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

[821 NYS2d 630]

Appeal by the People from a sentence of the County Court, Rockland County (Kelly, J.), imposed March 30, 2005, upon the defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being a determinate term of imprisonment of four years, to be followed by a five-year period of postrelease supervision.

Ordered that the sentence is reversed, on the law, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Rockland County, for resentencing in accordance herewith.

On November 4, 2004 the defendant entered a plea of guilty to one count of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, based on conduct which occurred on May 2, 2004. The defendant was promised an indeterminate sentence of four years to life. On December 14, 2004 the Drug Law *967Reform Act of 2004 (L 2004, ch 738 [hereinafter the DLRA]) was signed into law, creating a new sentencing structure for drug offenses. On March 30, 2005, over the People’s objection, the County Court sentenced the defendant pursuant to the ameliorative provisions of the DLRA *(see*Penal Law § 70.71 [2] [b] [ii]), reasoning that the defendant was entitled to the benefits of the new legislation *(see People v Behlog,*74 NY2d 237 [1989]).

As the People correctly assert, the sentence must be reversed. The DLRA took effect on January 13, 2005, which was the 30th day after it was approved by the Governor (L 2004, ch 738, § 41 [d-1]). Moreover, the new sentencing structure of the DLRA was expressly made applicable only “to crimes committed on or after the effective date” of the relevant provisions *(id.).*Since the defendant committed the instant offense before the effective date of the DLRA, the imposition of sentence upon the defendant pursuant to the DLRA was illegal *(see People v Castro,*28 AD3d 674 [2006]; *People v Lee,*28 AD3d 495 [2006], *lv denied*6 NY3d 896 [2006]; *People v McCray,*27 AD3d 486 [2006]; *People v Walker,*26 AD3d 676 [2006]; *People v Torres,*26 AD3d 398 [2006], *lv denied*6 NY3d 853 [2006]; *People v Nelson,*21 AD3d 861 [2005]). Accordingly, “the defendant must be resentenced under the law applicable at the time of his offense” *(People v Goode,*25 AD3d 723, 724 [2006], *lv denied*6 NY3d 848 [2006]). Florio, J.P., Goldstein, Mastro and Fisher, JJ., concur.
### §11263. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this part such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 1992 through 1996.

(Pub. L. 99–660, title IX, §936, formerly §949, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3812; renumbered §936, Pub. L. 100–607, title I, §142(c)(2)(B), Nov. 4, 1988, 102 Stat. 3057; Pub. L. 102–507, §7(b)(2), Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3286.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1992—Pub. L. 102–507 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section read as follows: "To carry out this part, there are authorized to be appropriated $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1988 through 1991."
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2434

For the relief of John Castellano. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 11, 2003

Mr. ROHRABACHER (for himself and Ms. HARMAN) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

For the relief of John Castellano.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. GRANTING POSTHUMOUS CITIZENSHIP TO 

4 JOHN CASTELLANO. 

5 (a) AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SE6 CURITY.—Notwithstanding the Immigration and Nation7 ality Act or any other provision of law, the Secretary of 

8 Homeland Security shall grant, in accordance with this 

9 Act, posthumous citizenship at the time of death to John 

10 Castellano, who died July 7, 1937, if the Secretary ap11 proves an application for posthumous citizenship under 

12 subsection (b). 
2

•HR 2434 IH 

1 (b) REQUEST FOR POSTHUMOUS CITIZENSHIP.—A 

2 request for the granting of posthumous citizenship to the 

3 individual referred to in subsection (a) may be filed on 

4 behalf of the individual only by the next-of-kin (as deter5 mined by the Secretary of Homeland Security) or another 

6 representative (as determined by the Secretary). The Sec7 retary shall approve such a request respecting the indi8 vidual referred to in subsection (a) if the request is filed 

9 not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of 

10 this Act and the Secretary finds that the individual satis11 fied the requirements of subsection (c). 

12 (c) CRITERIA FOR GRANTING OF POSTHUMOUS CITI13 ZENSHIP.—The requirements referred to in subsection (b) 

14 are that the individual referred to in subsection (a) is a 

15 person who, while an alien or a noncitizen national of the 

16 United States served honorably in an active-duty status 

17 in the military, air, or naval forces of the United States 

18 during any period described in the first sentence of section 

19 329(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

20 1440(a)), and satisfied the requirements of clause (1) or 

21 (2) of the first sentence of section 329(a). The executive 

22 department under which the person so served shall deter23 mine whether the individual satisfied the requirements of 

24 paragraphs (1) and (2). 
3

•HR 2434 IH 

1 (d) DOCUMENTATION OF POSTHUMOUS CITIZEN2 SHIP.—If the Secretary of Homeland Security approves 

3 such a request to grant the individual referred to in sub4 section (a) posthumous citizenship, the Secretary shall 

5 send to the person who filed the request a suitable docu6 ment which states that the United States considers the 

7 person to have been a citizen of the United States at the 

8 time of the individual’s death. 

9 (e) NO BENEFITS TO SURVIVORS.—Nothing in this 

10 Act shall be construed as providing for any benefits under 

11 this Act for any spouse, son, daughter, or other relative 

12 of a person granted posthumous citizenship under this sec13 tion.

Æ
### smwrBase—An R package for managing hydrologic data, version 1.1.1

By: David L. Lorenz**

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151202

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (241 kB pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Appendix:  **Appendix**  Appendix 1Appendix 2Appendix 3
- Superseding Publications:
                                        smwrGraphs—An R package for graphing hydrologic data, version 1.1.2(2017)                                    

- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

First posted December 9, 2015

**For additional information, contact:**
Director, Minnesota Water Science CenterU.S. Geological Survey2280 Woodale DriveMounds View, Minnesota 55112http://mn.water.usgs.gov/

This report describes an R package called smwrBase, which consists of a collection of functions to import, transform, manipulate, and manage hydrologic data within the R statistical environment. Functions in the package allow users to import surface-water and groundwater data from the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Water Information System database and other sources. Additional functions are provided to transform, manipulate, and manage hydrologic data in ways necessary for analyzing the data.

#### Suggested Citation

Lorenz, D.L., 2015, smwrBase—An R package for managing hydrologic data, version 1.1.1: U.S. GeologicalSurvey Open-File Report 2015–1202, 7 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151202.

ISSN: 2331-1258 (online)

#### Table of Contents

- Abstract
- Introduction
- Description of smwrBase
- Summary
- Disclaimer
- Acknowledgments
- References Cited
- Appendixes

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### C. Leo Calarco, Respondent, v. Charles G. Coster et al., as Commissioners of the Temporary City Housing Rent Commission of the City of New York, Appellants.

No opinion.1 Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ. [195 Misc. 34.] [See *post,*p. 923.]
#### In the Matter of Shari Iacone et al., Appellants, v Building Department of Oyster Bay Cove Village et al., Respondents.

[820 NYS2d 904]

In a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 78, inter alia, in effect, to review a determination by the respondent Board of Trustees of Oyster Bay Cove Village dated January 13, 2005, which granted the respondents Joseph Bellantuono and Mrs. Joseph Bellantuono a permit to remove trees on their real property, and a determination by the respondent Building Department of Oyster Bay Cove Village dated February 23, 2005, which granted the respondents Joseph Bellantuono and Mrs. Joseph Bellantuono a permit to build a “sports court” on the subject property, the petitioners appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), entered October 25, 2005, as, upon reargument, adhered to so much of its prior order and judgment (one paper) entered August 22, 2005, as granted those branches of the respective motions of the respondents Board of Trustees of Oyster Bay Cove Village and Building Department of Oyster Bay Cove Village, and the respondents Joseph Bellantuono and Mrs. Joseph Bellantuono, which were to dismiss so much of the petition as sought to vacate the permit to build a “sports court” for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and, in effect, which were to dismiss so much of the petition as sought to vacate the permit to remove trees, and dismissed those portions of the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as, upon reargument, adhered to so much of the original determination as granted those branches of the motions which were to dismiss so much of the petition as sought to vacate the tree removal permit, is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.

In *Matter of Iacone v Building Dept. of Oyster Bay Cove Vil.*(32 AD3d 1026 [2006] [decided herewith]), we held that the Supreme Court erred in granting those branches of the respondents’ re*1030spective motions which were, in effect, to dismiss so much of the petition as sought to vacate the tree removal permit, and modified the order and judgment entered August 22, 2005, accordingly. Therefore, so much of the instant appeal as concerns the tree removal permit must be dismissed as academic.

Contrary to the petitioners’ contention, the Supreme Court properly dismissed so much of the petition as sought to vacate the “sports court” permit, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies *(id.).*Miller, J.P., Luciano, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
§ 609.5 Additional information to be included in electronic credit monitoring notices. ( a ) The notice required in § 609.3(a), or the first page within the electronic credit monitoring service to which the notice may direct the consumer, shall include a hyperlink to a summary of the consumer's rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as prescribed by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection under 15 U.S.C. 1681g(c).
( b ) The nationwide consumer reporting agency shall provide to a consumer, with each file disclosure provided in § 609.3(a), the summary of the consumer's rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as prescribed by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection under 15 U.S.C. 1681g(c).
### Part A—Formula Grants to States for Home and Community-Based Health Services
---

CERTIFICATION OF 
  CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO 
  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Udaya Madanayake, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
  of Javakingcoffee, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
  2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company,
        for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2004, and to which this certification
        is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
        of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
        and
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Company.                                                                                                                                                             

| | By:    | /s/ Udaya Madanayake                 
| | ------ | -------------------------------------
| |        |                                      
| | Name:  | Udaya Madanayake                     
| |        |                                      
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
| |        |                                      
| | Date:  | October 21, 2004                     

A signed original of this written statement required by
  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Registrant
  and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
  Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-QSB to which
  it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
  and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant
  under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether
  made before or after the date of the Form 10-QSB), irrespective of any general
  incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
§ 1209.8 Procedure for calibration of radiation instrumentation. This procedure is used to calibrate the radiation instruments used in the test procedures for measuring critical radiant flux. ( a ) *Radition pyrometer.* Calibrate the radiation pyrometer by means of a conventional black body enclosure placed within a furnace and maintained at uniform temperatures of 490, 500, and 510 °C (914, 932, and 950 °F). The black body enclosure may consist of a closed chromel metal cylinder with a small sight hole in one end. Sight the radiation pyrometer upon the opposite end of the cylinder where a thermocouple indicates the black body temperature. Place the thermocouple within a drilled hole and in good thermal contact with the black body. When the black body enclosure has reached the appropriate temperature equilibrium, read the output of the radiation pyrometer. Repeat for each temperature.
( b ) *Total heat flux meter.* The total flux meter shall be calibrated by the National Bureau of Standards, (direct request for such calibration services to the: Radiometric Physics Division, 534, National Bureau of Standards (NBS), Washington, DC 20234.), or, alternatively, its calibration shall be developed by transfer calibration methods with an NBS calibrated flux meter. This latter calibration shall make use of the radiant panel tester as the heat source. Measurements shall be made at each of the nine dummy specimen positions and the mean value of these results shall constitute the final calibration.
( c ) *Recommendation.* It is recommended that each laboratory maintain a dedicated calibrated reference flux meter against which one or more working flux meters can be compared as needed. The working flux meters should be calibrated according to this procedure at least once per year.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Michelle F. Warmsley, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[820 NYS2d 668]

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 6, 2005, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant relocated from New York to Ohio and was employed as a treasury supervisor at a bank from September 20, 2004 until she resigned on November 17, 2004. Claimant testified that she resigned because her daughter, who was unhappy about the relocation, had run away and her father’s deteriorating health required round-the-clock care. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, reversing the decision of the Administrative Law Judge, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. We affirm.

Claimant’s supervisor testified that claimant never discussed the seriousness of her family situation or ascertained whether some type of leave of absence was available prior to resigning. *1060Under these circumstances, substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision that claimant failed to take reasonable steps to protect her employment prior to resigning *(see Matter of Nunez [Commissioner of Labor],*20 AD3d 848 [2005]; *Matter of Uemura [Lenge Rest.*— Commissioner *of Labor],*308 AD2d 632 [2003]). Claimant’s remaining contention that the Board improperly rejected her written reply to the employer’s appeal has been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
#### Emelia Eckstrom, Respondent, *v.*The Yellow Taxicab Company, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment, entered on a verdict, and also from an order denying a motion for a new trial.

Per Curiam:

We are of opinion that the testimony of the plaintiff herself shows that she was chargeable with contributory negligence as matter of law. The judgment and order appealed from are, therefore, reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed, with costs. *883Present — Clarke, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Page, JJ. Judgment and order reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.
IN RESPONSE, PLEASE 

REFER TO: M150423 

April 23, 2015 

MEMORANDUM FOR: Brooke P. Clark, Director 

Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication 

FROM: Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS - AFFIRMATION SESSION, 9:25 A.M., 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2015, COMMISSIONERS' 

CONFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, 

ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE) 

I. SECY-15-0033 – Shaw AREVA MOX Services, LLC (Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication 

Facility Possession and Use License) – Denial of Petition for Review of LBP-14-1

The Commission approved a Memorandum and Order responding to Nuclear Watch South, 

Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, and Nuclear Information and Resource Service’s 

petition for review of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board’s Initial Decision in LBP-14-1. 

The Memorandum and Order denies the petition for review. To ensure that protected 

information is not inadvertently disclosed, at this time the Memorandum and Order will be 

released only to the parties. The Memorandum and Order directs the parties to jointly submit 

proposed redactions to this decision or a statement that no redactions are needed within ten 

days. Chairman Burns did not participate in this matter. 

(Subsequently, on April 23, 2015, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

II. SECY-15-0041a - Petition to Supplement Final Environmental Impact Statements to 

Consider the Environmental Impacts of Continued Storage (Filed on Multiple Dockets)

The Commission approved a Memorandum and Order responding to a petition filed by several 

environmental organizations requesting supplementation of the final environmental impact 

statements in eight proceedings to reference the recently published Continued Storage generic 

environmental impact statement. The Memorandum and Order denies the petition. 

(Subsequently, on April 23, 2015, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

 
III. SECY-15-0041b - Motion to Reopen the Record and Petition to Intervene in the 

Callaway License Renewal Matter

The Commission approved a Memorandum and Order responding to a motion to reopen the 

record and petition to intervene filed by the Missouri Coalition for the Environment in the 

Callaway license renewal matter. The Memorandum and Order denies the motion to reopen 

and the petition to intervene. 

(Subsequently, on April 23, 2015, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

IV. SECY-15-0041c - Motion to Reopen the Record and Petition to Intervene in the Fermi

Combined License Matter

The Commission approved a Memorandum and Order responding to a motion to reopen the 

record and petition to intervene filed by Beyond Nuclear in the Fermi combined license matter. 

The Memorandum and Order denies the motion to reopen and the petition to intervene. 

(Subsequently, on April 23, 2015, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Ostendorff 

 Commissioner Baran 

 EDO 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCA 

 OIG 

 OPA 

 Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR
No: II-15-009 March 11, 2015

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416 

NRC Proposes $70,000 Fine for Violations at Sequoyah Nuclear Plant

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed a $70,000 civil penalty against the 

Tennessee Valley Authority for violations related to fire watches at the Sequoyah nuclear power plant 

near Soddy-Daisy, Tenn., about 18 miles northeast of Chattanooga. 

An NRC investigation found that on numerous occasions in October and November 2012, some 

of TVA’s contract fire watch workers failed to actually walk through certain areas as required and, 

along with their supervisors, deliberately recorded that those actions had been completed.

The violations did not result in any actual safety consequences as no fires occurred in those 

areas during the time the fire watches were missed. 

“The potential consequences of missed fire watches concern us,” said NRC Region II 

Administrator Victor McCree. “Although there are other fire protection features, fire watches are an 

important part of the plant’s overall fire protection strategy, especially in areas where other equipment 

may be temporarily unavailable.” 

Based on the severity of the violations and the plant’s recent enforcement history, the NRC staff 

found that a $70,000 civil penalty was warranted. In a January 2015 letter, TVA outlined corrective 

actions already taken and planned to correct the violations and prevent recurrence. The NRC plans to 

inspect those corrective actions to ensure that they adequately address the issue. The NRC does not 

plan to take additional action against any of the individuals responsible.

TVA has 30 days to pay the civil penalty or protest its imposition.