alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. IV-09-008 

Contact: Victor Dricks 

Phone: (817) 860-8128 

 

 March 23, 2009 

 E-Mail: opa4@nrc.gov

NRC TO DISCUSS 2008 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT 

FOR GRAND GULF NUCLEAR PLANT APRIL 14 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Entergy 

Operations, Inc., on April 14, to discuss the agency’s 2008 assessment of safety performance for 

the Grand Gulf nuclear plant, located near Port Gibson, Miss. 

 The meeting, which will be open to the public, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at the Port 

Gibson City Hall, 1005 College St., Port Gibson. The NRC staff will present the results of the 

assessment, talk about the NRC and its range of activities, and be available to respond to 

questions or comments from the public before the close of the meeting. 

 “The NRC continually reviews the safety performance of Grand Gulf and each of the 

nation’s commercial nuclear power plants,” said Region IV Administrator Elmo E. Collins. “The 

meeting provides an opportunity for us to discuss our annual assessment of safety performance 

with the company, local officials and members of the public. We look forward to meeting with 

members of the community and answering any questions they may have about our oversight.” 

 A letter sent from the NRC Region IV office to plant officials will serve as the basis for 

the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/gg_2008q4.pdf. 

The NRC said Grand Gulf operated safely during 2008 and will receive the very detailed 

inspection regime during 2009 used by the NRC for plants that are operating well. 

 These inspections are performed by inspectors assigned to the plant and by specialists 

from the Region IV office in Arlington, Texas. 

 Current performance information for Grand Gulf is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/GG1/gg1_chart.html. 

 ### 

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

Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400 

 Arlington, TX 76011-4125 

Telephone: (817) 860-8128
#### Marion Dickerman, Individually and as Trustee under an Agreement of Consolidation between Dalton Schools, Inc., and Todhunter School, Appellant, v. Helen Parkhurst et al., Respondents.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
### [§3628. Repealed. Pub. L. 109–435, title II, §201(b), Dec. 20, 2006, 120 Stat. 3205]

Section, Pub. L. 91–375, Aug. 12, 1970, 84 Stat. 763; Pub. L. 98–620, title IV, §402(37), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3360, related to appellate review of a decision of the Board of Governors to approve, allow under protest, reject, or modify a recommended decision of the Postal Rate Commission.
EXHIBIT 32



(Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350)

The undersigned hereby certify that:

(i)  This Form 10-KSB, Annual Report, for the period ended December 31, 2003, as
     filed by Chestatee Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") with the Securities and
     Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with
     the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
     of 1934, and

(ii) the information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: March 30, 2005           BY:  /s/ J. Philip Hester, Sr.
      --------------                -------------------------
                                    J. Philip Hester, Sr., President and C.E.O.
                                    (Principal Executive Officer)


Date: March 30, 2005           BY:  /s/ Deborah F. McLeod
      --------------                ---------------------
                                    Deborah F. McLeod, C.F.O. and Treasurer
                                    (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
### §4319. Employment and reemployment rights in foreign countries

(a) Liability of Controlling United States Employer of Foreign Entity.—If an employer controls an entity that is incorporated or otherwise organized in a foreign country, any denial of employment, reemployment, or benefit by such entity shall be presumed to be by such employer.

(b) Inapplicability to Foreign Employer.—This subchapter does not apply to foreign operations of an employer that is a foreign person not controlled by an United States employer.

(c) Determination of Controlling Employer.—For the purpose of this section, the determination of whether an employer controls an entity shall be based upon the interrelations of operations, common management, centralized control of labor relations, and common ownership or financial control of the employer and the entity.

(d) Exemption.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, an employer, or an entity controlled by an employer, shall be exempt from compliance with any of sections 4311 through 4318 of this title with respect to an employee in a workplace in a foreign country, if compliance with that section would cause such employer, or such entity controlled by an employer, to violate the law of the foreign country in which the workplace is located.

(Added Pub. L. 105–368, title II, §212(b)(1), Nov. 11, 1998, 112 Stat. 3331.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section applicable only with respect to causes of action arising after Nov. 11, 1998, see section 212(c) of Pub. L. 105–368, set out as an Effective Date of 1998 Amendment note under section 4303 of this title.
NRC TO HOLD REGULATORY CONFERENCE ON JUNE 30 REGARDING 

PRELIMINARY ‘WHITE’ FINDING ISSUED TO MILLSTONE 2 NUCLEAR PLANT 

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a Regulatory Conference with Dominion 

Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., on Thursday, June 30, to discuss a preliminary “White” (low to moderate 

safety significance) inspection finding issued to the Millstone Unit 2 nuclear power plant in May. 

 The meeting is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. at the NRC’s Region I Office, at 475 Allendale 

Road in King of Prussia, Pa. It will be open to the public, with an opportunity for attendees to ask 

questions of NRC staff before it is concluded. 

 

 The Preliminary “White” finding was identified by an NRC team that performed a Special 

Inspection in response to a Feb. 12 unintended reactor power change (from 88 to 96 percent of rated 

thermal power) at Millstone Unit 2. The finding involves the failure of Millstone Unit 2 personnel 

to carry out their assigned roles and responsibilities and inadequate reactor power-level 

management during main turbine control valve testing. This contributed to the unanticipated reactor 

power increase. 

 If finalized, the finding would result in Millstone Unit 2 moving to the Regulatory Response 

Column of the NRC Action Matrix and receiving additional NRC oversight. 

The purpose of a Regulatory Conference is to discuss the inspection finding and its safety 

significance. It will also give Dominion an opportunity to clarify any issues raised in the NRC 

inspection report. No decision on the apparent violation or any enforcement action will be made at 

the conference. Those decisions will be made by NRC officials at a later time. 

###

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. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region I 

475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 

Site: www.nrc.gov

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

No. I-11-023 

Contact: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 

 Neil Sheehan (610) 337-5331 

June 21, 2011 

Email: OPA1.RESOURCE@nrc.gov
1... See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-09-224-CV

CABINET CRAFTWORKS, INC. APPELLANT

V.

NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE APPELLEE

COMPANY OF HARTFORD

----------

FROM THE 362ND DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

----------

We have considered “Appellant’s Motion For Voluntary Dismissal.” It is

the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Costs of the appeal shall be paid by appellant, for which let execution

issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and MEIER, J.

DELIVERED: October 29, 2009
§ 30.25 Values for certain types of transactions. Special procedures govern the values to be reported for shipments of the following unusual types: ( a ) *Subsidized exports of agricultural products.* Where provision is made for the payment to the USPPI for the exportation of agricultural commodities under a program of the Department of Agriculture, the value required to be reported for EEI is the selling price paid by the foreign buyer minus the subsidy.
( b ) *General Services Administration (GSA) exports of excess personal property.* For exports of GSA excess personal property, the value to be shown in the EEI will be “fair market value,” plus charges when applicable, at which the property was transferred to GSA by the holding agency. These charges include packing, rehabilitation, inland freight, or drayage. The estimated “fair market value” may be zero, or it may be a percentage of the original or estimated acquisition costs. (Bill of lading, air waybill, and other commercial loading documents for such shipments will bear the notation “Excess Personal Property, GSA Regulations 1-III, 303.03.”)
( c ) *Goods rejected after entry.* For imported goods that are cleared by CBP but subsequently rejected, an EEI must be filed to export the goods. The value to be reported in the AES is the declared import value of the goods.
[73 FR 31555, June 2, 2008, as amended at 78 FR 16379, Mar. 14, 2013]
#### § 295.24 Registration.

Joint ventures selected for funding under the Program must notify the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission under the National Cooperative Research Act of 1984. No funds will be released prior to receipt by the Program of copies of such notification.

[63 FR 64415, Nov. 20, 1998]
NRC DETERMINES NO MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS PRECLUDE 

LICENSING NICHOLS RANCH URANIUM RECOVERY SITE IN WYOMING

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has determined there are no major 

environmental impacts that would preclude licensing the Nichols Ranch uranium 

recovery project proposed for Johnson and Campbell counties in Wyoming.

In its final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Nichols

Ranch project, the NRC determined only small to moderate environmental impacts would 

result from the construction, operation, aquifer restoration and decommissioning of the 

proposed in-situ recovery facility. Most of the impacts are projected to be “small,” 

meaning they would be undetectable or so minor that they would not noticeably alter any 

important attribute of the resource in question. The SEIS also identifies “small to 

moderate” socioeconomic impacts, primarily due to the potential need for additional 

housing for employees at the facility and economic activity generated by the facility. 

“Moderate” impacts are defined as being sufficient to alter the resource noticeably, but 

not destabilize its important attributes.

The Nichols Ranch report is a supplement to the NRC’s Generic Environmental 

Impact Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium Milling Facilities (GEIS, NUREG-1910), 

published in June 2009, which analyzed potential environmental impacts common to insitu recovery facilities in the western United States. The Nichols Ranch supplement 

analyzes potential environmental impacts specific to the proposed facility.

A draft SEIS for Nichols Ranch was published for public comment in 

December 2009. The final SEIS addresses the comments received on the draft report.

Uranerz Energy Corp. submitted the license application for Nichols Ranch on 

Nov. 30, 2007. The proposed project will be located in the Pumpkin Buttes Uranium 

Mining District of the Powder River Basin, about 46 miles south-southwest of Gillette 

and 60 miles north-northeast of Casper. The project would cover nearly 3,400 acres, of 

which about 300 acres would be directly affected by operations. The facility would 

recover and mill uranium for use in fuel for commercial nuclear power plants.

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

No. 11-010 January 24, 2011
The Nichols Ranch SEIS, NUREG-1910 Supplement 2, is available on the NRC 

website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1910/s2/. The 

final report was transmitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Jan. 21. 

Federal Register notices will be published by EPA and NRC on Jan. 28. 

###

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.
#### § 287.2 Definitions.

For the purposes of this part:

*Agency* means any Executive Department, independent commission, board, bureau, office, government-owned or controlled corporation, or other establishment of the Federal Government. It also includes any regulatory commission or board, except for independent regulatory commissions insofar as they are subject to separate statutory requirements regarding policy setting, management, operation, and use of conformity assessment. It does not include the legislative or judicial branches of the Federal Government.

*Agency Standards Executive* means an official designated by an agency as its representative on the Interagency Committee for Standards Policy (ICSP) and delegated the responsibility for agency implementation of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119 and the guidance in this part.

*Conformity assessment* is a demonstration, whether directly or indirectly, that specified requirements relating to a product, process, system, person, or body are fulfilled. Requirements for products, services, systems, persons, and organizations are those defined by law or regulation, by an agency in regulatory or procurement actions, or an agency programmatic policy. Conformity assessment does not include mandatory administrative procedures (such as registration notification) for granting permission for a good or service to be produced, marketed, or used for a stated purpose or under stated conditions. Conformity assessment related terminology and concepts, including a discussion of the value and benefits of conformity assessment, are contained in NIST Special Publication 2000-01, *ABCs of Conformity Assessment* (2018) found free of charge at: *https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.2000-01* and *NIST Special Publication 2000-02, Conformity Assessment Considerations for Federal Agencies,* found at: *https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.2000-02.* The definitions of conformity assessment related terminology included in these documents are based on voluntary consensus standards. See OMB Circular A-119 for a description of voluntary consensus standards and recommendations for their development and use by Federal agencies.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6244

ERIC SAMUEL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

J. CROOM HUNTER, Staff Attorney of the South Carolina Attorney General’s 

Office; STEPHANIE P. MCDONALD, Chief Administrative Judge of the Ninth 

Judicial Circuit; DANIEL E. SHEAROUSE, Clerk of Court of the South Carolina 

Supreme Court; R. MARKLEY DENNIS, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court Judge,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. 

Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (1:20-cv-01277-TMC)

Submitted: July 20, 2021 Decided: July 23, 2021

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Samuel, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Eric Samuel appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the 

magistrate judge and dismissing Samuel’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Samuel v. Hunter, 

No. 1:20-cv-01277-TMC (D.S.C. Feb. 2, 2021). We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Louis A. Weber, et al., as Administrators of the Estate of Lois J. Weber, Deceased, Respondents, v. United Air Lines, Inc., Appellant.

Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant, unless the plaintiffs stipulate to accept a further reduction in the personal injuries action to $15,000 damages, in addition to the $17,000 awarded in the wrongful death action, in which event the judgment, as so modified is affirmed, without costs. The amount awarded is excessive. Settle order on notice. Present-— Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Callahan and Breitel, JJ.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# 2009 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Waste Disposal Report, Palisades, Big Rock Point.

Accession Number: ML101270288

Date Released: Monday, May 10, 2010

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.
    - ML101270279 - 2009 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Waste Disposal Report, Palisades, Big Rock Point. (14 page(s), 4/30/2010)
    - ML101270280 - Enclosure 1, Palisades Nuclear Plant, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Revision 23. (166 page(s), 1/12/2010)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 21

- 00235

- CV

JENNIFER STEWART, DONALD STEWART,

STEVEN STEWART, AND KATHY STEWART,

AND D/B/A ROYAL HORSE FARMS

, Appellant s

v.

AARON WHITELOCK AND DONNA WHITELOCK

, Appellee s

From the 13th District Court

Navarro County, Texas

Trial Court No. D21

- 29799

- CV

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants Jennifer Stewart, Donald Stewart, Steven Stewart, and Kathy Stewart,

and collectively as d/b/a Royal Horse Farms, moved to dismiss their appeal on

October 1, 2021. In the motion, appellants assert they no longer wish to pursue their

appeal because a motio n for new trial was granted by the trial court which vacated the

order appealed.Stewart, et al. v. Whitelock Page 2 The Court grants the motion and dismisses the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(a).

T here being no agreement as to costs, costs are taxed against appellant s

, Jennifer Stew art,

Donald Stewart, Steven Stewart, and Kathy Stewart, and collectively as d /b /a Royal

Horse Farms

. Id . (d).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Johnson, and

Justice Smith

Motion granted

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed October 6 , 2021

[CV 06 ]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0282 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. RYAN PATRICK SULLIVAN,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**O RDER**  Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including February 14, 2022 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 5 2022

01/05/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0282
### §313. Availability of appropriations

(a) Funds appropriated to the Department may remain available until expended.

(b) Funds appropriated to the Department may not be used for a settlement of more than $1,000,000 on a construction contract unless—

(1) the settlement is audited by an entity outside the Department for reasonableness and appropriateness of expenditures; and

(2) the settlement is provided for specifically in an appropriation law.

(Added Pub. L. 102–83, §2(a), Aug. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 383.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Prior section 313 was renumbered section 1113 of this title.

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 203 of this title prior to repeal by Pub. L. 102–83, §2(a).

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

#### Recurring Expenses Transformational Fund

Pub. L. 114–113, div. J, title II, §243, Dec. 18, 2015, 129 Stat. 2701, provided that: "There is hereby established in the Treasury of the United States a fund to be known as the 'Recurring Expenses Transformational Fund' (the Fund): Provided, That unobligated balances of expired discretionary funds appropriated in this or any succeeding fiscal year from the General Fund of the Treasury to the Department of Veterans Affairs by this or any other Act may be transferred (at the end of the fifth fiscal year after the last fiscal year for which such funds are available for the purposes for which appropriated) into the Fund: Provided further, That amounts deposited in the Fund shall be available until expended, and in addition to such other funds as may be available for such purposes, for facilities infrastructure improvements, including nonrecurring maintenance, at existing hospitals and clinics of the Veterans Health Administration, and information technology systems improvements and sustainment, subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget: Provided further, That prior to obligation of any amounts in the Fund, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall request from the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress the authority to make such obligation and such Committees issue an approval, or absent a response, a period of 30 days has elapsed."
1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please

2 see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. 

3 Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated

4 errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does

5 not include the filing date. 

6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

7 TARGET NATIONAL BANK,

8 Plaintiff-Appellee,

9 v. NO. 29,831 

10 MARY H. RAMIREZ,

11 Defendant-Appellant.

12 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CHAVES COUNTY

13 Ralph D. Shamas, District Judge

14 Law Offices of Farrell & Seldin

15 James Grubel

16 Darren Tallman

17 Albuquerque, NM

18 for Appellee

19 Mary H. Ramirez

20 Roswell, NM

21 for Appellant

22 MEMORANDUM OPINION

23 WECHSLER, Judge.
2

1 Summary dismissal was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of

2 proposed disposition. No memorandum opposing summary dismissal has been filed,

3 and the time for doing so has expired.

4 Dismissed.

5 IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 ______________________________

7 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 

8 WE CONCUR:

9 _______________________________

10 ROBERT E. ROBLES, Judge

11 _______________________________

12 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge