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

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov

Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 00-140 September 14, 2000

NRC INCREASES PENALTY LIMITS AGAINST LICENSEES

TO REFLECT INFLATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is amending its regulations to increase the maximum

monetary civil penalty it can impose on licensees for violating agency requirements. The increase,

mandated by Congress, is to adjust fines for inflation. The agency’s enforcement policy has been

revised to reflect the new maximum penalty.

The maximum amount the agency may levy for the most severe violation is increased to

$120,000 from $110,000 for each violation, each day. The NRC normally applies penalties of this

magnitude only against power reactor licensees and gaseous diffusion plant certificate holders. Lower

penalties are usually applied for less severe violations and against smaller businesses, such as

radioactive material users and research reactor licensees. NRC has raised the base civil penalties to

account for inflation as well.

The revision applies to violations that occur after the rule change becomes effective -- 30 days

after publication of a Federal Register notice, expected shortly.

The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended by the Debt

Collection Improvement Act of 1996, requires federal agencies to adjust their maximum monetary

fines for inflation at least once every four years. The NRC’s last adjustment to its maximum civil

monetary penalties occurred in November 1996.

While the 1996 Act does not mandate changes to lesser civil penalty amounts, the NRC has

modified its enforcement policy by increasing these penalties to maintain their proportional

relationship to the maximum civil penalty. For example, the civil penalty for some fuel fabricators

authorized to possess special nuclear material has been increased to $60,000 from $55,000 to ensure it

retains its relationship as one half the maximum amount of a violation imposed on a power reactor

licensee ($120,000).

Additionally, penalties for civil fraud are amended by adjusting the maximum civil penalties

under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act from $5,500 to $6,000 for each false claim or statement.

These include instances in which a person knows or has reason to know the claim and statement to be

false, fictitious, or fraudulent, or omitting a material fact.
NRC’s enforcement policy is contained in NUREG-1600, which is available in its revised form

at http:/`/www.nrc.gov/OE on the agency’s web site.

For further information, contact Norman St. Amour, Office of the General Counsel, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, at 301-415-1589, e-mail at

NXS1@nrc.gov. Or contact Renee Pedersen, of the agency’s Office of Enforcement, at 301-415-2742,

e-mail at rmp@nrc.gov.

###
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle, IL 60532

 Web Site:

http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. III-01-033 July 5, 2001

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC TO MEET WITH EXELON GENERATION COMPANY TO DISCUSS 

SAFETY PERFORMANCE AT THE LASALLE NUCLEAR PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with Exelon Generation Company officials July

11 to discuss the NRCís annual assessment of safety performance at the LaSalle County Station near

Seneca, Illinois.

The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. CDT and will be held at the Brookfield Township Hall,

2099 E. 27th Road near Seneca, Illinois.

The annual assessment, referred to as the End-of-Cycle assessment, evaluates safety

performance at the LaSalle plant from April 2000 through March 2001, and informs plant officials of

the NRCís plans for future inspections at the facility.

The LaSalle assessment letter and inspection report are available at

http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr or from the Region III Public Affairs Office. Current performance

information for the plant is available at http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/index.html.

# # #
## NO. 12

- 10

- 00407

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

CODY WILKINSON

, § APPEAL FROM THE THIRD

APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

WARDEN RUPERT, ET AL

, APPELLEE S § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for want of jurisdiction pursuant to Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 42.3(a). The trial court’s judgment was signed on September 28, 2010.

Under rule of appellate procedure 2 6.1, the notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after

the judgment is signed. Appellant, Cody Wilkinson, did not file a motion for new trial. See T EX

.

R. A PP

. P. 26.1(a) (providing that notice of appeal must be filed within ninety days after

j udgment signed if any party timely files motion for new trial). Therefore, his notice of appeal

was due to have been filed no later than October 28, 2010. Wilkinson did not file his notice of

appeal until November 8, 2010. Because the notice of appeal w as not filed on or before

October 28, 2010, it was untimely.

On December 2, 2010, this court notified Wilkinson pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure 37.1 and 42.3 that his notice of appeal was untimely, but that this court would imply a

motion t o extend the time for filing the notice of appeal. See Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d

615, 615 (Tex. 1997). Wilkinson was further informed that the appeal would be dismissed

unless, on or before December 13, 2010, he informed the court in writing of fact s that reasonably

explain his need for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal. The deadline for

responding to this court’s notice has expired, and Wilkinson has not responded to the notice.2

Because this court is not authorized to extend the ti me for perfecting an appeal except as

provided by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 26.3, the appeal is dismissed for want

of jurisdiction

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(a).

Opinion delivered December 22 , 20 1 0.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griff ith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)
1

FOREMAN FRIEDMAN, PA, 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2300, Miami, FL 33131 Tel: 305-358-6555/Fax: 305-374-9077

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 0:20-cv-23223-BB

DRAGAN JANICIJEVIC, on his own 

behalf and on behalf of all other similarly 

situated crew members working aboard 

BAHAMAS PARADISE CRUISE LINE 

vessels 

Plaintiffs, 

v. CLASS ACTION 

CLASSICA CRUISE OPERATOR, LTD., 

PARADISE CRUISE LINE OPERATOR 

LTD. INC., a/k/a PARADISE CRUISE LINE 

OPERATOR LTD. d/b/a BAHAMAS 

PARADISE CRUISE LINE, BPCL 

MANAGEMENT, LLC, d/b/a BAHAMAS 

PARADISE CRUISE LINE, LLC., 

Defendants. 

___________________________________/

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Catherine J. MacIvor, Esq., of the law firm of Foreman Friedman, P.A., hereby files her 

Notice of Appearance as Counsel for Defendants, Classica Cruise Operator, Ltd., Paradise Cruise 

Line Operator Ltd. Inc., and hereby requests that all future pleadings, motions, notices, orders and 

other documents filed by the parties and the Court be served on Ms. MacIvor.

Dated: August 21, 2020

 Miami, FL 

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Catherine J. MacIvor

Jeffrey E. Foreman

Florida Bar No. 240310

jforeman@fflegal.com

Catherine J. MacIvor 

Florida Bar. No. 932711

Case 1:20-cv-23223-BB Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

FOREMAN FRIEDMAN, PA, 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2300, Miami, FL 33131 Tel: 305-358-6555/Fax: 305-374-9077

cmacivor@fflegal.com

FOREMAN FRIEDMAN, PA 

One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2300 

2 South Biscayne Boulevard 

Miami, FL 33131 

Telephone: (305) 358-6555

Attorneys for Defendants Classica Cruise Operator 

Ltd. and Paradise Cruise Line Operator, Ltd. Inc.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court 

via CM/ECF on August 21st, 2020. I also certify that the foregoing was served on all counsel or 

parties of record on the attached Service List either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing 

generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not 

authorized to receive electronic Notices of Filing.

By: /s/ Catherine J. MacIvor

Catherine J. MacIvor

SERVICE LIST

Janicijevic v. Paradise Cruise Line

20-cv-23223-BB

Jeffrey E. Foreman, Esq. 

Catherine J. MacIvor, Esq. 

FOREMAN FRIEDMAN, P.A.

One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2300 

2 South Biscayne Boulevard 

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 358-6555

Facsimile: (305) 374-9077 

jforeman@fflegal.com

cmacivor@fflegal.com

Michael A. Winkleman, Esq.

Daniel W. Grammes, Esq.

Andrew S. Freedman, Esq.

LIPCON, MARGULIES, ALSINA & 

WINKLEMAN, PA 

One Biscayne Tower, Suite 1776

2 South Biscayne Boulevard

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 373-3015

Facsimile: (305) 373-6204

mwinkleman@lipcon.com

dgrammes@lipcon.com

afreedman@lipcon.com

Case 1:20-cv-23223-BB Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2020 Page 2 of 2
### Part E—Labor Market Information
### §2883a. Omitted

Section, Pub. L. 109–149, title I, §102, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2842, which established the Office of Job Corps within the Office of the Secretary of Labor, was superseded by section 3193a of this title.
### §2006. Execution against revenue officer

Execution shall not issue against a collector or other revenue officer on a final judgment in any proceeding against him for any of his acts, or for the recovery of any money exacted by or paid to him and subsequently paid into the Treasury, in performing his official duties, if the court certifies that:

(1) probable cause existed; or

(2) the officer acted under the directions of the Secretary of the Treasury, the Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of Justice, or other proper Government officer.

When such certificate has been issued, the amount of the judgment shall be paid out of the proper appropriation by the Treasury.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 960; Pub. L. 107–296, title XI, §1112(l), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2277.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §842 (R.S. §989).

Changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Par. (2). Pub. L. 107–296 inserted ", the Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of Justice," after "the Secretary of the Treasury".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2002 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 107–296 effective 60 days after Nov. 25, 2002, see section 4 of Pub. L. 107–296, set out as an Effective Date note under section 101 of Title 6, Domestic Security.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsOn computations of the integrated space shuttle flowfield using overset gridsNumerical simulations using the thin-layer Navier-Stokes equations and chimera (overset) grid approach were carried out for flows around the integrated space shuttle vehicle over a range of Mach numbers. Body-conforming grids were used for all the component grids. Testcases include a three-component overset grid - the external tank (ET), the solid rocket booster (SRB) and the orbiter (ORB), and a five-component overset grid - the ET, SRB, ORB, forward and aft attach hardware, configurations. The results were compared with the wind tunnel and flight data. In addition, a Poisson solution procedure (a special case of the vorticity-velocity formulation) using primitive variables was developed to solve three-dimensional, irrotational, inviscid flows for single as well as overset grids. The solutions were validated by comparisons with other analytical or numerical solution, and/or experimental results for various geometries. The Poisson solution was also used as an initial guess for the thin-layer Navier-Stokes solution procedure to improve the efficiency of the numerical flow simulations. It was found that this approach resulted in roughly a 30 percent CPU time savings as compared with the procedure solving the thin-layer Navier-Stokes equations from a uniform free stream flowfield.Document ID19900018418Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsChiu, I-T.*(Iowa State Univ. of Science and Technology Ames, IA, United States)*Pletcher, R. H.*(Iowa State Univ. of Science and Technology Ames, IA, United States)*Steger, J. L.*(Iowa State Univ. of Science and Technology Ames, IA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJuly 1, 1990Subject CategorySpace TransportationReport/Patent NumberISU-ERI-AMES-91040NAS 1.26:186927HTL-53CFD-23NASA-CR-186927Accession Number90N27734Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NCC2-476Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900018418.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-98-35 May 28, 1998

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Greenman 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC STAFF TO HOLD PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

ON POSSIBLE FIRE PROTECTION VIOLATIONS AT QUAD CITIES PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet on June 8

with Commonwealth Edison Company officials in Lisle, Illinois,

for a predecisional enforcement conference on apparent fire

protection violations at the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station.

The two-reactor facility is located at Cordova, Illinois.

The meeting, which is open to public observation, will be at

2 p.m. in the Third Floor Conference Room, NRC Region III Office,

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois. NRC staff members will be

available at the close of the meeting for questions and comments

from members of the public.

The meeting will cover apparent violations of NRC fire

protection requirements for the Quad Cities plant involving the

capability to safely shut the plant down in the event of a fire.

In September of last year, the utility shut down Unit 2 and

Unit 1 was subsequently shut down in December for reviews of

shutdown procedures and systems which would be used in the event

of a fire affecting normal shutdown systems.

The predecisional enforcement conference will cover the

findings of NRC inspections which found deficiencies in the

plant's shutdown procedures. The inspections -- conducted from

October through April -- also found that Commonwealth Edison had

not done the required safety review in December of a planned

change to its procedures and equipment for shutting the plant

down.

Following the shutdowns last year, the two units remained

out of service for improvements to the shutdown procedures and

systems. On May 22 the NRC staff determined that the utility had

made sufficient changes for units to return safely to operation.

Unit 2 has resumed operation, and the utility is preparing to

restart Unit 1.

The purpose of the predecisional enforcement conference is

to discuss the apparent violations and provide the company an
opportunity to respond and to provide details of its corrective

actions and other additional information.

The information presented in the predecisional enforcement

conference will be considered in determining the appropriate

enforcement action. The enforcement action will not be

determined at the meeting; a decision on the enforcement action,

if any, is usually issued several weeks after the conference.

#####
NRC NEWS

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. II-01-026 July 2, 2001 

 

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416/e-mail: kmc2@nrc.gov

Roger D. Hannah (404)562-4417/e-mail: rdh1@nrc.gov

NRC TO MEET WITH TVA NUCLEAR OFFICIALS TO DISCUSS

SAFETY PERFORMANCE AT SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Tennessee Valley Authority

officials on Tuesday, July 10, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance

at the Sequoyah nuclear power plant.

The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. in the Sequoyah Nuclear Training Auditorium at the

plant site near Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee. The public is invited to observe the meeting. NRC officials

will be available after the meeting to answer questions. The NRC will hold a second meeting with

state and local government officials after the first meeting. That second meeting is also open to the

public.

A letter sent from NRC Region II to TVA, which addresses plant safety performance during the

previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is available from the Region II Office of

Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr . Current information for the plant is

available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SEQ1/seq1_chart.html and

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SEQ2/seq2_chart.html .

###
###### Editorial Note on Part 10

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 10.818 Filing of claim for tariff preference level.

A fabric, apparel, or made-up good described in § 10.819 of this subpart that does not qualify as an originating good under § 10.810 of this subpart may nevertheless be entitled to preferential tariff treatment under the BFTA under an applicable tariff preference level (TPL). To make a TPL claim, the importer must include on the entry summary, or equivalent documentation, the applicable subheading in Chapter 99 of the HTSUS (9914.99.20) immediately above the applicable subheading in Chapter 52 through Chapter 63 of the HTSUS under which each non-originating fabric or apparel good is classified.
No. 13,228.

#### Thimmig *v.*Cleave.

(18 P. [2d] 1118)

Decided January 7, 1933.

Mr. Heed Babcock, for plaintiff in error.

No appearance for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed en bane on application for supersedeas without written opinion.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Region II

101 Marietta Street, N. W.

Suite 2900

Atlanta, GA 30323

Number: II-96-61 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Ken Clark or Roger Hannah (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)

Telephone: 404 331-5503 or 331-7878

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $100,000 CIVIL PENALTY AGAINST FP&L

BASED ON LABOR DEPARTMENT RULING AT TURKEY POINT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $100,000 civil penalty against Florida

Power & Light Company for alleged discrimination against a former employee at the Turkey Point

nuclear power plant.

The NRC decision is based upon a case in which the Secretary of Labor reversed previous

Department of Labor decisions by the DOL Area Director and a DOL Administrative Law Judge by

concluding that the company discriminated against Mr. Regino R. Diaz-Robainas when he was

terminated on August 19, 1991 for failure to submit to a psychological evaluation ordered by FP&L.

The labor secretary's ruling found that Mr. Diaz-Robainas was engaged in protected activities which

included (1) identification of technical issues involving safety concerns, (2) various verbal

complaints to management alleging he was being discriminated against for identifying safety

concerns, and (3) assertions made to FP&L that he would go to the media and the NRC.

In a Predecisional Enforcement Conference with the NRC, held in Atlanta on June 14 of this year,

FP&L denied the alleged violation, stating that Mr. Diaz-Robainas' referral to a psychologist to

undergo a fitness-for-duty evaluation was based on a pattern of declining performance and

behavioral observations, and that he was terminated for failure to comply with the referral order.

In a letter to FP&L, Stewart D. Ebneter, administrator of the NRC's Region II office in Atlanta,

said that, despite the company's denial, "the NRC adopts the Secretary of Labor's decision and finds

that the action taken against Mr. Diaz-Robainas was an act of discrimination for his having engaged

in protected activities." He said the violation was classified as a Severity Level 2, the NRC's second

most serious category, "because it involved discrimination by a member of management above firstline supervision."

Ebneter noted that FP&L has appealed the labor secretary's decision in this case to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. He said that, if the case is successfully appealed

and the Secretary of Labor's decision is reversed, "the NRC will reconsider this enforcement action

at that time."

The NRC also informed FP&L that the company may defer written response and payment of the

proposed civil penalty until 30 days after judicial review of the case is completed and a decision

based on the review is issued.

####
472 P.2d 384

#### Howard LEACH, Secretary of Corrections of the State of New Mexico, Felix RODRIGUEZ, Superintendent of the Penitentiary of New Mexico, and the Penitentiary of New Mexico, Petitioners, v. Honorable Garnett R. BURKS, District Judge of the Seventh Judicial District, sitting as District Judge of the Second Judicial District, Respondent.

No. 9099.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

July 23, 1970.

Ordered that petition for exercise of superintending control be and the same is hereby denied.
#### Asphalt Paving and Contracting Company, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent. (2 cases.)

In each case order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Mo opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
#### Yuki TAGUCHI, Mio Nishikawa, Nobuto Koyama, Katsuhiko Yamamoto, Kiyozo Asada, and Ikunoshin Kato, Appellants, v. Steen T. JORGENSEN, Per L. Jorgensen, and Borge K. Diderichsen, Appellees.

No. 01-1623.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 13, 2002.

Before GAJARSA, LINN, and DYK, Circuit Judges.

*Judgment*

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R.36
Exhibit
      23








**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**














The
      Board
      of Directors


YP
      Corp.:





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
      YP
      Corp., f/k/a YP.Net, Inc., on Form S-8 (File No. 333-107721) filed as of August
      7, 2003, of our report dated December 20, 2000, on the consolidated balance
      sheet of YP Corp. as of September 30, 2000 and the related consolidated
      statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income and cash
      flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended September 30, 2000,
      which report appears in YP Corp.’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A (Amendment No.
      2).





/s/
      Epstein, Weber & Conover P.L.C.





Scottsdale,
      Arizona


November
      30 ,
      2005