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 127

**Question 127:** 10 CFR 20.1904 (a), Labeling containers, indicates in a parenthetical statement that "the radionuclides (s) present" may now be intended to be a part of the information required to be included on labels. In reply to comments on this rule, the preamble (56 FR 23380, first column) provides a special interpretation for nuclear power plant licensees as to acceptable methods for compliance for labeling fission and activation product containers. Taken together, the rule and preamble can be understood to mean that nuclear power plant licensees are required by the revised Part 20 to include the words "activation products" and/or "mixed fission products" on all containers in which greater than an Appendix C quantity is present - a considerable undertaking which would not contribute appreciably to radiation protection. Do the words "such as" in the parenthetical statement mean that this interpretation is incorrect?

**Answer:** Yes. This interpretation of the rule and preamble is incorrect. The parenthetical statement provides examples of the types of information that may be included on the label; it is not a requirement to include all of the information in the parenthetical statement. However, 10 CFR 20.1904 does require the label to include sufficient information to permit individuals handling or using the containers, or working in the vicinity of the containers, to take precautions to avoid or minimize exposures. Simply having only "Caution, Radioactive Material" or "Danger, Radioactive Material" on the label is not sufficient.

(Reference: 10 CFR 20.1904)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 01, 2017
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsFREQ: A computational package for multivariable system loop-shaping proceduresMany approaches in the field of linear, multivariable time-invariant systems analysis and controller synthesis employ loop-sharing procedures wherein design parameters are chosen to shape frequency-response singular value plots of selected transfer matrices. A software package, FREQ, is documented for computing within on unified framework many of the most used multivariable transfer matrices for both continuous and discrete systems. The matrices are evaluated at user-selected frequency-response values, and singular values against frequency. Example computations are presented to demonstrate the use of the FREQ code.Document ID19890019676Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsGiesy, Daniel P.*(PRC Kentron, Inc., Hampton VA., United States)*Armstrong, Ernest S.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1989Subject CategoryComputer Programming And SoftwareReport/Patent NumberL-16566NAS 1.15:4127NASA-TM-4127Accession Number89N29047Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 506-46-11-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19890019676.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
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

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

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

98-54 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Monday, April 20, 1998)

NOTE TO EDITORS:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has received five reports from its Advisory

Committee on Reactor Safeguards following the committee’s 451st meeting April 2-4.

The reports, in the form of letters, provide comments on:

-- Plans to increase performance-based approaches in regulatory activities.

-- The safety aspects of the Westinghouse Electric Co. application for

certification of the AP600 plant design - Interim Letter 2.

-- Proposed rulemaking: Changes to Paragraph (h) of 10 CFR 50.55a, “Codes

and Standards.”

-- Draft commission paper, “Status of the Environmental Qualification Task

Action Plan.”

-- Proposed final generic letter, “Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at

Nuclear Power Plants.”

Copies of the reports are available through the NRC's Office of Public Affairs, the

NRC's Internet Homepage (http://www.nrc.gov/ACRSACNW) and the Public Document

Room in Washington, D.C.

##
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR E N B ANC R ECONSIDERATION

Appellate case name: In re Bobby B. Dash, Relator

Appellate case number s : 01

- 1 8

- 00 653

- CV & 01

- 18

- 00725

- CV

Trial court case number: 2017

- 16096

Trial court: 152nd District Court of H a rri s County

The e n b anc Court voted to den y relator’s pro se motion for en banc reconsideration

of this Court’s August 31 , 2018 Memorandum O pinion

.

Relator’s motion for en banc reconsideration is denied

.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

__ Justice Evelyn Keyes

_____

x Acting for the Court

En Banc Court consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings, Keyes, Higley,

Bland, Massengale, Brown, and Caughey. Justice Lloyd not sit ting.

Date:

__ November 29, 2018

___
Order entered March 22, 2019

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 01246

- CR

JOHNATHAN COOPER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 297th Dis trict Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1031532D



### O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s March 19, 2019 motion to extend the time to file

appellant’s brief. We GRANT IN PART the motion a nd ORDER appellant’s brief filed on or

before THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
AFGHANISTAN RAMP Activities in Balkh Province
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-96-67 October 28, 1996

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

PERRY NUCLEAR STATION RATED "GOOD" IN FOUR AREAS

IN LATEST NRC ASSESSMENT REPORT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has rated the Perry

Nuclear Power Station "good" in plant operations, maintenance,

engineering, and plant support in the latest Systematic

Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) report.

The report was issued October 24 to Centerior Services

Company (Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.), operator of the

plant. The Perry plant is located 7 miles northeast of

Painesville, Ohio. The report covers the period January 8, 1995,

through September 14 of this year.

NRC officials will meet November 5 with representatives of

the utility to discuss the SALP findings. The meeting, which is

open to public observation, will be at 10 a.m. at the Training

Center at the Perry plant. NRC staff members will be available

after the meeting for questions and comments from the public.

NRC SALP reports rate utilities in four functional areas --

plant operations, maintenance, engineering, and plant support --

and assign ratings of Category 1, 2, or 3 depending on whether

their performance in those areas was superior, good or

acceptable. Plant support includes radiation protection,

security, emergency preparedness, and fire protection.

The report on Perry gives the plant a "Category 2" rating in

all four assessment areas, indicating good performance.

NRC Regional Administrator A. Bill Beach, in a letter to the

utility, said: "It is my view that conduct of nuclear activities

at Perry was good overall and improved in many aspects when

compared to the last assessment period. Continued management

attention may be warranted to sustain the improving trend that

occurred through this assessment period."

He continued, "The improving trend noted in the NRC

assessment of Perry performance appears to be due to effective

management focus and attention to resolving performance

weaknesses and implement improvement initiatives. While
personnel errors continued to result in events, the number and

significance of personnel errors has been reduced."

The ratings for each functional area of this report and the

previous report were:

Functional Area Current Period Previous Period

Operations 2 2

Maintenance 2 2

Engineering 2 2

Plant Support 2 2

####

Note: The full text of the SALP report is available on the NRC's internet web

site along with the current SALP reports for all operating nuclear plants.

The report may be accessed at <http://www.nrc.gov/OPA>. SALP reports are also

available as they are issued through an internet e-mail subscription. To

subscribe, send an e-mail message to listproc@nrc.gov with no subject and with

the message: subscribe salp yourfirstname yourlastname.
----

REPORT

on the annual accounts of the Community Plant Variety Office concerning the financial year 2004 together with the Office's replies

(2005/C 332/15)

CONTENTS

Tables 1 to 4

The Office's replies

INTRODUCTION

THE COURT'S OPINION

Reliability of the accountsThe Office's accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2004 are, in all material respects, reliable.Legality and regularity of the underlying transactionsThe transactions underlying the Office's annual accounts, taken as a whole, are legal and regular.The observations which follow do not call the Court's opinion into question.

OBSERVATIONS

This report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meeting of 5 October 2005.

For the Court of Auditors

Hubert WEBER

President

----

(1)OJ L 227, 1.9.1994, p. 27.

(2)  These accounts were drawn up on 4 July 2005 and received by the Court on 11 July 2005.

(3)  If the historical depreciation of the Office's building had been taken into account the total amount for depreciation entered in the balance sheet would have increased from 525 000 euro to approximately 900 000 euro. To compensate, the amount of own capital would have fallen by an equivalent amount from 2 508 000 euro to approximately 2 135 000 euro.

----

Table 1

Community Plant Variety Office (Angers)

Table 2

Community Plant Variety Office — Implementation of the budget for the financial year 2004

Table 3

Community Plant Variety Office — Revenue and expenditure account for the financial years 2004 and 2003

Table 4

Community Plant Variety Office — Balance sheet at 31 December 2004 and 31 December 2003

----

THE OFFICE'S REPLIES

----
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

Walnut Creek Field Office

1450 Maria Lane, Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5378

CONTACT: Mark Hammond Oct. 31, 1997

Office: (510) 975-0254 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEA

RIV-9766

NRC, SUPPLY SYSTEM OFFICIALS TO DISCUSS

PERFORMANCE AT WNP-2

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet next week with officials of the Washington

Public Power Supply System to discuss efforts towards improved performance at the Washington

Nuclear Project-2 (WNP-2) outside Richland, Wash.

The meeting will be at 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, Nov. 6, at the Supply System office at 3000

George Washington Way in Richland. It will be open to the public for observation; NRC officials will

be available after the meeting for questions.

The session is one in a series between Supply System officials and a special NRC oversight

panel the agency created in September 1995 to monitor and assess the Supply System's efforts to

improve performance at WNP-2.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 9, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 03-21173

_____________________

BOBBY LEE HINES, BILLY FRANK VICKERS, and KEVIN LEE ZIMMERMAN, Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

GARY JOHNSON ET AL, Defendants-Appellees

--------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(H-03-5594)

--------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Plaintiffs-Appellants, all death row inmates facing imminent
execution, appeal from the district court’s denial of their 42

U.S.C. § 1983 action seeking a permanent injunction to bar the use
of lethal injection as currently constituted. Our review of their filings and the order of the district court denying their claims convinces us that the district court ruled correctly. This matter poses both procedural and substantive questions.We are keenly aware that the Supreme Court has under consideration

the procedural question whether § 1983 is available as a vehicle

for mounting attack s such as this; but until a different rule is
announced, w e continue to follow the procedure described by the
district court. See , e.g. , Gomez v. United States District Court

for the No rthern District of California , 503 U.S. 653 (1992);
Martinez v. Texas Court of Criminal Appeals , 292 F.3d 417 (5th Cir.
2002), cert. denied , 535 U.S. 1091 (2002). Sub stantively, Plaintiffs-Appe llants have submitted evidence that appears to be facially stronger than that which has supported prior complaints of
this nature; but we are not in a po sture to deal further with it
under our present precedent.

For essentially the same reasons as expressed by the district court in its Order of December 8, 2003, we affirm that ruling and dismiss the Plaintiffs-Appellants’ appeal.

DISMISSED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-cv-22899-BLOOM/Louis

UTOPIA KIDS, INC. d/b/a

DENNY’S CHIDREN’S WEAR,

Plaintiff,

v.

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT 

LLOYD’S LONDON, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________________/

FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff Utopia Kids, Inc.’s Notice of Voluntary 

Dismissal without Prejudice, ECF No. [36]. Plaintiff seeks dismissal of this matter against 

Defendants, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London; National Fire & Marine Insurance 

Company; and Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company. Being fully advised it is, 

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff, Utopia Kids, Inc.’s Notice of Voluntary 

Dismissal without Prejudice, ECF No. [36], is approved and adopted, and the above-styled case 

is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. [32], is 

DENIED as moot. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on September 8, 2020.

_________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to: Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-22899-BB Document 37 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2020 Page 1 of 1
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.3007 Maintenance of records. ( a ) *General.* An importer claiming preferential tariff treatment for a good imported into the United States under § 10.3003(b) based on either the importer's certification or its knowledge must maintain, for a minimum of five years after the date of importation of the good, all records and documents necessary to demonstrate that the good qualifies for preferential tariff treatment under the CTPA. An importer claiming preferential tariff treatment for a good imported into the United States under § 10.3003(b) based on the certification issued by the exporter or producer must maintain, for a minimum of five years after the date of importation of the good, the certification issued by the exporter or producer. These records are in addition to any other records that the importer is required to prepare, maintain, or make available to CBP under part 163 of this chapter.
( b ) *Method of maintenance.* The records and documents referred to in paragraph (a) of this section must be maintained by importers as provided in § 163.5 of this chapter.
[77 FR 59069, Sept. 26, 2012, as amended at 78 FR 60193, Oct. 1, 2013]
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5010 

To terminate United States economic and military assistance to any country 

that recognizes Russia’s efforts to annex any part of Ukraine. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2022 

Mr. GRAHAM introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

A BILL 

To terminate United States economic and military assistance 

to any country that recognizes Russia’s efforts to annex 

any part of Ukraine. 

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 ‘‘Ensuring Ukrainian 

5 Sovereignty Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PURPOSE. 

7 The purpose of this Act is to ensure that any country 

8 that recognizes the annexation by the Russian Federation 

9 of any part of Ukraine, including any territory taken from 

10 Ukraine beginning in 2014 and the results of any 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 5010 IS

1 referenda sponsored by the Russian Federation that are 

2 held within Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine’s Donetsk, 

3 Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions, does not re4 ceive any economic or military assistance from the United 

5 States. 

6 SEC. 3. TERMINATION OF FOREIGN ASSISTANCE. 

7 (a) RESTRICTION.—The President shall immediately 

8 terminate all economic and military assistance from the 

9 United States to any country that recognizes any annex10 ation described in section 2 and is prohibited from pro11 viding any such assistance to any such country. 

12 (b) REPORT.—The President shall— 

13 (1) submit a report to Committee on Foreign 

14 Relations of the Senate, the Committee on Armed 

15 Services of the Senate, the Committee on Appropria16 tions of the Senate, the Committee on Foreign Af17 fairs of the House of Representatives, the Com18 mittee on Armed Services of the House of Rep19 resentatives, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

20 of the House of Representatives that— 

21 (A) lists all of the countries that are sub22 ject to the restrictions described in subsection 

23 (a); and 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 5010 IS

1 (B) identifies the amount of funding af2 fected by such restrictions, disaggregated by 

3 country and program; and 

4 (2) submit an update of such report to the com5 mittees referred to in paragraph (1) whenever a 

6 country is added to, or removed from, the list re7 ferred to in paragraph (1). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.421 Goods eligible for tariff preference claims. The following goods are eligible for a TPL claim filed under § 10.420 of this subpart: ( a ) *Woven fabrics.* Certain woven fabrics of Chapters 52, 54 and 55 of the HTSUS (Headings 5208 to 5212; 5407 and 5408; 5512 to 5516) that meet the applicable conditions for preferential tariff treatment under the US-CFTA other than the condition that they are originating goods, if they are wholly formed in the U.S. or Chile regardless of the origin of the yarn used to produce these fabrics.
( b ) *Cotton or man-made fabric goods.* Certain cotton or man-made fabric goods of Chapters 58 and 60 of the HTSUS that meet the applicable conditions for preferential tariff treatment under the US-CFTA other than the condition that they are originating goods if they are wholly formed in the U.S. or Chile regardless of the origin of the fibers used to produce the spun yarn or the yarn used to produce the fabrics.[1]
( c ) *Cotton or man-made apparel goods.* Cotton or man-made apparel goods in Chapters 61 and 62 of the HTSUS that are both cut (or knit-to-shape) and sewn or otherwise assembled in the U.S. or Chile regardless of the origin of the fabric or yarn, provided that they meet the applicable conditions for preferential tariff treatment under the US-CFTA, other than the condition that they are originating goods.
[CBP Dec. 05-07, 70 FR 10873, Mar. 7, 2005, as amended by CBP Dec. 06-39, 71 FR 76133, Dec. 20, 2006] Footnotes -
10.421
[1] The relevant HTSUS subheadings for fabric goods in Chapters 58 or 60 eligible under HTSUS 9911.99.20 are as follows: 5801.21, 5801.22, 5801.23, 5801.24, 5801.25, 5801.26, 5801.31, 5801.32, 5801.33, 5801.34, 5801.35, 5801.36, 5802.11, 5802.19, 5802.20.0020, 5802.30.0030, 5803.10, 5803.90.30, 5804.10.10, 5804.21, 5804.29.10, 5804.30.0020, 5805.00.30, 5805.00.4010, 5806.10.10, 5806.10.24, 5806.10.28, 5806.20, 5806.31, 5806.32, 5807.10.05, 5807.10.2010, 5807.10.2020, 5807.90.05, 5807.90.2010, 5807.90.2020, 5808.10.40, 5808.10.70, 5808.90.0010, 5809.00, 5810.10, 5810.91, 5810.92, 5811.00.20, 5811.00.30, 6001.10, 6001.21, 6001.22, 6001.91, 6001.92, 6002.40, 6002.90, 6003.20, 6003.30, 6003.40, 6004.10, 6004.90, 6005.21, 6005.22, 6005.23, 6005.24, 6005.31, 6005.32, 6005.33, 6005.34, 6005.41, 6005.42, 6005.43, 6005.44, 6006.21, 6006.22, 6006.23, 6006.24, 6006.31, 6006.32, 6006.33, 6006.34, 6006.41, 6006.42, 6006.43, 6006.44.
#### § 7.924 Affirmative action by recipient.

Even in the absence of a finding of discrimination, a recipient may take affirmative action to overcome the effects of conditions that resulted in the limited participation in the recipient's program or activity on the basis of age.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-60195

Summary Calendar

SHIRLEY GULLEY, Individually 

and as Surviving Heir of Mark A. Jones, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

YOUTHA YOU FOWLER, Estate of; MAYFLOWER TRANSIT INC., doing

business as Aero-Mayflower Transit Company Inc.; JOHN DOE, 1-10,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of Mississippi

(1:95-CV-54GR)

October 24, 1996

Before JONES, DEMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff-Appellant, Shirley Gulley, appeals from the district

court’s grant of summary judgment for defendants. We affirm.

Plaintiff’s deceased, Mark A. Jones, who was employed as a
temporary laborer to assist a truck driver in loading and unloading

the truck, died of carbon monoxide poisoning while sleeping in

defendant’s tractor trailer rig. The district court granted

defendant’s motion for summary judgment, holding that Gulley’s

exclusive remedy for Jones’s death is under state workers’

compensation law, following this Circuit’s law set out in White v.

Excaliber Ins. Co., 599 F.2d 50 (5th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444

U.S. 965 (1979). We affirm that decision for essentially the

reasons set out in the district court’s opinion. Gulley v. Fowler,

Civil Action No. 1:95cv54GR (S.D.Miss. Feb. 23, 1996).

AFFIRMED.