text:
EA-96-470 - Wolf Creek 1 (Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp.)
Otto L. Maynard, President and
Chief Executive Officer
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
P.O. Box 411
Burlington, Kansas 66839
Dear Mr. Maynard:
This refers to the predecisional enforcement conference held on January 16, 1997, in the NRC's Region IV office in Arlington, Texas. The purpose of the conference was to review the circumstances surrounding apparent violations described in the subject inspection report, which was issued on December 31, 1996. The inspection reviewed the effectiveness of the Wolf Creek Generating Station system and design engineering organizations. The onsite portion of this inspection ended on November 8, 1996. The overall scope and results of the inspection were discussed with your staff on December 31, 1996.
Based on the information developed during the inspection, the information that your staff provided during the conference, and the additional information provided in your staff's January 22, 1997 letter, the NRC has determined that several violations of NRC requirements occurred. These violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty. The circumstances surrounding them were described in detail in the subject inspection report. The first violation involves five examples of a violation of 10 CFR Appendix B, Criterion XVI. Specifically, while evaluating and responding to a Quality Assurance finding in 1994, your managers and staff failed to identify and correct conflicting positions between Wolf Creek's Technical Specification Clarifications (TSCs) and the actual Technical Specification requirement. As a result of your staff's use of some of these TSCs, Technical Specifications were violated.
Your staff stated that one cause was a "mind set" that permitted the use of operational knowledge in the application of Technical Specifications which, in some cases, compromised compliance. Although the actual safety significance of this violation was low, the circumstances surrounding it are of regulatory significance because of: (1) the management involvement in the violation, and (2) the fundamental importance of complying with Technical Specification requirements.
The second violation involves an inappropriate application of the regulatory guidance for determining the frequency of Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP) flywheel inspections. This is a violation of 10 CFR 50.59 because your staff changed a procedure described in the safety analysis report without recognizing that it also involved a change to Technical Specifications. This violation is significant because it resulted in a violation of Technical Specifications.
The third violation involves the continuing existence of TSC 001-94 after we informed your staff at the predecisional enforcement conference that the NRC considered it incorrect. This TSC involved an incorrect interpretation of Technical Specification 3.3.1, Table 3.3-1, Functional Unit 6.b, Action 5, associated with positive reactivity additions in conjunction with an inoperable source range nuclear instrumentation channel. Your staff's position at the conference was that this TSC did not conflict with the Technical Specification requirements. We continue to disagree with your position regarding this TSC. This is of concern to us because your staff did not either rescind the TSC after the inspection, request formal clarification from the NRC, or request a change to the Technical Specifications. Although a situation to implement the incorrect clarification has not occurred, this TSC was still in effect and available for use as of March 21, 1997. In a telephone conversation on that date between Mr. Bill Johnson of this office and Mr. Clay Warren of your staff, we informed your staff that the NRC considered that the continued existence of this TSC constituted a continuing violation. Subsequently, on March 21, 1997, the TSC was removed. We conclude that this incorrect interpretation of Technical Specifications, which remained in effect following our stated position at the predecisional enforcement conference on January 16, 1997 until March 21, 1997, represents an inappropriate instruction for an activity potentially affecting quality and, as such, constitutes a violation of Criterion V of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.
Given the regulatory significance of these violations that resulted in noncompliances with Technical Specifications and failure to take corrective actions, they are classified in the aggregate in accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, as a Severity Level III problem.
In accordance with the Enforcement Policy, a civil penalty with a base value of $50,000 is considered for a Severity Level III problem. Because your facility has been the subject of escalated enforcement actions within the last 2 years (1), the NRC considered whether credit was warranted for Identification and Corrective Action in accordance with the civil penalty assessment process in Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement Policy.
In evaluating whether credit is warranted for Corrective Action, the NRC carefully considered all your corrective actions. At the predecisional enforcement conference, the time at which the judgement of the adequacy of corrective actions is normally made, your corrective actions included: (1) conducting an extensive evaluation of the existing TSCs and deleting or revising several, (2) the Chief Operating Officer issuing a letter to all personnel detailing expectations for compliance with requirements, (3) chartering an Incident Investigation Team, (4) changing the Onsite Review Committee, and (5) arranging for an outside audit of the plant's corrective action program. Also, corrective actions for the violation involving the RCP flywheel inspections included: (1) performing an operability evaluation, (2) requesting a license amendment, and (3) initiating a change to the Updated Safety Analyses Report.
Our deliberations on Corrective Action also considered your staff's position in the enforcement conference that certain TSCs "were reviewed and found to not violate Technical Specification requirements and did not constitute a change to the existing specifications." The inspection report identified these TSCs as examples of the apparent Criterion XVI violation. After the conference, your staff reiterated your position in a letter dated January 22, 1997. One of these involved TSC 002-96 (source range power supplies). Your staff's initial position was that this TSC did not conflict with Technical Specification 3.8.2. After questioning by NRC during the conference, your staff changed its position and agreed with the NRC that the interpretation was not conservative. (This position was confirmed in your staff's letter dated January 22, 1997.) Therefore, your corrective actions were not adequate, in this example, to have identified your staff's nonconservative position at the time of the conference.
Further, as stated above regarding the third violation, TSC 001-94 remained available for use after the NRC stated its conclusion that it conflicted with Technical Specifications. Thus, our position is that your corrective actions were not prompt, in this example, because you did not either: (1) immediately resolve the issue with the NRC, or (2) rescind the TSC until the issue was resolved with the NRC.
Based on the above two examples, which involve nonconservative and erroneous interpretations of Technical Specifications (the basis for the citation), it appears your corrective actions were not sufficiently prompt nor comprehensive. As a result, the NRC cannot justify giving you Corrective Action credit.
Therefore, to emphasize the importance of compliance with Technical Specifications and of prompt identification and comprehensive correction of violations, and in recognition of your previous escalated enforcement action, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $100,000 for the Severity Level III problem.
At the conference, we also discussed other apparent violations. The first involved four examples of 10 CFR 50.59 violations. At the conference, your staff brought additional information to show that, although the documentation was weak, an evaluation was performed of the Set Point Change Request for the essential service water self cleaning strainer. This is not a violation of 10 CFR 50.59 and is not cited. We have concluded that the remaining 10 CFR 50.59 violations do not represent a programmatic failure and, except the example involving the RCP flywheel inspections discussed above, are therefore cited at Severity Level IV.
The second apparent violation discussed involved noncompliance with Technical Specification 3.5.4 which requires one centrifugal charging pump to be inoperable when in cold shutdown with the reactor vessel head on. After evaluating all the information, we have decided that citing this as another example of the Criterion XVI violation is more appropriate.
Also, one example of the apparent violation of 10 CFR Part 50 Criterion XVI involved TSC 026-85 (quadrant power tilt ratio [QPTR]). Your staff's position, as described in your January 22, 1997, letter, is that, "Action statements [Technical Specification 3.2.4] a.3, and thus a.4, should not be entered until just prior to 24 hours after exceeding the QPTR limit." We have reevaluated this issue and have determined that the wording of the Technical Specification supports your position. As such, this issue is not a violation of a legally binding requirement. However, we continue to believe that your interpretation is nonconservative. If, for example, an unknown stuck rod situation were to occur, your position would not require operators to "[i]dentify and correct the cause of the out-of-limit condition prior to increasing THERMAL POWER..." until just prior to 24 hours after exceeding the QPTR limit. Your position is nonconservative because it could allow for power increases that could ultimately lead to fuel failure. The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation will discuss our concern with you further in separate correspondence.
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. In your response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional actions you plan to prevent recurrence. With regard to the Criterion XVI violation, we note that your staff and the NRC team identified several examples of conflicts between your TSCs and the Technical Specifications. We limited the citation to the more important issues, those examples that actually resulted in violations of the Technical Specifications. Nevertheless, your corrective actions should be sufficiently comprehensive to identify and correct all other conflicting interpretations so that no future Technical Specification violations occur from this problem. The NRC will use your response, in part, to determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR).
Sincerely, org signed by Ellis W. Merschoff Regional Administrator
Docket: 50-482
License: NPF-42
Enclosure: Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty
cc w/Enclosure:
Vice President Plant Operations
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp.
P.O. Box 411
Burlington, Kansas 66839
Jay Silberg, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge
2300 N Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20037
Supervisor Licensing
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp.
P.O. Box 411
Burlington, Kansas 66839
Supervisor Regulatory Compliance
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp.
P.O. Box 411
Burlington, Kansas 66839
Chief Engineer
Utilities Division
Kansas Corporation Commission
1500 SW Arrowhead Rd.
Topeka, Kansas 66604-4027
Office of the Governor
State of Kansas
Topeka, Kansas 66612
Attorney General
Judicial Center
301 S.W. 10th
2nd Floor
Topeka, Kansas 66612-1597
County Clerk
Coffey County Courthouse
Burlington, Kansas 66839-1798
Public Health Physicist
Division of Environment
Kansas Department of Health
and Environment
Bureau of Air & Radiation
Forbes Field Building 283
Topeka, Kansas 66620
Mr. Frank Moussa
Division of Emergency Preparedness
2800 SW Topeka Blvd
Topeka, Kansas 66611-1287
Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Corporation Docket: 50-482 Wolf Creek Generating Station License: NPF-42 EA 96-470
During an NRC inspection conducted on October 7-25, 1996, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the NRC proposes to impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 2282, and 10 CFR 2.205. The particular violations and associated civil penalty are set forth below:
I. Violations Assessed a Civil Penalty
A. 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI requires, in part, that measures be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and corrected.
Contrary to the above, on March 31, 1994, the licensee's corrective actions in response to Quality Assurance Audit K381 findings failed to identify and correct conflicts between Technical Specification Clarifications (TSCs) and the Technical Specifications (TS), a condition adverse to quality. Specifically, the licensee's screenings of the following TSCs did not identify conflicts between the TSCs and the TS as indicated by the following examples:(1) TSC 009-85 conflicted with TS 3/4.5.3 and TS 3/4.5.4 (applicable in Modes 4 and 5, respectively) by allowing two centrifugal charging pumps to be available while in cold shutdown. TS 3/4.5.3 and TS 3/4.5.4 allowed only one centrifugal charging pump to be available while in cold shutdown.
(2) TSC 010-85 conflicted with TS 3.5.3 and 4.5.2 by allowing daily containment closeout inspections following multiple containment entries in one day. TS 3.5.3 and 4.5.2 specify a containment visual inspection for loose debris be performed following each containment entry.
(3) TSC 033-85 conflicted with TS 188.8.131.52 by allowing containment penetrations to be considered operable if dedicated operators were assigned to close inoperable containment isolation valves. TS 184.108.40.206 requires for operability that all containment penetrations be isolable by automatic isolation valves.
(4) TSC 004-86 conflicted with TS 4.5.1 and 4.0.3 allowing cold leg accumulators to be considered operable upon receipt of level and pressure alarms if accumulator level and pressure were within prescribed limits. TS 4.5.1 and 4.0.3 require the accumulators to be considered inoperable upon receipt of these alarms.
(5) TSC 005-94 conflicted with TS 126.96.36.199.2.g.7 by allowing hot restart testing of an emergency diesel generator to be performed any time before or after the 24 hour load test as long as the hot restart test was performed within 5 minutes of a 2 hour diesel run. TS 220.127.116.11.2.g.7 specifies that a hot restart test be performed within 5 minutes following the 24 hour test except that the hot restart test may be done following a warmup run only if it previously failed the test immediately following the 24 hour test. (01013)
B. 10 CFR 50.59 (a)(1) allows the holder of a license to make changes to the facility and procedures as described in the safety analysis report without prior Commission approval unless the proposed change involves a change in the Technical Specifications or an unreviewed safety question. 10 CFR 50.59(b)(1) requires that the licensee maintain records of changes to the facility and that these records include a written safety evaluation which provides the basis for the determination that the change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Contrary to the above, on January 11, 1995, the licensee made a change to a procedure described in the safety analysis report that involved a change to the Technical Specifications, without prior Commission approval. Specifically, the licensee changed the frequency for scheduled surface and ultrasonic examinations of reactor coolant pump flywheels, as described by Regulatory Guide 1.14, "Reactor Coolant Pump Flywheel Integrity," which is described in Chapters 3A and 5.4.1 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report. However, the licensee did not recognize that the change also involved a change to the Technical Specifications, because the Regulatory Guide's examination schedule was specified by reference in Technical Specification 4.4.10 (which was superseded by Technical Specification 6.8.5.b on October 2, 1995). (01023)
C. 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, "Instructions Procedures, and Drawings," requires, in part, that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to the circumstances.
TS 3.3.1, Table 3.3-1, Functional Unit 6.b, Action 5 specifies that with one inoperable source range channel, all operations involving positive reactivity changes be suspended.
Contrary to the above, for an activity affecting quality, a documented instruction was not of a type appropriate to the circumstances in that TSC 001-94 conflicted with TS 3.3.1, Table 3.3-1, Functional Unit 6.b, Action 5 by allowing the reactor coolant system to be cooled down, an activity which involves a positive reactivity change, with one inoperable source range channel of nuclear instrumentation. This instruction remained in place after the licensee was notified by the NRC, on January 16, 1997, that it conflicted with TS, until it was canceled on March 21, 1997. (01033)
These violations represent a Severity Level III problem. (Supplement I).
Civil Penalty - $100,000.
II. Violations Not Assessed a Civil Penalty
10 CFR 50.59 (a)(1) allows the holder of a license to make changes to the facility and procedures as described in the final safety analysis report without prior Commission approval unless the proposed change involves a change in the Technical Specifications or an unreviewed safety question. 10 CFR 50.59(b)(1) requires that the licensee shall maintain records of changes to the facility and that these records include a written safety evaluation which provides the basis for the determination that the change does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
Contrary to the above, in the following examples, the licensee made changes to procedures described in the safety analysis report without an adequate written safety evaluation which provided the basis for the determination that the changes did not involve an unreviewed safety question as indicated by the following examples:
A. On December 13, 1995, the licensee's screening for revisions to Procedures STS PE-049C, "A Train Underground Essential Service Water System Piping Flow Test," and STS PE-049D, "B Train Underground Essential Service Water System Piping Flow Test," failed to indicate that Chapter 9.2 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report was affected by the change. The procedure changes reclassified the systems as non-redundant whereas the Updated Safety Analysis Report described the essential service water system as redundant. As a result, the licensee failed either to submit a request for an alternative to the inservice inspection requirements or process a change to Chapter 9.2 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report and determine whether the change involved an unreviewed safety question.
B. On March 26, 1996, the licensee performed a 10 CFR 50.59 unreviewed safety question determination regarding changing the main turbine overspeed protection test frequency as stated in Chapter 16.3.2 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report from every 7 days to every 92 days, without providing supporting documentation to conclude that an unreviewed safety question was not involved. The unreviewed safety question determination did not address the licensee's experience with the testing of these valves and did not contain any information as to the acceptability, by the turbine vendor, of the decreased surveillance frequency of the turbine valves. (02014)
This is a Severity Level IV violation. (Supplement I).
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (Licensee) is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, within 30 days of the date of this Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each alleged violation: (1) admission or denial of the alleged violation, (2) the reasons for the violation if admitted, and if denied, the reasons why, (3) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved, (4) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (5) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or a Demand for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Consideration may be given to extending the response time for good cause shown. Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.
Within the same time as provided for the response required above under 10 CFR 2.201, the Licensee may pay the civil penalty by letter addressed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with a check, draft, money order, or electronic transfer payable to the Treasurer of the United States in the amount of the civil penalty proposed above, or the cumulative amount of the civil penalties if more than one civil penalty is proposed, or may protest imposition of the civil penalty, in whole or in part, by a written answer addressed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Should the Licensee fail to answer within the time specified, an order imposing the civil penalty will be issued. Should the Licensee elect to file an answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 protesting the civil penalty, in whole or in part, such answer should be clearly marked as an "Answer to a Notice of Violation" and may: (1) deny the violations listed in this Notice, in whole or in part, (2) demonstrate extenuating circumstances, (3) show error in this Notice, or (4) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed. In addition to protesting the civil penalty, in whole or in part, such answer may request remission or mitigation of the penalty.
In requesting mitigation of the proposed penalty, the factors addressed in Section VI.B.2 of the Enforcement Policy should be addressed. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 should be set forth separately from the statement or explanation in reply pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201, but may incorporate parts of the 10 CFR 2.201 reply by specific reference (e.g., citing page and paragraph numbers) to avoid repetition. The attention of the Licensee is directed to the other provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, regarding the procedure for imposing a civil penalty.
Upon failure to pay any civil penalty due which subsequently has been determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, this matter may be referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, unless compromised, remitted, or mitigated, may be collected by civil action pursuant to Section 234(c) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2282c.
The response noted above (Reply to Notice of Violation, letter with payment of civil penalty, and Answer to a Notice of Violation) should be addressed to: Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region IV, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the facility that is the subject of this Notice.
Because your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction. If personal privacy or proprietary information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request withholding of such material, you must specifically identify the portions of your response that you seek to have withheld and provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., explain why the disclosure of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or provide the information required by 10 CFR 2.790(b) to support a request for withholding confidential commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please provide the level of protection described in 10 CFR 73.21.
Dated at Arlington, Texas,
this 3rd day of April 1997
1. A $300,000 civil penalty was proposed for three Severity Level III violations/problems on July 1, 1996 (EA 96-124) related to a frazil ice condition which rendered one train of the Emergency Service Water inoperable and the other train degraded, in addition to problems related to a degraded turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump.


text:
Blue Cheese And Pear Salad With Candied PecansFrom krumkake 12 years ago
- candied Pecans: shopping list
- ¼ cup white sugar shopping list
- ½ cup pecans, coarsely chopped shopping list
- Dressing: shopping list
- ⅓ cup olive oil shopping list
- 3 tablespoons white wine vinegar shopping list
- 1 tablelspoon white sugar shopping list
- a good shot of honey (I'd guess I squirt in about a heaping tablespoon) shopping list
- 1½ teaspoons prepared mustard shopping list
- 1 clove garlic, minced shopping list
- ½ teaspoon salt shopping list
- 2 or 3 twists of fresh ground black pepper shopping list
- Salad ingredients: shopping list
- ½ head iceberg lettuce, chopped into bite-size pieces (or you can use romaine) shopping list
- ½ bag of spinach, chopped into bite-size pieces shopping list
- 2 pears, peeled and cored and chopped, and sprinkled with fruit Fresh to prevent browning shopping list
- 6 ounces Roquefort or blue cheese, crumbled (I prefer to use a block of blue cheese so I can make bigger chunks than what you usually get in the pre-crumbled cheese tubs) shopping list
- ½ cup chopped sweet onion shopping list
How to make it
- Prepare the pecans first, so they can cool off.
- In a skillet over medium heat, stir ¼ cup of sugar together with the pecans (watch carefully, as these will burn easily - you want a hot flame, but not so hot that it will scorch the sugar).
- Continue stirring constantly until sugar has melted completely and the pecans are beginning to turn a beautiful caramel color.
- Carefully (I say "carefully" because this is some HOT stuff - don't burn yourself) transfer nuts onto a cutting board to cool completely, seperating the nuts as they cool (otherwise they will cool in a big "clump" and you will need to break it all up, making for some "not so pretty" candied pecans!).
- NOTE - VERY IMPORTANT! Do not put the nuts on waxed paper to cool - I did that the first time I made this, not realizing that the nuts would stick to the waxed paper...I couldn't remove them to save my soul - I had to throw out the entire batch and start all over!! I've found that my cutting board works best - you can scrape up any "stuck" nuts with a spatula, and it's easy to clean up.
- For the dressing, blend oil and vinegar together with a whisk, then add remaining dressing ingredients, whisking until it is well blended (it will tend to seperate as it sits, so just give it a good stir before dressing the salad with it).
- Set dressing aside until ready to serve the salad.
- When ready to serve, toss lettuce, spinach, pears, blue cheese, and onions in a large bowl.
- Pour dressing over salad, sprinkle with pecans; toss and serve immediately.
- Unfortunately, this salad does not keep well once it is "dressed". Scale it down (or increase amounts) to make only what you think you will eat at one time. The dressing will keep well in the refrigerator for some time, so extra dressing is not a problem - it will be ready and waiting next time you're craving this salad.
People Who Like This Dish 7
Reviews & Comments 7
- notyourmomma ate it and said... Was this review helpful? Yes Flag
- paulasue1 ate it and said... Was this review helpful? Yes Flag
- jenniferbyrdez ate it and said... Was this review helpful? Yes Flag
- notyourmomma ate it and said... Was this review helpful? Yes Flag
- magali777 ate it and said... Was this review helpful? Yes Flag
- bluewaterandsand ate it and said... Was this review helpful? Yes Flag
- annieamie ate it and said... Was this review helpful? Yes Flag
The Cookkrumkake Chicago Suburbs, IL
The Rating6 people
Hi Krumkake! Thanks for adding the part about the waxed paper and the pecans. I see that you and I have made the same mistake before! But then, isn't waxed paper a fat-free product that's high in fiber? Naaa... I am going to enjoy your recipe as soon...moreannieamie in Los Angeles loved it
Wow, This sounds fantastic! I am so eager to try this. I think I will do this for our fathers day dinner.bluewaterandsand in GAFFNEY loved it
mmm.. sounds delicious! thanks Krumkake!!magali777 in Mexico loved it
The Groups
- Not added to any groups yet!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Alias: Smaug the ... Magnificent, Golden, Tremendous, Chiefest and Greatest of Calamaties, Mighty, unassessably wealthy, Dreadful, Lord Smaug the Impenetrable, the Dragon, the monster, Old Worm, Worm of Dread
Date of Birth: Unknown
Race: Dragon (fire-drake)
Height: Very tall/long
Date of Death: T.A. 2941
Alignment: Evil
Parents: Unknown
Spouse: None
Children: None
Description: Smaug is red-gold in color, has a long body, four legs, and two bat-like wings. Like most dragons, he has a scaly hide above that is impervious to most attacks. What makes Smaug unique, however, is that he has developed an equally powerful shield on his otherwise soft and vulnerable underbelly, made up of the jewels and gold on which he had been sleeping for two centuries. His underbelly shield has one weak spot on the left breast, which is noticed by Bilbo. This information ultimately leads to Smaug's undoing.
Smaug is one of the last great dragons of Middle-earth. He attacked the Dwarf kingdom of Erebor, also known as the Lonely Mountain, and the neighboring town of Dale. Driving out the Dwarves, Smaug took over the Lonely Mountain and laid claim to all of the treasure within. For two hundred years, he has lived in the Lonely Mountain, guarding the treasure. The people of the nearby town of Esgaroth, or Lake-town, live in constant fear that one day the sleeping dragon might awake.
In Tolkien's letters, he describes the name "Smaug" as the past-tense form of the old Germanic term smeugan, which means "to squeeze through a hole." This is significant, because the Dwarves ponder, at the beginning of The Hobbit, whether Smaug was able to squeeze through the secret entrance to the Lonely Mountain.
Memorable Quotes
- "You have nice manners for a thief and a liar." (to Bilbo)
- "Don't talk to me! … I know the smell (and taste) of dwarf — no one better." (to Bilbo)
- "Bless me! Had you never thought of the catch?" (to Bilbo)
- "My armor is like tenfold shields. My teeth are like swords. My claws, spears. The shock of my tail, a thunderbolt. My wings, a hurricane. And my breath, death." (to Bilbo)


text:
What does CRI mean and why is it important?
Unless you are a seasoned artist, you might not truly understand or appreciate the art of lighting a room. Choosing lights for your space can be quite technical. If you have a certain look you are trying to achieve in a room, restaurant, business, art gallery, etc., it is important to understand the different aspects there are to lights, such as the color rendering index (CRI), and why it's so important to achieving your goal for the space.
For some, lighting can be an afterthought, or just simply misunderstood. If you are opening a restaurant, for example, you might want dim lighting which might work great for your space—but it might also create a different environment from what you intended. Or, if you are an artist and are hanging your work in a gallery, the lighting will affect the way your painting is seen by customers and visitors. These risks can easily be solved by understand CRI—here are some key things to know.
CRI essentially refers to how different types of illumination, or light, affected the color of objects as they are perceived when the light hit them. The index provides lighting manufacturers to create different lights with CRIs that are best for different situations, i.e. a restaurant and an art gallery. To do this, they manufacture lights on a scale of 1-100:
- High pressure sodium light sources have a CRI around 24
- Mercury vapor light sources have a CRI around 49
- Fluorescent light sources have a CRI range between 50 and 85 depending on the phosphate coating of the bulb
- Metal halide light sources have a CRI range between 75 and 95
- Modern LEDs have a braod range of CRI up to 95
What do those CRI measurements mean? Simply put, the lower the CRI, the less accurate the true colors will be depicted. Therefore, if you are shining a light on a table where your food will be placed, you'd want a higher level CRI. The same goes for a piece of art—if the light shining on your painting or photo has a low CRI, the colors that you used or captured are not going to appear as you intended. The closer the CRI rating is to 100, the more the colors will appear as they would in perfect natural, true lighting.
There might be some instances when a lower CRI is suitable, but never in the case of lighting artwork or any typw of craft or hobby lighting.For these applicatioins you should use a minimum of 90 CRI. Always think about the object or objects you are lighting before you buy a lighting fixture. It's never a bad idea to consult a lighting specialist at the store where you are planning purchase your lights—they should be very knowledgeable and able to help you achieve the look for which you are hoping.


text:
Free Direct Access
from the members of the
The Division of Library Development and the
State Librarian
New York State Library
Albany, New York
September 1997
- Task Force Members
- Introduction
- Brief Overview of Major Causes of Problems With Current Free Direct Access Policy
- Charge to the Task Force
- Revisiting Past Recommendations
- Gathering New Data
- Summary of Survey Findings
- How Big is the Problem [chart]
- How Many People Live in the Library Service Areas Surveyed [chart]
- How Many People Live in the Library Service Areas Where There Is a Problem [chart]
- Problem Locations
- Funding Issues
- Solutions for Today -- Short-Term Recommendations
- Vision for Tomorrow -- Long-Term Recommendations
- Conclusion
- Appendix A: Proposed Revision
- Appendix B: Current Regulation
- Appendix C: Major Differences Between Current Regulation and Proposed Revision
- Appendix D: Questions and Answers on Direct Access
- Appendix E: Free Direct Access Survey
Richard V. Anglin, Director
Ramapo Catskill Library System
Betty Babanoury, Director
Niagara Falls Public Library
Linda Caliguiri (Trustee)
Greece Public Library
Harry J. Dutcher, Director
Saratoga Springs Public Library
Joseph Eisner, Director
Plainedge Public Library
Virginia Lowell, Director
Nassau Library System
Elizabeth S. Manion, Director
Marlboro Free Library
Frank Queener, Director
Southern Tier Library System
Myron Roochvarg, Director
Commack Public Library
Library Development Staff
Carol Ann Desch, DLD
Jim Farrell, DLD (Convener)
Judy Levine, DLD (Retired)
Maureen Read, DLD
Commissioner's Regulations §90.3 currently provides for "free direct access" which, simply stated, permits the holder of a valid library card issued by a public or association library or public library system to borrow on site, free of charge, materials from any member library within that system.
Free direct access as defined in Commissioner's Regulation §90.3 gives rise to several problems. These problems fall into two categories:
1. Overuse of a library's resources by people not residing in the library's service area.
With 58% of our borrowers coming from outside the chartered service area, you can clearly see the burden it places on our library. A change in the 90.3 regulations is long overdue and is a problem affecting not only our library but also libraries statewide. -- HUNTINGTON MEMORIAL LIBRARY
2. Negative political perception and impacts because non-residents who are using services are not paying for them at the same level as residents.
The current system of direct access invites and is subject to gross abuse. For example, the village board of trustees of a large adjoining community publicly proclaimed several years ago that they would not fund their library beyond a very minimal level because their residents could "go to Garden City and get anything they want." This is a perversion of direct access and it is WRONG!! -- GARDEN CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY
Brief Overview of Major Causes of Problems With Current Free Direct Access Policy
Disparity of support:
The first cause of problems is usually found in systems where two adjacent communities have disparities in the level of library support. In these situations, the residents of a lower-funded library's service area seek direct access from a better-funded neighboring library. If the borrowing were indeed reciprocal, there would be no problem, but, typically, few of the patrons from the better-funded library will seek to avail themselves of the services and collections of their lower-funded neighbor. "Lower-funded" should not be equated with "poor." In some of the worst cases, the opposite is true: the lower-funded community has a higher assessed valuation than its better-funded neighbor. The statewide local public income per capita for New York State public libraries was $27.07 per capita in 1995. The statewide valuation per capita was $44,872. Data gathered from the annual reports submitted to the Division of Library Development by 741 public libraries indicates that 47 libraries with an assessed valuation per capita of $75,000 or better have a local public funding per capita of under $25. [Source: 1995 Annual Report of Public and Association Libraries.] The ability to pay should not be confused with the willingness to pay.
An illustration of this is the Gates Public Library in Monroe County. Gates has three communities on its borders that have similar assessed valuation, but support their libraries at much lower rates. [Source: Free Direct Access Survey, May 1997 and 1995 Annual Report of Public and Association Libraries.]
Assessed Valuation
Per Capita Library Support
|Gates Public Library
|Greece Public Library
|Farmers' Library
|Chili Public Library
Gates is surrounded by under-funded libraries... Under free direct access, residents in communities who do not fund their libraries as generously as Gates is funded can use our facilities on the same terms as Gates taxpayers. Therefore there is little pressure put on the under-funded libraries to improve their funding when their customers can find the quality library service they wish elsewhere for free. -- GATES PUBLIC LIBRARY
Geographic boundaries:
The second cause of problems is geographic boundaries, as is the case in the Nassau Library System. Proximity to a library is a convenience to a patron who does not heed arbitrary, and often incomprehensible, boundary lines which are easily transcended in a mobile society.
There are 5 library buildings within the five mile area surrounding Seaford. Many people in the vicinity like to go from one library to another. If Seaford Library District residents approve a budget increase for videos, they expect to see them on the shelves. If residents of our several adjacent communities can check out anything from our special collection, our taxpayers lose. They do not want to go to empty shelves in their locally supported institution. -- SEAFORD PUBLIC LIBRARY
Unserved areas:
The third cause of problems stems from the requirement in §90.3 that unserved areas within a library system's service area with a population under 10,000 must be served by neighboring communities having libraries, without reference to the costs such service imposes on these neighboring communities. Some municipalities without a local library contract with surrounding libraries. However, since there is no requirement to do so, or standards for doing so, many do not.
Twenty of the twenty-three public library systems have people who live in unserved areas. In 1996 systems reported 493 partially or wholly unserved municipalities representing a total of 1,286,874 people. [Source: Population of Unserved Areas Reported by Public Library Systems as of December 1996.]
Percentage of People Unserved by a Local Public Library
|North Country L. S.
|Westchester L. S.
|Clinton-Essex-Franklin L. S.
|Monroe County L. S.
|Chautauqua-Cattaraugus L. S.
|Nassau L. S.
|Finger Lakes L. S.
|Buffalo & Erie County L. S.
A public library such as our own is surrounded by several communities of fewer than 10,000 population where no public library exists. The collective impact of these non-residents is indeed significant, and in our case amounted to fully 37% of our active card holders. - SEYMOUR PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT
In 1993, the New York State Library presented a series of recommendations to the Board of Regents aimed at addressing the problems inherent in Commissioner's Regulation §90.3. The Regents decided, in 1994, to defer action until such time as specific problems and locations could be identified. In effect, the 1997 Task Force is following up on the work done in 1993. Specifically, the 1997 Task Force was charged with:
* gathering data that identified those localities currently experiencing problems with the requirements for free direct access at both the member library and system levels;
* identifying what those problems are; and
* developing recommendations to the Board of Regents on how to address these problems.
Revisiting Past Recommendations
The Task Force reviewed the work done on §90.3 by previous committees in 1974, 1989 and 1993 and carefully considered their recommendations. During a 1993 presentation, the Regents advised State Library staff of their concern for poor communities. The 1997 Task Force kept this concern in mind as members developed new recommendations. However, the following quote best describes the overriding philosophy of the 1997 Task Force:
"free direct access is not intended to relieve any area from the responsibility for localsupport of public library service. It is not only inequitable but it is inimical to the development of good library service for certain jurisdictions to expect that major library service needs will be met by the taxpayers of other jurisdictions..." -- Report of the Commissioner of Education's Committee on Direct Access, 1974
The Task Force discussed the importance of access to library services and resources for all New Yorkers and agreed that its recommendations would be targeted towards reaching the following goal:
All residents of New York State will have access to a full range of library services and resources to meet their information needs. Skilled librarians will provide access to information for people of all ages, backgrounds, interests and abilities using resources located within their institutions, as well as telecommunications and electronic technology to go beyond the library's walls.
The 1997 Task Force concluded that the solutions proposed in earlier reports would not address current problems in their entirety. Therefore, to respond to the Regents request for information, the Task Force conducted a survey. The survey was designed to determine the nature and extent of current problems with §90.3, so that the Task Force could propose a reasonable solution.
The Task Force requested that Library Development mail survey forms to the 741 chartered public and association libraries in the State.(see Appendix E) The term "public library" encompasses institutions that range from one-room-one-person facilities with operating budgets as low as $3,000, to The New York Public Library, an institution staffed with over a thousand people and a budget over $88 million.
Some 467 libraries responded with a 67% return rate. Based on careful analysis of survey results, existing data and adjustment of responses to reflect first hand knowledge, the Task Force determined that of the 467 responses there are 165 libraries with free direct access problems. The Task Force concluded that the regulatory language of Commissioner's Regulation §90.3 requires revision.
165 libraries out of 467 report having a problem with direct access.
These problems are statewide. 29 Senate districts, 55 Assembly Districts and all of the Judicial Districts, with the exception of those in New York City, are affected.
224 libraries said that §90.3 needs to be changed.
22 libraries would either withdraw or strongly consider withdrawing from their system if §90.3 were to be enforced.
101 libraries charge a fee for library service to people residing outside the library's chartered service area and in the system service area.
58 of 467 libraries contract to supply library services to municipalities without libraries.
[Note: Of the 467 responses, 84 answered "Yes" to Question One, "Does your library have a problem caused by or related to the free direct access provision (90.3) of Commissioner's Regulations?" The Task Force believes there was some misinterpretation of this question caused by past practice, assumptions, system variances and perceived library variances. Based on first hand knowledge the Task Force analyzed the survey and adjusted responses to reflect the true situation. These situations were primarily Long Island libraries that answered "No" to Question One because they have a variance. As a result, there are 165 libraries reporting a problem and 329 libraries reporting no problem.]
165 Libraries Identify a Problem with Free Direct Access
New York State
Total Public and Association Libraries
The 165 libraries with free direct access problems serve a total population of 3,701,035. The population of the State, according to the 1990 census data used by the Education Department, is 17,990,764. The three New York City library systems and the Buffalo and Erie County Public Library System were not included in the survey results because by the very nature of their governance and financing, they do not have free direct access problems. Hence, for the purposes of analysis, the populations of these areas were subtracted from the State's total population. Another segment of the State's population, the unserved, was also subtracted because this population does not have library service. In many cases these unserved areas are the cause of the problems for the 165 libraries. The total population for the three New York City Systems, Buffalo and Erie County and the unserved areas is 9,578,022(See Chart 2).
How Many People Live in the Library Service Areas Surveyed?
8,412,742 People Reside in Library Service Areas Surveyed
How Many People Live in the Library Service Areas Where There is a Problem?
3.7 Million People Reside in Library Service Areas With A Free Direct Access Problem
The total population of the 165 libraries with free direct access problems is 3,701,035. This constitutes 44% of the total number of people residing in library service areas surveyed.
The survey results indicated to the Task Force that the problems with free direct access exist throughout the State in large, as well as, small libraries. The dots indicate where problems with free direct access were identified.
Should people living in communities which do not support public library service be able to obtain such services at no cost? The fact that there are still local jurisdictions which, 40 years after the implementation of the public library system concept, still fail to tax themselves for library service, is a reasonable indication that these jurisdictions, not the State nor the public library systems, are depriving their citizens of library service. State aid was never designed to replace local tax funds for the support of local public library service.
In the provision of other public services, i.e., schools, parks, roads, etc. the public appreciates that different communities have different priorities regarding these services, and fund them at different levels. For example, if parents want a better education for their child and believe that higher funding for schools is needed, they must either make the case politically in the community in which they live or, alternatively, move to or contract with a better-funded school district. The State funds public schools at a much higher level than it does the public library systems and libraries, but the State does not require that a non-resident pupil be allowed to attend other community's schools free of charge.
There is an inconsistency in how the NYS Education Department approaches the issue of open access for public libraries on the one hand, and open access to public education on the other. The Education Department now requires library systems to include the provision of open access for member libraries, and at the same time, the Education Department allows school districts to restrict access to their schools to district residents only, and permits school districts to charge tuition fees for non-district residents. -- -SEYMOUR PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT
The average person is unaware of the difference between school and library funding. One might assume that just as the schools receive an average of 40.3% of their funding from the State in the form of State aid, so it must be for public libraries. [Source: New York The State Of Learning, A Report to the Governor and the Legislature on the Educational Status of the State's Schools: Submitted February 1997.] Even when system dollars are included, the percentage of State funds invested in public library services falls well below the State investment in public schools. Some 11 percent of total New York State public library services income was from State funds in 1995 ($67 million). Over eighty percent or $55 million supported the operation of New York's 23 public library systems (including the three consolidated systems in New York City). [Source: 1995 Annual Report of Public and Association Libraries.] This State funding to library systems results in better quality and more cost effective local library services through system services such as: consultant services, resource sharing, inter library loan networks, joint automation projects, outreach to special target populations and continuing education for library staff and trustees.
There are two cases where State aid goes directly to local libraries. Central and co-central libraries of public library systems will receive some $7 million in State funds during 1997-98 to purchase nonfiction library materials and to provide full library services to all residents of the system service area.
The Local Services Support Aid Program (LSSA) and the Local Library Services Aid (LLSA) Program instituted in 1993 provides limited funds of 29¢ per person to systems for serving the unserved and to local libraries to help them meet minimum standards set by the Board of Regents. In areas where §90.3 is a problem the direct State aid as a percentage of the affected member library's budget is usually less than one percent and never more than two percent; the other 99+% is raised locally through the property tax, less income from fees, etc.
Direct State Aid as a Percentage of Library Budgets
[from 1995 Annual Report of Public and Association Libraries]
Total Operating Fund Receipts
Population Chartered to Serve
Direct State Aid
Percentage of Receipts that is State Aid
|Commack Public Library
|Pearl River Public Library
|North Castle Public Library
|Saratoga Springs Public Library
|Guilderland Public Library
The issue is how public libraries are funded. NYS needs to look to the school district model.... -- CRANDALL PUBLIC LIBRARY
Of the 165 libraries reporting a problem with free direct access, the average total operating fund receipts are $1,326,810. The average direct State aid is $12,608, or 0.95% of their operating budget.[Source: 1995 Annual Report of Public and Association Libraries.] The average direct State aid to school districts in New York is 40.3% of their operating budget. If an individual living outside a school district service area wants to have his or her child use the resources of that school district, he or she must pay a tuition to the school district to off set the cost of those resources. Public libraries are expected to share their resources, yet receive much less in direct library aid from the State.
The following figures illustrate the range of average direct State aid provided to the 741 public libraries in New York State.
Public and Association Libraries
Range of Direct State Aid
By Level of Operating Receipts (1996)
[Source: 1995 Annual Report of Public and Association Libraries]
|Level of Operating Receipts
Number of Libraries
Average Total Operating Fund Receipts
Average Direct State Aid
Average % of Receipts That is State Aid
|$500,000 +
|$100,000 to $499,000
|$25,000 to $99,999
|$5,000 to $24,999
Solutions For Today -- Short-Term Recommendations
Using data such as the findings listed earlier, and first-hand knowledge of Task Force members, some of whom believe that court action may be necessary to address the immediate problems of Regulation §90.3, the Task Force developed both short-term and long-term recommendations for action. Focusing first on the present conditions and how to deal with immediate concerns, the Task Force determined that new regulatory language relating to direct access is needed.
Withdrawal from our system or going to court, this library, with the support of many other member libraries in our system, will do what is necessary to protect the interests of this library's taxpayers. -- COMMACK PUBLIC LIBRARY
Proposed new regulatory language is included in Appendix A. Key features of the amended regulation include:
* definition of terms such as nonresident, on-site use, serious inequities and hardships and library resources that previously caused confusion;
* elimination of permission for municipalities with a population of under 10,000 to use the resources of a neighboring library at no cost to the individual or municipality;
* a requirement that member libraries vote on the system's direct access plan; and
* provision for a procedure whereby a member library may request a variance from the system's direct access plan.
In order to address the diverse demographics and needs of New Yorkers, the proposed regulation will provide flexibility for each public library system to outline in its individual plan of service the method by which that system will provide direct access for people residing in geographic areas unserved by a public library, for people who are overusing libraries other than their own and for people who frequently cross arbitrary geographic boundaries for shopping, employment or other reasons. The proposed new regulation recognizes that:
* one single solution will not work statewide;
* no library service is without cost;
* adequate local funding, regardless of the size of the community, is required for quality library service; and
* there must be an accepted minimum statewide standard for service to non-residents.
Do not put in place policies with which it is not possible to comply. "One Size" does not fit all libraries. -- GILBERTSVILLE FREE LIBRARY
The proposed new regulation serves to empower and encourage underfunded libraries or unfunded unserved areas to:
* increase or seek funding for library service;
* raise and expand library service standards; and
* set goals for library service.
The proposed new regulation assumes that the New York State Library's Division of Library Development will have sufficient resources to:
* routinely examine the plan of service of each public library system;
* fairly enforce the regulation;
* clearly state the consequences for non-compliance; and
* resolve how minimum standards can be adjusted for libraries who contract for services.
Vision For Tomorrow -- Long-Term Recommendations
The Task Force's long-term recommendations are ones that require significantly increased funding, legislative action and Regent's support. The Task Force believes that these recommendations, although desirable, may take several years to accomplish.
Access to library services and resources for all New Yorkers is desirable and possible. In order to make this happen we recommend that the Commissioner and the Board of Regents:
* pursue with the legislature mandating public library service to all communities;
* establish minimum standards for all public and association libraries contracting with communities outside their chartered service area;
* advocate for increased State funding that will allow libraries to meet State requirements in law and regulation;
* educate the public, State and local officials, and library trustees concerning the role of libraries in life long learning and the need for adequately funded public library service;
* continue to pursue funding for the establishment of a Commission on Library Services to reexamine the financing and governance of public library service;
* increase State funding to the New York State Library's Division of Library Development so there is sufficient staff to encourage resource sharing and to assist libraries in providing high quality cost effective services in all communities; and
* evaluate the impact of these regulatory changes before the year 2000.
New York State should make a decision. If universal access is considered a "common good" and of high value for the state as a whole, then there should be no part of the state that is not part of a library district. -- NORTH TONAWANDA PUBLIC LIBRARY
The Task Force believes that the proposed regulation will equitably address, for the present,the problems and concerns associated with the current direct access regulation. The Task Force's recommendations are broad and flexible in order to accommodate current issues in localities and regions throughout the State. It is the Task Force's hope that the Regents will amend §90.3 as quickly as possible to relieve immediate problems and work consistently over time to address some of the Task Force's long-term recommendations in order to ensure continued equitable access to high quality, cost effective public library service to all New Yorkers.
This is not a single problem with one-size-fits-all solution. We have not succeeded in finding solutions because, among other things, we have not been willing to admit the diversity of preference from system to system. Allow these preferences to co-exist and support them, and let that be the statewide solution.
Uphold the right of communities to use local funds to benefit their taxpayers. Uphold the right of local library boards to make decisions on use of local funds to benefit their communities. Ensure that system membership does not usurp or compromise these rights unfairly. Allow library boards leeway to make a wide variety of choices to serve their residents first and best. State mandates for localities to serve other communities are not legal, and unfunded state mandates are not right. -- WHITE PLAINS PUBLIC LIBRARY
-Proposed Revision-
§90.3 Approval of Public Library Systems. (a) As used in this Part,
i) a public library system means: a library established by one or more counties, a group of libraries serving an area including one or more counties in whole or in part, a library of a city containing one or more counties, or a cooperative library system established pursuant to the provisions of §255 of the Education Law. A public library system may be approved for State aid under §272 and §273 of the Education Law if it complies with the provisions of the aforementioned sections of the Education Law and if it meets the provisions of this part.
ii) approved plan of service means: a plan submitted by a system board of trustees in accordance with §272 of the Education Law and which has been approved by the Commissioner. The plan of service defines the mutual commitments, responsibilities and obligations of the library system and its members in meeting the service needs of the area served and Statewide library service goals.
iii) direct access means: the ability of an individual who resides within the boundaries of a library system to borrow materials from, but not necessarily at, any library in the system provided that individual has a borrower's card issued by the system or any member library in the system.
iv) library resources means: those materials and services specified in each system's approved plan of service, available via direct access to residents within the system's chartered service area.
v) nonresident means: an individual whose primary residence is outside of a library's chartered service area or contracted service area, but within the system.
vi) on-site use means: access by an individual to a library's resources on premises.
vii) serious inequities and hardships means: those conditions which adversely affect member libraries in providing direct access in accordance with the provisions in each system's approved plan of service including, but not limited to, excessive use of a library by those from outside the library's chartered service or contracted service area and by the level of local tax support, per capita support, size of collection, range and diversity of materials, and types and range of non-print resources.
(c)(1) In order to qualify for full approval, a plan submitted by a public library system shall provide for direct access by all residents of the area served, of the library resources within the system by acceptance by all libraries in the system of a borrower's card issued by the system or by any library in the system. Age shall not be a factor in determining direct access policy.
(2) The plan of service may stipulate conditions whereby residents of jurisdictions within the system's service area which do not exercise the authority contained in Section 255 of the Education Law or other pertinent legislative acts to establish and maintain a public library, may use member libraries.
(3) No plan of service shall be approved unless it provides for free, on-site use at every member library. Loan of specific materials to or use of specific services by persons living outside the chartered service area of a member library may be restricted if failure to do so would result in serious inequities and hardships to resident borrowers of member libraries. When attendance at local library programs or use of local library services must be limited, due to space or fiscal constraints, local residents may be given first access to them.
(4) A plan of service shall specify a procedure whereby member libraries may discuss, modify or amend the conditions, procedures, and agreed upon means of implementing, changing or altering the conditions of direct access within the system service area. The system board of trustees, prior to submission of a plan of service for approval by the Commissioner, shall by majority vote of the member libraries obtain ratification of the direct access provision.
(5) A variance may be granted to a member library on the basis of serious inequities and hardship. An individual member library may request the Commissioner to consider a variance to allow exemption from compliance with the direct access provision of its system's approved plan of service. Such a request may be considered if it is submitted by the systemboard of trustees and if it has been subject to the procedures in (4) above relating to member library modification of direct access procedures within the system and in accordance with the procedures specified in the system's plan of service. The system board of trustees shall not have the authority to unreasonably delay consideration of a member library's request to the Commissioner for a variance, or its transmission to the Commissioner.
Current Regulations 90.3(b)
(b)(1) In order to qualify for full approval, a plan submitted by a public library system shall provide for the free direct use, by all residents of the area served, of the total library resources within the system by acceptance by all libraries in the system of a borrower's card issued by the system or by any library in the system, to be honored on the same basis as that specified for cardholders in each individual library. No such resident shall be excluded from free direct use because of age.
(2) Subject to the approval of the commissioner, and under the following conditions, the plan of service of a public library system may be amended to modify unrestricted free direct use as defined in paragraph (1) of this subdivision.
(i) Registered member libraries shall not be required to provide free direct access to their materials and services to residents of a jurisdiction of 10,000 population or more which has not exercised the authority contained in section 255 of the Education Law, or other pertinent legislative act, to establish and maintain a public library, or which is not contracting for public library service in accordance with section 256 of the Education Law.
(ii) Loan of specific materials to persons living outside the chartered service area of a member library may be restricted if, in the judgment of the commissioner, failure to do so would result in serious inequities and hardships to resident borrowers of member libraries. Restrictions upon the loan of specific materials shall be limited to non print materials and equipment, and printed materials less than one year old, including fiction and nonfiction books and periodicals. Such materials must have been purchased from local funds. When attendance at local library programs must be limited, local residents may be given first access to them.
(iii) Procedures for dealing with delinquent borrowers including restrictions upon their borrowing privileges, may be stipulated.
Major Differences Between Current Regulation §90.3 and Proposed Revision
Current §90.3
Proposed Revision
|Free Direct Use
|On-site restrictions.
|System must provide for free on-site use and free on-site borrowing privileges to all residents of a library system who have a valid library card or a valid system card if the individual does not live in an area of 10,000 or more which is not supporting library service.
|Library service to individuals living in an area of 10,000 or more not supporting library service.
|May be restricted from on-site use and or borrowing.
|All residents, regardless of size of community, have free on-site use of library resources at every member library. The 10,000 population is removed from the regulation. May be restricted from on-site borrowing.
|Library service to individuals living in an area of 10,000 or more not supporting library service.
|System must provide for free on-site use and on-site borrowing privileges to all residents of a library system who have a valid library card or a valid system card.
|All residents, regardless of size of community, have free on-site use of library resources at every member library. May be restricted from on-site borrowing.
|Loan of materials.
|System must provide for free on-site use and free on-site borrowing privileges to all residents of a library system who have a valid library card or a valid system card if the individual does not live in an area of 10,000 or more which is not supporting library service.
|The system plan must state how, and under what conditions, individuals living within the system service area may borrow materials from libraries other than their home library. All residents within a system service area will be able to borrow materials, purchased with State funds, from the system's central library.
|Development of system plan of service.
|System develops the plan. Member input not required. The Commissioner approves the plan.
|System and member libraries develop the direct access section of the plan of service. The section is then voted on by the member libraries. The Commissioner approves the plan.
|Variance requests.
|System plan is amended to reflect any variance given to a member library by the Commissioner.
|Member libraries may apply to the system board of trustees for a variance to allow exemption from compliance to the direct access provision of the system plan of service. If the system rejects this request, the member library may appeal the decision to the Commissioner. The system would send the appeal to the Commissioner on behalf of the member library.
Questions and Answers on Direct Access
Q. What is meant by "Direct Access"?
A. "Access, of course, means that persons are allowed to use the resources and services of a library. In this context access implies the use of all member libraries in a public library system by all of the residents of the area served by the system. 'Direct' access implies that the use shall be in person, as distinguished from an inter-library loan. 'Free direct' access means that there will be no charge to the user, either for the individual transaction or in the form of an annual or other non-resident fee, although the library used may be reimbursed in some way from system funds or other sources.
"In the strictest sense, free direct access covers all types of in-person library use, including reference and other uses which may not result in the borrowing of materials for use outside the library....." [Report of the Commissioner of Education's Committee on Direct Access, Albany, 1974, pp. 4, 20.]
Q. Why hasn't the Task Force recommended an increase in State funding to cover the costs of reimbursing member libraries for meeting "Direct Access" requirements?
A. The Task Force believes that adoption of the proposed regulation allows greater local control and is preferable to the imposition of state mandates which cannot take into account the wide variety of local conditions within library systems. Without revision, the amount of increased State aid required to effectuate the intent of the regulation, is not deemed practical at this time.
Q. Why is it important that we do something now?
A. This is the fourth time in twenty-two years the question of, and problems with, free direct access have been addressed. Over the years the problems have grown. We are not meeting the needs of our customers. Libraries are finding it very difficult to explain to residents that their tax dollars are going to support services for people who live outside their community. Legislators are also examining the issue, looking for answers to the problem.
If the issue of Direct Access is not satisfactorily resolved, this could be the end of public library systems in New York State. -- HEMPSTEAD PUBLIC LIBRARY
Q. How does this issue effect the "Electronic Doorway Library" services initiative?
A. We must constantly keep in mind that most of the funds to operate public libraries in New York State come from local taxes. Relieving libraries overburdened by the obligation to serve those who do not contribute to those taxes will mean libraries can redirect those funds and staff resources to implement new technology.
Q. Don't local businesses benefit from "wide open" library service and thus generate tax revenues for libraries?
A. If a library's funding authority sees the library as a "magnet" and service is funded and planned accordingly, this notion might make some sense. If thirty or forty percent of a library's business is from outside the area taxed, for example, funding authorities and tax payers must willingly provide the extra funds needed to guarantee quality service for all users. This is seldom, if ever, the case.
Q. Doesn't the millions of dollars the State provides in library aid provide public library service to all New Yorkers?
A. Even including the $67 million in State funds which support all public library and public library system services, only 11% of the New York State public library services income was from State funds in 1995. $610 million, or 89%, of New York State public library income was from local tax funds (72%) and other sources such as gifts, fees, fines and investments of the funds. State funding to library systems provides better quality and more cost-effective services through resource sharing, inter library loan networks, joint automation projects, continuing education for library staff, etc. Many of these activities assume a strong local library to begin with. The lack of adequate funding at the local level, in fact, can make it difficult for some local libraries to take advantage of the vast array of services available through library systems. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
Q. Isn't public library service a right of all New Yorkers?
A. Although one might think so, it is, in fact, not the case. Public library service is not mandated in New York State. Much needs to be done to make this a reality. If we continue funding libraries primarily with local property tax funds, as seems likely, then universal service requires universal local funding. The Regents, the Legislature and the library community need to examine governance and funding structures to ensure high-quality and cost-effective library services are being delivered to all New Yorkers.
Q. If the proposed new regulation is adopted, does this mean some New Yorkers will be charged for library services even though they already pay State taxes?
A. Library systems will have the option to develop a system plan of service that will give the system the option of implementing some type of relief for libraries experiencing overuse of their materials by people living outside their chartered service areas and contracted area.
Free Direct Access Survey
1. Does your library have a problem caused by or related to the free direct access provision (90.3) of Commissioners Regulations ?
(If No, go to Question 3)
2. If yes, please check one or all of the following that apply:
People who live in communities that do not support a public library and that do not contract with our library for library services are causing "overuse" of our resources.
People who live in service areas of neighboring libraries in the system are causing "overuse" of our resources.
People who live outside our public library system boundaries are causing "overuse" of our resources.
3. Does your library contract with one or more communities or districts outside your chartered service area to supply library services?
(If No, go to Question 4)
If yes, please supply the following information:
Community/District Name ________ Population ________ Contract Amount $_______
Community/District Name ________ Population ________ Contract Amount $_______
(If your library contracts with other Communities/Districts, please list them at the end of the survey.)
If yes, are those residents in the contracted service area given the same borrowing privileges as library users in your chartered service area?
If no, what services are restricted? Check all that apply.
___ New Books ___ Audiovisual material___ Program attendance ___ Other (Specify)
4. Are people living within your library system, but outside your chartered service and contracted service areas, allowed free direct access borrowing privileges at your library the same way people living in your chartered service area are?
5. Has use of your library by people living outside your chartered service area and contracted service areas resulted in materials not being available for your local patrons on a regular basis?
___ yes ___ no
___ No record kept, but I think so. ___ No record kept, but I think not.
6. In the last twelve months, what percentage of your library's materials have been borrowed by:
|a. people from other public library service areas within the library system?
|b. people from outside your library's chartered and contracted service areas who reside in "unserved areas" within the public library system?
|c. people from your chartered service area and contracted service areas?
(Please indicate if these percentages are actual or estimated by checking the appropriate box.)
7. Is the present percentage of non-resident use greater now then it was in 1993? ___ yes ___ no
If yes, what is the percentage increase? _______
8. Do you have a variance from the State Education Department to restrict free direct access to people from within your library system, but outside your chartered service and contracted service areas? ___ yes ___ no
9. Does your library charge for full library privileges to people who reside outside your chartered and contracted service areas, but within the system? ___ yes ___ no (If No, go to Question 10)
What is that charge? __________
Is it ___ Per person ___ Per household ___ Other (Specify)
10. Do State aid and system services adequately compensate your library for the cost of providing free direct access services to people outside your library's service area? ___ yes ___ no
11. If the State's policy on free direct access remains unchanged and 90.3 isstrictly adhered to my library will remain a member of the library system. (Only check one box)
__ Strongly disagree __ Disagree __ Undecided __ Agree __ Strongly agree
12. If the State's policy on free direct access is changed, which of the following should be considered: (Using the following scale, please circle each accordingly)
A. Preserve "free direct access" concept -- do not allow libraries to charge people a fee for services or library cards if people reside within the library system boundaries.
1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Undecided 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree
B. Allow local public library boards to set policies that deny service to non-residents.
1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Undecided 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree
C. Allow public library boards to set policies that charge a fee for service to non-residents if the library can document, to the Commissioner of Education, financial hardship caused by overuse by non-residents.
1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Undecided 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree
D. Allow each library system to develop a system plan for setting the direct access policies. Plan would meet broad guidelines determined by the Commissioner.
1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Undecided 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree
E. The State should provide funds to partially compensate a library for use by people who reside outside the service area.
1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Undecided 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree
F. Revise "free direct access" policies statewide to eliminate "on-site" borrowing for non-residents and to allow unrestricted access to materials from libraries within a system through interlibrary loan.
1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Undecided 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree
List below other possible solutions you think could or might work on a statewide basis.
Additional Comments
Please return survey before Friday, May 16, 1997, to:
James L. Farrell. Jr.
Division of Library Development
Cultural Education Center
Albany, New York 12230


text:
Purchase extra RunPhones® headbands. Available in a variety of vibrant colors, RunPhones® headbands are washable - just remove the headphones first!
Available in our SheepCloud™ Fabric
Newly designed, SheepCloud™ fabric is lightweight, soft, stretchy fabric that keeps you cool and dry:
This band does not include speakers and therefore offers no ambient sound reduction.


text:
Fargo Billy Bob Thornton as the Devil?
Month: April 2014
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent Hill to the Rescue? (Recap/Review) *Contains Spoilers*
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent Hill to the Rescue? (Recap/Review) *Contains Spoilers*
As the clock continues to tick, the remaining Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. are either struggling to find Skye and HYDRA undercover agent Ward or they're working for Stark Industries like Agent Hill, who comes riding in to Coulson's rescue. Or is she? Hill's motives are very questionable in that she maintains that Fury is dead. Did she not see Captain America: The Winter Soldier? Kidding aside, it seems that the new improved Agent Phil Coulson is the only S.H.I.E.L.D. operative who believes that Director Fury is alive.
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Like Being in an Awesome Video Game (Trailer/Review)
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Like Being in an Awesome Video Game (Trailer/Review)
Watching The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was like being in the middle of one the world's most awesome video games. Speaking to another "Spidey" fan two weeks prior to this advanced screening, we both agreed that the first of the Spider-Man remakes felt as though the filmmakers had taken a leaf out of the video gameMirror's Edge. For those who have not played the game, it was the "first" first-person action/adventure platforming game and it was developed by EA Digital Illusions CE.
The Following Season 2 Finale: Bodies Everywhere and Bromance in the Air
The Following Season 2 Finale: Bodies Everywhere and Bromance in the Air
After waiting, in vain, to see Joe Carroll die in a hail of bullets from the trio gunning for him, the season 2 finale of The Following can be summed up with bodies being left everywhere, but where you want them and there was a hint of bromance in the air. Brotherly love aside, it has to be said, when the overweight blond Carroll follower got punched twice by Hardy and then anonymously shot in the dark by the storming SWAT members, it was hard to not "punch" the air in victory. Not because she was overweight, but because she was a nasty bit of work.
George Clooney Caught by Anne Hathaway Lookalike
George Clooney Caught by Anne Hathaway Lookalike
It doesn't seem to be that obvious to anyone else yet, but, it appears that George Clooney has been caught by an Anne Hathaway lookalike. It is being reported that Clooney is engaged to 36 year-old English solicitor, that's lawyer in the U.S., Amal Alamuddin. Amal is an Oxford graduate and while no one knows when the 52 year-old star popped the question, Alamuddin was showing the ring off in Mexico.


text:
We're here with your one-stop shop to your favourite Islander's style. Get the deets on all of their Missguided looks. Here's everything you need to know about Hayley.
About Hayley
Hayley is 21, and a model from Liverpool
She thinks her outgoing personality will make her stand out from the rest of the group – As well as her cute dimples!
People always tell her she's funny, but she doesn't really know why.
She has learnt her lesson to go for more than just looks, and now wants the full package. Her dream man is somebody who makes her laugh.
She's worried that her lack of a filter will get her in hot water with other Islanders because she always says what she's thinking (but usually in a nice way).
She's only ever had one boyfriend, who she was with for 5 years, so she's a bit of a dating novice.
Hayley's a firm believer in girl code – Yes, babe!
Get Hayley's Island Style
In Tuesday's episode Hayley wore our blue cross front bikini set in blue, worn as a bikini and as a crop top. Shop her outfit below!
Get the look:
Get her style…
Want to Love Island your wardrobe?


text:
If you think it's time-consuming to maintain your own Facebook page, imagine how Mayor John Hickenlooper must feel. The guy's got nearly 5,000 "friends" -- or at least he will until the end of the day Tuesday, when they will all become simply "fans."
"I am deleting this personal profile at the end of the day. My apologies to anyone who has sent me a message or a friend request that I have not responded to. Please visit me on my new fan page," the mayor posted on his Facebook page today.
The reason for the change? "Personal pages on Facebook unfortunately have a limit of 5,000 friends, which we found out recently," explains Sabrina D'Agosta, deputy communications director for the mayor's office. "Having a government-official fan page will allow him to have an unlimited number of fans."
We Believe Local Journalism is Critical to the Life of a City
Engaging with our readers is essential to Westword's mission. Make a financial contribution or sign up for a newsletter, and help us keep telling Denver's stories with no paywalls.
Support Our Journalism
But, don't worry, the mayor isn't going to unfriend you.
Facebook has already transitioned the mayor's friends to the fan page (which is up to 6,782 fans), D'Agosts says. But there may be glitches with the 2,000 or so people who have submitted friend requests to Hick since that happened.
In the future, Hick's staff won't have to physically approve each friend. Since fan pages allow people to sign up automatically, D'Agosta says, it will save a lot of staff time and allow the mayor to get his message out to more people.
So, will the Mayor start up a new, secret personal Facebook page with a fake name? D'Agosta says she doubts it. "There is no secret page to my knowledge," she says.


text:
The Land of Water (水の国, Mizu no Kuni) is oriented towards the element of water. Its government leader is the Water Daimyō. It is composed of many islands, with each having its own unique traditions. The country's weather is typically cool and full of mist and lakes. In some places, like the area where Haku grew up, it is very cold and snows quite a bit. Little is currently known about it and it apparently leaves itself out of most political affairs, which is understandable considering that it is composed of vast islands relatively remote from the continent containing the other four major countries. What is known, however, is that the country used to be ravaged by many civil wars, during which clans with Kekkei Genkai were used extensively, causing many to view them as harbingers of war and death, leading to purges and genocide to the point of parents killing their own children.
"Kirin Nectar" (麒麟蜜, Kirin Mitsu, English TV: Unicorn Nectar) is a regional speciality of the Land of Water.[1]
Main article: Kirigakure Kirigakure (霧隠れの里, Kirigakure no Sato, Literally meaning: Village Hidden by Mist) is the hidden village of the Land of Water. As the village of one of the Five Great Shinobi Countries, Kiri has a Kage as its leader known as the Mizukage, of which there have been six in its history. Befitting its name, the village is surrounded by a thick mist, with several mountains in the background, making it difficult to find by foreigners.
Unknown Island
This is one the islands off the coast of the Land of Water where Chōjūrō and his team were supposed to rendezvous with the Tsuchikage's messenger, Akatsuchi.
- In matters of land area, the Land of Water is undoubtedly the smallest of the five great nations, not being much larger than some of the largest minor countries.
- ↑ Naruto anime, episode 213


text:
Search results
Registration is Now Open for Leadership in the City!
Are you interested in Extension in urban areas and ready to improve your knowledge, skills, and ... results? The Leadership in the City course will help you learn about leadership, networks, innovation, and ... comprehensive professional development program is to improve the knowledge, skills, and results of university ...
Who in the world is the CFAES Alumni Society Board?
The College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences Alumni Society Board represents the ... members each month. Yolanda Owens, President ' 07 BS Agricultural Communications Director of Marketing, ... a bit about what you like to do when you are not at work. A: Volunteering, gardening, painting, and ...
Farm Science Review will be a virtual show in 2020
will be implemented for 2020. The farm show, sponsored by Ohio State's College of Food, Agricultural ... innovative virtual show in support of agriculture during this pandemic," said Cathann A. Kress, Ohio State ... vice president for agricultural administration and dean of CFAES. "Throughout its history, the Farm ...
CFAES Alumni Webinar Series continues
agricultural, and environmental industries." In this latest installment, our alumni panel will address the ... current challenges of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the food, agricultural, and environmental ... industries. The panel of speakers will include: Lewis R. Jones, '65 BS Agricultural Economics, deputy ...
Where are they now? Alumni Awards edition
17% from the Department of Agricultural Communication, Education, and Leadership, and 16% from the ... BS Agricultural Education, '69 MS Agricultural Education CFAES Distinguished Alumni Award, 2005 Q: ... agriculture and administrative education, it was a great culmination to the many students and staff I had ...
Fifty years of transformative power
Scholars Program, a scholarship pipeline from Ohio's largest urban school districts to Ohio State ...
Who in the world is the CFAES Alumni Society Board?
The College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences Alumni Society Board represents the ... and go backpacking. I have a tiny garden and a ton of house plants. Like many of us, I've been bitten ...
Where are they now? Alumni Awards edition
from the Department of Agricultural Communication, Education, and Leadership, and 16% from the ... '61 BS Agricultural Education, '77 MS Agricultural Education CFAES Distinguished Alumni Award, 2007 Q: ... the Ohio Agricultural Hall of Fame at the Ohio State Fair! Q: Do you have other thoughts or comments ...
Time and Change Webinar Series
agricultural, and environmental industries 2 to 3 p.m. EDT August 20, 2020 Register here Previous webinars ...
Alumni in the News August
://delphosherald.com/Content/Social/Social/Article/Ag-Hall-of-Fame-accepts-Smith-Blythe/-2/-2/212735 Dr. Pat Whittington https://u.osu.edu/cfaesadmin/2020/07/17/whittington-named-president-of-the-national-agricultural ...


text:
We reported a while ago that Diego Hypolito was thinking of throwing a super hard floor routine at the World Cup Final. Well, he's confirmed it now: The routine he'll do in Madrid will feature his signature skill, the Hypolito (a full-twisting layout double Arabian). Moreover, Hypolito has been working on his landings, to make sure there won't be any more disasters, like the one he suffered in Beijing. Or so he says in this Globoesporte article.
(photo: Reuters)
In Spain, Diego Hypolito will test the effect of his exercises to improve his landings
Although he maintains that his fall during the Olympic Games was an act of fate [rather than a mistake on his part], Diego Hypolito has devoted himself to exercises to improve his landings. According to his coach, Renato Oliveira, he has trained hard to stick his landings like he used to do. This weekend, Diego will test the effect of his training exercises at the World Cup Final in Madrid.
"I hope that he gets it right this time, because in the 2 last competitions he made mistakes," coach Renato Ribeiro told Globoesporte, referring to the World Cup competition in Stuttgart and a recent national competition in Curitiba. In Germany, Diego placed 7th on floor, and in Curitiba, he won the all-around, but for Renato, he wasn't good enough on floor.
A backache and the fact that he was trying out new routines in the 2 last competitions were the main reasons the coach brought up with respect to Diego's less than stellar performances. Moreover, after the Olympics, the athlete's disappointment with his fall in Beijing made him very insecure.
"When he returned to competition after Beijing, it was clear that he was very nervous. He was afraid he'd fall again. He was imagining what people would think..." Renato said.
Diego, who left for Madrid on Tuesday, agreed that his Beijing result had caused him to be very nervous after the Olympics. However, he claimed he had since gotten over his disappointment.
"The World Cup competitions I took part in after Beijing were mostly to 'break the ice.' I wasn't exactly well prepared for them. But I didn't fall in any of the 8 competitions I've done since Beijing. I've only fallen twice in my life: When I was 16 and in Beijing. So this is not something to get worried about," he said.
(photo: Reuters)
After trying out several new routines, Diego decided to perform a routine in the World Cup Final which will be similar to the one he did in Beijing, the only difference being the inclusion of the element that bears his name, the "Hypolito," which will raise his difficulty value to 6.8. But what he hopes will be most different from the Olympics will be his landings after his tumbling passes.
"I've been doing certain exercises for my ankles, to make them stronger when I land. Since 2005, I've lost a little flexibility in my ankle, which makes it difficult for me to stick my landings. After suffering a few injuries, I got afraid I'd strain something on my landings, and this ended up doing me no favors. But now, with these exercises, I'm regaining my flexibility," explained the gymnast, who has had surgery on his right foot.
We look forward to seeing that immensely difficult routine (preferably with stuck landings) in Madrid. Good luck, Diego!
December 11, 2008
Diego Hypolito Confident of Success in Madrid
Posted by The Gym Girls at 8:51 PM
Labels: diego hypolito
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
Results 1 to 1 of 1
- 05-04-2011, 01:35 PM #1Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
- Posts
- 52
- Rep Power
- 0
Sorry For ReOpening The Thread Can any One please suggest me
I want to Read an Open office excel file(.ods File) and need to fetch record row by row. Is there any method where i can use the data line by line and print it to the file that i have already created.
Java Code:
public static void ReadOds(File f1) { Writer output = null; int i=1; Sheet sheet; try { sheet = SpreadSheet.createFromFile(f1).getSheet(0); int nColCount = sheet.getColumnCount(); int nRowCount = sheet.getRowCount(); System.out.println("Rows :"+nRowCount); System.out.println("Cols :"+nColCount); MutableCell cell = null; for(int nRowIndex = 0; nRowIndex < nRowCount; nRowIndex++) { cell=sheet.getCellAt(i, nRowIndex); System.out.print(cell.getValue()+ ""); }
please suggest me the way how can i make this simple and how to find the array size dynamically if my data is huge.
Thanks In Advance......
Similar Threads
Problem in java, python socket reopeningBy cool in forum NetworkingReplies: 0Last Post: 02-02-2011, 09:41 AM
Problem in java python socket reopeningBy cool in forum AWT / SwingReplies: 0Last Post: 01-19-2011, 10:15 AM
Hello friends !! suggest me a projectBy Nishit in forum Advanced JavaReplies: 7Last Post: 07-17-2008, 07:51 AM
Please suggest me the correct approach!By rjuyal in forum Advanced JavaReplies: 6Last Post: 05-05-2008, 02:54 PM
Please suggest a database ?By Vinuraj in forum CLDC and MIDPReplies: 1Last Post: 01-14-2008, 08:48 AM


text:
House Buildings Insurance
The freeholder or homeowner is responsible to offer the Developing Insurance plan. And needs a particular addition to the Trainer Home Structures Insurance plan. Property owner's Legal Responsibility Insurance plan.
House Buildings Insurance Quote
The freeholder is completely responsible for all the carports despite only having accessibility 1 of them for themselves. It is unusual, but on some activities the freeholder of the residence may not have accessibility any of the car ports. But even in this example would still need to offer insurance for them on part of the leaseholder's.
Homeowner and Renter's Insurance. The leasehold arrangement/contract is usually a 999 year Peppercorn Rental, and it is usually specified in the actions that no ground lease is due. The Freeholder can ask for a affordable participation to the cost of the Trainer Home Structures Insurance plan if they wish. This would usually be a complete of around 20% of the complete Developing Rates between all the Leaseholder's.
For example: If there were 2 car ports on Leasehold, the freeholder could ask for 10% of the complete Trainer Home Structures Insurance plan Expenses from each leaseholder – adding up to a 20% participation. The amount a freeholder can ask for may differ a little bit, but around 20% would be the standard.
Homeowner Cover Insurance Policy
The freeholder must also be cautious to eliminate added costs from the when determining this participation – such as the freeholder must not consist of his own insurance costs for material, or Home Urgent Cover, but remember to consist of costs such as Insurance plan Top quality Tax (IPT) which is 6%. The plan provider will be able to help the homeowner cover insurance policy holder with splitting down these costs.
Coach Homes also need a particular Trainer Home Contents Insurance plan. And this is something many people ignore. Supposing they can have any material insurance, smooth Insurance plan is the most common error. This is not the case. If a leaseholder started a fire which damaged the residence and the material then an insurance provider would not pay out to substitute the material of a coach house if the plan is for a smooth. A coach Home Insurance plan plan for Structures and Contents allows for covered activities by a leaseholder – non coach house policy's do not.
Home Buildings Insurance For Risk
It is also beneficial to guarantee the material and the buildings on a single plan. This would avoid 2 insurance providers, 2 statements and 2 plan extravagances in most claim circumstances. Most shoots harm the residence and the material. Most break-ins include harm to the residence as well as robbery or harm to material. Evade of water can eliminate floor coverings (contents Insurance) as well as bring roofs down!
Specific Trainer Home Structures and Contents affordable property Insurance plan Quotations are available here:
* House Buildings Insurance in Compare Rates and Save Money.