alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC NEWS U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

 Arlington, TX 76011-4005

No. IV-07-003 February 22, 2007

Contact: Victor Dricks E-Mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128

NRC ISSUES “WHITE” FINDING AT PALO VERDE NUCLEAR PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has determined that an inspection finding at the

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station regarding operability of emergency diesel generators is of

“white” or low to moderate safety significance. The facility is operated by Arizona Public

Service Co., near Wintersburg, Ariz.

“This finding was caused by performance deficiencies similar to others noted by NRC at

Palo Verde since 2004,” Region IV Administrator Bruce Mallett said. “The NRC will determine 

the appropriate follow-up actions to ensure performance improvements at Palo Verde.”

Following testing failures on July 25 and Sept. 22, an NRC special inspection identified

problems in an electrical relay that rendered the emergency diesel generator non-functional for

approximately 18 days during 2006.

Under the NRCs reactor oversight process, inspection findings are evaluated under a

significance determination process and assigned a color that indicates its safety significance.

Findings with very low safety significance are labeled "green." "White" findings have low to

moderate safety significance, "yellow" findings have substantial safety significance, and "red"

findings have high safety significance.

A preliminary "white" finding was described in a Dec. 6 inspection report. The letter

transmitting the report provided the company with an opportunity to either request a regulatory

conference to discuss the issue or to respond in writing.

During a regulatory conference with the NRC on Jan. 16, APS officials admitted

violations of NRC requirements but maintained they were of very low safety significance. After

review, the NRC has characterized the violations as a single “white” finding, of low to moderate

safety significance. 
“Diesel generators are critical components of every nuclear power plant’s defense in

depth and are relied upon to supply power to key safety systems during an emergency should the

need arise,” Mallett said. “The NRC has very rigorous requirements designed to ensure that this

equipment is properly maintained and capable of performing its safety function if called upon to

do so. APS did not do this, and this failure is similar to others identified in numerous inspection

findings and assessments since 2004. We will determine whether additional inspections,

increased oversight and other regulatory actions are appropriate.”

The company has 30 days to appeal the NRC staff’s determination of the “white” finding,

which requires additional oversight of the plant.

###

NRC news releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html . The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

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

No. III-03-013 March 26, 2003

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC TO MEET WITH EXELON NUCLEAR OFFICIALS TO DISCUSS SAFETY

PERFORMANCE AT QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Exelon Nuclear officials on

Tuesday, April 1, to discuss the results of NRC’s annual assessment of safety performance at the Quad

Cities nuclear power plant in Cordova, Illinois.

The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at the Best Western Steeplegate Inn, 100 West 76th Street

(Intersection of I-80 and Route 61), Davenport, Iowa. The public is invited to observe the meeting,

and NRC officials will be available before the conclusion of the meeting for questions and comments

from the public.

A letter from the NRC to Exelon Nuclear addresses plant safety performance during the

previous year and forms the basis for the meeting discussions. The letter states that, overall, Quad

Cities operated in a manner that preserved public health and safety and that plant performance was at a

level requiring no additional NRC inspection beyond normal baseline activities. The letter is available

from Region III Public Affairs Office and on the NRC web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/listofasmrpt.html

The letter also states that the NRC staff “has identified a substantive cross-cutting issue in the

area of human performance involving a number of findings.” Some of the examples include the

damage to a control drive pump due to improper setting of a lubricating device, a failure to recognize

that the Unit 2 shut down cooling system was inoperable for several months and instances of valves

placed in the wrong position. The NRC will discuss this issue at the meeting and continue to monitor

human performance through the baseline inspections program.

In addition, the letter notes: "As you are aware, since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,

the NRC has issued several Orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve guard

force readiness. We have conducted inspections to review your implementation of these requirements and

have monitored your actions in response to changing threat advisories. For calendar Year 2003, we plan

to continue these inspections and conduct portions of the security baseline inspection program, as well as

perform additional inspections to evaluate your compliance with new requirements that may be ordered."
Current performance information for Quad Cities is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/quad_2002q4.pdf

###
§ 551.531 Compensatory time off. ( a ) At the request of an employee who is not exempt under subpart B of this part, the head of an agency (or designee) may grant compensatory time off from an employee's tour of duty instead of payment under § 551.501 for an equal amount of irregular or occasional overtime work.
( b ) At the request of an employee, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 2105, the head of an agency may grant compensatory time off from an employee's basic work requirement under a flexible work schedule under 5 U.S.C. 6122 instead of payment under § 551.501 of this part for an equal amount of overtime work, whether or not irregular or occasional in nature.
( c ) An agency may not require that an employee be compensated for overtime work under this subpart with an equivalent amount of compensatory time off from the employee's tour of duty. An employee may not directly or indirectly intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other employee for the purpose of interfering with such employee's rights to request or not to request compensatory time off in lieu of payment for overtime hours.
( d ) If compensatory time off earned under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section is not taken within 26 pay periods after the pay period during which it was earned or if the employee transfers or separates from an agency before using the compensatory time, the employee must be paid for overtime work at the dollar value prescribed in paragraph (g) of this section.
( e ) Compensatory time off to an employee's credit as of May 14, 2007 must be used by the end of the pay period ending 3 years after May 14, 2007. If the earned compensatory time off is not taken by the end of the pay period ending 3 years after May 14, 2007, the employee must be paid for overtime work at the dollar value prescribed in paragraph (g) of this section.
( f ) If an employee with unused compensatory time off under paragraphs (a), (b), or (e) of this section separates from Federal service or is placed in a leave without pay status under the following circumstances, the employee must be paid for overtime work at the overtime rate at the dollar value prescribed in paragraph (g) of this section: ( 1 ) The employee is separated or placed in a leave without pay status to perform service in the uniformed services (as defined in 38 U.S.C. 4303 and § 353.102); or
( 2 ) The employee is separated or placed in a leave without pay status because of an on-the-job injury with entitlement to injury compensation under 5 U.S.C. chapter 81.
( g ) The dollar value of compensatory time off when it is liquidated is the amount of overtime pay the employee otherwise would have received for hours of the pay period during which compensatory time off was earned by performing overtime work.
[56 FR 20343, May 3, 1991, as amended at 62 FR 28307, May 23, 1997; 64 FR 69181, Dec. 10, 1999; 72 FR 12036, Mar. 15, 2007]
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-20501

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOHN ANTHONY TAYLOR,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-99-CR-553-2

--------------------

January 23, 2001

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

John Anthony Taylor has appealed his convictions for bank

robbery and aiding and abetting; using, carrying, and brandishing

a firearm during a crime of violence; armed bank robbery; and

using and carrying a firearm during a crime of violence. 

Taylor contends that his convictions should be reversed because

the district court constructively amended the superseding

indictment by submitting jury instructions that permitted the

jury to convict him for an offense not charged in the indictment. 
No. 00-20501

-2-

Because he did not object to the district court's special

instructions, Taylor concedes that this issue should be reviewed

for plain error. See United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160,

162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc); see also United States v.

Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 730-35 (1993). Although the district

court's instruction arguably broadened the superseding

indictment, we decline to exercise our discretion to correct the

error. See United States v. Fletcher, 121 F.3d 187, 192-93 (5th

Cir. 1997); United States v. Reyes, 102 F.3d 1361, 1364-66 (5th

Cir. 1996). 

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 10.12
                           ADDENDUM TO LEASE AGREEMENT
                             DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2004

<PAGE>



                          Addendum to a Lease Number II

This is an Addendum to the Lease dated March 29, 2001 between SAFETY HARBOR
CENTRE, INC. (Landlord) and NEW MILLENIUM MEDIA INTERNATIONAL (Tenant) for
commercial space at 200 9TH AVENUE NORTH -- SUITE 210, SAFETY HARBOR, FLORIDA
34695.

The parties agree to the following changes and additions to the Lease:

EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 2003 THE SPACE LOCATED TO THE SOUTH WEST OF THE MAIN
SUITE, SPECIFICALLY, SOUTH OF THE COMMON AREA BATHROOMS WILL BE VACATED BY NMMI
AND IN RETURN A DEDUCTION OF ($2,177.45) PER MONTH FROM THE PRESENT LEASE WILL
BE APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY BOTH PARTIES. ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS CHANGE
INCLUDING MODIFICATIONS OF THE EXISTING SPACES AS REQUESTED BY NMMI SHALL BE
PAID BY NMMI.

IT IS ALSO AGREED THAT THE RENT FOR THE COMMON AREA WHICH INCLUDES; RESTROOMS,
LOUNGE AND EQUIPMENT ROOM SHALL BE PAID AND MAINTAINED BY NMMI AT NO COST TO THE
LANDLORD, HOWEVER, THE FUTURE TENANT LEASING THE VACATED SPACES SHALL HAVE THE
RIGHT TO USE THE RESTROOMS AND THE LOUNGE.

A 200,000 SHARES OF NMMG AS SECURITY DEPOSIT.

In all other respects, the terms of the original Lease remain in full effect.
However, if there is a conflict between this addendum and the original Lease,
the Addendum will prevail.





                        [SINAGTURES ILLEGIBLE]


/s/                                            /s/
-----------------------------------            ---------------------------------
Safety Harbor Centre, Inc.                     New Millenium Media International


        2/1/04                                           2/01/04
------------------------                       --------------------------
Date                                           Date
#### § 532.201 Definitions.

For the purposes of this part:

*Full-scale survey* means a survey conducted at least every 2 years in which data are collected from a current sampling of establishments in the private sector by personal visit of data collectors. With the unanimous consent of the members of a Local Wage Survey Committee, data may also be obtained from a private sector establishment or establishments during a full-scale wage survey by telephone, mail, or electronic means.

*Host activity* is the local Federal activity designated by the lead agency to obtain employment statistics from other Federal activities in the wage area and to provide support facilities and clerical assistance for the wage survey.

*Lead agency* means the agency designated by the Office of Personnel Management to plan and conduct wage surveys, analyze wage survey data, and determine and issue required wage schedules for a wage area.

*Survey area* means that part of the wage area where the private enterprise establishments included in the wage survey are located.

*Wage area* means that geographic area within which a single set of regular wage schedules is applied uniformly by Federal installations to covered occupations.

*Wage change survey* means a survey in which rate change data are collected from the same establishments and for the same establishment occupations represented in the full-scale survey. These data may be collected by telephone, mail, electronic means, or personal visit.

[46 FR 21344, Apr. 10, 1981, as amended at 86 FR 11858, Mar. 1, 2021]
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. 98-16 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Wednesday, January 28, 1998)

NRC SEEKS INFORMATION ON ‘YEAR 2000' READINESS OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

COMPUTER SYSTEMS; ASKS PUBLIC COMMENT ON PROPOSED LETTER TO LICENSEES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is proposing to send a

letter to all licensed utilities with operational nuclear power

plants, requiring that they inform the NRC of steps they have taken or

will take to assure their computers have no problems adjusting to the

year 2000.

But before issuing the letter, NRC is seeking public comment on

its technical and regulatory aspects. NRC proposes to require that

all nuclear power plant licensees have effectively addressed the

problem by July of 1999.

The “Year 2000" problem refers to computers’ potential inability

to recognize 21st Century dates beginning with January 1, 2000, and

beyond. It is caused by computer programs that use two-digit numbers

to represent a calendar year (such as “98" for 1998). If the problem

is not corrected, vulnerable computer systems will read “00" as 1900,

rather than 2000, possibly causing some plant systems or equipment to

malfunction.

Thus far, NRC has no information that such computer-related

problems exist with safety-related systems in nuclear power plants.

But “Year 2000" problems have been found in non-safety, but

nevertheless important, computer-based applications such as security

computers, control room display systems, inventory control,

engineering programs, control systems, radiation monitoring, and

emergency response.

The proposed letter to nuclear power plant licensees would

require a response, under oath or affirmation, no later than July 1,

1999, confirming that their facility computer systems are suitable for

use at least into the year 2000 and that the plant complies with its

license and NRC regulations. Also required would be a status report

of work remaining to make computer systems fully operational in the

new century.

Written comments on the letter should be sent to Chief, Rules and

Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T6-D69, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
They also may be delivered to 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

Maryland, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.

More details, including the text of the proposed letter, are in a

notice to be published shortly in the Federal Register. The notice is

also available at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, N.W.

(Lower Level), Washington, DC.

The notice also will be posted on the NRC Internet web page at

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/NEWS/year2000.html. This web page already

contains a number of other documents issued earlier relating to the

Year 2000 problem, including NRC advisories to the industry published

in December 1996 and August 1997, as well as a summary of a meeting

NRC staff had with the Nuclear Energy Institute last October.

###
Editorial Note on Part 352
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 352 appear at 69 FR 2050, Jan. 13, 2004.

§ 352.404 Retirement and insurance. ( a ) *Coverage.* ( 1 ) To obtain retirement benefits for a term of employment with the agency, an officer covered by subchapter III of chapter 83 of title 5 United States Code, within 90 days after the date he is separated from the agency, shall pay to OPM all necessary employee deductions and agency contributions for coverage under that subchapter for his term of employment with the agency. Interest shall not be charged an officer on any payment of necessary employee deductions and agency contributions. The amount of the employee deductions so paid shall be added to the officer's lump-sum credit in the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund.
( 2 ) To retain coverage under chapter 87 of title 5, United States Code, during his term of employment with the agency, an officer covered by that chapter shall currently pay employee deductions and agency contributions necessary for coverage under that chapter for his term of employment with the agency. Collections may be made under procedures which may be determined in accordance with written agreements reached between accounting representatives of OPM and the agency.
( 3 ) All retirement and insurance benefits and obligations shall be computed in the same manner as if the rate of basic pay the officer was receiving on the last day he was in his Federal position before employment with the agency had continued without change.
( 4 ) An officer not covered by either subchapter III of chapter 83, or chapter 87, of title 5, United States Code, in the Federal position which he last held or from which he separates to enter employment with the agency does not acquire coverage or benefits under these statutes based on employment with the agency.
( b ) *Death coverage.* An officer who dies during his term of employment or within 90 days of his separation therefrom is deemed to have died in the Federal Service.
### §29a. East River, Wisconsin

All of that portion of the East River, in the county of Brown, State of Wisconsin, extending from Baird Street, in the city of Green Bay, east and south is declared to be a nonnavigable stream within the meaning of the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America.

The right of Congress to alter, amend or repeal this section is expressly reserved.

(Aug. 30, 1935, ch. 831, §9, 49 Stat. 1048.)
§ 531.206 Order of processing simultaneous pay actions. When multiple pay actions with the same effective date affect an employee's rate of basic pay, the actions will be processed in the following order: ( a ) Process general pay adjustments before any individual pay action that takes effect at the same time. General pay adjustments include an annual adjustment in the General Schedule under 5 U.S.C. 5303; an adjustment in LEO special base rates; an adjustment of a locality pay percentage under subpart F of this part; the establishment or adjustment of a special rate schedule under 5 CFR part 530, subpart C, or similar legal authority (e.g., 38 U.S.C. 7455); and an adjustment of a retained rate under 5 CFR 359.705(d)(1) and 536.305(a)(1) based on the establishment or adjustment of a pay schedule.
( b ) Convert the employee's rate(s) of pay to reflect any change in the location of the employee's official worksite, as prescribed in § 531.205 (or similar geographic conversion provision).
( c ) Process any within-grade increase or quality step increase to which the employee is entitled.
( d ) Process any promotion action using the rates of pay and rate ranges in the sequence prescribed in § 531.214.
( e ) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section or other regulation, process individual pay actions that take effect at the same time in the order that gives the employee the maximum benefit.
§ 179.305 Agency review. ( a ) A debtor may dispute the existence of the debt, the amount of the debt, or the terms of repayment. The request to review a disputed debt must be received by the OPM official identified in the notification within 30 calendar days of the debtor's receipt of the written notice described in § 179.304.
( b ) If the debtor requests an opportunity to inspect or copy OPM's records concerning the disputed claim, 10 business days will be granted for the review. The time period will be measured from the time the request for inspection is granted or from the time the copy of the records is received by the debtor.
( c ) Pending the resolution of a dispute initiated by the debtor, transactions in any of the debtor's account(s) maintained in OPM may be temporarily suspended to the extent of the debt that is owed. Depending on the type of transaction, the suspension could preclude payment, removal, or transfer, as well as prevent the payment of interest or discount due thereon. Should the dispute be resolved in the debtor's favor, the suspension will be lifted immediately.
( d ) During the review period, interest, penalties, and administrative costs authorized under the Federal Claims Collection Act of 1966, as amended, will continue to accrue.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs, Region I

 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa.

 www.nrc.gov

 

No. I-06-012 March 2, 2006

Contact: Diane Screnci, 610/337-5330 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov

Neil Sheehan, 610/337-5331

Note: The “Alert” was terminated at 4:33 a.m. on Thursday, March 2nd. The NRC Region I Office is

following up on the company’s actions during the event.

NRC TRACKING ‘ALERT’ AT SUSQUEHANNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is closely tracking an event at the Susquehanna nuclear

power plant that led to the declaration of an “Alert” on Wednesday night. An Alert is the second

lowest of four levels of emergency classification.

PPL declared the Alert at 9:27 p.m. Wednesday, after a fire-protection system discharged a firesuppression gas in a security-related building at the site, resulting in its evacuation. Despite the

localized evacuation, security at the plant, located in Berwick, Pa., and operated by PPL, was at no

point reduced or compromised.

Early this morning, an assessment was still under way to determine whether the activation of

the fire-protection system was spurious or caused by any actual smoke or fire.

Both reactors at the twin-unit nuclear plant have remained in operation throughout the event

and have not been impacted.

In response to the event, an NRC Resident Inspector stationed at the plant has reported to the

site to observe and evaluate the company’s response. In addition, the NRC is tracking developments

from the Incident Response Center at the agency’s Region I Office in King of Prussia, Pa.; has

maintained continuous contact with the company; and has communicated with the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania regarding the situation.

“We will continue to keep a close watch on the company’s response to the event, both

immediately and longer term,” NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins said. “However, it’s

important to note that the plant has remained safe and secure throughout this event.”

###