alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Criteria in NUREG Are Not Substitutes for Regulations

## HPPOS-074 PDR-9111210181

See the letter from R. C. DeYoung to Ira Myers, M.D., dated August 10, 1983, and the incoming request from Dr. Ira Myers (State Health Officer, Alabama Department of Public Health) dated June 9, 1983.

NUREG-0654 contains criteria that the NRC will use in evaluating if a licensee meets regulatory requirements. The criteria in a NUREG are not substitutes for the regulations and compliance is not a requirement.

The State of Alabama requested a formal binding interpretation of 10 CFR 50.47 (b) by the General Counsel. Specifically, the State wanted to know whether the provisions of NUREG-0654 were binding regulation or advisory guidance. Given the lack of dispute about the "guidance" nature of the document, an official interpretation was not needed in order to confirm the NRC's view on this subject. In order for a nuclear power plant to continue operations or to receive an operating license, the regulations require that the NRC find emergency preparedness provides reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency.

Section 50.47 of 10 CFR establishes standards that must be met by the onsite and offsite emergency response plans in order for the NRC staff to make a positive reasonable assurance finding.

Guidance to licensees and applicants, as well as to offsite organizations, on methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the Commission's emergency planning regulations for nuclear power reactors is provided in NUREG-0654 / FEMA-REP-1, "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants," Revision 1.

This document was published in November 1980 to provide specific acceptance criteria for complying with the standards set forth in Section 50.47 of 10 CFR. The criteria in NUREG-0654 / FEMA-REP-1 have been endorsed in Regulatory Guide 1.101, "Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Nuclear Power Reactors," Revision 2, dated October 1981.

The criteria in NUREG-0654 / FEMA-REP-1, as well as the criteria in any NUREG document, were issued to establish criteria that the NRC staff intends to use in evaluating if an applicant / licensee meets the applicable regulatory requirements. The criteria in a NUREG document are not a substitute for the regulations, and compliance is not a requirement. However, the use of methods or criteria different from those set forth in NUREG documents will be acceptable only if such methods or criteria clearly provide a proper basis for determining that the regulatory requirements have been met.

**Regulatory references:** Regulatory Guide 1.101, NUREG-0654

**Subject codes:** 12.6, 12.19

**Applicability:** Reactors

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, October 13, 2017
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.960 Responsibility for closing. ( a ) The CDC is responsible for the 504 loan closing.
( b ) The Debenture closing is the joint responsibility of the CDC and SBA.
( c ) SBA may, within its sole discretion, decline to close the Debenture; direct the transfer of the 504 loan to another CDC; or cancel its guarantee of the Debenture, prior to sale, if any of the following occur: ( 1 ) The CDC has failed to comply materially with any Loan Program Requirement as defined in § 120.10;
( 2 ) The CDC has failed to make or close the 504 loan or prepare the Debenture closing in a prudent or commercially reasonable manner;
( 3 ) The CDC's improper action or inaction places SBA at risk;
( 4 ) The CDC has failed to use required SBA forms or electronic versions of those forms;
( 5 ) The CDC, Third Party Lender or Borrower has failed to timely disclose to SBA a material fact regarding the Project or 504 loan;
( 6 ) The CDC, Third Party Lender or Borrower has misrepresented a material fact to SBA regarding the Project or 504 loan; or
( 7 ) SBA determines that there has been an unremedied material adverse change, such as deterioration in the Borrower's financial condition, since the 504 loan was approved, or that approving the closing of the Debenture will put SBA at unacceptable financial risk.
[68 FR 57988, Oct. 7, 2003, as amended at 88 FR 21900, Apr. 12, 2023]
### §1733. Government records and papers; copies

(a) Books or records of account or minutes of proceedings of any department or agency of the United States shall be admissible to prove the act, transaction or occurrence as a memorandum of which the same were made or kept.

(b) Properly authenticated copies or transcripts of any books, records, papers or documents of any department or agency of the United States shall be admitted in evidence equally with the originals thereof.

(c) This section does not apply to cases, actions, and proceedings to which the Federal Rules of Evidence apply.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 946; Pub. L. 93–595, §2(c), Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§661–667, 671 (R.S. §§882–886, 889; July 31, 1894, ch. 174, §§17, 22, 28 Stat. 210; Mar. 2, 1895, ch. 177, §10, 28 Stat. 809; June 10, 1921, ch. 18, §§301, 302, 304, 310, 42 Stat. 23–25; May 10, 1934, ch. 277, §512, 48 Stat. 758; June 19, 1934, ch. 653, §6(a), 48 Stat. 1109).

The consolidation of sections 661–667 and 671 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., permitted omission of obsolete, unnecessary and repetitive provisions in such sections. For example, the provision in section 665 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., authorizing the court to require production of documents on a plea of non est factum, was omitted. Such plea is obsolete in Federal practice.

Numerous provisions with respect to authentication were omitted as covered by Rule 44 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Likewise the provision that official seals shall be judicially noticed was omitted as unnecessary. Seals of Federal agencies are judicially noticed by States and Federal courts without statutory mandate. Gardner v. Barney, 1867, 6 Wall. 499, 73 U.S.C. 499, 18 L.Ed. 890, 31 C.J.S. 599 n. 27–30 and 23 C.J.S. 99 n. 41. The same principle unquestionably will apply to seals of Government corporations.

Words "of any corporation all the stock of which is beneficially owned by the United States, either directly or indirectly", in section 661 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., were omitted as covered by "or agency". The revised section was broadened to apply to "any department or agency". (See reviser's note under section 1345 of this title.)

Changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Federal Rules of Evidence, referred to in subsec. (c), are set out in the Appendix to this title.

#### Amendments

1975—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 93–595 added subsec. (c).
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4966 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4966

                 To permit voluntary economic activity.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 27, 2022

   Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                 To permit voluntary economic activity.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Antitrust Freedom Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. VOLUNTARY ECONOMIC COORDINATION BY INDIVIDUALS.

    The Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 
12 et seq.), and section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 
U.S.C. 45) shall not be construed to prohibit, ban, or otherwise extend 
to any voluntary economic coordination, cooperation, agreement, or 
other association, compact, contract, or covenant entered into by or 
between any individual or group of individuals.
                                 <all>
```
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsComputer modeling of human decision makingModels of human decision making are reviewed. Models which treat just the cognitive aspects of human behavior are included as well as models which include motivation. Both models which have associated computer programs, and those that do not, are considered. Since flow diagrams, that assist in constructing computer simulation of such models, were not generally available, such diagrams were constructed and are presented. The result provides a rich source of information, which can aid in construction of more realistic future simulations of human decision making.Document ID19920017387Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsGevarter, William B.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1991Subject CategoryCyberneticsReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-107868FIA-91-32NAS 1.15:107868Accession Number92N26630Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19920017387.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
###### Editorial Note on Part 126

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 126 appear at 72 FR 50041, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 126.603 Does HUBZone certification guarantee receipt of HUBZone contracts?

HUBZone certification does not guarantee that a certified HUBZone small business concernwill receive HUBZone contracts. Certified HUBZone small business concerns should market their capabilities to appropriate contracting activities in order to increase the prospect that the contracting activity will adopt an acquisition strategy that includes HUBZone contract opportunities.

[69 FR 29425, May 24, 2004, as amended at 84 FR 65247, Nov. 26, 2019]
medspa_ex42.htm

EXHIBIT 4.2
  
 DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK
  
 Our authorized capital stock consists of 100,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share and 25,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001. As of March 25, 2021, there were 10,005,000 shares of common stock, and no shares of preferred stock, issued and outstanding.
  
 Common Stock
  
 Holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote per share. Our Articles of Incorporation do not provide for cumulative voting. Holders of our common stock are entitled to receive ratably such dividends, if any, as may be declared by our board of directors out of legally available funds. However, the current policy of our board of directors is to retain earnings, if any, for the operation and expansion of the Company. Upon liquidation, dissolution or winding-up, the holders of our common stock are entitled to share ratably in all of our assets which are legally available for distribution, after payment of or provision for all liabilities and the liquidation preference of any outstanding preferred stock. The holders of our common stock have no preemptive, subscription, redemption or conversion rights. 
  
 Preferred Stock
  
 Our Articles of Incorporation authorize the issuance of up to 25,000,000 shares of preferred stock with designations, rights and preferences as may be determined from time to time by our board of directors (commonly known as "blank check" preferred stock). The board of directors may, without stockholder approval, issue preferred stock with voting, dividend, liquidation and conversion rights that could dilute the voting strength of our common stockholder and may assist management in impeding an unfriendly takeover or attempted changes in control.
United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

Richard Stearns-Miller, Plaintiff,

v.

Florida Department of Corrections 

Secretary and others, Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-21659-Civ-Scola

Order Adopting Magistrate Judge’s Report And Recommendation

This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid, 

consistent with Administrative Order 2019-02 of this Court, for a ruling on all 

pre-trial, nondispositive matters and for a report and recommendation on any 

dispositive matters. On August 24, 2020, Judge Reid issued a report, 

recommending that this Court dismiss Plaintiff’s petition and that all pending 

motions be denied as moot. (Report of Magistrate, ECF No. 21.) The Plaintiff has 

not filed objections to the report, and the time to do so has passed.

The Court has considered Judge Reid’s report, the record, and the relevant 

legal authorities. The Court finds Judge Reid’s report and recommendation

cogent and compelling. The Court affirms and adopts Judge Reid’s report and 

recommendation. (ECF No. 17.) Accordingly, the Clerk is directed to dismiss the 

petition (ECF No. 1) and deny as moot all pending motions. The Clerk is further 

directed to close this case.

Done and ordered, at Miami, Florida, on September 18, 2020.

_______________________________

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-22309-RNS Document 22 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/21/2020 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 10.24


 


 











	 	Paul D. Dickman	 
	 	33680 County
Rd. 112,	 
	 	Robertsdale
, AL 36567	March 20, 2020
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	Dear Mr. Dickman,	 






 





 


It has
come to our attention that Medicine Man Technologies, Inc. erroneously issued 500,000 shares of common stock to you on or about
January 8, 2019. The grant of such 500,000 shares of common stock is explicitly contingent upon the common stock meeting certain
milestones within 36 months from the date of the board of directors' approval -(i) market price of $8.00 per share and (ii)
minimum of250,000 shares in average daily trading volume for five consecutive trading days. The shares should not have been issued
until the conditions are met. Therefore, we have instructed our common stock transfer agent to cancel the stock certificate representing
these shares. In connection with the cancellation of these shares, we hereby request that you (i) countersign this letter and
(ii) return this countersigned letter and stock certificates number
1880 and 1881 to us by putting it in the pre-paid UPS envelope enclosed herewith and sending it back to us.


 


We
are requesting the original stock certificates for everyone's protection,
in order to prevent the possibility that someone may innocently believe that the stock certificates represents validly issued shares
of Medicine Man Technologies, Inc. Failure to promptly return the stock certificate could result in us taking action against you,
including but not limited to, termination


of the Consulting Agreement for
Cause.


 


At such time as the
milestones described above are met, the Company will issue a new stock certificate to you representing the shares.


 


Thank you for your cooperation.


 


Sincerely,


 


 


	 	/s/ Daniel R. Pabon	 
	 	Daniel R. Pabon	 
	 	General Counsel	/s/ Paul Dickman                        3/23/2020
	 	Medicine Man Technologies, Inc.	Paul D. Dickman                         Date
	 	 	 
	 	 	 









 





 


 


 





 


 


 


 


4880 Havana St., Suite 201, Denver,
CO 80239


 


 


 






    	 	1	 



     


    








    	 	2	 



     


    








    	 	3
#### § 3809.598 What if the amount forfeited will not cover the cost of reclamation?

If the amount forfeited is insufficient to pay for the full cost of reclamation, the operators and mining claimants are liable for the remaining costs as set forth in § 3809.116. BLM may complete or authorize completion of reclamation of the area covered by the financial guarantee and may recover from responsible persons all costs of reclamation in excess of the amount forfeited.

[66 FR 54862, Oct. 30, 2001]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997 
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,233
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,079
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     40,916
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        103,949
<ALLOWANCE>                                        494
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 154,551
<DEPOSITS>                                      99,665
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,612
<LONG-TERM>                                     37,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,465
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 154,551
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,187
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  711
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    28
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,926
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,169
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 589
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,168
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       20
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  11
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,258
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     48
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                          79
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        79
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.60
<LOANS-NON>                                        122
<LOANS-PAST>                                        11
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    55
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,802
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   553
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       93
<RECOVERIES>                                        14
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  494
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               486
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              8
        

</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 120.314 Resolving doubts about creditworthiness.

For the purpose of the DAL Program, SBA shall resolve doubts concerning the creditworthiness of an applicant in favor of the applicant. However, the applicant must present satisfactory evidence of repayment ability. Personal guarantees of Associates are not required for purposes of DAL-1 financial assistance.
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.401 Scope of the rules in this subpart D. The rules of practice in this subpart D apply to all appeals to OHA from: ( a ) Denials of 8(a) BD program admission based solely on a negative finding(s) of social disadvantage, economic disadvantage, ownership or control pursuant to § 124.206 of this title;
( b ) Early graduation pursuant to §§ 124.302 and 124.304;
( c ) Termination pursuant to §§ 124.303 and 124.304;
( d ) Denials of requests to issue a waiver pursuant to § 124.515; and
( e ) Suspensions pursuant to § 124.305(a).
Exhibit 32.1



Statement



Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of Appleton Papers Inc. (the Company),
hereby certifies that to his knowledge:



| | (1) | the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 1, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                      |  |                                        
|--------------------- |  | -------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|                      |  | APPLETON PAPERS INC.
|Dated: March 24, 2005 |  |                      |  |                                        
|                      |  | /s/ Douglas P. Buth 
|                      |  | Name:                |  | Douglas P. Buth                        
|                      |  | Title:               |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive
|                      |  |                      |  | Officer                                



This certification accompanies this
Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Case 0:00-cr-06218-NCR Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/13/2002 Page 1 of 1
### §4906. Application of State laws

The payment of any special tax imposed by this subtitle for carrying on any trade or business shall not be held to exempt any person from any penalty or punishment provided by the laws of any State for carrying on the same within such State, or in any manner to authorize the commencement or continuance of such trade or business contrary to the laws of such State or in places prohibited by municipal law; nor shall the payment of any such tax be held to prohibit any State from placing a duty or tax on the same trade or business, for State or other purposes.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 594.)
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite ofcataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications.  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the eventthat publications are no longer available from the original publishing agencysite. (Historical purposes)
**Title:****Journal of accident investigation [electronic resource].
 
SuDoc:TD 1.134:
ItemNumber:0982-I-33(online)
CGPsystem Number:000583013
 
Vol. 1 No. 1
Vol. 2 No. 1**