alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy ActRecent FOIA Requests2021

# Recent FOIA Requests – July 2021

This page presents a chronological listing of the subject and reference number of each Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) Request submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) during July 2021. For additional detail, see the Index of Closed FOIA/PA Requests by Subject.
i

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 10, 2021

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - January
          - February
          - March
          - April
          - May
          - June
          - July
          - August
          - September
          - October
          - November
          - December

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 10, 2021
No. 86-5255.

#### Allen et al. *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Motion of petitioners for leave to proceed *informa pauperis*and certiorari granted. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of *Griffith*v. *Kentucky, ante,*p. 314.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsRegulatory Guides (by Division)Division 6 - Products

# Products (Division 6): Regulatory Guides 6.1 - 6.9

This page lists the number, title, publication date, and revisions for each regulatory guide in Division 6, "Products," with references to draft guides and related documents (where applicable).

See also Draft Regulatory Guides for Public Comment.

See NRC Regulatory Guides for more general information.

Regulatory Guides are reviewed about every 10 years, although a guide may be reviewed more frequently if the staff believes an emerging issue affects the guide. The NRC began these reviews in 2010, and began posting the results of its reviews on this site in 2013. The review dates are hyperlinked to the review memorandum, which provide useful information about the status and any known issues with the associated regulatory guide.

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, April 03, 2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM STAR GAS
PARTNERS, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF MARCH 31, 1999
AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE INTERIM PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 1998
THROUGH MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001002590
<NAME> STAR GAS PARTNERS, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          11,738
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,192
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,716
<INVENTORY>                                     16,313
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               114,979
<PP&E>                                         179,289
<DEPRECIATION>                                  30,868
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 581,910
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           73,701
<BONDS>                                        272,242
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       188,681
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   581,910
<SALES>                                         76,903
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                82,338
<CGS>                                           29,829
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   32,459
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                29,807
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,614
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,539
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,647
<INCOME-TAX>                                        38
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,609
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,609
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.03
        

</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APP EAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

DELROY CAMPBELL,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D14-4425

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed March 4, 2016

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Heather Pinder Rodriguez, Judg e
Delroy Campbell, Perry, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and L. Charlene Matthews, A ssistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PALMER, J.

Delroy Campbell (defendant) appeals the final order entered by the trial court

denying his motion seeking post-conviction relief. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850. As to the

claims denied after an evidentiary hearing, we affirm. As to th e claims summarily denied,

we reverse claims 1(a), 3, 4, and 7, and remand for the trial c ourt to either provide record

attachments which support summary denial or to conduct an evide ntiary hearing. See2 Burgos v. State, 181 So. 3d 572 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015); Fla. R. Cr im. P. 3.850(f)(5) (“If the

denial is based on the records in the case, a copy of that port ion of the files and records

that conclusively shows that the defendant is entitled to no re lief shall be attached to the

final order.”). Although the trial court referenced documents i n support of the denial of

these claims, it failed to attach any documents to its final or der. As for the remaining

claims summarily denied, we affirm.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

LAWSON, C.J. and BERGER, JJ., concur.
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit 10.12


     

    FIRST MODIFICATION TO
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

     

    The
parties hereto, CAMOFI Master LDC (“CAMOFI”), and Global Axcess Corp (“Global”),
having entered into that certain Settlement Agreement dated August 12, 2008,
providing among other things that Global will pay to CAMOFI the sum of
$3,700,000 to cancel a certain Note, within 90 days thereof (or on or before
November 10, 2008), do hereby agree to extend the closing of the refinancing
required in Section D of the Settlement Agreement, to December 31,
2008.  All other provisions of the Settlement Agreement shall remain
unchanged and in full force and effect.

     

    Dated:  November
6, 2008

    


    
      	
              /s/ Michael
      Loew                                    
      

              Michael
      Loew

              CAMOFI
      Master LDC

            	
              /s/ George A.
      McQuain                                    

              George
      A. McQuain

              Global
      Axcess Corp
#### AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY CO., Inc., Appellee, v. SHERWOOD DISTILLING CO., Inc., Appellant.

No. 9862.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued May 6, 1965.

Decided May 14, 1965.

John F. King, Baltimore, Md. (Ward B. Coe, Jr., Arthur K. Crocker, and Anderson, Coe & King, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellant.

Preston C. King, Jr., Washington, D. C. (William B. Kempton, Baltimore, Md., and John A. Whitney, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for appellee.

Before BOREMAN and BRYAN, Circuit Judges, and LEWIS, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

For the reasons stated by the District Judge in his opinion, 235 F.Supp. 776 (D.C.Md. 1964), the judgment on appeal is affirmed.

Affirmed.
### Devany , Denni s (OST)

. gAnTMCIff O F From : Jeanni e Blak e Oeannieblake@gmail.com ] ''NbPORTATIO N Sent : Thursday , Januar y13 , 201 1 10:2 5 PiVl ! •'i' TOPrRATION S To : LaHood , Ra y(OST ) Cc : Kurland , Susa n (OST) ; Devany , Denni s (OST) ; Sean.parnel l Subject : Continuatio n o f Alask a Airline Docke t OST-1998-489 9 ' ' ' 

### 5 8

Dea r Secretary LaHood , I woul dlike t o expres s my stron g support fo r th e selectio n o f

Alask aAirline s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai r servic e t o Cordova , Alaska

. Alaska' s curren t

pattern o f

service , usin g je t

aircraft , meet s crucia l need s that woul db e difficult , i

f no t impossible , t o mee t

withan y othe r

typ e o f servic e o r

aircraf t type : Alaska' s servic e connect s Southeas t Alask apassenger s t o on e o r mor e majo r

communitie s o f

interest , wit

h single-plan e servic e t o Anchorage , Juneau , Ketchika no r Seattle

. Fro mthes e hubs , ou r community can acces s th e airline' s extensiv e rout e syste man dbenefi t fro mit s marketin g relationship s withothe r carriers

. Th e 737-40 0 combinatio n ("combi" ) passenge r an dcarg o aircraft , whic hAlask aAirline s propose s t o continu e usin g o n thi s route , provide s freight , mai l an dcarg o capacit y that anon-je t carrie r simpl y canno t

provide

. Further , th e 737

- 40 0 comb i aircraf

t i s equippe dwithRequire dNavigatio n Performanc e Technolog y precisio n technology,whic h enable s th e airlin e t o reliabl y acces s th e airport durin g inclemen t

weather , thu s reducin g diversion s an d cancellation s and , in turn , enablin g peopl e an dproduct s t o dependabl y reac hth e community

. In sum , Alaska' s je t servic e i s critica l t o th e economi c wel l bein g o f ou r community

. W e ar e acommercia l fishin g famil y an dw e us e Alask aAirline s t o transport ou r direc t marke t salmo n t o Anchorage , Seattle , California , an dArizona

. Alask aAirline s service s ou r busines s need s efficientl y an d professionally

. Cordov ai s asmal l communit y an dw e mus t trave l t o Anchorag e for

man y medica l needs

. Ai r transportatio n i s crucial

. Fo r thes e reasons , w e respectfull y urg e th e Departmen t o f Transportatio n t o selec t

Alask aAirline s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai r

servic e t o Southeas t

Alaska , a s th e airlin e ha s successfull y don e for mor e tha n thirty years . Sincerely , Kory & Jeanni e Blak e POBo x 112 2 Cordova , A K

9957 4 907-424-719 4
#### Henry E. LEE, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 18803.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued Feb. 15, 1965.

Decided March 11, 1965.

Mr. Bernard Margolius (appointed by this court), Washington, D. C., for appellant.

Mr. William C. Weitzel, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. David C. Acheson, U. S. Atty., and Frank Q. Nebeker, Asst.-U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before Bazelon, Chief Judge, and Fahy and Weight, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of assault upon a Metropolitan Police officer. 22 D.C.Code § 505(a) (1961). We have carefully studied the points raised on appeal and find no basis for reversing the conviction. We note, however, that the jury asked if it could recommend mercy and was advised by the trial judge that it could not. The inference is plain that this desire on the part of the jury grew out of the emotional situation in which the assault occurred. The appellant and others were present at the D. C. General Hospital. They became upset by what they thought was inattention to the relative of one of them who had been injured in an accident. The police were called and the conduct which constituted the crime resulted.

In these circumstances, in view of appellant’s age and lack of prior criminal record, and especially the apparent feeling of the jury that the punishment should be tempered with mercy, the Dis*567trict Court may wish to reconsider the sentence imposed. Rule 35, Fhd.R.Crim. P. See Kaplan v. United States, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 521, 523, cert. denied, 354 U.S. 941, 77 S.Ct. 1406, 1 L.Ed.2d 1539 (1957). Compare Scarbeck v. United States, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 135, 158, 317 F.2d 546, 569, cert. denied, 374 U.S. 856, 83 S.Ct. 1897, 10 L.Ed.2d 1077, rehearing denied, 375 U.S. 874, 84 S.Ct. 35, 11 L.Ed.2d 105 (1963).

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM HELPMATE
ROBOTICS INC. THIRD QUARTER 1998 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         456,753
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  456,533
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (40,293)
<INVENTORY>                                    387,565
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,309,134
<PP&E>                                       4,691,466
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,769,966)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,312,218
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,424,259
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    19,440,297
<OTHER-SE>                                (17,732,645)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,312,218
<SALES>                                        784,096
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,232,840
<CGS>                                          402,758
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,102,874
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (1,426,677)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (159,458)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (456,169)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (456,169)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (456,169)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)
        

</TABLE>
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# New Source Term Model for the RESRAD-OFFSITE Code Version 3 (NUREG/CR-7127)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7127 (PDF - 9.54 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:****Date Published:**
**Prepared by:** C. Yu, E. K. Gnanapragasam, J. J. Cheng, S. Kamboj, and S. Y. Chen

Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439

Ralph Cady, NRC Project Manager

NRC Job Codes N6731 and V6360

**Prepared for:**

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION Ill 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

The Honorable Randy C. Huffman Secretary, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection Division of

### Air Quality 601 57th Street, SE Charleston, WV 25304-2943 Dear Secretary Huffman: 

## AUG 202012

On March 6, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Department ofEnvironmental Protection. This revision requests redesignation ofthe West Virginia portion ofthe ParkersburgMarietta, WV-OH 1997 PM2 .5 nonattainment area to attainment and approval ofthe Area's maintenance plan. EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing it to prepare a Notice ofProposed Rulemaking (NPR). Ifmembers ofyour staff have any questions, they may direct them to Marilyn**Po~ers ,**  

### Air Quality Planning Branch, at (215) 814-2308. She is the principal contact for this rulemaking.

cc: John Benedict, WVDEP Fred Durham, WVDEP Sincerely,

# ~tCAAA-o._~ Diana Esher, Director 

### Air Protection Division

Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01731]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP15-22-000; CP15-24-000]


Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP; Notice of Extension of Comment 
Period for the St. Charles Transportation and Keys Energy Projects

    On January 5, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC 
or Commission) issued a Notice of Intent (NOI) to Prepare an 
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed St. Charles Transportation 
and Keys Energy Projects and Request for Comments on Environmental 
Issues. The notice solicited comments on the potential environmental 
impacts of the planned project, and listed the close of the public 
comment period as February 4, 2015.
    Due to a limited printing delay in the mailing of the notice, we 
are extending the comment period. Please note that the scoping period 
will now close on February 20, 2015.
    Please refer to the NOI for how to participate in the environmental 
proceeding.

    Dated: January 23, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01731 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 23.1

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-100116) and on Form S-8 (No. 333-65376) of
Accenture Ltd of our report dated October 11, 2001, except as to Note 1 as to
reimbursements and reimbursable expenses and Note 18 which are as of October
29, 2002, relating to the combined and consolidated financial statements of
Accenture Ltd, which appears in this Form 10-K/A.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Chicago, Illinois
October 30, 2002

                                      1
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Safety Evaluation Report, Related to the License Renewal of LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, Exelon Generation Company, LLC (NUREG-2205)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG–2205 (PDF – 6.82 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** August 2016**Date Published:** September 2016

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This safety evaluation report (SER) documents the technical review of the LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 (LSCS), license renewal application (LRA) by the United States (U.S.) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff (the staff). By letter dated December 9, 2014, Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon or the applicant), submitted the LRA in accordance with Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations*, (10 CFR) Part 54, "Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants." Exelon requests renewal of the LSCS operating licenses (Operating License Nos. NPF-11 and NPF-18) for a period of 20 years beyond the current expiration at midnight on April 17, 2022, for Unit 1, and at midnight on December 16, 2023, for Unit 2.

LSCS is located approximately 55 direct-line miles southwest of Chicago, IL. The NRC issued the Unit 1 and Unit 2 construction permits (CPPR-99 and CPPR-100, respectively) on September 7, 1973, and the operating licenses on April 17, 1982, for Unit 1, and December 16, 1983, for Unit 2. Units 1 and 2 are of a boiling water reactor design. General Electric (Nuclear Energy Division) supplied the nuclear steam supply system and Sargent & Lundy originally designed and constructed the balance of the plant. Units 1 and 2 each have a licensed power output of 3,546 megawatts thermal, with a gross electrical output of approximately 1,207 megawatts electric.

Unless otherwise indicated, this SER presents the status of the staff's review of information submitted through June 8, 2016, the cutoff date for consideration in the SER. The two open items previously identified in the SER with open items, issued February 29, 2016, have been closed (see Section 1.5); therefore, no open items remain to be resolved before the final determination is reached by the staff on the LRA.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021