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

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 459

**Question 459:** In the answer to Question 379, the NRC addressed the issue of whether noble gases should be included in assessing the requirement to post an area as an airborne radioactivity area. This question is intended to obtain further clarification with regards to the two separate provisions that require posting of airborne radioactivity areas. The first provision requires posting of areas in which concentrations of airborne radioactive materials are "in excess of the derived air concentrations (DACs) specified in Appendix B." As pointed out previously (in the answer to Question 379), Appendix B includes DACs for noble gases, and therefore noble gas concentrations should be included in posting considerations. The second provision requires that posting be established for areas where an individual could "exceed...an intake of 0.6 percent of the annual limit on intake (ALI) or 12 DAC-hours" in a week. The answer to Question 379 states, "radioactive noble gases . . . (which have no inhalation ALI) should be excluded in determining DAC hours for use in determining the committed effective dose equivalent (CEDE)." From this it appears that for the second provision regarding posting of airborne radioactivity areas, which established precautions to limit internal exposures from intakes, one should not take into account noble gas concentrations because they result in external exposures from submersion. However, noble gas radioactive daughters must be included when determining posting requirements under either provision. Is this clarification of the differences between the two provisions and respective applicability of radioactive noble gas concentrations correct?

**Answer:** Yes, assuming that it is understood that the "two provisions" in the statements preceding the question refer to the two parts of the definition (in 10 CFR 20.1003) of "airborne radioactivity area", which are separated by the word "or". There is only one "provision" that requires posting of airborne radioactivity areas, the "provision" of 10 CFR 20.1902 (d).

(References: 10 CFR 20.1902, 10 CFR 20.1502, 10 CFR 20.1003)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, December 12, 2017
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5148 

To end unemployment payments to jobless millionaires. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 30 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 29), 2022 

Ms. ERNST (for herself, Mr. TESTER, and Mr. BRAUN) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To end unemployment payments to jobless millionaires. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ending Unemployment 

5 Payments to Jobless Millionaires Act of 2022’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ENDING UNEMPLOYMENT PAYMENTS TO JOBLESS 

7 MILLIONAIRES. 

8 (a) PROHIBITION.—Notwithstanding any other provi9 sion of law, no Federal funds may be used to make pay10 ments of unemployment compensation (including such 

11 compensation under the Federal-State Extended Com12 pensation Act of 1970) in a year to an individual whose 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 5148 IS

1 adjusted gross income is equal to or greater than 

2 $1,000,000. 

3 (b) COMPLIANCE.—Any application for unemploy4 ment compensation shall include a form or procedure for 

5 an individual applicant to certify that such individual is 

6 not prohibited from receiving unemployment compensation 

7 pursuant to subsection (a). 

8 (c) AUDITS.—The certifications required by sub9 section (b) shall be auditable by the Department of Labor 

10 or the Government Accountability Office. 

11 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The prohibition under sub12 section (a) shall apply to weeks of unemployment begin13 ning on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Exhibit 32

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 quarterly report of E Med Future, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for
the period ending March 31, 2006 (the Report) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, the undersigned, being the Chief Financial Officer and Interim President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with
the requirements of § 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/ Donald Sullivan                  
|DONALD SULLIVAN                      
|CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND INTERIM  
|PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Date: May 25, 2006
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 Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Tule Lake
National Monument
California


Info
Alerts
Maps
Calendar
Fees


Alerts In Effect Dismiss
 more information on current conditions...
 Dismiss View all alerts


Contact Us
  Basic Information
 Directions
Operating Hours & Seasons
Fees & Passes
There are no fees for this national monument.
Internet & Cellular Access
Internet & Cellular Access Details



**Here are the basics:**
The visitor center is open from Memorial Day to Friday, September 29th on Thursdays through Mondays.
Access to the jail and Camp Tulelake is closed unless on a ranger guided tour. Ranger tours are offered daily when the visitor center is open. Please call 530-664-4015 to save your spot on the tour.  The rest of the year tours can be request at least 2 weeks in advance by calling 530-260-0537.
There are no fees to the monument.
Cell phone service can be unreliable.
Check out our visitor center for more information.

Loading weather forecast...

National Weather Service IconWeather
Hazardous Weather Conditions
Lat: **41.95051635000084** Long: **-121.47922848943716**
Last updated:
Extended Graphical Forecast for This Location

Air Quality
On days when air quality reaches ‘Hazardous”, i.e. over **301 AQI**, all non-emergency outdoor activities must stop, and moved to an indoor setting.
There is an internet-connected air monitoring device running near the jail, that we use to determain when activities must move inside. Here’s a link to view the live air quality data:
Real-time air quality map
 Last updated: August 17, 2023
 Park footer Contact Info Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1240
Tulelake,
CA
96134
 Phone: (530) 664 4015
or call (530) 667 8113 for the Lava Beds National Monument Visitor Center between October to May. Contact Us
 Tools FAQ
Site Index
Español
 Stay Connected


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 350

_____________________________ G REGORY B RADHAM , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. James C. Hankinson , Judge

. March 1, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OWE , B ILBREY , and W INSOR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and M. J. Lord, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody , Attorney General, and Quentin Humphrey, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
#### § 106.200 Cosponsored Activity.

The Administrator (or designee), after consultation with the General Counsel (or designee), may provide assistance for the benefit of small business through Cosponsored Activities pursuant to section 4(h) of the Small Business Act.
Page 1 of 2 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-61286-CIV-WILLIAMS/VALLE

JEANETTE JANDASEK, 

Plaintiff,

v. 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY,

Defendant.

__________________________/

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Alicia O. Valle’s 

Report and Recommendation (DE 26) (“the Report”) on Plaintiff Jeannette Jandasek’s 

(“Plaintiff”) Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees (“the Motion”). (DE 25.) In the Report, Judge 

Valle recommends that the Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion and awards her a total of $4,006.31 in 

attorney’s fees, to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel once the U.S. Department of the Treasury 

determines that Plaintiff owes no debt to the United States.1 (DE 26 at 3.) 

Upon an independent review of the Report, the record, and applicable case law, it is 

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. The conclusions in the Report (DE 26) are AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. 

2. Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees (DE 25) is GRANTED. 

3. In accordance with the Court’s Order of Remand and Final Judgment (DE 24), this case 

remains CLOSED. 

1 The Court notes that Plaintiff stated in the Motion that Defendant “does not oppose the 18.9 attorney hours 

[billed by Plaintiff’s counsel] or the amount of $4,006.31 in attorney fees [that Plaintiff requests].” (DE 25 at 

1.) Further, to date, Defendant has not objected to the Report and the September 15, 2021 deadline to 

object has passed. (See DE 26 at 3.)

Case 0:20-cv-61286-KMW Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/08/2021 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Miami, Florida on this 8th day of October, 2021.

 

Case 0:20-cv-61286-KMW Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/08/2021 Page 2 of 2
§ 4720.1 Removal of excess animals from public lands. Upon examination of current information and a determination by the authorized officer that an excess of wild horses or burros exists, the authorized officer shall remove the excess animals immediately in the following order. ( a ) Old, sick, or lame animals shall be destroyed in accordance with subpart 4730 of this title;
( b ) Additional excess animals for which an adoption demand by qualified individuals exists shall be humanely captured and made available for private maintenance in accordance with subpart 4750 of this title; and
( c ) Remaining excess animals for which no adoption demand by qualified individuals exists shall be destroyed in accordance with subpart 4730 of this title.
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 Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Women's Rights
National Historical Park
New York


Info
Alerts
Maps
Calendar
Fees


Alerts In Effect Dismiss
 more information on current conditions...
 Dismiss View all alerts


Contact Us
  Hunt House
 The Hunt House is a two story red brick residence with four decorative white columns and portico on the front.Hunt HouseRichard Hunt built this house in 1829. He owned several acres of farmland surrounding the property.
On July 9, 1848 Jane Hunt hosted a social gathering in Lucretia Mott's honor where those assembled decided to call the first ever women's rights convention in the U.S.
The park was able to aquire the house in 2000 and begin the restoration process. A Historic Structure Report is currently being written and will include several alternatives for public use.
The house is not yet open to the public.
 Last updated: February 26, 2015
 Park footer Contact Info Mailing Address: 136 Fall Street
Seneca Falls,
NY
13148
 Phone: 315 568-0024 Contact Us
 Tools FAQ
Site Index
Español
 Stay Connected


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
#### § 129.104 What are the penalties of misrepresentation of size or status?

The penalties relevant to the particular size or socioeconomic status representation under 13 CFR 121.108, 125.32, 126.900, and 127.700 are applicable to set-asides under this part.

[84 FR 65665, Nov. 29, 2019. Redesignated at 85 FR 69125, Nov. 2, 2020]
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Qualification of Radiation Protection Manager - Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 2

## HPPOS-217 PDR-9111220020

See the memorandum from L. J. Cunningham to R. R. Bellamy (and others) dated August 24, 1989.

The minimum qualifications of the Radiation Protection Manager (RPM) at nuclear power plants should include four years of professional experience. At least three years of this professional experience should be in applied radiation protection work similar to that encountered at nuclear power stations, preferably at an actual nuclear power station.

Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 2, "Qualification and Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants," includes Regulatory Position C.1.k: "The radiation protection manager should have the qualifications described in Section 4.44 of ANSI / ANS 3.1-1981 with the clarification that three of the four years experience in applied radiation protection should be professional-level experience."

ANSI / ANS 3.1-1981 includes the requirement that at least three of the four years experience in applied radiation protection "... shall be in applied radiation protection work on a nuclear facility dealing with radiological problems similar to those encountered in nuclear power plants, preferably in a nuclear power plant."

To clarify the intent of Regulatory Position C.1.k in Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 2, the three years experience "... in applied radiation protection work in a nuclear facility ..." should all be professional level experience. This is consistent with the earlier position of Revision 1 in Regulatory Guide 1.8 that "at least three years of this professional experience should be in applied radiation protection work in a nuclear facility dealing with radiological problems similar to those encountered in nuclear power stations, preferably in an actual nuclear power station." In preparing Revision 2, there was no intention to change the position of Revision 1.

**Regulatory references:** ANSI / ANS 3.1-1981, Regulatory Guide 1.8

**Subject codes:** 1.1, 1.2

**Applicability:** Reactors

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, October 18, 2017
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7631

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CURTIS ANTHONY HAYNES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CR-95-353-A) Submitted: March 30, 1999 Decided: April 19, 1999 Before WIDENER, ERVIN, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curtis Anthony Haynes, Appellant Pro Se. Scott Stewart Dahl, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Haynes’ motions for stay, default judgment, and for remand are denied. 2 PER CURIAM: Curtis Anthony Haynes appeals the district court’s order denying Haynes’ motion for modification of his sentence. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. * See United States v. Haynes, No. CR-95-353-A (E.D. Va. Oct. 16, 1998). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
### §2504. Plaintiff's testimony

The United States Court of Federal Claims may, at the instance of the Attorney General, order any plaintiff to appear, upon reasonable notice, before any judge of the court and be examined on oath as to all matters pertaining to his claim. Such examination shall be reduced to writing by the judge, and shall be returned to and filed in the court, and may, at the discretion of the attorneys for the United States, be read and used as evidence on the trial. If any plaintiff, after such order is made and due and reasonable notice thereof is given to him, fails to appear, or refuses to testify or answer fully as to all material matters within his knowledge, the court may order that the case shall not be tried until he fully complies with such order.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 976; Pub. L. 97–164, title I, §139(c), Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 42; Pub. L. 102–572, title IX, §902(a)(1), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4516.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §274 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §166, 36 Stat. 1140).

Words "Attorney General" were substituted for "attorney or solicitor appearing in behalf of the United States," in view of section 309 of title 5, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Executive Departments and Government Officers and Employees.

Changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1992—Pub. L. 102–572 substituted "United States Court of Federal Claims" for "United States Claims Court".

1982—Pub. L. 97–164 substituted "United States Claims Court" for "Court of Claims", and "judge" for "commissioner" wherever appearing.

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

#### Effective Date of 1992 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 102–572 effective Oct. 29, 1992, see section 911 of Pub. L. 102–572, set out as a note under section 171 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1982 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 97–164 effective Oct. 1, 1982, see section 402 of Pub. L. 97–164, set out as a note under section 171 of this title.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-41027

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JORGE BALLESTEROS-RIVERA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:97-CR-18-1

- - - - - - - - - -

August 20, 1998

Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Jorge Ballesteros-Rivera has

filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967). Ballesteros-Rivera has not filed a response. Our

independent review of the brief and the record reveals no

nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00098-CV

VETS SECURING AMERICA

v.

EDWARD SMITH

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 2 of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2020CCV-60872-2

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

March 31, 2022
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 0:20-cv-61359-RNS

DOUG LONGHINI, 

Plaintiff,

v.

17070 COLLINS AVENUE SHOPPING

CENTER, LTD. et al.,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

JOINT NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiff, DOUG LONGHINI, hereby advise the Court that Plaintiff, DOUG LONGHINI 

and Defendant, BURLINGTON COAT FACTORY WAREHOUSE CORPORATION, have 

reached an agreement in principle to settle the instant case pending execution of a Settlement 

Agreement. The parties will file a Stipulation dismissing this Action with prejudice once the 

settlement agreement is executed, which they reasonably expect to do no later than 30 days from 

the date of this Notice. Accordingly, the Parties, respectfully request that the Court vacate all 

currently set dates and deadlines as to Defendant, BURLINGTON COAT FACTORY 

WAREHOUSE CORPORATION only.

Respectfully submitted this February 26, 2021. 

/s/ Anthony J. Perez

ANTHONY J. PEREZ

Florida Bar No.: 535451

GARCIA-MENOCAL & PEREZ, P.L.

4937 S.W. 74th Court, Unit #3

Miami, FL 33155

Telephone: (305) 553- 3464

Facsímile: (305) 553-3031

Primary Email: ajperezlaw@gmail.com;

aquezada@lawgmp.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff

/s/ Elizabeth G. McIntosh

ELIZABETH G. MCINTOSH

Florida Bar No.: 1011555

GENOVESE JOBLOVE & BATTISTA, P.A.

4400 Miami Tower

100 Southeast Second Street

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 349-2300

Email: emcintosh@gjb-law.com

-- and --

Case 0:20-cv-61359-RNS Document 90 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/26/2021 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court 

by using the CM/ECF system. I further certify a copy of the foregoing was sent by CM/ECF to 

all counsel of record on this February 26, 2021.

Respectfully submitted,

 GARCIA-MENOCAL & PEREZ, P.L.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

4937 S.W. 74th Court, No. 3

Miami, FL 33155

Telephone: (305) 553-3464

Facsimile: (305) 553-3031

Primary E-Mail: ajperez@lawgmp.com

 Secondary E-Mail: bvirues@lawgmp.com

aquezada@lawgmp.com;

crodriguez@lawgmp.com; 

By: /s/ Anthony J. Perez____ 

 ANTHONY J. PEREZ

 Florida Bar No.: 535451

/s/ Matthew S. Kenefick

MATTHEW S. KENEFICK

California Bar No.: 227298 – admitted pro hac 

vice

JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER 

& MITCHELL LLP

Two Embarcadero Center – 5

th Floor

San Francisco, California 94111

Telephone: (415) 398-8080

Email: msk@jmbm.com

Attorneys for Defendant, Burlington Coat 

Factory Warehouse Corporation

Case 0:20-cv-61359-RNS Document 90 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/26/2021 Page 2 of 2
#### § 142.15 What kind of hearing is contemplated?

The hearing is a formal proceeding conducted by the ALJ during which a defendant will have the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, present testimony, and dispute liability.
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.304 Commencement of appeals from size determinations and NAICS code designations. ( a ) Size appeals must be filed within 15 calendar days after receipt of the formal size determination.
( b ) NAICS code appeals must be filed within 10 calendar days after issuance of the solicitation, or amendment to the solicitation affecting the NAICS code or size standard. However, SBA may file a NAICS code appeal at any time before offers or bids are due.
( c ) An untimely appeal will be dismissed.
[76 FR 5685, Feb. 2, 2011]
#### Bessie A. McGuire, Appellant, v, John Wanamaker New York et al., Respondents.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division granted. Present — Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ.