徐州拍四维彩超的时间(徐州怎样看4维彩超) (今日更新中)

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s opposition to Pacific Gas & Electric’s restructuring plan just a week after it struck a .5 billion settlement with fire victims is forcing the nation’s largest utility to go back to the negotiating table and come up with a solution fairly quickly.The San Francisco-based company needs to pull a deal off to meet a June 30 deadline to emerge from bankruptcy protection and regain its financial footing.Missing the deadline would prevent PG&E from being able to draw from a special fund created by the Democratic governor and state lawmakers to help insulate California utilities from future fires that many people believe are bound to erupt as a changing climate continues to create hazardous conditions. Utilities are at risk because their aging electric transmission lines are expected to take years to upgrade.On Thursday, PG&E filed an amended reorganization plan with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court after reaching a settlement on Dec. 6 with thousands of people who lost homes, businesses and family members in a series of devastating fires.In his letter on Friday, Newsom said the plan does not comply with state law and does not achieve the goal of addressing what he considers its most important elements: providing safe and reliable power to PG&E customers.“In my judgment, the amended plan and the restructuring transactions do not result in a reorganized company positioned to provide safe, reliable, and affordable service,” he said.The governor said PG&E’s plan did not go far enough in improving safety, corporate governance and the company’s financial position. The company has until Tuesday to appease Newsom and get him to sign off on the plan.“We’ve welcomed feedback from all stakeholders throughout these proceedings and will continue to work diligently in the coming days to resolve any issues that may arise,” PG&E said in a statement.Without the added protection of the California wildfire fund, PG&E would likely find it more difficult to borrow money to pay for the necessary upgrades and perhaps even fund its ongoing operations if it remains mired in bankruptcy proceedings beyond June 30.If PG&E can’t get a revised deal with the fire victims approved, it also will face the specter of navigating through two other legal gauntlets early next year that would be used as an alternative way to estimate how much the company owes for the catastrophic wildfires in 2017 and 2018 that killed nearly 130 people and destroyed about 28,000 structures in its sprawling service territory.One, a California state trial to be held in January, will determine whether PG&E is liable for a 2017 fire in Sonoma County that the company hasn’t accepted full responsibility for. The trial would also award damages to the victims if PG&E is blamed. A subsequent proceeding, known as an estimation hearing, is scheduled in February before a federal judge to determine PG&E’s total bill for all the fires that could have been covered in the settlement that had been worked out with the victims.Attorneys for the fire victims so far have collectively lodged claims of about billion against PG&E, according to court documents. But that figure could rise even higher after the state trial and estimation hearing, and it if does would likely leave PG&E unable to meet its financial obligations — a development that could lead U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to declare the company insolvent.If that were to happen, it would automatically void a separate billion settlement deal PG&E has reached with insurers who say they are owed billion for the fire insurance claims they expect to pay their policyholders in the wildfires blamed on the utility. The insurance settlement, though, is also being opposed by Newsom, and is still awaiting Montali’s approval.The governor “may have upset a rather delicate bankruptcy process,” said Jared Ellias, a bankruptcy expert at University of California, Hastings College of the Law.“We’re going to see how resilient the deal that comes out of this process is going to be and whether it can adjust to meet his approval,” he said. 4197

SAN DIEGO (KGTV): With recreational marijuana now legal in California, doctors are warning parents to be extra vigilant when checking their kids' candy on Halloween. They worry that the kids may confuse edibles for candy."There's going to be candy all over the house," says Dr. James Elia from Sharp Grossmont Hospital. "If there are edibles that are in the household and are forgotten to put away, kids may be able to get into them as well."State law allows edibles but has strict guidelines for how much THC can be in them. A package can't contain more than 100 milligrams, and each piece can't have more than 10.Marijuana vendors say new rules also make it harder for the edibles to be confused for candy."You cannot use the word candy and animals cannot be in the shape of certain animals and images that might be attractive to children," says Kyle Dukes from Torrey Holistics. He also noted that state law doesn't allow the edibles to be in any shape the State Bureau of Cannabis Control deems "attractive to children." Specifically, they can't be shaped like fruit, animals or lollipops.Packaging for marijuana-infused food must also be child resistant and clearly labeled.Dr. Elia recommends keeping edibles locked away, similar to the way people treat medicine they don't want kids to get. He says the side effects of THC on children could be devastating."They could experience alteration of mental status, sometimes hallucinations, severe anxiety, severe paranoia," he says. "With children, it's also noted shortness of breath."Elia also says parents should be extra vigilant when checking their kids' trick-or-treat candy, to make sure an edible didn't wind up in their collection."We all have to be concerned about this," he says. "We all have to raise the level of suspicion." 1811

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A judge ordered California's attorney general to release police misconduct records predating Jan. 1, when new transparency legislation took effect.San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard B. Ulmer, Jr. on Friday also rejected arguments by Attorney General Xavier Becerra that his office should not have to release records of local law enforcement.The legislation was designed to guarantee public access to disciplinary records involving investigations into officer shootings, use-of-force incidents and incidents involving officer misconduct.The tentative ruling was a win for the First Amendment Coalition and National Public Radio member KQED-FM, which sued Becerra's office for records under the legislation."Judge Ulmer's order sends the clear message that the Attorney General is not above California law," said David Snyder, the coalition's executive director.In response, Becerra's office said Friday it would release records from before 2019 but only those regarding Department of Justice officers. The office said in a statement that requiring the office to release records involving other departments "would result in duplication of efforts."The judge ordered the attorney general's office to meet with the coalition and KQED to work out the logistics of releasing records.Ulmer said the 1st District Court of Appeal had already decided that the law is retroactive. He also dismissed the argument that making the attorney general provide records of local law enforcement would be burdensome.Ulmer said lawmakers could not have been oblivious to the potential cost of carrying out the legislation, and "the people will likely be agnostic as to which tax-funded agency foots the bill." 1724

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge in San Francisco is mulling the competency to stand trial of a Mexican man who shot and killed 32-year-old Kate Steinle. The 2015 shooting figured prominently in President Donald Trump’s run for the White House four years ago. The case against Jose Ines Garcia Zarate on federal gun charges has been pending since a judge raised “serious concerns” about Garcia Zarate's mental capacities back in January. Two doctors have diagnosed Garcia Zarate with schizophrenia and found him unfit to stand trial. The San Francisco Examiner reports that Garcia Zarate told the court Friday through a Spanish interpreter that he wanted to be sentenced to prison or deported back to Mexico. 720

San Diego (KGTV)- Homes and businesses aren't the only things being affected by power shut-offs Thursday. Traffic lights are also out, and it's causing a lot of confusion for drivers. Just before 10 a.m., a crash happened at the intersection of Poway Road and Highway 67, where the traffic lights had no power. A car slammed into the side of an SUV. Good Samaritans ran through traffic to assist and call 911. Both drivers are expected to be okay. Hours earlier, traffic backed up for about half a mile during the morning rush hour. Drivers were confused about their turn to go. "A lot of these people have been coming to this intersection for 30-plus years," says Deputy Nicholas McGregor. "They have an expectation that when they get here, it's going to be smooth, flow traffic. So when the lights go out, I think it's a hazard."Wednesday night, a car rammed into the back of a truck after power was shut off at the intersection of Scripps Poway Parkway and Highway 67. The car burst into flames moments after the crash.The Sheriff's Department says there are only about two hours of battery life on the traffic lights after the power is shut off. Deputies try to put as much signage out for drivers but say they should remain cautious. 1247

来源：资阳报