alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature: Project No.: 0172.08.005.607 Page 1 of 1

Project Name: 2011 Prelim Cat Rev 

### CBI?
Yes
No TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Incoming Outgoing Date: 08/24/11 Time: 2:00 am
pm

Company Name: NCDENR ERG Staff Name: Elizabeth Sabol

Contact Name: Jacquelyn Nowell Contact Phone Number: (919)733-5083 ext 512

General Subject: 2009 DMR Fluoride Discharges



### TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

I called Ms. Nowell on Wednesday, August 24, 2011 at 2:00 pm to obtain information on fluoride discharges from the Feldspar Corporation Spruce Pine mine in the 2009 DMR data. A summary of the conversation is provided below.

Ms. Nowell stated that there are 5 feldspar mines al ong the North Toe River in North Carolina (including the Spruce Pine mine). Ms. Nowell explaine d that the water quality standard in the North Carolina for fluoride is 1.8 mg/L. Using the water quality standard, the total allocation for fluoride in the North Toe River is determine and then divided among the five mines based on the design capacity to determine each facility’s fluoride permit limits. Ms. Nowell also explained that they use the 7Q 10 flow to determine the fluoride allocation. North
Carolina monitors fluoride levels in the North Toe River at ambient monitoring stations to confirm that fluoride concentrations are below 1.8 mg/L. Ms. Nowell also stat ed that fluoride is not considered a problem in the North Toe River; therefore, no revisions to the wa ter quality standard are in the near future.

Ms. Nowell also stated that all five feldspar mines curr ently discharge directly to the North Toe River; however, prior to 2010, one facility (Unimin Co rporation) directed its facility disc harges to the Feldspar Corporation Spruce Pine facility. Therefore, the Spruce Pine permit lim its were higher to account for the Unimin discharges until 2010, when they were lowered after Unimin started discharging directly.
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 18, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-21154

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ANDRES BADILLO-LEIJA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CR-316-1

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

We recall the mandate, withdraw the opinion issued May 7,

2003, and substitute the following:

Andres Badillo-Leija (“Badillo”) appeals his sentence for illegal reentry after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
No. 01-21154

-2-

He argues that the district court erred (1) by enhancing his offense level by eight levels pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C),

(2) by departing upward by four levels pursuant to U.S.S.G.

§ 4A1.3, and (3) by including special conditions of supervised release in its written judgment that were not orally pronounced at

the sentencing hearing. 

Badillo argues that his felony convictions for possession of

cocaine were not “aggravated felonies” warranting an eight-level

enhancement but were instead “other felonies” warranting only a

four-level enhancement. A prior conviction is an aggravated felony

“if (1) the offense was punishable under the Controlled Substances

Act and (2) it was a felony.” United States v. Hinojosa-Lopez, 130

F.3d 691, 694 (5th Cir. 1997). Badillo’s arguments were rejected

in United States v. Caicedo-Cuero, 312 F.3d 697, 706-11 (5th Cir.

2002), cert. denied, 123 S. Ct. 1948 (2003).

We affirm an upward departure “if (1) the [district] court

gives acceptable reasons for departing and (2) the extent of the

departure is reasonable.” United States v. Route, 104 F.3d 59, 64

(5th Cir. 1997). The district court provided acceptable reasons

for departing upward pursuant to § 4A1.3 by citing Badillo’s five

previous felony convictions and his history of recidivism, and the

four-level departure and additional 16 months’ imprisonment were

reasonable.

Badillo argues that the district court erred by including in

the written judgment special conditions of supervised release that
No. 01-21154

-3-

were not stated at the sentencing hearing. We recently held that

the inclusion in the written judgment of a condition requiring additional drug testing, even if that condition was not orally pronounced, does not create a conflict between the oral and written

judgments. See United States v. Vega, No. 01-41019, 2003 WL

21257969 (5th Cir. June 2, 2003) (per curiam). 

Badillo’s argument that the district court impermissibly delegated to the Probation Department the authority to determine his

ability to pay is foreclosed by United States v. Warden, 291 F.3d

363, 364-65 & n.1 (5th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 123 S. Ct. 35

(2003).

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 21 (Thursday, January 31, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 529-530]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00428]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 270

[Docket ID: DOD-2018-OS-0050]
RIN 0790-AK38


Compensation of Certain Former Operatives Incarcerated by the 
Democratic Republic of Vietnam

AGENCY: Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule removes the Department of Defense (DoD) 
regulation concerning compensation of certain former operatives 
incarcerated by the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. The content of this 
part is obsolete as the claim period expired and the Vietnam Commandos 
Compensation Commission was disbanded. Therefore, this part is 
unnecessary, and can be removed.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 31, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Syendsen, 703-695-9371.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This part was originally published 15 May 
1997 under the National Defense Authorization Act of FY 1997 and 
established the Vietnam Commandos Compensation Commission within the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense. The rule authorized a claims 
process for compensation of Vietnamese operatives who served in certain 
U.S.-led operations, were captured, and incarcerated in the Democratic 
Republic of Vietnam. The claim period expired 15 May 2000; payments 
were completed by July 2001; and, the commission was disbanded.
    This rule is not significant under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, 
``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' therefore, the requirements of E.O. 
13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,'' do not 
apply.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 270

    Claims, Military personnel, Prisoners of war, Vietnam.

[[Page 530]]

PART 270--[REMOVED]

0
Accordingly, by the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301, 32 CFR part 270, is 
removed.

    Dated: January 28, 2019.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2019-00428 Filed 1-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
### SUBCHAPTER II—URBAN AND RURAL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ABOVE ALL BAIL BONDS and TIMOTHY KOZLOWSKI,

Appellants,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA and

THE ST. LUCIE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT,

Appellees.

No. 4D18-2266

[March 14, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Gary L. Sweet, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562017CF002231A.

Russell J. Ferraro, III, of Ferraro Law Group PL, Stuart, for appellant.

Stephen S. Isherwood of Travis R. Walker, P.A., Stuart, for appellee The 

St. Lucie Clerk of the Circuit Court.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., TAYLOR and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
### Part D—Enforcement
### SUBCHAPTER II—ENERGY SECURITY THROUGH INCREASED PRODUCTION OF BIOFUELS
Exhibit 23.1





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We have issued our report dated March 31, 2011 with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of XO Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.  We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of XO Holdings, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-103428, effective April 11, 2006 and File No. 333-106302 effective April 11, 2006) and on Forms S-3 (File No. 333-128489, effective April 14, 2006, File No. 333-135173, effective July 5, 2006, File No. 333-147643 effective January 18, 2008 and File No. 333-144567, effective August 27, 2008).





/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLPMcLean, VirginiaMarch 31, 2011
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-12-0095 - Tier 3 Program Plans And 6-Month Status Update In Response To Lessons Learned From Japan's March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake And Subsequent Tsunami

Accession Number: ML12165A089

Date Released: Friday, April 29, 2022

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.
    - ML12165A092 - SECY-12-0095 - Enclosure 1:  Six-Month Status Update On Charter Activities - February 2012 - July 2012 (10 page(s), 7/13/2012)
    - ML12165A093 - SECY-12-0095 - Enclosure 2:  Japan Lessons-Learned Action Items And Long-Term Evaluations (July 2012) (3 page(s), 7/13/2012)
    - ML12208A208 - SECY-12-0095 Redacted - Tier 3 Program Plans And 6-Month Status Update In Response To Lessons Learned From Japan's March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake And Subsequent Tsunami (16 page(s), 7/13/2012)
    - ML12208A210 - SECY-12-0095 - Enclosure 3:  Tier 3 - Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.2 Program Plan For Periodic Confirmation Of Seismic And Flooding Hazards (REDACTED) (55 page(s), 7/13/2012)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
NRC TO INCREASE OVERSIGHT OF HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Harris nuclear power plant faces increased oversight from the U. S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission due to violations linked to the ventilation systems for facilities at the

plant that would be staffed during emergencies. 

The Harris plant, which is operated by Duke Energy, is located near New Hill, N.C., 

about 20 miles southwest of Raleigh. 

One violation involves the company’s failure to maintain the Emergency Operations 

Facility, or EOF, ventilation system, which was out of service for extended periods over two 

years. There was not an immediate safety concern because no emergencies requiring use of the 

facility occurred during that time.

The company was also cited for not notifying the NRC during the times that the 

ventilation system was degraded or out of service. 

The NRC evaluates regulatory performance at commercial nuclear power plants with a 

color-coded system which classifies findings as green, white, yellow or red in increasing order of 

safety significance. The NRC staff determined that the violation involving the EOF ventilation 

system is a white finding, meaning it has low to moderate safety significance.

At Duke Energy’s request, the NRC staff held a Regulatory Conference on Aug. 24 to 

discuss the risk significance of the inspection finding with the company. After reviewing 

information from the inspection and the supplemental information provided by Duke during the 

conference, the staff concluded that the finding is appropriately characterized as “white.”

The finding puts Harris into the Regulatory Response Column on the NRC Action 

Matrix, meaning the plant will be subject to additional NRC inspections beyond the baseline 

inspections that are conducted at all nuclear plants.

###

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.

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-12-058

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 997-4417

 Joey Ledford (404) 997-4416 

 October 4, 2012

E-mail: OPA2.Resource@nrc.gov
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00192-CR

Rodrigo Villalobos

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From Criminal District Court No. 1

of Tarrant County (1220999D)

May 2, 2013

Opinion by Justice Walker

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By _________________________________

 Justice Sue Walker
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-12-0030 - Final Rule: Requirements for Maintenance of Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (RIN 3150-AI77)

Accession Number: ML113390314

Date Released: Friday, March 9, 2012

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.
    - ML113390369 - SECY-12-0030 - Final Rule - Requirements for Maintenance of Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (RIN 3150-AI77) (10 page(s), 2/23/2012)
    - ML113390318 - SECY-12-0030 - Enclosure 1 - Federal Register Notice 10 CFR Parts 2 and 52 - Final Rule: Requirements for Maintenance of Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (RIN 3150-AI77) (50 page(s), 2/23/2012)
    - ML120100062 - SECY-12-0030 - Enclosure 2 - Regulatory Analysis ITAAC Maintenance Final Rulemaking (25 page(s), 2/23/2012)
    - ML120050209 - SECY-12-0030 - Enclosure 3 - OMB 3150-0151 Supporting Statement for Final Rule 10 CFR Parts 2 and 52 Requirements for ITAAC Maintenance (RIN 3150-AI77) (8 page(s), 2/23/2012)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
### §210311. Service of process

The corporation shall comply with the law on service of process of each State in which it is incorporated and each State in which it carries on activities.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1458.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 210311 | 36:3004. | Oct. 30, 1984, Pub. L. 98–565, §4, 98 Stat. 2920. |

Section

The words "in furtherance of its corporate purposes" are omitted as unnecessary.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-10-0100 - Staff Progress In Resolving Issues Associated With Inspections, Tests, Analyses, And Acceptance Criteria

Accession Number: ML101660706

Date Released: Friday, August 20, 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.
    - ML101660583 - SECY-10-0100 - Staff Progress In Resolving Issues Associated With Inspections, Tests, Analyses, And Acceptance Criteria (7 page(s), 8/5/2010)
    - ML101660681 - SECY-10-0100 - Enclosure 1 - ITAAC Maintenance Thresholds and Associated License Amendments (2 page(s), 8/5/2010)
    - ML101660695 - SECY-10-0100 - Enclosure 2 - ITAAC Closure Verification Process Flowchart (2 page(s), 8/5/2010)
    - ML101660702 - SECY-10-0100 - Enclosure 3 - Simulated ITAAC Closure and Verification Demonstration Proposal (6 page(s), 8/5/2010)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
No. IV-11-011 

Contact: Victor Dricks (817) 860-8128

 Lara Uselding (817) 276-6519

 

 April 7, 2011 

E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

NRC TO DISCUSS 2010 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT FOR

SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet in San Juan Capistrano, Calif., on 

April 28, with representatives of Southern California Edison Co. to discuss the agency=s 2010 

assessment of safety performance at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.

The meeting, which will be open to the public, will begin at 6:00 p.m. at the Capistrano 

Unified School District Board Room, 33122 Valle Road, San Juan Capistrano.

Following the performance assessment, the NRC staff will be available to answer 

questions from the public concerning San Onofre, as well as the NRC=s role in ensuring safe 

plant operation.

 AThe NRC continually reviews the performance of San Onofre and the nation=s other 

commercial nuclear power facilities,@ NRC Region IV Administrator Elmo Collins said. This 

meeting will provide an opportunity for a discussion of our annual assessment of safety 

performance with the company and with local officials and residents who live near the plant.@

A letter sent from the NRC Region IV 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 http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/sano_2010q4.pdf.

San Onofre operated safely in 2010. The licensee addressed longstanding concerns in the 

area of problem identification and resolution, but has not been fully successful in addressing 

several longstanding human performance issues. The NRC will conduct additional focused 

inspections in the human performance area, and also in the safety conscious work environment 

area to verify that corrective actions are effective and sustainable.

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

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov
Inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant and by 

specialists from the Region IV Office in Arlington, Texas.

Current performance information for San Onofre Unit Two is available on the NRC web 

site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SANO2/sano2_chart.html. 

Current performance information for San Onofre Unit 3 is available at 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SANO3/sano3_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.
**GAO-03-548T**                      Published: Mar 19, 2003. Publicly Released: Mar 19, 2003.                  

-   
-   
-   
-   

    Jump To:  
-  Elder Abuse 
-  Services for Older Adults 
-  State and Local-Level Drivers and Trends 
-  State and Local Fiscal Projections 
-  Federal Borrowing 
-  Managing the Debt 
-  Summary of Funding Provisions 
-  Auditing the Government's Books 
-  Unpacking the Financial Report 
-  Highlights 
-  Recommendations 
-  Background 
-  About This Work 
-  About This Work 
-  Trends 
-  About the Center 
-  Why It's High Risk 
-  What Remains To Be Done 
-  Key Reports 
-  Newest COVID-Related Reports 
-  AI Use Cases 
-  Flood Insurance 
-  Past Pandemic-Related Reports 
-  CARES Act Oversight Reports 
-  All COVID-19 Reports 
-  Report Suspected Fraud 
-  Subjects 
-  How to Get Notified 
-  Past Reports 
-  Public Health Threats 
-  Explore the FY 2022 and 2023 Funds 
-  Status of FY22 Projects 
-  Lessons Learned 
-  Agency Reports 
-  Recent Reports 
-  Recommendations 
-  Supplemental Material 
-  Full Report 
-  Additional Data 
-  View Decision 
-  Downloads 
-  Previously Identified Actions 
-  Related Pages 
-  Associated Agencies 
-  Tough Choices and Opportunities Ahead 
-  Americas Fiscal Future Key Areas 
-  Retirement Security Key Areas 
-  Current List 
-  About The High Risk List 
-  Area Ratings 
-  Previous High Risk Products 
-  Search Federal Vacancies 
-  Past Federal Vacancies 
-  Violation Letters 
-  About the Yellow Book 
-  Advisory Council 
-  Related Resources 
-  Comment Letters 
-  Related Publications 
-  Contacts and Resources 
-  Major Issues Facing the Nation 
-  Meeting Strategic Challenges 
-  Additional Resources 
-  Resources 
-  GAO Contacts 
-  Mission Teams 
-  Operations and Staff Offices  
-  Organization Chart  
-  Why a Career at GAO? 
-  Am I Qualified? 
-  Company Culture 
-  Reasonable Accommodations 
-  Video Gallery 
-  Paid Internships 
-  Student Volunteers 
-  Professional Development Program 
-  Advancement 
-  Executive Candidate Program 
-  Summer Associates 
-  Externships 
-  Benefits 
-  Contacts 

Skip to Highlights

## Highlights

The Department of Defense (DOD) has increasingly engaged in multiservice and multinational operations. Congress enacted the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, in part, so that DOD's military leaders would be better prepared to plan, support, and conduct joint operations. GAO assessed DOD actions to implement provisions in the law that address the development of officers in joint matters and evaluated impediments affecting DOD's ability to fully respond to the provisions in the act.

## Full Report

Highlights

Full Report (18 pages)

Accessible Text 

## Office of Public Affairs

### Media Inquiries

Sarah Kaczmarek
kaczmareks@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

### Public Inquiries

Public Affairs
PublicAffairs@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

## Topics

National Defense

Joint venturesMilitary personnelMilitary trainingStrategic planningMilitary forcesMilitary reserve personnelSchoolsStrategic planDefense reorganizationHuman capital
§ 208.21 Confidential business information; furnishing of nonconfidential summaries thereof. ( a ) *Nonrelease of information.* Except as provided for in § 208.22, in the case of an investigation under this part, the Commission will not release information that the Commission considers to be confidential business information within the meaning of § 201.6 of this chapter, including such information obtained under section 322(e)(2) of the Act, unless the party submitting the confidential business information had notice, at the time of submission, that such information would be released by the Commission, or such party subsequently consents to the release of the information. When appropriate, the Commission will include confidential business information in reports transmitted to the President, the Trade Representative, and the Secretary of Transportation; such reports will be marked as containing confidential business information, and a nonconfidential version of such report will be made available to the public.
( b ) *Nonconfidential summaries.* Except as the Commission may otherwise provide, a party submitting confidential business information shall also submit to the Commission, at the time that it submits such information, a nonconfidential summary of the information. If a party indicates that the confidential business information cannot be summarized, it shall state in writing the reasons why a summary cannot be provided. If the Commission finds that a request for confidentiality is not warranted, and if the party concerned is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summarized form, the Commission may disregard the submission.
### SUBCHAPTER IX—STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Executive Order No. 13684

Ex. Ord. No. 13684, Dec. 18, 2014, 79 F.R. 76865, which established a President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing, was editorially reclassified and is set out as a note preceding section 12591 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.