alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateAllegations

# Public Meetings for Allegation Program

This page lists, in chronological order, the notices, slides and summaries documenting the public meetings held concerning the Allegation Program.

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - What is an Allegation
          - Frequently Asked Questions
          - Allegations Annual Reports
          - Report a Safety or Security Concern
          - Statistics on Allegations
          - Safety Conscious Work Environment Policy Guidance
          - Public Meetings

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

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

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020
1

The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the Northern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-3003

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

David Brian Bern, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: April 7, 2004

Filed: May 4, 2004

___________

Before MELLOY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

David Bern appeals the district court’s1

 judgment entered after a jury found him

guilty of conspiring to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine (mixture)

and to manufacture 5 grams or more of methamphetamine (actual), in violation of 21

U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) and (B), and 846. In a brief filed pursuant to Anders
-2-

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Bern challenges the admission of a gun into

evidence at trial and the imposition of a role enhancement for sentencing purposes.

Following careful review, we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s

admission of the gun found by law enforcement officials in a vehicle parked in front

of Bern’s home. See United States v. Johnson, 28 F.3d 1487, 1498 (8th Cir. 1994)

(reviewing for abuse of discretion district court’s decision to admit or exclude

evidence), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1098 (1995). Bern’s objection centered around the

government’s inability to identify the registered owner of the gun, a fact to which the

parties stipulated. Like the district court, we see no relationship between Bern’s

objection and the gun’s admissibility, and we find no violation of Brady v. Maryland,

373 U.S. 83 (1963). 

Turning to Bern’s sentence, we conclude that the district court did not clearly

err in adjusting Bern’s offense level under the Sentencing Guidelines upward 3 levels

for his role as a manager or supervisor of criminal activity involving 5 or more

participants. See U.S.S.G § 3B1.1(b); United States v. Zimmer, 299 F.3d 710, 723-24

(8th Cir. 2002) (standard of review; manager or supervisor need only have managed

or supervised one other participant of criminal conspiracy), cert. denied, 537 U.S.

1146 (2003). 

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the

district court.

______________________________
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 12

**Question 12:** How will the revised Regulatory Guides be used in determining acceptability of a licensee's implementation of the revised Part 20?

**Answer:** In determining the acceptability of a licensee's implementation of the revised Part 20, new regulatory guides will be used in the same way existing guides have been used in determining acceptability of a licensee's implementation of the old Part 20 in cases in which there is no licensee commitment to the guide in a license application. As stated in virtually every guide, Regulatory Guides are not regulations and compliance with them is not required, unless the guide has been made a specific condition of a license (a common practice for materials licensees who are licensed by NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards). Also, as indicated in every guide, alternatives to methods described in the guide may be acceptable.

(Reference: Regulatory Guides)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, October 31, 2017
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: FAA- 2012 - 0677 Directorate Identifier: 2012NM105AD
GAMPS 4000, RF --- 1/4/12

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket **MA Y BE VIEWED AT:**  Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 03/05/2008
```

[House Document 106-271]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress, 2nd Session - - - - - - - - - - - House Document 106-271

 
      DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S FISCAL YEAR 2001 BUDGET REQUEST ACT

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FISCAL YEAR 2001 BUDGET REQUEST ACT, PURSUANT 
           TO PUB. L. 105-33 SEC. 11701(a)(1) (111 STAT. 780)

    July 24, 2000.--Message and accompanying papers referred to the 
         Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-012                     WASHINGTON : 2000

To the Congress of the United States:
    In accordance with section 202(c) of the District of 
Columbia Financial Management and Responsibility Assistance Act 
of 1995 and section 446 of the District of Columbia Self-
Governmental Reorganization Act as amended in 1989, I am 
transmitting the District of Columbia's Fiscal Year 2001 Budget 
Request Act.
    The proposed FY 2001 Budget reflects the major programmatic 
objectives of the Mayor, the Council of the District of 
Columbia, and the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility 
and Management Assistance Authority. For FY 2001, the District 
estimates revenue of $5.718 billion and total expenditures of 
$5.714 billion, resulting in a budget surplus of $4.128 million
    My transmittal of the District of Columbia's budget, as 
required by law, does not represent an endorsement of its 
contents.

                                                William J. Clinton.
    The White House, July 20, 2000.
    
    

```
#### § 295.13 Subrogation.

An insurer or other third party with the rights of a subrogee, who has compensated an Injured Person for Cerro Grande Fire related losses, may file a Subrogation Notice of Loss under the CGFAA for the subrogated claim. An insurer or other third party with the rights of a subrogee may file a Subrogation Notice of Loss without regard to whether the Injured Party who received payment from the insurer or third party filed a Notice of Loss. A Subrogation Notice of Loss may not be filed until the insurer or other party with the rights of a subrogee has made all payments that it believes the Injured Person is entitled to receive for Cerro Grande Fire related losses under the terms of the insurance policy or other agreement between the insurer or other party with the rights of a subrogee and the Injured Person. By filing a Subrogation Notice of Loss for any subrogated claim, the insurer or third party elects the CGFAA as its exclusive remedy against the United States for all subrogated claims arising out of the Cerro Grande Fire. Subrogation claims must be made on a Subrogation Notice of Loss form furnished by OCGFC. FEMA will evaluate subrogation claims on their merits. FEMA may reimburse insurers and other third parties with the rights of a subrogee for reasonable payments made to an Injured Party on or before October 25, 2000, which exceeded or were not required by the terms of the insurance policy or other agreement creating a right of subrogation. FEMA will not reimburse insurers and other third parties with the rights of a subrogee for payments made to an Injured Party after October 25, 2000 that exceeded or are not required by the terms of the insurance policy or other agreement creating a right of subrogation.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.
 Date: May 9, 2007
    BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., TRUSTEE FOR
WILLIAMS COAL SEAM GAS ROYALTY TRUSTBy:
    /s/ RON E. HOOPERRon E. HooperSenior Vice President and Administrator
Bank of America, N.A.
### §624. Powers of the Board

The Board is authorized—

(1) to appoint and fix the duties of the Director and the Deputy Director of the Federal Judicial Center, who shall serve at the pleasure of the Board;

(2) to request from any department, agency, or independent instrumentality of the Government any information it deems necessary to the performance of the functions of the Federal Judicial Center set forth in this chapter, and each such department, agency, or instrumentality is directed to cooperate with the Board and, to the extent permitted by law, to furnish such information to the Center upon request of the Chairman or upon request of the Director when the Board has delegated this authority to him;

(3) to contract with and compensate government and private agencies or persons for research projects and other services, without regard to section 6101(b) to (d) of title 41, and to delegate such contract authority to the Director of the Federal Judicial Center, who is hereby empowered to exercise such delegated authority.

(Added Pub. L. 90–219, title I, §101, Dec. 20, 1967, 81 Stat. 666; amended Pub. L. 100–702, title III, §304(a), Nov. 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 4648; Pub. L. 111–350, §5(g)(3), Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3848.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2011—Par. (3). Pub. L. 111–350 substituted "section 6101(b) to (d) of title 41" for "section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (41 U.S.C. 5)".

1988—Par. (1). Pub. L. 100–702 inserted "and the Deputy Director" after "Director".
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report of Diametrics Medical, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, W.
Brucer Comer III, Chief Executive 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:

      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/ W. Bruce Comer III
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         W. Bruce Comer III
                                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                                         December 16, 2005

A signed original of the 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.

                                       22
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 145

**Question 145:** Automated personnel contamination monitors ("portal monitors") are used at nuclear power plants to detect radioactive surface contamination on the skin and clothing of workers. The alarm setpoints for these monitors are maintained very low to detect low levels of surface contamination and hot particles. Implementation of the "respirator ALARA rule," [10 CFR 20.1702 and 20.1703 (b) (1)] may result in intakes of radioactive material by workers that will trigger the alarms on these monitors. Would the NRC object if, to facilitate compliance with the "new respirator ALARA rule", portal monitor set points were raised to a more reasonable level?

**Answer:** Set points for automated personnel contamination monitors are established by, and can be changed by, licensees without NRC approval. NRC has no requirement that licensees use automated personnel monitors nor does it have numerical guidance on set points for these monitors (unless a licensee has committed to using automated personnel contamination monitors, with a particular set point in a license application). However, if a licensee uses these monitors and the monitor alarms because of an intake (rather than because of external contamination), that intake should be evaluated. The question implies that the detection of small intakes of radioactive material using these monitors is undesirable and should be avoided by raising the monitor set points above their current levels. This is not necessarily the case. At least one nuclear power reactor licensee has recognized that the sensitivity of these monitors for detecting intakes can be used to advantage in internal "passive internal monitoring program" for workers for whom individual monitoring for intake is not required by 10 CFR 20.1502 (b). That licensee plans to use these monitors with a setpoint that results in the reliable detection of internal contamination equivalent to 1% of the ALI for mixtures of radionuclides encountered in the licensee's plant.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1702)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, November 07, 2017
### **CHAPTER 29—WORKERS TECHNOLOGY SKILL DEVELOPMENT**

Sec.
2701.
Findings.
2702.
Purposes.
2703.
Definitions.
2704.
Grants.
2705.
Identification and dissemination of best practices.
2706.
Authorization of appropriations.
### part 4—financial assistance
§ 201.1 Purpose. ( a ) The purpose of this part is to provide information on the policies and procedures for mitigation planning as required by the provisions of section 322 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5165, and section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4104c.
( b ) The purpose of mitigation planning is for State, local, and Indian tribal governments to identify the natural hazards that impact them, to identify actions and activities to reduce any losses from those hazards, and to establish a coordinated process to implement the plan, taking advantage of a wide range of resources.
[67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 86 FR 50673, Sept. 10, 2021]
#### Paolo Scotto, Respondent, v. Gerlando Gibilaro, Appellant.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division denied, without costs. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Nolan, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
[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 Med Gen, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended September 30 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report'), I, Paul B. Kravitz, Chief Executive 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:

(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 result of operations of
the Company.

February 8, 2007					/s/ Paul B. Kravitz
							---------------------------
							Paul B. Kravitz,
							Principal Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-22603-GOODMAN

ERIK CHAVEZ, individually, and

on behalf of others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

GRILL ENTERPRISES, LLC, a 

Florida Limited Liability Company, d/b/a 

Los Parrilleros and Parrilleros Tavern, and 

RUBEN SIERRA, individually,

 Defendants.

_____________________________________/

DEFENDANTS’ SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR LEAVE TO ALLOW ELECTRONIC 

EQUIPMENT IN THE COURTROOM FOR USE DURING EACH DAY OF TRIAL

Defendants, Grill Enterprises, LLC, and Ruben Sierra, request the Court to enter an Order 

that allows Yeison Gonzalez, a corporate representative for Grill Enterprises, LLC, to also bring 

his iPad into the courthouse based on the following good cause:

1. The Court’s prior Order allows, inter alia, Yeison Gonzalez to bring his phone and 

charging cables into the courthouse during the trial. [ECF No. 163.]

2. Defendants request that the Court also allow Yeison Gonzalez to an iPad into the 

courthouse during the trial. 

3. Mr. Gonzalez is expected to attend several days of the trial, and he request 

permission to bring his iPad to assist with performing his daily activities while attending the trial.

4. A proposed Order is being submitted herewith.

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 174 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/05/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

WHEREFORE Defendants, Grill Enterprises, LLC, and Ruben Sierra, request this 

Honorable Court to grant this Motion and enter an Order permitting Yeison Gonzalez to bring his 

phone, iPad, and charging cables into the courthouse for the duration of the trial period in the 

above-captioned matter. 

Respectfully submitted this 5th day of May 2023,

/s/Todd W. Shulby, Esq.

Todd W. Shulby, Esq.

Todd W. Shulby, P.A. 

1792 Bell Tower Lane

Weston, FL 33326

Telephone: (954) 530-2236

Facsimile: (954) 530-6628

E-mail: tshulby@shulbylaw.com

Florida Bar No.: 068365

Co-Counsel for Defendants

/s/Brian H. Pollock, Esq. 

Brian H. Pollock, Esq.

FairLaw Firm

135 San Lorenzo Avenue

Suite 770

Coral Gables, FL 33146

Telephone: (305) 230-4884

Facsimile: (305) 230-4844

E-mail: brian@fairlawattorney.com

Florida Bar No.: 174742

Co-Counsel for Defendants

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 174 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/05/2023 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61272]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23199]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and 
Exchange Commission will hold the following meeting during the week of 
October 18, 2004:
    A Closed Meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 at 10 
a.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the 
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting. 
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be 
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (8), (9)(B), and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), (8), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of 
the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Glassman, as duty officer, voted to consider the items 
listed for the closed meeting in closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 
October 19, 2004 will be:
    Formal orders of investigations;
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an 
enforcement nature;
    Regulatory matters regarding financial institutions; and
    Amici consideration.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at (202) 942-7070.

    Dated: October 12, 2004.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-23199 Filed 10-12-04; 4:09 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,833
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,016
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,135)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          65,435
<DEPRECIATION>                                (34,910)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  71,132
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                         23,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,514
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    71,132
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,670
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,220
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   897
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,263
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,963
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,963
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,963
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.24


</TABLE>
# Combine-DecidingPSFs
#### John R. Morron, Plaintiff, v. Edith Cooper Bryce and Others, Defendants.

Motion granted. Present—Burr, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.; Jenks, P. J., taking no part.