alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC ACCEPTS APPLICATION FOR NEW REACTORS AT VOGTLE 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has accepted for review a combined license (COL) 

application for two new reactors at the Vogtle site near Waynesboro, Ga. 

 Southern Nuclear submitted the application and associated information March 31. The 

application, minus proprietary or security-related details, is available on the NRC Web site here: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/col/vogtle.html. 

Southern Nuclear is applying for a license to build and operate two AP 1000 reactors at 

the Vogtle site, approximately 26 miles southwest of Augusta. The AP1000 is a 1,100 MWe 

pressurized-water reactor design the NRC certified in 2006. The agency is currently reviewing a 

Westinghouse application, submitted in May 2007, to amend the certified design. More 

information regarding the review is available on the NRC’s Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/design-cert/amended-ap1000.html. 

Docketing the Vogtle application does not indicate whether the Commission will approve 

or reject the request. The docket number established for this application is 52-025 and 52-026. 

The NRC will publish in the near future a notice of opportunity to intervene in the adjudicatory 

hearing required for this application. Petitions to intervene in a hearing may be filed within 60 

days of the notice, by anyone whose interest may be affected by the proposed license and who 

wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding. 

 In addition to Vogtle, the NRC is reviewing COL applications for the South Texas 

Project site in Texas, the North Anna site in Virginia, the Bellefonte site in Alabama, the 

Shearon Harris site in North Carolina, the Grand Gulf site in Mississippi, the Lee site in South 

Carolina and the Calvert Cliffs site in Maryland. Detailed information about the new reactor 

licensing process can be found on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/newreactor-licensing.html. 

### 

 News releases are available through a free listserv 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

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 08-113 June 9, 2008
#### In the Matter of Albert F. Ford et al., Copartners Doing Business as The Fords & University Studios, Appellants. Edward Corsi, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Appeal from a portion of a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, dated December 24, 1952, and filed in the Department of Labor on December 30, 1952. Appellants operate a photograph studio, and in connection therewith sell individual and group portraits to college sororities and fraternities. The scheme of that part of appellants’ business is for a *“*booker ” to make the original contact and interest the individual or group in at least having a photograph taken and having the proofs submitted to them. Then the *“*photographer ” follows up these contacts and takes the actual photographs and delivers the negatives to appellants. Following this, appellants furnish to *“*salesmen ” the proofs of the photographs and they proceed to sell the finished photograph or portrait. The only question involved on this appeal is whether the “ salesmen ” are employees or independent contractors. The status of the *“*bookers ” and *“*photographers ” is not in question, as they have already been held to be independent contractors. The board has determined that the salesmen are employees and subject to the Unemployment Insurance Law (Labor Law, art. 18). These salesmen work on a straight commission basis under a written contract which refers to them as independent contractors and gives them *997a great deal of latitude as to the manner of conducting their work. This is not conclusive upon the board, however, if there is evidence that they are actually employees. There is evidence that they are required to work full time; that they are subject to discharge if they fail to produce a certain result, and, necessarily, they are directed by the employers where to go to do their work, as when the employers furnish them with photographic proofs of a certain individual or group it would obviously be useless for them to go elsewhere than to these people. With this and other minor evidence of control by the employers, a question of fact is presented which we may not review. *(Matter of Morton,*284 N. Y. 167, 170.) Decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Poster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ. [See 283 App. Div. 677.]
### §153510. Statement required in audit report

The corporation shall include in the audit report statement required under section 10101(b)(1)(B) of this title a schedule of all contracts requiring payments greater than $10,000 and all payments of compensation or fees at a rate of greater than $10,000 a year.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1427.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 153510 | 36:4610(b) (2d sentence cl. (2)). | Aug. 19, 1964, Pub. L. 88–449, §10(b) (2d sentence cl. (2)), 78 Stat. 498. |

Section

The word "salaries" is omitted as included in "compensation".

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

#### Termination of Reporting Requirements

For termination, effective May 15, 2000, of reporting provisions in this section, see section 3003 of Pub. L. 104–66, set out as a note under section 1113 of Title 31, Money and Finance, and page 205 of House Document No. 103–7.
§ 430.306 Planning and communicating performance. ( a ) Each senior executive must have a performance plan that describes the individual and organizational expectations for the appraisal period that clearly fall within the senior executive's area of responsibility and control.
( b ) Supervisors must develop performance plans in consultation with senior executives and communicate the plans to them in writing, including through the use of automated systems, on or before the beginning of the appraisal period.
( c ) A senior executive performance plan must include— ( 1 ) *Critical elements.* Critical elements must reflect individual performance results or competencies as well as organizational performance priorities within each executive's respective area of responsibility and control, and be based on OPM-validated executive competencies.
( 2 ) *Performance standards.* Performance plans must include the performance standards describing each level of performance at which a senior executive's performance can be appraised. Performance standards describe the general expectations that must be met to be rated at each level of performance and provide the benchmarks for developing performance requirements.
( 3 ) *Performance requirements.* At a minimum, performance requirements must describe expected accomplishments or demonstrated competencies for fully successful performance by the executive. An agency may establish performance requirements associated with other levels of performance as well. These performance requirements must align with agency mission and strategic planning initiatives. Performance requirements must contain measures of the quality, quantity, timeliness, cost savings, or manner of performance, as appropriate, expected for the applicable level of performance.
( d ) Agencies may require a review of senior executive performance plans at the beginning of the appraisal period to ensure consistency of agency-specific performance requirements. Such reviews may be performed by the Performance Review Board (PRB) or another body of the agency's choosing.
§ 848.602 Deposit for military service. ( a ) A phased retiree who wishes to make a military service credit deposit under § 842.307 for military service performed prior to entering phased retirement status must complete such a deposit no later than the day before the effective date of his or her phased employment and the commencing date of the phased retirement annuity. A military service credit deposit for military service performed prior to an individual's entry into phased retirement status cannot be made after the effective date of phased employment and the commencing date of phased retirement annuity.
( b ) A phased retiree who wishes to make a military service credit deposit under § 842.307 for military service performed after the effective date of phased employment and the commencing date of phased retirement annuity and before the effective date of the composite retirement annuity (e.g., due to the call-up of the employee for active military service) must complete such a deposit no later than the day before the effective date of his or her composite retirement annuity.
NRC MEETING WITH PUBLIC JUNE 10 ON ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING 

FOR HARRIS NEW REACTOR APPLICATION 

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold public meetings Tuesday, June 10, in 

Holly Springs, N.C., to discuss the agency’s review of a Combined License (COL) application 

for two new reactors proposed for the Shearon Harris site and the environmental issues the 

agency should consider in reviewing the application. 

 The NRC will meet with the public from 12:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 

at the Holly Springs Cultural Center, 300 W Ballentine St. in Holly Springs. The NRC will 

transcribe the meeting, including any follow-up answers the staff provides after the meeting, and 

post the information on the agency’s Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/col/harris.html . 

NRC staff will be available for informal discussions with members of the public during 

“open house” sessions from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. No formal comments 

on the environmental review will be accepted during these open houses. 

Progress Energy submitted its application Feb. 19, seeking a license to build and operate 

two AP1000 reactors at the site, approximately 20 miles southwest of Raleigh. The AP1000 is a 

Westinghouse-designed 1,100 MWe pressurized-water reactor the NRC certified in 2006. The 

agency is currently reviewing a Westinghouse application, submitted in May 2007, to amend the 

certified design. More information regarding the review is available on the NRC’s Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/design-cert/amended-ap1000.html . 

 Those wishing to register in advance to present their comments at the meeting should 

contact Donald Palmrose by telephone at 800-368-5642 x3803, or via e-mail at 

Harris.COLEIS@nrc.gov by June 3. Those with special needs for attending or presenting 

information at the meetings should notify the staff by June 3. Those wishing to speak may also 

register at each meeting no later than 12:15 p.m. and 5:45 p.m., respectively. Individual 

comments could be limited by the time available and the number of people wishing to speak. 

 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 08-102 May 27, 2008
NRC staff will also consider written comments on the scoping process, which has been 

extended to July 25. Comments should be submitted either by mail to the Chief, Rules and 

Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, via e- mail at 

Harris.COLEIS@nrc.gov , or hand-delivered to the NRC at 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Md., between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on federal workdays. 

### 

 News releases are available through a free listserv 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.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 01-4962

STEPHEN AUBREY MCININCH,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke.

Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge.

(CR-01-20)

Submitted: April 25, 2002

Decided: June 3, 2002

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Dennis P. Brumberg, Paul A. Dull, BRUMBERG, MACKEY &

WALL, P.L.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. John L. Brownlee,

United States Attorney, Thomas J. Bondurant, Jr., Chief, Criminal

Division, Tara J. Mooney, Third Year Law Intern, Roanoke, Virginia,

for Appellee. 
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 

OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Stephen Aubrey McIninch was found guilty following a jury trial

of two counts of maliciously damaging, or attempting to damage, by

means of a fire, a building used in or affecting interstate commerce,

in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 844(i) (West 2000). Finding no reversible error, we affirm. 

On appeal, McIninch first contends that the district court erred in

denying his motions for a judgment of acquittal on both counts. A

reviewing court must uphold a jury’s verdict if the evidence, when

viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, is sufficient for

a rational trier of fact to have found the essential elements of the

crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S.

60, 80 (1942). We have reviewed the record and are satisfied that substantial evidence supports McIninch’s convictions. 

McIninch also claims that the district court abused its discretion in

admitting a videotape recreation of a fire occurring at Pebble Creek

apartments. Recognizing the potential prejudicial effects of such recreations, we have "established a requirement that video taped evidence purporting to recreate events at issue must be substantially

similar to the actual events to be admissible." Hinkle v. City of

Clarksburg, 81 F.3d 416, 425 (4th Cir. 1996). McIninch contends that

the videotape was not substantially similar to the actual event because

the light used to simulate the fire was not flickering and the apartment

lights were on during the taping. Even assuming, without deciding,

that the district court abused its discretion in admitting the videotape,

we find that any resulting error was harmless given the overwhelming

evidence against McIninch presented at trial. See Talkington v. Atria

Reclamelucifers Fabrieken BV, 152 F.3d 254, 266 (4th Cir. 1998)

(finding that any resulting error from district court’s decision to admit

a videotape of a burn test in a products liability case was harmless).

2 UNITED STATES v. MCININCH
Accordingly, we affirm McIninch’s convictions and sentence. 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. 

AFFIRMED

UNITED STATES v. MCININCH 3
§ 842.806 Mandatory separation. ( a ) The mandatory separation provisions of 5 U.S.C. 8425 apply to all law enforcement officers and firefighters, including those in secondary positions, and air traffic controllers, with the exception of a civilian employee of the Department of Transportation or the Department of Defense who is the immediate supervisor of a person described under 5 U.S.C. 2109(1)(B) (*i.e.*, a second-level supervisor). A mandatory separation under 5 U.S.C. 8425 is not an adverse action under part 752 of this chapter or a removal action under part 359 of this chapter.
( b ) Exemptions from mandatory separation are subject to the conditions set forth under 5 U.S.C. 8425. An exemption may be granted at the sole discretion of the head of the employing agency or by the President in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 8425(c).
( c ) In the event that an employee is separated mandatorily under 5 U.S.C. 8425, or is separated for optional retirement under 5 U.S.C. 8412 (d) or (e), and OPM finds that all or part of the minimum service required for entitlement to immediate annuity was in a position that did not meet the requirements of a primary or secondary position and the conditions set forth in this subpart or, if applicable, in part 831 of this chapter, such separation will be considered erroneous.
[52 FR 2069, Jan. 16, 1987, as amended at 70 FR 32710, June 6, 2005]
Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER I, Richard M.
Grandy, Manager and Chief Executive Officer of Easy Gardener Products, Ltd.,
certify that: 1. I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September
30, 2005 of Easy Gardener Products, Ltd.; 2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The
registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared; b) Evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and; c) Disclosed
in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and; 5. The
registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting. Date: November
14, 2005 /s/ Richard
  M. GrandyRichard M.
  GrandyManager /
  CEO
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 21, 2021

No. 04-20-00243-CV

THE LAW OFFICE OF DENNIS HUNSBERGER PLLC,

Appellant

v.

PHYSICIAN LIFE CARE PLANNING, LLC,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CV04283

Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

The panel has considered the Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing, and the motion is 

DENIED.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 21st day of September, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 217 (Wednesday, November 10, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 65208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25017]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special 
Emphasis Panel, Review of HIV Supplement.
    Date: November 30, 2004.
    Time: 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 
Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Martha Ann Carey, PhD, RN, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activites, National Institute 
of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd, 
Room 6151, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, (301) 443-1606, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6a07090b180f132a070b030644040302440d051c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3a57595b485f437a575b535614545352145d554c">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.242, 
Mental Health Research Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development Award, 
Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, and Research Scientist 
Award; 93.282, Mental Health National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training; National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 2, 2004.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-25017 Filed 11-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>