) within six months of the date of the decline notice. After six months, a new loan application is required.
( d ) A request for reconsideration must contain all significant new information that you rely on to overcome SBA's denial of your original loan application.
( e ) If SBA declines your application a second time, you have the right to appeal in writing to the Director, Disaster Assistance Processing and Disbursement Center (DAPDC) or the Director's designee(s). All appeals must be received by the processing center within 30 days of the decline action. Your request must state that you are appealing, and must give specific reasons why the decline action should be reversed.
( f ) The decision of the Director, DAPDC or the Director's designee(s), is final unless: ( 1 ) The Director, DAPDC or the Director's designee(s), does not have the authority to approve the requested loan;
( 2 ) The Director, DAPDC or the Director's designee(s), refers the matter to the SBA Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance (AA/DA);
( 3 ) The AA/DA, upon a showing of special circumstances, requests that the Director, DAPDC or the Director's designee(s), forward the matter to him or her for final consideration; or
( 4 ) The SBA Administrator, solely within the Administrator's discretion, chooses to review the matter and make the final decision. Such discretionary authority of the Administrator does not create additional rights of appeal on the part of an applicant not otherwise specified in SBA regulations.
( g ) This section does not apply to IDAP loans.
[61 FR 3304, Jan. 31, 1996, as amended at 71 FR 63676, Oct. 31, 2006; 75 FR 60598, Oct. 1, 2010; 81 FR 67903, Oct. 3, 2016; 86 FR 50219, Sept. 8, 2021; 88 FR 39340, June 16, 2023]
No: I-24-004 March 14, 2024 

CONTACT: Diane Screnci, 610-337-5330 

 Neil Sheehan, 610-337-5331 

NRC Proposes $9,000 Fine to West Virginia Firm

for Apparent Violation Involving Nuclear Gauges

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed a $9,000 civil penalty against Phoenix 

Federal No. 2 Mining, the owner of a non-operational coal mine in Fairview, West Virginia, for 

failing to properly dispose of or transfer nuclear gauges it possesses. 

The proposed fine stems from an NRC inspector’s discovery in January 2023 during a site 

visit that the facility appeared to be abandoned. The inspector subsequently learned the owner listed 

on the license had ceased operations in December 2017 and had sold the site to Phoenix in June 

2018 without notifying the NRC. Phoenix had in its possession, without an NRC license, several

nuclear gauges left by the previous owner. Federal regulations require a valid NRC or Agreement 

State license to possess these types of gauges.

The NRC notified Phoenix in December 2023 that it must dispose of or transfer the gauges, 

or obtain a license from the agency and properly secure and control them. Meantime, the NRC 

confirmed the company has prevented access to any of the gauges to avoid public exposure or 

misuse.

“Ensuring the safety of the nuclear gauges is the primary objective of this enforcement 

action,” NRC Region I Administrator Ray Lorson said. “When we identified the issue, NRC 

inspectors took prompt action to confirm that the gauges were safe and being properly stored so that 

no workers or the public would be harmed. However, the obligation to address the secure handling 

and storage rests with the site’s owner.”
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-64,007-09

EX P ARTE ST EVEN EDWARD VILLNAVE, Appli cant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W11-22458-U ( A) IN THE 291 DISTRICT COURT st F ROM DALLAS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1
. 07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Ap p l i ca nt was convicted of the offense of felony driving while intox icated a nd sentenc ed to imprisonment for ten y ear s. The Applicant alleg es, inter alia , that his trial counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance in this
case . The State re sponded to this alleg ation as follows, in pertinent pa rt: The State contends that Applicant was provided with eff ective assistance of couns el
. The State, howeve r, rec og nizes that further evidenc e may be neede d reg ardin g co u n sel’s repr esentation of Applicant. There fore , the State reque sts that this Court issue an order desig nating issues and g ather evidenc e, as is customary , by way of af fidavit from de fense counsel or he aring should the Court de em such to be nece ssary .On May 17, 2014, a ti mely order desig nating issues was signed by the trial cour

t ordering , i n part, that the issue of whether Applicant rec eived ineffe ctive assistance of trial counse l b e resolved. The habea s rec ord has was t h en p roper ly forwa rded to this Court, but without the desi g nated issue having been resolved by the trial court. We rema nd this application to the 291 st District Court of Dallas County to allow the trial judge to complete an evidentiar y investigation and enter finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law. This application will be held in abey ance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this order
. A supplement al t ra n s cr i pt containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hear ing or deposition, along with the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of t he date of t his order
. Any extensions of ti me shall be obtained f

rom this Court.
Filed: Apr il 29, 2015 Do not publish