alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Workshop on Development of a High-Level Safety Culture Definition 

and Description/Traits, plus Receive Comments on the 

Draft Safety Culture Policy Statement 

February 2-4, 2010 

Panelist List and Affiliation 

1. Kevin Buckley (American Association of Physicists in Medicine) 

2. Gerard Castro (Joint Commission) 

3. David Collins (Member of the Public) 

4. David Garchow (Institute of Nuclear Power Operations) 

5. Billie Garde (Attorney, Clifford and Garde, LLP) 

6. Tom Houghton (Nuclear Energy Institute) 

7. Bob Link (AREVA) 

8. George Marshall (American Portable Nuclear Gauge Association) 

9. Wayne Rice (Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO) 

10. Diane Sieracki (Dominion Resources) 

11. Gayle Staton (Non-Destructive Testing Management Association) 

12. Duann Vanderslice Thistlewaite (Society of Nuclear Medicine) 

13. Dr. Richard Toohey (Health Physics Society) 

14. Victoria Winfrey (Prairie Island Indian Community Tribal Council) 

15. Bruce Williams (Shaw Power Group) 

16. Chuck Workman (G4S Regulated Security Solutions) 

Breakout Session 1: New Construction-Reactors and Power Reactors 

1. David Garchow (Institute of Nuclear Power Operations) 

2. Victoria Winfrey (Prairie Island Indian Community Tribal Council) 

3. Tom Houghton (Nuclear Energy Institute) 

4. Wayne Rice (Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO) 

5. Diane Sieracki (Dominion Resources) 

6. Bruce Williams (Shaw Power Group) 

7. Chuck Workman (G4S Regulated Security Solutions) 

8. Billie Garde (Attorney, Clifford and Garde, LLP) 

9. David Collins (Member of the Public) 

Breakout Session 2: Materials-Industrial and Fuel Cycle 

1. George Marshall (American Portable Nuclear Gauge Association) 

2. Gayle Staton (Non-Destructive Testing Management Association) 

3. Dr. Richard Toohey (Health Physics Society) 

4. Bob Link (AREVA) 

Breakout Session 3: Materials-Medical 

1. Kevin Buckley (American Association of Physicists in Medicine) 

2. Gerard Castro (Joint Commission) 

3. Duann Vanderslice Thistlewaite (Society of Nuclear Medicine)
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.845 Premier Certified Lenders Program (PCLP). ( a ) *General.* Under the PCLP, SBA designates qualified CDCs as PCLP CDCs and delegates to them increased authority to process, close, service, and liquidate 504 loans. SBA also may give PCLP CDCs increased authority to litigate 504 loans.
( b ) *Application.* A CDC must apply for PCLP status to the Lead SBA Office. The Lead SBA Office will send its written recommendation and the application to SBA's PCLP Loan Processing Center. The PCLP Loan Processing Center will review these materials and forward them to the appropriate Office of Capital Access official in accordance with Delegations of Authority for final determination.
( c ) *Eligibility.* In order for a CDC to be eligible to receive PCLP status, its application must show that it meets the following criteria: ( 1 ) The CDC must be an ALP CDC in substantial compliance with Loan Program Requirements or meet the criteria to be an ALP CDC set forth in § 120.841(a) through (f).
( 2 ) The CDC can adequately comply with SBA liquidation and litigation requirements.
( d ) *Additional application requirements.* The application must include the following: ( 1 ) Certified copy of the CDC's Board of Directors' resolution authorizing the application for PCLP status.
( 2 ) Summary of the experience of each of the CDC's loan processing, closing, servicing and liquidation staff members with significant authority.
( 3 ) Name, address and summary of experience of Designated Attorney.
( 4 ) Documentation of any SBA required insurance.
( 5 ) Any other documentation required by SBA.
( e ) *Term of designation.* If approved, SBA generally will confer PCLP status for a period of two years. However, if SBA deems it appropriate, it may confer PCLP status for a period of less than two years.
( f ) *Area of Operations for PCLP CDCs.* If the SBA approves the CDC's application, the PCLP CDC may exercise its PCLP authority in its entire Area of Operations.
( g ) *SBA approval or decline decision.* SBA will notify the CDC in writing of an approval or decline of a PCLP application. If an application is declined, SBA will notify the CDC of the reasons for the decision.
[68 FR 57982, Oct. 7, 2003, as amended at 72 FR 18364, Apr. 12, 2007; 73 FR 75519, Dec. 11, 2008; 87 FR 38909, June 30, 2022]
#### Rocco D’Agostino *v.*Angelina D’Addio

*Robert J. Nichols,*in support of the petition.

Decided April 8, 1986

The plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 6 Conn. App. 187, is denied.
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 407

**Question 407:**
> 
(a) Does Part 20 apply to emergency response personnel such as city fire fighters?

(b) If Part 20 does apply, would the radiation dose received by the workers be considered to be an occupational dose or a public dose?

**Answer:**
> 
(a) No. As stated in 10 CFR 20.1001, "Purpose," Part 20 applies to activities conducted under licenses issued by the NRC. Emergency response activities such as fire fighting by employees of a city fire department are not conducted under a license issued by the NRC (even when the fire being fought is in a facility of an NRC licensee). Furthermore, as stated in 10 CFR 21.1001, nothing in Part 20 shall be construed as limiting actions to protect health and safety. Thus, Part 20 does not apply to emergency response activities and workers such as fire fighting by employees of a city fire department.

For NRC licensees, it is the Commission's intent that the regulations be observed to the extent practicable during emergencies, but that conformance with the regulations should not hinder any actions that are necessary to protect public health and safety such as lifesaving or maintaining confinement of radioactive materials (56 FR 23365). Also, for nuclear power reactor licensees, a different part of the regulations, 10 CFR Part 50, includes a requirement, in 10 CFR 50.47 (b) (11), that the offsite emergency response plans must include means for controlling radiological exposure of emergency workers in an emergency.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1001)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, December 01, 2017
EXHIBIT 32.1  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 NuTech Digital, Inc (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the twelve months ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, A. Frederick Greenberg, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 of the Company as of the dates presented and the results of operations of the Company.   Dated: March 31, 2008  /s/ A. Frederick Greenberg --------------------- A. Frederick Greenberg Chief Executive Officer (Principal executive officer)   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Document

[NAME]






MARCH 15, 2021
PERFORMANCE UNITS 
AWARD LETTER


(35% Enhanced 2021 Award)
Protective Life Corporation has awarded you:
_______ Performance Units
Award Period: January 1, 2021 – December 31, 2023
Date of Grant: March 15, 2021


These Performance Units were awarded pursuant to the Protective Life Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), and are subject to the terms and conditions contained in the 2021 Performance Units Award Provisions (“Provisions”), as set forth in Appendix A to this Award Letter, and the Plan. The Plan and the Provisions contain terms and conditions regarding the payment of these Performance Units, termination of employment, tax withholding, non-solicitation of Company employees and customers, regulatory compliance, and other matters, and I encourage you to read the Provisions carefully.


Please retain these documents in your personal records.




/s/ RICHARD J. BIELEN




Richard J. Bielen
President and Chief Executive Officer of 
Protective Life Corporation
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Sampling Drywell Atmosphere Before a Release

## HPPOS-170 PDR-9111220188

See the memorandum from L. J. Cunningham to R. B. Samworth dated November 3, 1988.

Sampling drywell atmosphere is required before each and every purging or venting. Furthermore, methodology and parameters in TS referencing the ODCM, should accurately represent the contents of the ODCM.

Region V requested assistance in interpretation of two current Washington Nuclear Plant - Unit 2 (WNP-2) Technical Specifications (TS): TS 3/4.11.2.1, and TS 3/4.11.2.8.

Specifically, Region V asked: "Does TS Section 4.11.21 and Table 4.11.2 require a sample of drywell atmosphere be taken and analyzed prior to each vent and/or purge operation through the Standby Gas Treatment (SGT) system?"

Region V also asked: "If prior-to-release samples are required, should this be reflected in the ODCM, along with an appropriate decontamination factor to account for SGT cleanup?"

NRR reviewed the Inspection Report documenting the positions of both the inspector and the licensee in regard to the subject question.

NRR agreed with the position expressed by the licensee's Corporate Nuclear Safety Review Board (CNSRB) member at the November 27, 1985 meeting of their Plant Operations Committee (POC) recorded on pages 10 and 11 of the Inspection Report. WPN-2 TS 4.11.2.1.2 with its Table 4.11.2 requires that a grab sample be taken prior to each purge and vent from primary containment. TS 4.11.2.8.3 provides additional requirements for the case of purging or venting through other than the SGTS, but says nothing about when the SGTS is used. The applicability of TS 3/4.11.2.1 is "At all times." Therefore, the answer to the first question of Region V is "yes."

In regard to the second question, TS 3/4.11.2.1.2 ties the sampling and analysis program of Table 4.11.2 to dose rate determinations "in accordance with the methodology and parameters in the ODCM." Thus, statements regarding these determinations should be incorporated in the ODCM.

**Regulatory references:** Technical Specifications

**Subject codes:** 7.3

**Applicability:** Reactors (BWR)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, October 16, 2017
### part 8—pension-linked emergency savings accounts
(No. 821

Claimant awarded $318.56.)

#### Clark Coal & Coke Co., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed November 9, 1926.*

War *tax*— when *State liable to refund.*Where coal is furnished, to a Department of the State, under a contract and the bid accepted did not include the Federal War Tax, and it was represented by the proper State authorities at the time the hid was accepted that there would he .no war tax, and afterwards claimant was required by the Federal authorities to pay the tax: *Held.*The State is liable to reimburse claimant for the tax paid.

Stevens & Herndon, for claimant.

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

Mr. Chief Justice Clarity

delivered the opinion of the court:

The facts disclosed in this claim and by the testimony offered, are that the State of Illinois purchased coal from claimant for certain of the State Institutions; that the bids for said coal were made at a lump sum price consisting of two amounts, one the purchase price of the coal, and the other the freight rate from the mine from which the coal was to be furnished to the institution to which it was shipped. The freight rate set out in said bids and order did not include a war tax. It appeared that the defendant from the local Federal Internal Revenue office received advice that war tax was not due the Federal Government on shipments of coal purchased by the *235State and the Federal Government afterwards insisted on the payment of such tax which amounted to $318.56, which amount was paid by the claimant. It further appears from the evidence and statements that the defendant through its Division of Purchases and Supplies represented that there would be suffering in State institutions unless they were furnished coal at that time, and it further appears from the evidence that the coal supply of claimant was contracted for through other channels. However it appears from the evidence that claimant not withstanding the demands from other sources furnished the coal for our State Institutions at a price below the market price. In fact it appears that the freight was advanced by claimant in good faith and it was understood by defendant in' like manner that there would.be no war tax. Therefore, it would appear to this court that in face of the facts disclosed that as a matter of equity and good conscience, if not as a matter of law, that the State should reimburse the defendant, for the amount of this tax. If it were known at the time of the transaction, the tax would have been added and paid by the defendant as a matter of course.

Therefore, it is ordered by the Court that the claimant be allowed the sum of $318.56.
#### Stanley Dreben, Individually and as an Officer, Director and Stockholder of Resin Corner, Inc., Suing on Behalf of Himself and All Other Stockholders of Said Corporation Similarly Situated, Respondent, *v.*Steve Belloise et al., Appellants.

*756
      *Per Curiam.*

The first three causes of action alleged in the complaint are derivative in nature. They are brought by the plaintiff in a representative capacity as stockholder against the defendant Belloise as officer, director and stockholder of the defendant corporation. These causes of action are unnecessarily, though perhaps not improperly, separately stated. It is not required that each transaction or act allegedly constituting a breach of fiduciary duty be pleaded as a distinct cause of action. The statement of these causes of action is replete with legal conclusions instead of factual averments in respect to alleged breaches of duty and the legal effect of certain agreements. We also find that many allegations in paragraphs 5 to 9, inclusive, as well as paragraphs 12 and 13 of the complaint purport to set forth a breach or violation of a stockholder’s agreement between the individual parties to the action. These allegations appear to have no relation to the rights of the corporation and no place in a derivative suit. The plaintiff has likewise been guilty of equivocal pleading at times in the improper use of the “ and/or ” form of expression (see *Kleinfeld*v. *Roburn Agencies,*270 App. Div. 509, 512).

The fourth cause of action is alleged on behalf of the plaintiff individually. It incorporates by reference many allegations of the complaint that have no relation to any personal right of the plaintiff. It also alleges wrongful interference by the defendant Belloise with the plaintiff’s right to appraisal of his stock. If it is intended to plead a cause of action for breach of the stockholder’s agreement, the complaint should set forth only such allegations as are material to such cause of action. If, however, it is the plaintiff’s purpose to assert a cause of action for unlawful interference with his statutory right to stock appraisement, the pleading should only contain such allegations of fact as are appropriate to establish the alleged wrongdoing or misconduct of the defendant.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements, and the defendants’ motion granted, with leave to the plaintiff to serve an amended complaint setting forth a plain and concise statement of the material facts constituting the derivative and individual causes of action intended to be pleaded.

Glennon, J. P., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellants, and the motion granted, with leave to the plaintiff to serve an amended complaint setting forth a plain and concise statement of the material facts constituting the derivative and individual causes of action to be pleaded, within ten days after service of the order, with notice of entry thereof, on payment of said costs.
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of EntreMed, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Dane R. Saglio, as Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge, that:



| | (1) |  | The 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 for the dates and periods covered by the Report.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to EntreMed, Inc. and will be retained by EntreMed, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by
the Chief Financial Officer of the Company with the requirements of Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be disclosed, distributed or
used by any person or for any reason other than as specifically required by
law.

|             |  |                                                         
|------------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|May 15, 2003 |  | /s/ Dane R. SaglioDane R. Saglio
Chief Financial Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency   

          - [FEMA-1549-DR]   

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.   

# ACTION:

Notice.   

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Alabama (FEMA-1549-DR), dated September 15, 2004, and related determinations.   

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

October 4, 2004.   

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.   

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Alabama is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 15, 2004: 

Colbert, Madison, and Randolph Counties for Individual Assistance.   

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program) 

Michael D. Brown,   

Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of Homeland Security.   

[FR Doc. 04-22866 Filed 10-8-04; 8:45 am]   

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
### [§54. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–97, title I, §13404(a), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2138]

Section, added Pub. L. 109–58, title XIII, §1303(a), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 992; amended Pub. L. 109–135, title I, §101(b)(1), title IV, §402(c)(1), Dec. 21, 2005, 119 Stat. 2593, 2610; Pub. L. 109–222, title V, §508(d)(3), May 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 362; Pub. L. 109–432, div. A, title I, §107(b)(2), title II, §202(a), Dec. 20, 2006, 120 Stat. 2939, 2944; Pub. L. 110–234, title XV, §15316(c)(1), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1511; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title XV, §15316(c)(1), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2273; Pub. L. 110–343, div. B, title I, §107(c), Oct. 3, 2008, 122 Stat. 3819; Pub. L. 111–5, div. B, title I, §§1531(c)(3), 1541(b)(1), Feb. 17, 2009, 123 Stat. 360, 362; Pub. L. 115–97, title I, §13404(c)(2), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2138, related to credit to holders of clean renewable energy bonds.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Pub. L. 115–97, title I, §13404(d), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2138, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [amending this section and sections 6211 and 6401 of this title and repealing this section and sections 54A to 54F, 54AA, 1397E, and 6431 of this title] shall apply to bonds issued after December 31, 2017."

#### Regulations

Pub. L. 109–58, title XIII, §1303(d), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 997, provided that the Secretary of the Treasury was to issue regulations required under former 26 U.S.C. 54 not later than 120 days after Aug. 8, 2005.