alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.1



RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION

BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Richard E. Stoddard, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 10-K/A of Kaiser Ventures LLC;



2. Based on my knowledge, this amended annual report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this amended annual
report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,
and other financial information included in this amended annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this amended
annual report;



4. The registrants other certifying
officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this amended annual report is being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this amended report based on such evaluation; and



c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is
reasonably likely to materially affect the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls
over financial reporting.



|                       |  |                                       
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|Date: December 2, 2004 |  | /s/ Richard E. Stoddard               
|                       |  | Richard E. Stoddard                   
|                       |  | Chairman of the Board, President & CEO
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Hiking Dune Life Nature Trail

White Sands National Park
#### § 9185.2 Requirements for surveys.
### §1358. Eminent domain

The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all proceedings to condemn real estate for the use of the United States or its departments or agencies.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 935.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on section 257 of title 40, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Public Buildings, Property, and Works (Aug. 1, 1888, ch. 728, §1, 25 Stat. 357; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167).

The venue provisions of section 257 of title 40, U.S.C., 1940 ed., are incorporated in section 1403 of this title.

Other provisions of section 257 of title 40, U.S.C., 1940 ed., are retained in said title 40.

Changes were made in phraseology.
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to this park navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to this park information section
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

Theodore Roosevelt
National ParkNorth Dakota
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Meaning of the Expression "Dose Equivalent Xe-133" in the Technical Specifications

## HPPOS-102 PDR-9111210230

See the memorandum from C. A. Willis to D. M. Montgomery dated March 4, 1985.

"Dose equivalent Xe-133" means equivalent in ability to deliver gamma-ray doses to the whole body. Either 0.018 Ci of Kr-89 or 18 Ci of Kr-85 is equivalent to 1 Ci of Xe-133.

Historically, the activity inventory limits for waste gas storage tanks have been expressed in curies (Ci) of dose equivalent Xe-133, specifically "curies noble gas (considered as Xe-133)." In the RETS implementation program, it was suggested that this be clarified by adding a definition to the RETS. This suggestion was rejected on the grounds that the intent was manifest from the "basis" statement. The "basis" statement says that this limit is to ensure the release of a tank's contents will not cause a whole body dose to any individual at the exclusion area boundary of more than 0.5 rem.

Questions have indicated that further clarification may be appropriate. The intent of the LCO is to ensure that the inadvertent release of the contents of a waste storage tank does not cause a gamma-ray dose to the whole body of over 0.5 rem offsite. Thus, the LCO whole body was given in terms of Xe-133 equivalent curies to facilitate implementation.

That is, the licensee need never determine the actual radioactivity contents of a tank; instead it may simply determine the dose rate from gamma rays and convert to equivalent curies of Xe-133 based on a calibration with Xe-133.

This approach seems more accurate than the alternative. The alternative is to determine the quantity present of each nuclide and calculate the potential gamma-ray dose to the whole body using the various dose conversion factors. The problem is more difficult if the detector responds to beta-particles. The dose rate from beta particles is not the quantity of interest and so cannot be used directly.

It is necessary to determine the nuclide composition of the gas and relate this to the total activity. The quantities of the various nuclides can be converted to Xe-133 equivalent curies using the dose conversion factors (DFB1) of Regulatory Guide 1.109, the values for gamma radiation of DOE / TIC-11026, the energy specific values for gamma rays from the "Table of Isotopes" (7th Edition), or other convenient reference. The slight differences in results obtained with the different references is unimportant.

Where this approach is used the "dose equivalent Xe-133" concept offers no practical advantages; it is simply another way of saying "potential for delivering a gamma-ray dose to the whole body."

If the inventory is determined by sampling and isotopic measurement by gamma-ray spectrometry, the problem is much the same as with the beta-particle measurements, and involves the weighting by various dose-conversion factors.

**Regulatory references:** Technical Specifications

**Subject codes:** 7.3, 9.1

**Applicability:** Reactors

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, October 13, 2017
### [§1451. Repealed. Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title IV, §474(r)(29)(A), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 844]

Section, acts Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 359; Oct. 4, 1976, Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), 90 Stat. 1834, related to tax-free covenant bonds. The repeal was not applicable with respect to obligations issued before Jan. 1, 1984, pursuant to section 475(b) of Pub. L. 98–369, set out as an Effective Date of 1984 Amendment note under section 33 of this title.
Exhibit 10.2


 


LIMITLESS
PROJECTS INC. 


2261
Rosanna Street


Las
Vegas, Nevada 89117


 


April
20, 2021


 


Cyber
Apps World, Inc.


9436
W. Lake Mead Blvd


Las
Vegas, NV 89134;


 


Attention:
Mohammed Irfan Rafimiya Kazi


 


Dear
Irfan:


 


Re:
Asset Purchase and Joint Venture Agreement dated March 15, 2021 (the “Agreement”) 


 


For
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, we hereby confirm the following revisions
to the Agreement:


 


		1.	Limitless
                                            Projects Inc. (“Limitless”) shall incorporate a subsidiary named “Privacy
                                            and Value Inc.” (“P&V”) and transfer its 100% interest in the Software
                                            (as defined in the Agreement) to P&V.



 


		2.	The
                                            issued and outstanding share capital of P&V shall be 50% owned by Limitless and 50% owned
                                            by Danial Okelo (“Okelo”), the President of Limitless.



 


		3.	Upon
                                            the date that Cyber Apps earns its 50% undivided interest in the Software pursuant to Section
                                            2.1 of the Agreement, Limitless and Okelo shall forthwith transfer to Cyber Apps the number
                                            of shares equal to 50% of the issued shares of P&V.



 


All
other terms and conditions of the Agreement, except as amended or modified hereby, remain in full force and effect. If these amendments
to the Agreement are acceptable, please sign and return a copy of this letter to us.


 


Sincerely,


 


LIMITLESS
PROJECTS INC.


 


PER:
/s/ Daniel Okelo                         


 


DANIEL
OKELO


President



 


AGREED
AND CONFIRMED this


20th
day of April, 2021


 


/s/
Mohammed Irfan Rafimiya Kazi                    


Cyber
Apps World, Inc.


By
its president, Mohammed Irfan Rafimiya Kazi
#### Carrie J. Maxwell, as Administratrix, etc., of Earl Maxwell, Deceased, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Lessee of the Boston and Albany Railroad Company, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs. All concurred.
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 111

**Question 111:** Section 20.105 (a) of 10 CFR Part 20 provides for Commission authorization of radiation levels in unrestricted areas based on a criterion of 500 millirems in one year to an individual in such areas. Does such an authorization for radiation levels in an unrestricted area excess of 100 millirems in a year continue under 10 CFR 20.1301 (c)? In other words is this considered an "exemption" as covered in 10 CFR 20.1008 (d)?

**Answer:** No and No. The nature of the information requested under 20.1301 (c) is different from that requested under 20.105 (a) in that 20.1301 (c) requires a demonstration of need for the proposed dose limit and procedures for maintaining doses ALARA. It may be appropriate for an applicant to refer to information submitted under 20.105 (a) as part of an application submitted under 10.1301 (c). 

(References: 10 CFR 20.1301 (c), 10 CFR 20.1008 (d), and 20.105 (a))

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, October 31, 2017
§ 3900.50 Land use plans and environmental considerations. ( a ) Any lease or exploration license issued under this part or parts 3910 through 3930 of this chapter will be issued in conformance with the decisions, terms, and conditions of a comprehensive land use plan developed under part 1600 of this chapter.
( b ) Before a lease or exploration license is issued, the BLM, or the appropriate surface management agency, must comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).
( c ) Before the BLM approves a POD, the BLM must comply with NEPA, in cooperation with the surface management agency when possible, if the surface is managed by another Federal agency.
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateAdvisory ActivitiesAdvisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

# ACRS History

The organizational history of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) began in June 1947 when the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), out of concern for reactor safety, established a blue-ribbon advisory group to evaluate technical health and safety aspects of reactor hazards. This advisory group was known as the Reactor Safeguards Committee. In late 1950, the AEC expanded its safety program by creating a second advisory group, the Industrial Committee on Reactor Location Problems, to evaluate the scientific and environmental aspects of reactor locations. In July 1953, after recognizing that the responsibilities of these two committees had become inter-related, the AEC combined them under the new name, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.

In 1957, the ACRS was established as a statutory committee with the passing of the Price–Anderson Bill. The bill mandated that a public hearing be held for each reactor case and that the ACRS reports be made public. Years later with the enactment of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the ACRS was transferred intact from the AEC to the newly established Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The ACRS is subject to the NRC regulations set forth in 10 CFR Part 7.

The ACRS has a history of recommending innovative and risk-based approaches to regulatory problems. A specific example of this is that the ACRS endorsed the development of an NRC quantitative safety goal policy and developed the first set of quantitative safety goals for nuclear power plants (NUREG-0739). These safety goals were the basis for the later NRC work on the development of an NRC Safety Goal Policy. The ACRS has a significant role in the review and resolution of key technical issues associated with regulation of nuclear power plants.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - ACRS Membership
          - ACRS History
          - ACRS Charter

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

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

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020
Exhibit 4.1


 


Share
Certificate


 


	Number
                            of certificate 	 	Number
                                         of shares
	 	 	 
	 

                                                                           
	 	 



 


RON
Holding Limited


COMPANY
NUMBER [NUMBER]


 


This
is to certify that [Name] of [Address] is the registered holder of [Number] [Share Class] shares of [Value] each being [partly
paid to the extent of [amount in words][amount in numerals] per share]]/[fully paid][and numbered [number]] in the above-named
company, subject to the memorandum and articles of association of the company.


 


[Transfer
date]


 





	 	 	 
	Director	 	Director/ Secretary
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 13, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 60842]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22884]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Meeting of the DOD Advisory Group on Electron Devices

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Advisory Group on Electron Devices.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The DoD Advisory Group on Electron Devices (AGED) announces a 
closed Special Technical Area Review (STAR) on Electronics for 
Reconfigurable Military Systems.

DATES: The STAR will be held at 0830, Tuesday and Wednesday, October 
26th and 27th 2004.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Palisades Institute for Research 
Services, 241 18th Street, Crystal Square 4, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 
22202.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Point of Contact for the meeting 
is Mr. David Cox, AGED Secretariat, 241 18th Street, Crystal Square 
Four, Suite 500, Arlington, Virginia 22202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The mission of the Advisory Group is to 
provide advice to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology and Logistics to the Director of Defense Research and 
Engineering (DDR&E), and through the DDR&E to the Director, Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Military Departments in 
planning and managing an effective and economical research and 
development program in the area of electron devices.
    The AGED meeting will be limited to review of research and 
development programs which the Military Departments propose to initiate 
with industry, universities or in their laboratories. The agenda for 
this meeting will include programs on microwave technology, 
microelectronics, electro-optics, and electronics materials.
    In accordance with section 10(d) of Public Law 92-463, as amended, 
(5 U.S.C. App. 10(d)), it has been determined that this Advisory Group 
meeting concerns matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1), and that 
accordingly, this meeting will be closed to the public.

    Dated: October 6, 2004.
Jeannette Owings Ballard
Alternate, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-22884 Filed 10-12-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
#### In the Matter of the Estate of William Frederic Parker, Deceased.

Filed November 2, 1904.

No. 13,596.

Estate of Decedent: Sale: Review. In the conduct of proceedings for. tie sale of real estate for tlie payment of debts of a deceased person, tie principal duty of a district court is to conserve tbe estate, and its orders and judgments to that end ought rarely to be disturbed, and never unless they appear to have been mistakenly made, or disclose an abuse of discretion unjustly injurious to a party in interest.

Appeal from the district court for Douglas county: George A. Day, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*Gaines,*Kelby, *Storey & Martin*and *I. B. Andrews,*for appellant.

*Charles A. Goss*and *J. W.*Hamilton, *contra.*

Ames, C.

Executors of the will of William Frederic Parker, deceased, obtained from the district court a license for the sale of certain real property belonging to the estate of the testator for the payment of his debts. Sales of a large number of tracts Avere accordingly made and reported to the court. As a part of their report, the executors recited that there were several tracts that were bid off at the sale for sums, in their opinion, below their value, among them being five lots in an addition to the city of Omaha for which the appellant Isaac R. Andrews was bidder, and as to such tracts they recommended that the bids he not accepted, but a resale ordered. A like representation was also made *602by a minor son of tbe testator by a guardian *ad litem.*Andrews bid at tbe sale an aggregate sum of $35 for tbe five lots, and, on the coming in of the report, another person offered, in case of a resale, to bid $50 for them. In view of the fact that other tracts were required to be advertised, so that the resale of these lots would occasion no appreciable additional expense, the court granted the application of the executors and minor, and Andrews appealed from the order to that effect to this court.

The principal duty of the district court in such cases is to conserve the estate of the decedent, and, in our opinion, its orders and judgments to that end ought rarely to be disturbed, and never unless they appear to have been 'mistakenly made, or disclose an abuse of discretion unjustly injurious to a party in interest. Such a condition of affair^ is not disclosed by the record, and we recommend that the order appealed from be affirmed.

Letton and Oldham, CC., concur.

By the Court:

For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, it is ordered that the order appealed from be

Affirmed.
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Hike Cap Rock

Joshua Tree National Park
### §412. Sale of Supreme Court reports

The Director of the Government Publishing Office, or other printer designated by the Supreme Court of the United States shall print such additional bound volumes and preliminary prints of such reports as may be required for sale to the public. Such additional copies shall be sold by the Superintendent of Documents, as provided by law.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 906; July 10, 1952, ch. 632, §5, 66 Stat. 541; Pub. L. 113–235, div. H, title I, §1301(d), Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2537.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §335 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §228, 36 Stat. 1155; July 1, 1922, ch. 267, §4, 42 Stat. 818; May 29, 1926, ch. 425, §2, 44 Stat. 677).

Authority for making an appropriation to carry into effect the provisions of this section is contained in section 336 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., acts July 1, 1922, ch. 267, §5, 42 Stat. 818; May 29, 1926, ch. 425, §3, 44 Stat. 678, which is omitted, but not repealed, as unnecessary in this revision.

Reference to digests was omitted to conform to administrative practice. (See section 604(a)(9) of this title.)

Changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1952—Act July 10, 1952, permitted Superintendent of Documents to sell reports under same terms as other Government publications.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Change of Name

"Director of the Government Publishing Office" substituted for "Public Printer" in text on authority of section 1301(d) of Pub. L. 113–235, set out as a note under section 301 of Title 44, Public Printing and Documents.