alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

RIV: 99-09 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Breck Henderson March 25, 1999

OFFICE: 817-860-8128

PAGER: 888-876-2331

E-Mail: bwh@nrc.gov

NRC FINDS PERFORMANCE ‘ACCEPTABLE’

AT COMANCHE PEAK IN LATEST REVIEW

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has found that safety performance remains

acceptable in the NRC’s latest plant performance review at the Comanche Peak nuclear power

plant, located near Glen Rose, Texas.

Officials of NRC and TU Electric, the utility which operates the plant, will discuss the

review during a meeting set for Monday, March 29 at 1 p.m. in the Comanche Peak support

services building training room. The meeting will be open for public observation. NRC officials

will be available afterwards to speak with reporters, state and local officials, and members of

the public.

In a letter to TU Electric Nuclear Group Vice President C. L. Terry summarizing the

review findings, NRC Branch Chief Joseph I. Tapia said, “Overall performance at Comanche

Peak has continued to be acceptable. Performance in the operations area exhibited a strong

safety focus and conservative decision making. The maintenance area was characterized by

consistent performance and excellent plant material condition. An overall strong Maintenance

Rule program has been developed.”

In the engineering area, support to assure safe plant operations was good although

isolated design problems posed challenges to operators during transients. Corrective actions

were generally appropriate and conservative, but examples of weak troubleshooting were

recently identified. Performance in the plant support area continued to be effective, Mr. Tapia

said. Only core inspections will be performed during the next eight months.

The text of the plant performance review letter is available from the NRC Region IV

Office of Public Affairs and on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr.

NRC reviews safety performance twice a year at every licensed nuclear power plant in

the nation. These reviews give the agency staff an integrated assessment of plant performance

and provide a basis for planning inspection activities.

Plant performance reviews are an interim measure NRC is utilizing to monitor nuclear

power plant safety. The agency began using it for this purpose after suspending the

Systematic Assessment of License Performance (SALP) process until a new assessment

program is developed. Previously, SALP reports were issued every 12 to 24 months.

The new reactor oversight and assessment program being developed will provide
quarterly performance reports, based on a number of performance indicators and on inspection

findings. This program will be tested at eight plants beginning in June and, if found acceptable,

will be extended to all plants next January. A full description of the new program is available on

the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/primer.htm.

###
#### Charles A. Jacobson, Jr., Respondent, v. Kazimierz Warzycki, as Liquidator of the Bank of Dyskontowy Warszawski, Spolka Akcyjna (Warsaw Discount Bank Stock Corporation), Appellant.

Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-02-0198 - Changes in Staff Regulatory Oversight of Decommissioning Commercial Nuclear Power Reactor Plants

Accession Number: ML022910262

Date Released: Tuesday, November 26, 2002

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML022910247 - SECY-02-0198 - Changes in Staff Regulatory Oversight of Decommissioning Commercial Nuclear Power Reactor Plants (6 page(s), 11/8/2002)
    - ML022910258 - SECY-02-0198-Attachment:  The Road Map - Transfer of Commercial Nuclear Power Plants from NRR to NMSS (1 page(s), 11/8/2002)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
### §1024. Inclusion of geothermal leasing under certain other laws

As to any land subject to geothermal leasing under section 1002 of this title, all laws which either (a) provide for the disposal of land by patent or other form of conveyance or by grant or by operation of law subject to a reservation of any mineral or (b) prevent or restrict the disposal of such land because of the mineral character of the land, shall hereafter be deemed to embrace geothermal resources as a substance which either must be reserved or must prevent or restrict the disposal of such land, as the case may be. This section shall not be construed to affect grants, patents, or other forms of conveyances made prior to December 24, 1970.

(Pub. L. 91–581, §25, Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1573; Pub. L. 109–58, title II, §236(1), (23), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 671, 673.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2005—Pub. L. 109–58 inserted section catchline and substituted "geothermal resources" for "geothermal steam and associated geothermal resources" in text.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6795

CHRISTOPHER BANKS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus GENE JOHNSON, Director of D.O.C., Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:06-cv-00988-LMB) Submitted: December 20, 2007 Decided: December 27, 2007 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Banks, Appellant Pro Se. Alice T. Armstrong, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Christopher Banks seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 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 that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Banks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         403,435
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,631,939
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (120,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,000,658
<PP&E>                                      18,987,597
<DEPRECIATION>                             (5,514,497)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,715,969
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,595,015
<BONDS>                                     49,555,649
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       19,396,949
<PREFERRED>                                  3,000,000
<COMMON>                                        26,627
<OTHER-SE>                                (62,081,510)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,715,969
<SALES>                                          4,807
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,501,269
<CGS>                                            1,526
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               27,748,987
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (67,175)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               223,989
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,296,716
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (29,995,247)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (29,995,247)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (29,995,247)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (12.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (12.34)


</TABLE>
§ 162.73 Penalties under section 592, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. ( a ) *Maximum penalty without prior disclosure.* If the person concerned has not made a prior disclosure as provided in § 162.74, the monetary penalty under section 592, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1592), shall not exceed: ( 1 ) For fraudulent violations, the domestic value of the merchandise;
( 2 ) For grossly negligent violations, ( i ) The lesser of the domestic value of the merchandise or four times the loss of duties, taxes and fees or
( ii ) If there is no loss of duties, taxes and fees 40 percent of the dutiable value of the merchandise; and
( 3 ) For negligent violations, ( i ) The lesser of the domestic value of the merchandise or two times the loss of duties, taxes and fees or
( ii ) If there is no loss of duties, taxes and fees 20 percent of the dutiable value of the merchandise.
( b ) *Maximum penalty with prior disclosure.* If the person concerned has made a prior disclosure, the monetary penalty shall not exceed: ( 1 ) For fraudulent violations, ( i ) One times the loss of duties, taxes and fees or
( ii ) If there is no loss of duties, taxes and fees 10 percent of the dutiable value of the merchandise; and
( 2 ) For grossly negligent and negligent violations, the interest on any loss of duties, taxes and fees. The interest shall be computed from the date of liquidation at the prevailing rate of interest applied under section 6621, Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended (26 U.S.C. 6621).
( c ) *Exception; clerical error or mistake of fact.* There is no violation and, consequently, no penalty incurred, if the falsity or omission is due solely to clerical error or mistake of fact, unless the error or mistake is part of the pattern of negligent conduct.
[T.D. 79-160, 44 FR 31958, June 4, 1979, as amended by T.D. 99-64, 64 FR 43267, Aug. 10, 1999]
Promissory Note


$100,000.00                                                    March 4, 2002
-----------                                                    -------------


         On the date  listed  above,  for value  received  Prime  Resource,  LLC
(hereinafter  referred  to as  Borrower)  hereby  promise to pay to the order of
Terry Deru (hereinafter  referred to as Holder),  at 99 Cove Lane, Layton,  Utah
84040 the sum of One Hundred  Thousand Dollars  ($100,000.00),  with interest at
the rate of five  percent  (5.0%),  in  lawful  money of the  United  States  of
America, on or before March 4, 2005.

         In the event of  default,  Borrower(s)  agrees  that the entire  unpaid
balance  hereof  shall  become,  at the  election  of Holder and with  Notice to
Borrower,  accelerated and immediately due and payable; (b) agrees to pay Holder
all lawful collection costs and legal expenses,  including reasonable attorney's
fees,  and (c) agrees that any  payments  from  whatever  source  shall first be
applied to Holder's  collection costs and legal expenses,  second to late charge
fees,  third to interest,  and fourth to principal,  at the option of the Holder
hereof.  Waiver of any default shall not  constitute a waiver of any  subsequent
default.

         Any  payment  not  received  by Holder  within ten (10) days of its due
date,  shall include an eighteen  Percent (18%) late charge fee per month on the
balance due.

         The  maker  and  endorser  of  this  Note   expressly   waives  demand,
preentation for payment,  notice of nonpayment and protest, and suit against the
Maker;  and also  agrees  that  this  Note may be  extended  in whole or in part
without his consent at or after maturity.




/s/ Terry Deru
-------------------------------
    Terry Deru, Managing Member
NO. 12-24-00092-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

DWIGHT CALLIER AND 

FRAN CALLIER, 

APPELLANTS

V.

NEW DOOR PROPERTIES, LLC,

APPELLEE

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE 

COUNTY COURT AT LAW

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellants Dwight Callier and Fran Callier filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this 

appeal. The motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.1(a). Costs are taxed against the party incurring same.

Opinion delivered May 31, 2024.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

MAY 31, 2024

NO. 12-24-00092-CV

DWIGHT CALLIER AND FRAN CALLIER,

Appellants

V.

NEW DOOR PROPERTIES, LLC,

Appellee

Appeal from the County Court at Law

of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 76481)

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the unopposed motion of the 

Appellants to dismiss the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, 

ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal 

be dismissed, and that the decision be certified to the court below for observance. Costs are 

taxed against the party incurring same.

By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.64 Crediting or cancellation of bonds. ( a ) Except as stated below, a bond on Customs Form 301, containing the bond conditions set forth in § 113.62 of this chapter may be credited or canceled in respect of such articles upon the vessel's departure from the port of lading in a class of trade or business entitling the articles to exemption from duty and tax under the statute. The withdrawer shall cause the merchandise to be delivered to the lading vessel, and shall provide such evidence of lading as required by the port director within 30 days after lading, except as provided in this section. If the vessel is not operated by the United States and proceeds in ballast from the port where the articles are laden to another port to lade passengers or cargo for carriage in a class of trade specified in section 309, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, the bond may be credited or canceled upon the filing with the director of the port of withdrawal within 3 months after the date of withdrawal of a proper declaration as prescribed below. The declaration shall be executed by one of the following who has knowledge of the facts: ( 1 ) The operations manager or port captain for the vessel on which the articles are laden but not a representative of the supplier.
( 2 ) The master or other officer of the vessel on which the articles are laden. The declaration shall be in substantially the following form: I,

(Operations manager, port captain, master, or other officer) of the vessel ____________ declare that I have knowledge of the facts set forth herein, and that upon the lading of the articles described below covered by withdrawal No. ________, filed at ________________(Name of port), the vessel then proceeded in ballast to ________________(Name of port) to lade cargo or passengers; that the vessel was suitable for service in the class of trade checked below with fittings, outfit, and equipment for such trade already installed when it so departed in ballast; and that upon arrival it proceeded to engage in the carriage of cargo or passengers in such trade, except as stated below: (If no exception, note “None”) 1. Foreign Trade. 2. Trade between Atlantic and Pacific ports of the United States, when such trade is not prohibited by coastwise laws. 3. Trade between the United States and any of its possessions, when such trade is not prohibited by coastwise laws. 4. Trade between Alaska or Hawaii and any other part of the United States, when such trade is not prohibited by coastwise laws. Description of articles: (Name and title)
( b ) A declaration as to the intended business or trade of a vessel may, in the discretion of the port director, be accepted in lieu of a declaration prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section when the amount of duty or tax, or both, involved in a single lading is less than $100.
[28 FR 14663, Dec. 31, 1963, as amended by T.D. 84-213, 49 FR 41166, Oct. 19, 1984]
CERTIFICATION OF 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 Quarterly Report of Global Industries, Ltd. ("Global") on Form10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on
August 13, 2003 (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
SS 1350 as adopted pursuant to SS 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge based upon a review of the Report, that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 Global as of the dates and for periods presented as required by such Report.





|/S/ WILLIAM J. DORE    
|-----------------------
|William J. Dore        
|Chief Executive Officer
|August 8, 2003         



This certification is provided pursuant to SS 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by Global or the certifying officer for purposes of
SS 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by SS 906 has been provided to Global Industries, Ltd.
and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-78295, No. 333-48154, No. 333-48156, No. 333-65130, No. 333-83818, and No.
333-99385 on Form S-8 of BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries of our report dated March
8, 2004 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an
explanatory paragraph relating to the change in method of accounting for
contributions received from trade vendors), appearing in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries for the fiscal year ended December 28,
2003.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 11, 2004
### §1868a. Semiannual report of disbursements

#### (a) Reports required

Not later than 60 days after the last day of each semiannual period, the Architect of the Capitol shall submit to Congress, with respect to that period, a detailed, itemized report of the disbursements for the operations of the Office of the Architect of the Capitol.

#### (b) Contents

The report required by subsection (a) shall include—

(1) the name of each person who receives a payment from the Office of the Architect of the Capitol;

(2) the quantity and price of any item furnished to the Office of the Architect of the Capitol;

(3) a description of any service rendered to the Office of the Architect of the Capitol, together with a statement of the time required for the service, and the name, title, and amount paid to each person who renders the service;

(4) a statement of all amounts appropriated to, or received or expended by, the Office of the Architect of the Capitol and any unexpended balances of such amounts;

(5) the information submitted to the Comptroller General under section 3523(b) of title 31; and

(6) such additional information as may be required by regulation of the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representatives or the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate.

#### (c) Printing

Each report under this section shall be printed as a House document.

#### (d) Effective date

This section shall apply with respect to the semiannual periods of January 1 through June 30 and July 1 through December 31 of each year, beginning with the semiannual period in which this section is enacted.

(Pub. L. 113–76, div. I, title I, §1301, Jan. 17, 2014, 128 Stat. 428.)
### §558. Library, records, etc., of Department

The Secretary of Labor shall have charge in the buildings or premises occupied by or appropriated to the Department of Labor, of the library, furniture, fixtures, records, and other property pertaining to it or acquired for use in its business. He shall be allowed to expend for periodicals and the purposes of the library and for rental of appropriate quarters for the accommodation of the Department of Labor within the District of Columbia, and for all other incidental expenses, such sums as Congress may provide from time to time.

(Mar. 4, 1913, ch. 141, §6, 37 Stat. 738.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 617 of Title 5 prior to the general revision and enactment of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, by Pub. L. 89–554, §1, Sept. 1, 1966, 80 Stat. 378.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of Labor, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of Labor, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 6, of 1950, §§1, 2, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1263, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
Editorial Note on Part 142
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 142 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 142.25 Discontinuance of immediate delivery privileges. ( a ) *Authority of port director.* The port director may discontinue immediate delivery privileges if the importer: ( 1 ) Has failed repeatedly to file the applicable Customs documentation set forth in § 142.22(b) timely without justification, or
( 2 ) Has not taken prompt action to settle a claim for liquidated damages issued under § 142.27 for failure to file the applicable Customs documentation set forth in § 142.22(b) timely, or a claim for liquidated damages issued under the basic importation and entry bond for failure to deposit estimated duties, taxes and charges timely, as provided in such bond. “Prompt action” means that the importer, within the time specified in a claim for liquidated damages shall petition for relief or pay the amount claimed and, file the applicable documentation and deposit estimated duties, if any.
( 3 ) Has repeatedly delivered documentation required by § 142.22(b) which is incomplete or which contains erroneous information.
( 4 ) Is substantially or habitually delinquent in the payment of Customs bills. See § 142.26.
( b ) *Brokers; restriction.* A broker shall not circumvent an action taken under this section by applying for the immediate release of the importer's merchandise in the broker's name and under the broker's bond.
[T.D. 79-221, 44 FR 46821, Aug. 9, 1979, as amended by T.D. 93-37, 58 FR 30984, May 28, 1993; T.D. 95-77, 60 FR 50020, Sept. 27, 1995]