alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or vld@nrc.gov

I-96-40 June 21, 1996

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Victor Dricks

NRC RESIDENT INSPECTOR AT MILLSTONE UNIT 2 REASSIGNED

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has reassigned Paul

Swetland, currently the Senior Resident Inspector at Millstone

Unit 2, in Waterford, Connecticut.

Mr. Swetland has accepted a position in the Region I office,

in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, as a Project Engineer in the

Division of Reactor Projects. As a Project Engineer, Mr.

Swetland will use his experience and skills to implement the

inspection program, perform inspections and act for the Branch

Chief in his absence.

Mr. Swetland's reassignment is effective in October. His

successor will be named in the near future.

Mr. Swetland has been Senior Resident Inspector at Millstone

since August 1992. Since joining the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission in January 1980, he has worked as a Senior Resident

Inspector and Resident Inspector at a number of nuclear plants in

the Northeastern United States, and as a Section Chief in the

Regional Office. Mr. Swetland is a graduate of the U.S. Naval

Academy, and served with the Navy's nuclear power program for

eight years.

#
### §2715. Publication

The marshal shall cause publication of an executed warrant of attachment—

(1) for two months in case of an absconding debtor, and

(2) for four months in case of a nonresident debtor

in a newspaper published in the district where the property is situated pursuant to the details of the order under which the warrant is issued.

(Added Pub. L. 86–682, §9, Sept. 2, 1960, 74 Stat. 707.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was derived from R.S. §929, which was originally classified to section 742 of former Title 28. Following the general revision and enactment of Title 28 by act June 25, 1948, R.S. §929 was reclassified to section 842 of Title 39. R.S. §929 was repealed by Pub. L. 86–682, §12(c), Sept. 2, 1960, 74 Stat. 708, (section 1 of which revised and enacted Title 39), and reenacted by section 9 thereof as section 2715 of this title.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Sept. 1, 1960, see section 11 of Pub. L. 86–682, 74 Stat. 708.
#### § 429.30 May use authorizations be transferred or assigned to others?

Your use authorization may not be transferred or assigned to others without prior written approval of Reclamation, unless specifically provided for in your use authorization or as provided under subpart H of this part for existing private exclusive recreational and residential uses. Should you wish to transfer or assign your use authorization to another individual or entity, you must contact the Reclamation office that issued your use authorization prior to taking such action.
EX-10.10






 Exhibit 10.10 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

This First Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into, effective as of
January 23, 2018 (the “Effective Date”), by and among Aveanna Healthcare LLC f/k/a BCPE Eagle Buyer LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Aveanna Healthcare”), Pediatric Services of America, Inc., a Georgia corporation
(the “Company”), and Rodney D. Windley (“Executive”). 
 RECITALS: 

 

	 	A.	 Aveanna Healthcare, the Company and Employee are parties to that certain Amended and Restated Employment
Agreement dated as of March 15, 2017 (the “Employment Agreement”). 


  

	 	B.	 Aveanna Healthcare, the Company and Employee desire to amend the Employment Agreement. 



NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, the parties, intending to be legally bound,
hereby expressly agree as follows: 
  

	 	1.	 Amendment. Section 4(a)(i) in the Employment Agreement is hereby amended by replacing each
reference to “$160 million” with “$140 million”. 


  

	 	2.	 Miscellaneous. 



(a)     This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which
together will constitute one and the same instrument. Any executed copy of this Amendment sent by facsimile or electronic mail (with a pdf attachment) or executed electronically shall be treated the same as an original signature copy. 

(b)     Except as modified herein, the Employment Agreement is hereby ratified and shall remain in full force and effect.
The Employment Agreement and this Amendment constitute the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the matters set forth herein. 

(c)     This Amendment shall be effective as of the Effective Date. 

(d)     Unless the context requires otherwise, the term “Agreement” or “Employment Agreement” in the
Employment Agreement or in this Amendment shall refer to the Employment Agreement, as amended and modified by this Amendment. 
 [Signatures
on Following Page] 













 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to Amended
and Restated Employment Agreement to be duly executed and delivered as of the day and year first above written. 
  

			
	PEDIATRIC SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ H. Anthony
Strange                    

	Name:	 	H. Anthony Strange
	Title:	 	President and Chief Executive Office
	
	AVEANNA HEALTHCARE LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ H. Anthony Strange

	Name:	 	H. Anthony Strange
	Title:	 	President and Chief Executive Officer
	
	EXECUTIVE
	
	 /s/ Rodney D. Windley

	Rodney D. Windley


  
 Signature Page to First
Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement
#### New York Casualty Company v. Peter R. Kuhn et al.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 875.]
Exhibit
        23
 
 **CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
  
 
 The
        Board
        of Directors
 YP
        Corp.:
 
 We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
        of YP
        Corp., f/k/a YP.Net, Inc., on Form S-8 (File No. 333-107721) filed as of
        August
        7, 2003, of our report dated December 20, 2001, on the consolidated balance
        sheet of YP Corp. as of September 30, 2001 and the related consolidated
        statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income and cash
        flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended September
        30, 2001, which report appears in YP Corp.’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A
        (Amendment No. 1).
 
 /s/
        Epstein, Weber & Conover P.L.C.
 
 Scottsdale,
        Arizona
 November
        30, 2005
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

*CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*

 

In connection with the AnnualReport of MedicalCV, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB, as amended,for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Marc P. Flores,President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Companyand will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
| Dated: December  7, 2005 | By:    | /s/ Marc P.  Flores                    |   |
|--------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                     |   | Marc P.  Flores                        |   |
|                     |   | President  and Chief Executive 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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

# AGENCY:

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Time and Date: 11:30 a.m., Monday, February 9, 2004.

Place: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, 20th and C Streets NW., Washington, DC 20551.

Status: Closed.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

 

1.  Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal Reserve System employees.

2.  Any items carried forward from a previously announced meeting.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michelle A. Smith, Director, Office of Board Members; (202) 452-2955.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                        You may call (202) 452-3206 beginning at approximately 5 p.m. two business days before the meeting for a recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications scheduled for the meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at                         *http://www.federalreserve.gov*                         for an electronic announcement that not only lists applications, but also indicates procedural and other information about the meeting.                    

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 30, 2004.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 04-2321 Filed 1-30-04; 3:21 pm]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 99-194 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, September 9, 1999)

NRC NAMES JOHN D. SIEBER TO THE

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has appointed John D. Sieber of Wexford,

Pennsylvania, to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS).

Mr. Sieber received a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering from

Carnegie Mellon University in 1961. He also attended Purdue University and the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

His 30-year career includes line and management positions at Duquesne Light

Company. He has also served as a member or director of many organizations, including the

Electric Power Research Institute, Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited, the Nuclear Energy

Institute, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the Westinghouse Owners

Group.

As a consultant to RWE Energie in Essen, Germany, Mr. Sieber was active in the use of

simulators for nuclear operator training.

Since 1994, Mr. Sieber has been the President of Northmont Consulting, Incorporated,

involved in nuclear plant assessments, management oversight and mentoring, event analysis,

oversight of root cause determinations, and operational and human performance analysis.

The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, established in 1957, advises the

Commission on the safety aspects of nuclear facilities and the adequacy of safety standards.

Members serve for four-year terms, and may serve no more than three consecutive terms.

Other Members of the Committee are:

CHAIRMAN: Dr. Dana A. Powers, Senior Scientist, Nuclear Facilities Safety Department,

Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: Dr. George Apostolakis, Professor, Nuclear Engineering Department,

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
MEMBER-AT-LARGE: Dr. Thomas S. Kress, retired Head of Applied Systems Technology

Section, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN.

Mr. John B. Barton, retired Vice-President, GPU Nuclear Corporation, Parsippany, NJ.

Dr. Mario V. Bonaca, retired Director, Nuclear Engineering Department, Northeast Utilities,

Connecticut.

Dr. William J. Shack, Associate Director, Energy Technology Division, Argonne National

Laboratory, Argonne, IL.

Dr. Robert L. Seale, Professor Emeritus of Nuclear and Energy Engineering, Department of

Nuclear and Energy Engineering, College of Engineering and Mines, University of Arizona,

Tucson, AZ.

Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Distinguished Professor, Nuclear Engineering Department, University of

Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, and Distinguished Scientist, I&C Division, Oak Ridge

National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Dr. Graham B. Wallis, Professor, Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover,

New Hampshire.

###
#### Peter J. Mentges, Respondent, v. Flagg Storage Warehouse Company, Appellant.

Motion for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs. Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied.
###### Editorial Note on Part 134

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 134.221 Prehearing conferences.

Prior to a hearing, the Judge, at his or her own initiative, or upon the motion of any party, may direct the parties or their attorneys to appear, by telephone or in person, in order to consider any matter which may assist in the efficient, prompt, and fair determination of the case. The conference may be recorded verbatim at the discretion of the Judge, and, if so, a party may purchase a transcript, at its own expense, from the recording service.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-97-47 May 21, 1997

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

$2,500 FINE AGAINST ESCANABA, MICHIGAN, HOSPITAL FOR

DELIBERATE VIOLATION OF NRC SAFETY RECORD REQUIREMENTS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a

$2,500 fine against St. Francis Hospital, Escanaba, Michigan, for

deliberate violations of NRC requirements for radiation safety

tests and recordkeeping.

The fine is based on the findings of an NRC inspection which

began on July 15 of last year. The inspection and a subsequent

investigation by the NRC Office of Investigations determined that

a hospital employee had deliberately generated documents that

implied that daily tests and surveys had been performed.

The individual, however, told NRC personnel that he often

found it expedient to fill out the required daily records during

slow times and then perform the actual tests or surveys later.

The records were to document the results of daily radiation

surveys in the nuclear medicine area of the hospital, a test of

the device used to measure radioactive pharmaceuticals, and a

test of the constituents of radioactive pharmaceuticals used at

the hospital.

The recording of test results before the tests were actually

performed did not appear to adversely impact the health of the

patients. However, deliberate violations are of significant

concern because the NRC's regulatory programs are based on a

licensee and its employees acting with integrity.

A contributing factor to the violations was the hospital's

failure to provide the employee with sufficient instruction and

oversight to ensure that he understood why certain tests should

be performed prior to administering doses of radioactive

pharmaceuticals to patients.

Several additional violations were identified in the

inspection, but no fine was proposed for these violations. A

Notice of Violation, requiring adequate corrective action, was

issued.

These additional violations included failure to measure the

radiation level and check for radioactive contamination on a
package received at the hospital; failure to perform tests of the

radiation dose calibrator and to measure the constituents of a

radioactive pharmaceutical; and failure to provide annual

refresher training.

The hospital has until June 13 to pay the fine or to protest

it. If the fine is protested and subsequently imposed by the NRC

staff, the hospital may request a hearing.

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

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 95

**Question 95:**10 CFR 19.12 requires training (instruction) of workers who enter a restricted area. Do individuals receiving occupational doses in controlled areas need training?

**Answer:**Yes. They need training, but it is not specifically required by 10 CFR 19.12 since this section addresses only individuals working in or frequenting any portion of a restricted area. The obvious intent of the training (instruction) requirement of Part 19 is that individuals who are permitted to receive occupational doses within the occupational limits will receive appropriate training. Although not explicitly stated in 10 CFR Parts 19 or 20, individuals who are to receive an occupational dose in any area should receive appropriate training.

Reference: 10 CFR 19.12).

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, December 13, 2017
#### Carlton Kraft *v.*Joseph Maile

*Joseph Maile,*pro se, in support of the petition.

Decided March 26, 1986

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 5 Conn. App. 628, is denied.
Nuclear Regulatory Commissio

Safety Culture Policy Stateme

Martin J. Virgilio

Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Waste, Resea

State, Tribal, and Compliance Programs

NRC Stakeholders Meeting 

February 3, 2010
Overview

• Introduction• Importance of Safety Culture• Role of Policy Statement • Importance of Public Workshops• Safety Culture Characteristics• Remaining Steps Policy• Closing Remarks
Importance of Safety Culture

• Nexus to Safety • Historical Events• Preventing Events
Role of Policy Statement

• Establish NRC Expectations for Safet

Culture

– Materials Licensees and Certificate Hold– Reactor Licensees– Agreement State Licensees

• Define Safety Culture and Describe 

Characteristics

• Communicate Roles and Responsibil
Importance of This Work Shop

Engage Stakeholders:• Comments on Proposed Policy Statement • Seek Alignment (Using Common Terminology)

– Definition of Safety Culture– Safety Culture Characteristics

• Clarify Process and Next Steps
Importance of Safety Culture Charac

Draft Characteristics

– Work Practices– Work Planning and Control– Safety Conscious Work Environment– Problem Identification and Evaluation– Problem Resolution– Resources– Licensee Decision-Making– Accountability– Continuous Learning Environment
Considerations For Characterist

• Characteristic Clarity• Unnecessary Duplication• Missing Characteristics• Tangible
Remaining Steps• Continue to Solicit Stakeholder Inpu• Submit final policy statement for 

Commission approval – early March 

• After final approval and issuance, fo

on implementation 
Closing Remarks• Safety culture is an essential element for 

anyone performing or overseeing NRC regulated activities 

• Licensee management has primary 

responsibility for establishing and maintapositive safety culture

• NRC has independent oversight role• This Work Shop and Outreach efforts are 

important component for developing finastatement
Questions?
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsTolerating failures of continuous-valued sensorsOne aspect of fault tolerance in process control programs is the ability to tolerate sensor failure. A methodology for transforming a process control program that cannot tolerate sensor failures onto one that can is presented. Issues addressed include modifying specifications in order to accommodate uncertainty in sensor values and averaging sensor values in a fault tolerant manner. In addition, a hierarchy of sensor failure models is identified, and both the attainable accuracy and the run-time complexity of sensor averaging with respect to this hierarchy is discussed.Document ID19900018719Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsMarzullo, Keith*(Cornell Univ. Ithaca, NY, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1990Subject CategoryInstrumentation And PhotographyReport/Patent NumberAD-A227140TR-90-1156NAS 1.26:187028NASA-CR-187028Accession Number90N28035Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: N00140-87-C-8904CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG2-593Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900018719.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
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6177** 

JAMES LEWIS SANFORD , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

WARDEN KENNETH LASSITER; MANAGER MARSHALL PIKE; LT. LAWRANCE; LT. SHELTON; LT. BLANKS; OFFICER SLABACH , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:13

- ct

- 03138

- BO )

Submitted : July 21, 2015 Decided: July 23, 2015

Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

James Lewis Sanford, Appellant Pro Se. Jodi Harrison, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY , Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpub lished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
James Lewis Sanford appeals the district court ’ s order granting summary judgment to the defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(2012) action . We have reviewed the record and find no reve rsible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. Sanford v. Lassiter , No. 5:13

- ct

- 03138

- BO
(E.D.N.C. Jan. 8, 2015) . We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before th is court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

AFFIRMED