alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeAbout NRCCareer OpportunitiesWorking at NRCNRC EthicsSummaries of Major Ethics Rules

# Impartiality

The standards of conduct (5 CFR 2635 subpart E) require employees to disqualify themselves, unless they receive a waiver, from participating in any "particular NRC matter involving specific parties" that the employee knows is likely to have a direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of a member of the employee's household if a reasonable person would question the employee's impartiality. This ban also includes anyone with whom the employee has a "covered relationship" if that person is or represents a party. (A covered relationship includes: anyone with whom the employee has a business, contractual, or other financial relationship; a relative with whom the employee has a close personal relationship; and anyone the employee has served during the **past year** as officer, director, trustee, general partner, agent attorney, consultant, contractor, or employee.)
> 
*Example: An employee's involvement in an NRC inspection where the employee's brother is an officer of the licensee would raise a question of impartiality. The question would also be raised if the employee worked for the licensee within a year prior to the proposed inspection.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 12, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Financial Interests
          - Impartiality
          - Security Ownership Restrictions
          - Gifts
          - Bribery
          - NRC Time and Property
          - NRC Title or Position
          - Nonpublic Information
          - Outside Employment
          - Supplementing Federal Salary
          - Teaching, Speaking, or Writing
          - Fundraising
          - Representations to the Government
          - Job Seeking
          - Post-Employment Restrictions
          - Expert Witness
          - Political Restrictions
          - Procurement Restrictions
          - Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act
          - Foreign Governments
          - Financial Disclosure (5 CFR Part 2634)

#### 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 Thursday, March 12, 2020
### §564b. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Aug. 13, 1954, ch. 732, §3, 68 Stat. 718, which related to membership in tribe, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.353 Eligibility. SBA may assist a qualified employee trust (or equivalent trust) that meets the requirements and conditions for an ESOP prescribed in all applicable IRS, Treasury and Department of Labor (DOL) regulations. In addition, the following conditions apply: ( a ) The small business must provide the funds needed by the trust to repay the loan; and
( b ) The small business must provide adequate collateral.
Supporting Statement Appendix of Public Comments and Responses

#1 AS A NATIONAL TAXPAYER, WE DID NOT DO THIS TO THE SALMON AT WILLAMETTE. THE GUYS WHO 

DID THIS ARE THE COMMERCIAL FI SH PROFITEERS, THEPOLLUTERS, AND THE BOATERS, AND ALL WHO 

USED THIS AREA. GET THEM WITH A FEE TO REPLENISH THESE SALMON. THE REST OF US ARE ALREADY 

PAYING VERY HIGH TAXES AND SHOUDL NOT BE FURTHER BLED INTO BANKRUPTCY. ONE ALSO HAS TO 

WONDER WHY THE FWS DID NOT STEP IN TO STOP THE KILLING OF ALL THE SALMON. WE 

HAVENUMEROUS GOVT AGENCIES ALL PULLING DOWN HUGE SALARIES. NOBODY DID A THING AND THE 

SALMON ARE GONE. WHY ARE WE PAYING SUCH HUGE TAXES WHEN NO GOVT AGENCY EVER TAKES 

CHARGE TO PREVENT THESE DECIMATION OF SPECIES.

Response: We include several questions to probe for scenario rejection, including questions that ask for 

respondent attitudes on who they think should be responsible for paying for salmon recovery and 

whether they feel that a tax-based payment vehicle is appropriate.
(No. 994

Claimant awarded $250.00.)

#### The Cable Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed January 19, 1927.*

Franchise *tax*— when *refund will be 'made. Overpayment.*This case is controlled by the decision of the court in *C. A. Roberts & Co.*v. *State, supra.*

Benj. F. Cassiday, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General ; Frank R. Eagleton, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Thomas

delivered the opinioirof the court:

This is a claim filed by the Cable Company for a refund of $250.00 franchise tax erroneously paid to the Secretary of State for the period beginning July, 1923, and ending June 30, 1924. The amount legally due the State from claimant for this period was the sum of $250.00, but the Secretary of State demanded, and claimant paid, $500.00.

The Attorney General has filed a statement and attached - thereto a letter from the Secretary of State as an exhibit, in which the Secretary of State admits that this claim is just and should be allowed, and the Attorney G-eneral in his statement consents to an award in favor of claimant in the sum of $250.00. • • ,

As. the amount of tax legally due was only $250.00, we therefore allow claimant an award in the sum of $250.00.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 November 12, 2004 VIA EDGAR
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549  Re:
    Segue Software, Inc. Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Ladies and Gentlemen: In connection with the quarterly report of Segue Software, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Douglas Zaccaro, Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby
certify that: 1. the Companys Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and 2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall
not be deemed a part of the Report or filed for any purpose whatsoever nor
shall it be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended. Sincerely,/s/ Douglas Zaccaro
Douglas ZaccaroChief Financial Officer
 34
§ 9185.4-1 Estimate of cost. ( a ) The cost of resurvey procedure is as a rule considerably in excess of that incident to the execution of original surveys and may range between rather wide limits. Where the obliteration is not excessive and the evidences of the original survey are harmoniously related, extensive verifying retracements will be unnecessary and ordinary dependent methods of resurvey can usually be applied. If, however, the obliteration is general or total, many miles of preliminary retracement may be required in order to obtain technical control, and where, by reason of errors in the original survey, the existing evidences thereof are discordant and conflicting locations have resulted, the procedure required may, in the case of densely entered townships, involve an expense of $5,000 or more per township.
( b ) The applicants for resurvey should understand, therefore, that although the estimate supplied will be as nearly correct as the available information will permit, its accuracy cannot be guaranteed, and, consequently, all such estimates are subject to revision, if necessary, as the work proceeds and the field conditions are more fully developed. Any deposit in excess of actual cost will be returned to the applicants as provided by law, but in cases where the cost exceeds the deposit made in accordance with the estimate, an additional deposit will be required, failing which, operations will be suspended.
( c ) In the application of the terms of this Act it is not intended that there shall be undertaken any work involving the mere reestablishment of lost or obliterated or misplaced corners in a limited area of a township, such work being within the province of the local surveyor, and the authority of the State Director will be restricted to the giving of advice in accordance with the circular for the restoration of lost or obliterated corners. Employees of the Government are prohibited from participating in the resurvey of a township or the reestablishment of lost corners or in the subdivision of sections for private parties, even if the expense is borne by the county or State authorities or by individuals, except as such action is specifically authorized by the Director, Bureau of Land Management, in accordance with the provisions of existing statutes.
( d ) Deposit required: The deposit required of the petitioners by law must accompany the application and must be made in the amount, at the place and in the manner prescribed by the instructions which will accompany the estimate.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of
Jefferson Savings Bancorp, Inc. at and for the nine months ended
September 30, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements. 

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      10,571,081
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      22,161,648
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             8,325,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                207,499,166
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0 
<LOANS>                                    952,385,358
<ALLOWANCE>                                  8,470,492
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,257,752,654
<DEPOSITS>                               1,069,651,787
<SHORT-TERM>                                51,301,038
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         23,283,843
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        50,180
<OTHER-SE>                                 113,465,806
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           1,257,752,654
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             59,465,712
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           10,989,969
<INTEREST-OTHER>                             1,686,385
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            72,142,066
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          39,823,827
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          43,690,939
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       28,451,127
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                1,158,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               3,822
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             17,150,276
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             12,405,190
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   7,651,190
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,651,190
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.63
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.15
<LOANS-NON>                                  4,448,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               174,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              5,725,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             6,528,601
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  372,123
<RECOVERIES>                                       250
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            8,470,492
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         6,994,457
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      1,476,035
        

</TABLE>
§ 113.310 Recruitment. ( a ) *Nondiscriminatory recruitment.* A recipient to which §§ 113.300 through 113.310 apply shall not discriminate on the basis of sex in the recruitment and admission of students. A recipient may be required to undertake additional recruitment efforts for one sex as remedial action pursuant to § 113.110(a), and may choose to undertake such efforts as affirmative action pursuant to § 113.110(b).
( b ) *Recruitment at certain institutions.* A recipient to which §§ 113.300 through 113.310 apply shall not recruit primarily or exclusively at educational institutions, schools, or entities that admit as students only or predominantly members of one sex, if such actions have the effect of discriminating on the basis of sex in violation of §§ 113.300 through 113.310.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of ARAMARK Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 1, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, L. Frederick Sutherland, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/S/    L. FREDERICK SUTHERLANDL. Frederick Sutherland
### **CHAPTER 10—DISCLOSURE OF WELFARE AND PENSION PLANS**
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Request for Guidance Concerning Use of NRC Certified Casks

## HPPOS-152 PDR-9111220116

See the memorandum from L. B. Higginbotham to L. R. Greger dated October 19, 1982, and the incoming request from L. R. Greger dated October 6, 1982.

It is acceptable for a licensee to use an NRC-certified cask as an outer enclosure. In this case, it is appropriate to obliterate or cover the certificate identification on the cask exterior and refrain from referencing the certificate on shipping papers. HPPOS-064 contains a related topic.

Frequently, licensees ship 55-gallon drums containing LSA material inside shielded casks. When this is done, the licensee may consider the drums to be packages and the cask as a shield to meet the transport vehicle dose rate limits (10 mr/hr at 2 meters and 2 mr/hr in the cab).

IE Information Notice No. 82-32, Revision 1, acknowledges this practice and finds it acceptable under the specified circumstances. However, a telephone conversation with NMSS prompted this request for clarification concerning the acceptability of such action when the cask is an NRC certified package.

Specifically, is it acceptable for a licensee to use an NRC certified cask in the same manner as an uncertified cask, as described above, without regard to the certificate of compliance requirements? If such use is acceptable, must anything be done to clarify the intended use of the cask, such as obliterating the cask identification? Obliteration of the cask identification was suggested by NMSS.

IE has no objection to the use of an NRC certified cask as an outer enclosure for inside packages, effectively simulating a "closed transport vehicle, as illustrated in Appendix B (Left side scenario), IE Information Notice 80-32, Revision 1 (see HPPOS-064). In such a case it would be appropriate to obliterate or cover over the NRC certification identification marking on the cask exterior, and refrain from any reference to the certificate on shipping orders.

**Regulatory references:** 10 CFR 71, 49 CFR 173

**Subject codes:** 7.1, 12.17

**Applicability:** All

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, October 16, 2017
**Exhibit 31.2**
I, Glen Shipley, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Internet Commerce Corporation; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a.  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b.  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our report about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and  c.  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a.  All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial report which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b.  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 16, 2005     By: /s/ Glen Shipley       Glen Shipley   Chief Financial Officer
### §106. Montana

Montana, exclusive of Yellowstone National Park, constitutes one judicial district.

Court shall be held at Billings, Butte, Glasgow, Great Falls, Havre, Helena, Kalispell, Lewistown, Livingston, Miles City, and Missoula.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 884.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §172 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §92, 36 Stat. 1118; July 3, 1926, ch. 748, 44 Stat. 825; July 5, 1937, ch. 430, 50 Stat. 474; Aug. 26, 1937, ch. 819, §2, 50 Stat. 837; Aug. 7, 1939, ch. 506, 53 Stat. 1236).

All of Yellowstone National Park is included in the judicial district of Wyoming by section 131 of this title. Those parts of the park lying in Montana are accordingly excluded from the judicial district of Montana.

A provision for furnishing rooms and accommodations at Havre was omitted as obsolete on advice of the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that Federal accommodations are now available there.

A provision for transfer of causes, civil or criminal, from one place of holding court to another was omitted. Such provision, as to civil cases, is covered by section 1404 of this title, and, as to criminal cases, is rendered unnecessary because of inherent power of the court and Rules 18–20 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, relating to venue.

A provision for the making of any interlocutory order at any place designated for holding court was omitted as unnecessary in view of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 77–(b).

The provisions respecting court accommodations at Kalispell, Lewistown, and Livingston were omitted as covered by section 142 of this title.

Changes were made in arrangement and phraseology.
Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/03/2023 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/03/2023 Page 2 of 2
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 120.550 What is homestead protection for farmers?

SBA may lease to a farmer-Borrower the farm residence occupied by the Borrower and a reasonable amount of adjoining property (no more than 10 acres and seven farm buildings), if they were acquired by SBA as a result of a defaulted farm loan made or guaranteed by SBA (*see* the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, 7 U.S.C. 1921, for qualifying loan purposes).
#### § 9265.5 Non-sale disposals, general.

Commission of any of the acts listed in § 5511.4 of this title is a violation of Federal regulations and may subject the responsible person(s) to criminal penalties under titles 18 and 43 U.S.C.

[60 FR 50451, Sept. 29, 1995]
### part 7—group health plan requirements
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## A IR 

## F ORCE 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS



### UNITED STATES ) No. ACM S32656

Appellee ) )

v. ) ) ORDER
Kwabena PREMPEH )
Airman First Class (E

- 3 ) )
U.S. Air Force )

Appellant ) Panel 2

On 21 February 2022 , Appellant submitted a Motion to Withdraw from Appellate Review and Motion to A ttach . Specifically, Appellant moved to attach DD Form 2330, Waiver/Withdrawal of Appellate Rights in General and Special

Courts

- Martial Subject to Review by a Court of Criminal Appeals , signed by Appellant and Appellant’s counsel on 19 and 21 February 2022 , respectively

. On 22 February 2022, th e Government submitted its response not opposing Appellant’s motion

. Additionally, on 21 Februar y 2022, Appellant submitted a Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Answer to Specified Issues. Appellant explained it
filed this motion “ in an abundance of caution to ensure this Court has time to
rule on the motion to withdraw before the briefs are due. ”

According ly

, it is by the c ourt on this 23d day of February

, 202 2

,
ORDERED:

Appellant’s Motion to Withdraw from Appellate Review and Motion to A tta ch are GRANTED

. Therefore, Appellant’s Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Answer to Specified Issues is DENIED as MOOT

. Appellant’s case is forwarded to the Appellate Records Branch, AFLOA/JAJM, for further processing in accordance with Rules for Courts

- Martial 111 5 ( f )(3) and 1201

, Manual f or Courts

- Martial, United States (201 9 ed. ).

FOR THE COURT

CAROL K. JOYCE Clerk of the Court