alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Arnold McNeil, Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Kings County, sentencing him to a maximum of ten years and a minimum of four years and sending him to the Elmira Reception Center for classification and confinement pursuant to article 3-A of the Correction Law, and from the sentence imposed. The sentence was rendered after the defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of burglary in the third degree. The appeal is on the ground that the sentence was severe and excessive. Judgment unanimously affirmed. No opinion. No separate appeal lies from the sentence which has been reviewed on the appeal from the judgment. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, MaeCrate and Schmidt, JJ.
#### Irene Steinberg, Appellant, v. Louis Steinberg, Respondent.

Present— Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ.
No. II-10-083 December 3, 2010 

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 997-4417 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

 Joey Ledford (404) 997-4416 

NRC SCHEDULES MEETING TO DISCUSS FIRE PROTECTION 

ISSUES AT BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a public meeting for Tuesday, 

Dec. 14, to discuss corrective actions associated with previously issued inspection findings 

related to fire protection at the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant. The plant is located near 

Athens, Ala., and is operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority. 

 The meeting is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. CST in the Browns Ferry Training Center 

Auditorium at the plant site. Members of the public may attend the meeting and NRC officials 

will be available to answer questions after the discussion. 

 The discussion at this regulatory performance meeting will focus on the adequacy of the 

company’s corrective actions associated with two inspection findings and related violations. 

One finding, classified as white, dealt with a revision of the plant’s fire procedures which 

reduced their effectiveness. The second finding, determined to be yellow, involved failures to 

take adequate measures to protect equipment in the event of a fire. 

Under the NRC reactor oversight process, inspection findings are evaluated using a 

significance determination process and assigned colors indicating their 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. Inspection findings with higher safety significance than 

“green” prompt the NRC to increase oversight and inspection. 

The meeting notice and the NRC inspection report covering the issues are available 

through the agency’s electronic reading room at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 

### 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II 

245 Peachtree Center Ave. NE, Suite 1200 

Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 

Web Site: www.nrc.gov
# CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT: PAC COM

 

Join BISNIS at the 

 

5th Annual Pacific Rim 

Construction Oil Mining Expo & Conference

Feb. 15-16 - Sullivan Arena - Anchorage - Alaska

www.sourdough.net
 

Join your peers & competitors atthe most important gathering of influential  industry people 

in the year 2000.

 

All the Industry Heavyweights 

What does BP Exploration Alaska,Petroleum Association of Japan, US Trade & Development Agency, US AsiaEnvironmental Partnership, US Army Corps, AGC, State of AK DOT, US Dept. ofCommerce, Newmont Gold, Cominco AK, and many other industry organizations allhave in common? ... They all will be at the 5th Annual Pac Rim Construction OilMining Expo. 

 

All the Products, Services &Equipment 

Join your peers and competitors at thePAC COM Expo and visit hundreds of exhibits. This is your best chance to see,touch & compare firsthand the newest equipment, innovative technology &state-of-the-art services - all geared toward helping you operate efficiently& effectively. 

 

All the Contacts, Opportunities &Trends 

You won't find a more dynamic,comprehensive education program than that offered at PAC COM Expo - sessions ontopics of most interest to you: contracting opportunities with the federal,state and municipal government, new business developments in the Pacific Rim,major oil and mining operators' work plans and future development.Presentations will be made by top experts state-wide, US and foreign industryand government leaders. 

http://www.sourdough.net/events/listings/pacome/conferencesched2000.htmlTrends

 

Event Admission

 

Trade show admission: FREE, you mustpre-register before Feb. 10 

Conference Admission: $15 valid forboth days, payable at the door. Lunch is available for purchase 

 

Where: Sullivan Arena, 1600 GambellSt. Anchorage Alaska - 907-279-0618 

When: February 15-16, 2000,  10:00 am to 6:00 pm daily 

Organizers: Sourdough Productions, Inc- 907-277-7469 - 888-509-7469 

http://www.sourdough.net/

 

***ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THISEVENT IS NOT AVAILABLE FROM BISNIS. 

Please contact Sourdough Productions for more information.

 

Although BISNIS have every reason to believe that this is an eventwell worth attendin, this notice does not constitute a U.S. Department ofCommerce endorsement of the event or of the organizer(s).  For a more complete listing of NIS. tradeevents, visit BISNIS Online at: http://www.bisnis.doc.gov/.

All information provided by BISNIS regarding trade events issubject to change without notice by the organizers of those events.
NRC SCHEDULES MEETING TO DISCUSS 2010 PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT FOR CATAWBA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a meeting for Thursday, 

April 28, to discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance during 2010 at the Catawba 

nuclear power plant. The plant, operated by Duke Energy, is near York, S.C., about 18 miles 

south of Charlotte, N.C.

The meeting, in the Rock Hill City Hall, 155 Johnston St. in Rock Hill, S.C., will begin 

with a presentation at 6:30 p.m., followed by an informal open house ending at 8 p.m. 

NRC staff will be available to answer questions on the safety performance of the 

Catawba plant, as well as the NRC role in ensuring safe plant operation. 

“The NRC evaluates nuclear power plants in a systemic and detailed way every year,” 

said NRC Region II Administrator Victor McCree. “The inspections and oversight at Catawba 

ensure that the plant is operated in a way that protects people and the environment.”

A letter sent from the NRC Region II office to plant officials addresses the performance 

of the plant during 2010 and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on 

the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/cat_2010q4.pdf.

The NRC found that the Catawba plant met all NRC safety objectives during 2010. 

Based on that performance, the two Catawba units will receive detailed baseline NRC 

inspections in 2011. In addition, the agency will complete an inspection related to spent fuel 

storage as well as operator licensing examinations. 

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess plant 

performance. The colors start with “green,” which has very low safety significance, to “white,” 

“yellow” or “red,” based on the significance of the issues. Inspection findings and performance 

indicators are updated on the NRC’s web site (www.nrc.gov) each quarter.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II

245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 1200

Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No: II-11-025

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 997-4417

 Joey Ledford (404) 997-4416

April 20, 2011 

E-mail: OPA2.Resource@nrc.gov
Current performance information for Catawba Unit 1 is available on the NRC web site at: 

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CAT1/cat1_chart.html. Current information for Unit 

2 is at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CAT2/cat2_chart.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 website.
#### § 839.221 If my qualifying retirement coverage error was that I was put into FERS by mistake and then, after the error was discovered, I chose my current retirement coverage, can I now make another election?

No, OPM regulations allow certain employees who were put in FERS in error to choose between remaining in FERS or being covered under their automatic retirement coverage. (See § 846.204(b)(2) of this chapter). If you already had this opportunity to choose your retirement coverage; then you may not make an election of retirement coverage based on the same error under these rules.
Exhibit 10.71



 



Exhibit 10.71


ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



     This Addendum (the “Addendum”) is made effective as of the 12th day of
December, 2003 and is intended to amend a certain Employment Agreement (the
“Agreement”) by and between Erie Indemnity Company and Michael J. Krahe
effective as of December 15, 2002.


     WHEREAS, the Company has determined that it is in the best interest of the
Company and its Shareholders to secure the continued employment of the
Executive in accordance with the terms of the Agreement; and


     WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company at its meeting of December
9, 2003 has again agreed to extend the term of the Agreement for a period of
one (1) additional year as contained herein; and


     WHEREAS, the Executive is agreeable to the extension of the Agreement.


     NOW, THEREFORE, intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as
follows:


     1.     Paragraph 1 of the Agreement with respect to the Term is hereby amended
by extending the Term to expire on December 15, 2005.


     2.     All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force
and effect.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	ATTEST:
	 	 	 	ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
/s/
	 	Jan R. Van Gorder
	 	 
	 	By:  
	/s/  	F. William Hirt
	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	Jan R. Van Gorder
	 	 	 	 	 	F. William Hirt
	 	 	 	 	Secretary
	 	 	 	 	 	Chairman of the Board
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	WITNESS:	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
/s/
	 	Kathleen E. Skelton
	 	 	 	 	/s/
	Michael J. Krahe
	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	Kathleen E. Skelton
	 	 	 	 	 	Michael J. Krahe
	 	 	 	 	Executive Secretary
	 	 	 	 	 	4516 Cedarwood Ct.
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	Erie, PA 16506




43
#### § 845.401 Purpose.

This subpart prescribes the procedures to be followed by a Federal agency when it requests the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to recover a debt owed to the United States by administrative offset against money due and payable to the debtor from the Fund. This subpart also prescribes the procedures that OPM must follow to make these administrative offsets.
Argued and submitted October 30,

affirmed November 22, 2000

#### In the Matter of the Compensation of Lonny W. Gallagher, Claimant. Lonny W. GALLAGHER, *Petitioner, v.*SAIF CORPORATION, Medford Corporation, Medite Corporation, and Compro, Inc., *Respondents.*

(99-00300; CA A109195)

14 P3d 616

Robert F. Webber argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Black, Chapman, Webber & Stevens.

Jerome P. Larkin argued the cause and filed the brief for respondents SAIF Corporation and Medford Corporation.

Gene L. Platt argued the cause for respondents Medite Corporation and Compro, Inc. With him on the brief was Cummins, Goodman, Fish & Platt, P.C.

Before Landau, Presiding Judge, and Linder and Brewer, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed. *Wantowski v. Crown Cork & Seal,*164 Or App 214, 991 P2d 574 (1999).
#### § 18.9 Awards against other agencies.

If an applicant is entitled to an award because it prevailed over another agency of the United States that participated in a proceeding before the Department and took a position that was not substantially justified, the award or an appropriate portion of the award shall be made against that agency.
###### Editorial Note on Subpart C of Part 9701

#### Editorial Note:

At 73 FR 58435, Oct. 7, 2008, the application of subpart C to part 9701 was rescinded.

#### § 9701.345 Developmental pay adjustments.

DHS will issue implementing directives regarding pay adjustments within the Entry/Developmental band. These directives may require employees to meet certain standardized assessment or certification points as part of a formal training/developmental program. In administering Entry/Developmental band pay progression plans, DHS may link pay progression to the demonstration of required knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs)/competencies. DHS may set standard timeframes for progression through an Entry/Developmental band while allowing an employee to progress at a slower or faster rate based on his or her performance, demonstration of required competencies, and/or other factors.
§ 890.1066 Notice of proposed penalties and assessments. ( a ) *Written notice.* OPM must inform a provider of proposed penalties and assessments by written notice, sent via certified mail with return receipt requested, to the provider's last known street or post office address. OPM may, at its discretion, use an express service that furnishes a verification of delivery instead of postal mail.
( b ) *Statutory limitations period.* OPM must send the notice to the provider within 6 years of the date on which the claim underlying the proposed penalties and assessments was presented to an FEHBP carrier. If the proposed penalties and assessments do not involve a claim presented for payment, OPM must send the notice within 6 years of the date of the actions on which the proposed penalties and assessments are based.
( c ) *Contents of the notice.* OPM's notice must contain, at a minimum: ( 1 ) The statement that OPM proposes to impose penalties and/or assessments against the provider;
( 2 ) Identification of the actions, conduct, and claims that comprise the basis for the proposed penalties and assessments;
( 3 ) The amount of the proposed penalties and assessments, and an explanation of how OPM determined those amounts;
( 4 ) The statutory and regulatory bases for the proposed penalties and assessments; and
( 5 ) Instructions for responding to the notice, including specific explanations regarding: ( i ) The provider's right to contest the imposition and/or amounts of penalties and assessments before they are formally imposed; and
( ii ) OPM's right, if the provider does not contest the proposed penalties and assessments within 30 days of the date he receives the notice, to implement them immediately without further administrative appeal or recourse.
( d ) *Proposing debarment in the same notice.* OPM may propose a provider's debarment in the same notice that also proposes penalties and assessments. In this case, the notice must also provide the elements of information required to appear in a notice of proposed debarment under § 890.1006(b).
( e ) *Procedures if the notice cannot be delivered.* OPM must apply the provisions of § 890.1006(f) if the notice of proposed penalties and assessments cannot be delivered as originally addressed.
( f ) *Sending notice by electronic means.* [Reserved]
# L_2021287EN.01000101.xml

| 10.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 287/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 287/1

---

Notice concerning the date of entry into force of the Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Thailand pursuant to Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in the EU Schedule CLXXV as a consequence of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union

The Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Thailand pursuant to Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in the EU Schedule CLXXV as a consequence of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union (1), signed in Brussels on 7 May 2021, entered into force on 20 July 2021.

1

---

(1)  
  OJ L 274, 30.7.2021, p. 57.

1

---
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 46139

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

BRUCE ALLEN MARCHANT,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Filed: March 6, 2019

Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Jonathan Medema, District Judge. 

Order denying I.C.R. 35 motion for reduction of sentence, affirmed. 

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before HUSKEY, Judge; LORELLO, Judge;

and BRAILSFORD, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM 

Bruce Allen Marchant pled guilty to first degree murder. I.C. §§ 18-4001, 18-4002, and 

18-4003. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court 

sentenced Marchant to a fixed life sentence. Marchant filed an I.C.R. 35 motion, which the 

district court denied. Mindful that Marchant did not submit any additional information in 

support of his Rule 35 motion, he appeals and argues that the district court erred in denying his 

motion for reduction of sentence.

A motion for reduction of sentence under I.C.R. 35 is essentially a plea for leniency, 

addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 
2

23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In 

presenting a Rule 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of 

new or additional information subsequently provided to the district court in support of the 

motion. State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). Upon review of the 

record, we conclude no abuse of discretion has been shown. Therefore, the district court’s order 

denying Marchant’s Rule 35 motion is affirmed.
### §4302. Relation to other law and plans or agreements

(a) Nothing in this chapter shall supersede, nullify or diminish any Federal or State law (including any local law or ordinance), contract, agreement, policy, plan, practice, or other matter that establishes a right or benefit that is more beneficial to, or is in addition to, a right or benefit provided for such person in this chapter.

(b) This chapter supersedes any State law (including any local law or ordinance), contract, agreement, policy, plan, practice, or other matter that reduces, limits, or eliminates in any manner any right or benefit provided by this chapter, including the establishment of additional prerequisites to the exercise of any such right or the receipt of any such benefit.

(Added Pub. L. 103–353, §2(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3150.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 4302, added Pub. L. 93–508, title IV, §404(a), Dec. 3, 1974, 88 Stat. 1596, §2022; amended Pub. L. 97–295, §4(71), Oct. 12, 1982, 96 Stat. 1310; Pub. L. 98–620, title IV, §402(36), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3360; renumbered §4302 and amended Pub. L. 102–568, title V, §506(a), (c)(1), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4340, 4341, related to procedures to enforce reemployment rights, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 103–353. This section, as in effect on the day before Oct. 13, 1994, continues to apply to reemployments initiated before the end of the 60-day period beginning Oct. 13, 1994, see section 8 of Pub. L. 103–353, as amended, set out as an Effective Date under section 4301 of this title.

Another prior section 4302 was renumbered section 7602 of this title.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective with respect to reemployments initiated on or after the first day after the 60-day period beginning Oct. 13, 1994, with transition rules, see section 8 of Pub. L. 103–353, set out as a note under section 4301 of this title.
No. 10-139 August 12, 2010 

OPENING REMARKS OF NRC CHAIRMAN GREGORY B. JACZKO AT TODAY’S 

ANNUAL BRIEFING FOR THE COMMISSION FROM THE OAS AND CRCPD 

The Commission meets today to receive its annual briefing from representatives of the 

Organization of Agreement States (OAS) and the Conference of Radiation Control Program 

Directors (CRCPD). This annual meeting offers a good opportunity for the agency and these 

important organizations to discuss how to further enhance what is already a strong working 

relationship. 

As our agenda today demonstrates, there are a number of important issues on which the 

NRC and the States work together closely – perhaps none as significant as source security. It is 

critical that the NRC, the OAS, and the CRCPD continue to coordinate effectively on the 

National Source Tracking System, Web-Based Licensing, and the License Verification System to 

ensure that their implementation proceeds smoothly. I look forward to discussing these issues, as 

well as other areas of mutual interest on our agenda today. 

### 

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.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov