alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     Textainer Equipment Income Fund VI, LP
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001003638
<NAME>                        Textainer Equipment Incoem Fund VI, LP
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         10
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,466
<ALLOWANCES>                                   79
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               13
<PP&E>                                         33,367
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 31,377
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          604
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     30,773
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   31,377
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4,189
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3,065
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               36
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,088
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,088
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
Conservation Practice Overview 

Helping People Help the Land

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. 

October 2017 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

CPS Contour Farming (Code 330) 

Contour farming is using ridges, furrows, and 

roughness formed by tillage, planting and other 

farming operations at a grade near the contour to 

alter the velocity or the direction of water flow.

Practice Information

Contour farming is generally used on sloping land 

where tillage, planting, and cultivation are used to 

grow annual crops.

In a properly designed contour farming system the 

tillage furrows intercept runoff and allow more moisture to infiltrate into the soil. Contour farming is 

most effective on slopes between 2 and 10 percent.

Conservation benefits may include, but are not limited to— 

• Reduced sheet and rill erosion.

• Reduced sediment transport to surface waters

• Reduce excess nutrients in surface waters

• Reduce pesticide transport to surface waters

• Increased water infiltration.

To maintain the effectiveness of this practice, all tillage and planting operations must be parallel to the 

established markers.

Common Associated Practices

Because rainfall amounts occasionally exceed the ability of contours to control runoff, Conservation 

Practice Standard (CPS) Contour Farming (Code 330) is commonly planned in conjunction with other 

erosion controlling CPSs such as Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till (Code 345) and

No-Till (Code 329); and Contour Buffer Strips (Code 332).

To protect areas of existing or potential concentrated flow erosion CPS Contour Farming (Code 330) 

is commonly applied with CPSs such as Grassed Waterway (Code 412), Water and Sediment Control 

Basin (Code 638), and Underground Outlet (Code 620).

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-1858

CLARENCE C. MOORE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CHURCH HILL HOUSE/AGENT WINN MANAGEMENT,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge.

(CA-03-165)

Submitted: September 11, 2003 Decided: September 17, 2003

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clarence C. Moore, Appellant Pro Se. John Kirkland Burke, Jr.,

TROUTMAN SANDERS, L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia; Jason Christopher

Roper, TROUTMAN SANDERS, L.L.P., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Clarence C. Moore appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his civil action against Church Hill House and Winn

Management. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. See Moore v. Church Hill House, No. CA-03-165

(E.D. Va. June 18, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy ActRecent FOIA Requests2022

# Recent FOIA Requests - December 2022

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 November 2022. For additional detail, see the Index of Closed FOIA/PA Requests by Subject.
[1][2]

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, January 3, 2023

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, January 3, 2023
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Technical Manual and User’s Guide for MILDOS, Version 4.1 (NUREG/CR-7258, ANL/EVS-18/5)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7258 (PDF – 5.01 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** October 2018**Date Published:** November 2019

**Prepared by:** B.M. Biwer, D.J. LePoire, S. Kamboj, and Y.-S. Chang

Casper Sun, NRC Project Manager

Environmental Science Division Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439 Argonne is a U.S. Department of Energy laboratory managed by UChicago Argonne, LLC

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The MILDOS computer code is used to estimate the radiological impacts of airborne emissions from uranium mining and milling facilities. The code allows users to consider both conventional uranium ore operations and operations associated with *in situ* recovery (ISR) facilities. The code is used by license applicants and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff to perform routine radiological impact and compliance evaluations for various uranium recovery operations. As part of a major code update, the following improvements and additions were made to the code: (a) revised ISR models, (b) support for ores containing thorium-232 (Th-232) and its daughter radionuclides in addition to the currently supported uranium-238 (U-238) and its daughter radionuclides, (c) a revised area source model, (d) the capability to perform sensitivity analysis on specific input parameters, (e) the capability to use current meteorological data provided by the National Centers for Environmental Information, and (f) an interactive results module.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-30903

Summary Calendar

EDWARD SMITH

Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; MAGISTRATE JUDGE

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER, of the United States District Court for the

Middle District of Louisiana; ELIZABETH HAECKER RYAN, Attorney-atLaw of the firm Lemle & Kelleher; WACKENHUT CORP; LEMLE &

KELLEHER LLP

Defendants - Appellants

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Middle District of Louisiana

No. 3:09-CV-478

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

In this appeal, Edward Smith challenges the district court’s dismissal of

his suit in which he claimed that defendants fraudulently obtained a judgment

against him.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 21, 2010

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

Case: 09-30903 Document: 00511009727 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/21/2010
No. 09-30903

2

This case arises out of an earlier employment discrimination suit Smith

filed against his employer Wackenhut Corporation in the United States District

Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. After discovery commenced,

Magistrate Judge Stephen Riedlinger recommended the dismissal of Smith’s

case when he repeatedly failed to meet discovery deadlines. The magistrate’s

recommendation was subsequently approved and the district court dismissed

the suit on August 19, 2008. That judgment was not appealed.

Smith then filed this suit on July 23, 2009 against Appellees the United

States, Magistrate Judge Riedlinger, his former employer and its counsel,

claiming that they fraudulently colluded to dismiss his suit. On August 3, 2009,

a magistrate judge filed a report recommending that this suit be dismissed

against all parties as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The district judge

accepted the magistrate’s recommendations and entered judgment dismissing

this suit with prejudice. Smith now appeals.

For the reasons thoroughly addressed in the magistrate judge’s report,

both the United States and Magistrate Judge Stephen Riedlinger are immune

from suit. Additionally, Smith’s brief to this court fails to address any issues

regarding his former employer and its counsel. Therefore, Smith’s arguments

against Wackenhut, Ryan, and Lemle Kelleher are waived and considered

abandoned. See Procter & Gamble Co. v. Amway Corp., 376 F.3d 496, 499 (5th

Cir. 2004).

Therefore, the district court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED

Case: 09-30903 Document: 00511009727 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/21/2010
# C_2004139EN.01000201.xml

| 19.5.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.5.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/2

---

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

Communication pursuant to Article 23(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 (1) implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) on the control of concentrations between undertakings

1

2

(2004/C 139/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Address of the Commission's Directorate General for Competition

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| Rue Joseph II / Jozef II Straat, 70 |
| B-1000 Bruxelles / Brussel |

European Commission

Directorate General for Competition

Merger Registry

Rue Joseph II / Jozef II Straat, 70

B-1000 Bruxelles / Brussel

---

(1)  OJ L 133, 30.04.2004, pages 1-39.

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings, OJ L 24, 29.01.2004, pages 1-22.

2

---
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy Act

# NRC Annual Chief FOIA Officer Reports

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, March 1, 2024

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - FOIA Guide
          - Amendments to the FOIA "OPEN Government Act of 2007"
          - Freedom of Information Act
          - Open Government Assessment of the NRC's FOIA Process
          - NRC FOIA Backlog Reduction Goals for FY2008, FY2009, and FY2010
          - Privacy Act Request Guide
          - Processing Fees
          - FOIAs Related to Japan's Emergency
          - Closed Requests
          - Recent FOIA Requests
          - Privacy Act Systems of Records
          - Annual FOIA Reports
          - Quarterly FOIA Reports
          - Annual Chief FOIA Officer Reports
          - Contact Us About FOIA/Privacy Act, FOIA Team, and Public Liaison
          - Record Authentication
          - Reactor Operator License Verification

#### 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 Friday, March 1, 2024
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.1

                                  STRAIGHT NOTE


  $200,000                  South E1 Monte, California       February 12, 2001
------------

         For value received, Lee Pharmaceuticals promises to pay Mark DiSalvo or
order, at South El Monte, California the sum of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS,
with interest from February 12, 2001, on unpaid principal at the rate of twenty
(20) per cent per annum; principal is payable monthly, commencing on April 10,
2001, with monthly principal payments of $4,000. Interest shall be calculated on
the basis of the unpaid principal balance daily, based on a 365-day year, actual
day month and payable monthly. Principal and interest shall be payable in lawful
money of the United States. If action were instituted on this note, I promise to
pay such sum as the Court may fix as attorney's fees. This note is secured by
the trademark on the product brand Black-Draught(R).

  2/12/01                                       RONALD G. LEE
------------                         ---------------------------------------
  Date                               Lee Pharmaceuticals- Ronald G. Lee

  2/12/01                                     MICHAEL L. AGRESTI
------------                         ---------------------------------------
  Date                               Lee Pharmaceuticals- Michael L. Agresti
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-10531 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MARIO GARCIA SANTOLLO, also known as Mago, also known as Antero Estrada, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CR-266-16-X

-------------------- April 10, 2002 Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Mario Garcia Santollo appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiring to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine in excess of 500 grams and to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine in excess of five kilograms. Santollo argues that 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846, the statutes under which he was convicted and sentenced, wereNo. 01-10531 -2- rendered facially unconstitutional by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000) . Santollo’s argument is foreclosed by our opinion in United States v. Slaughter , 238 F.3d 580, 581-82 (5th Cir. 2000)(revised opinion), cert. denied , 532 U.S. 1045 (2001), which rejected a broad, Apprendi -based, attack on the constitutionality of those statutes. A panel of this court cannot overrule a prior panel’s decision in the absence of an intervening contrary or superseding decision by this court sitting en banc or by the United States Supreme Court. Burge v. Parish of St. Tammany , 187 F.3d 452, 466 (5th Cir. 1999). Santollo has identified no such decision . The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. In lieu of filing an appellee’s brief, the Government has filed a motion asking us to dismiss this appeal or, in the alternative, to summarily affirm the district court’s judgment. The Government’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. The motion for a summary affirmance is GRANTED. The Government need not file an appellee’s brief. MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED; MOTION FOR SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE GRANTED; AFFIRMED.
# Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management (Ac.) (644) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management (Ac.) (644) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management (Ac.) (644).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management (Ac.) (644) (11/22) Standard Document(35.64 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management (Ac.) (644) Overview(125.29 KB)

Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management (Ac.) (644) CPPE(24.97 KB)

Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management (Ac.) (644) Network Effects Diagram(17.99 KB)

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNews Releases1999

# NRC Issues License to DOE for Storage of TMI-2 Fuel in Idaho

----

----

No. 99-56 March 19, 1999

**NRC ISSUES LICENSE TO DOE FOR STORAGE OF TMI-2 FUEL IN IDAHO**

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards has issued a license to the Department of Energy (DOE) to permit nuclear fuel debris from the Three Mile Island Unit 2 accident to be placed in dry storage at an independent spent fuel storage facility on the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) reservation near Idaho Falls.

The debris is currently in wet storage at INEEL.

The fuel debris was moved from the Three Mile Island Unit 2 site to INEEL in a series of shipments between 1986 and 1990. It was placed in wet pool storage for both study and safekeeping. In response to litigation, DOE signed a settlement agreement with the State of Idaho and others in which DOE agreed to construct a dry storage facility for the debris, thus allowing for the eventual decommissioning of the pool.

The fuel debris canisters will be loaded into steel overpacks known as dry storage canisters. The overpack canisters will then be welded closed and transported in an NRC-approved shielded transfer cask the 20-mile distance from the present pool to the new dry storage facility, all within the INEEL reservation. At the new installation, the dry storage canisters will be loaded into one of 30 heavily reinforced concrete storage vaults known as horizontal storage modules.

The independent spent fuel storage installation license is for 20 years. NRC regulations permit DOE to request renewal.

This is the first independent spent fuel storage license issued by NRC to DOE. Regulations governing the facility are the same ones that commercial, non-government applicants must meet.

Copies of the "License Application for the INEL TMI-2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation," as well as the "Safety Evaluation Report of Three Mile Island Unit 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Safety Analysis Report," are available by written request to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Distribution Services, Washington, DC 20555-0001. They may also be reviewed at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 205555-0001.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
Table
of Contents


Exhibit 32.01





Certification
of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant To


Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Silicon Image, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Steve Tirado, President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company
      for the periods presented therein.














Date:
      October 24, 2008
            /s/ Steve
      TiradoSteve
      Tirado
              President
      and Chief Executive Officer
              (Principal
      Executive Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Fitzgerald, Respondent, vs. Fitzgerald, Appellant.

*January 12*

February *7, 1933.*

For the appellant there was a brief by *Raymond J. Can*non, attorney, and *John L. Newman*of counsel, both of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Mr. Newman.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Kersten & McKinnon*of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Charles J. Kersten*and *Arlo A. McKinnon.*

Rosenberry, C. J.

This case is ruled by the case of Harry J. Fitzgerald, Appellant, v. Emily Fitzgerald, Respondent, decided herewith *(ante,*p. 543, 246 N. W. 680).

*By the Court.*— The order appealed from is affirmed.