alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM
     UNAUDITED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  FOR  QUARTER  ENDED  SEPTEMBER  30,  1999
     INCLUDED IN THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10QSB.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         671,949
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  490,194
<ALLOWANCES>                                    35,409
<INVENTORY>                                     12,725
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,175,030
<PP&E>                                         777,986
<DEPRECIATION>                                 171,309
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,089,383
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,056,043
<BONDS>                                      1,933,911
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         56
<COMMON>                                         2,344
<OTHER-SE>                                  (1,902,971)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,089,383
<SALES>                                         25,785
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               722,125
<CGS>                                           13,692
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  382,276
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,930,296
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                14,421
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             180,135
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,778,879)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,778,879)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,778,879)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.19)



</TABLE>
Exhibit 13.1





CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 Formula Systems (1985) Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Guy Bernstein, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and





(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  March 17, 2011
/s/ Guy BernsteinGuy BernsteinChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
§ 423.12 How will Reclamation notify the public of additional closed areas? ( a ) *Non-emergency situations.* In non-emergency situations, an authorized official must provide 30 days advance public notice before closing all or portions of Reclamation facilities, lands, or waterbodies. The notice must include publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the locale of the Reclamation facilities, lands, or waterbodies to be closed. Non-emergency situations covered by this section include: ( 1 ) Protection and security of Reclamation facilities and of Reclamation's employees and agents;
( 2 ) Protection of public health and safety, cultural resources, natural resources, scenic values, or scientific research activities;
( 3 ) Safe and efficient operation and maintenance of Reclamation projects;
( 4 ) Reduction or avoidance of conflicts among visitor use activities;
( 5 ) National security; or
( 6 ) Other reasons in the public interest.
( b ) *Emergency situations.* In emergency situations where delay would result in significant and immediate risks to public safety, security, or other public concerns, an authorized official may close all or portions of Reclamation facilities, lands, or waterbodies without advance public notice.
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page
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. 98-177 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, October 1, 1998)

NRC PROPOSES TO REQUIRE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO ASSESS SAFETY

IMPACT BEFORE TAKING EQUIPMENT OUT OF SERVICE FOR MAINTENANCE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to revise its

Maintenance Rule to require that nuclear power plant licensees

assess the impact on safety before they take equipment out of

service for maintenance. At present, the rule says that

licensees “should” do such an assessment, but does not require

it.

NRC is taking comments on the proposed rule change.

Comments are due December 14.

NRC has long been concerned about a trend in the nuclear

power industry to take key equipment out of service for

maintenance while a plant is on line, without a thorough risk

evaluation. Published NRC reports on 50 inspections conducted

since the Maintenance Rule was first adopted in 1991 show that

all licensees checked have programs in place requiring a review

of the safety impact on the plant before equipment is taken out

of service for maintenance. But at five sites, licensees had not

performed such assessments, and at 19 others safety assessment

weaknesses were found.

The present rulemaking results from a directive given the

NRC staff by the Commission after it was informed last year that

the Maintenance Rule language on safety assessments is

permissive, rather than mandatory. Also at the Commission’s

direction, the proposed amendment specifies that the Maintenance

Rule applies during all conditions of plant operations, including

shutdowns, and that safety assessments are to be performed for

all maintenance activities.

More details about the proposed rule amendment may be found

in a notice published on pages 52201-52206 of the September 30

edition of the Federal Register. Comments should be mailed to

the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC

20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. They

also may be hand-delivered to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
MD, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.

Comments may be transmitted via the NRC’s interactive rulemaking

web site through the NRC home page found at http://www.nrc.gov.

###
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site.(Historical purposes)
**Title:****Annual report FY...**
 
2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005
 
SuDoc:ID 1.27:W 51 BA/
Item Number:0900-I-18 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000637706
 
November 1, 2017
No: 23-072 November 6, 2023 

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200 

NRC Seeks Input on V.C. Summer License Renewal Environmental Review Issues;

Virtual and In-Person Meetings Scheduled Nov. 9 and 14

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public comment on environmental issues 

the staff should consider in reviewing an application for a second renewal of the license for the 

Virgil C. Summer reactor in South Carolina. 

Dominion Energy South Carolina submitted in August an application seeking to extend 

Summer’s license from 60 years up to 80 years. The Summer station is in Jenkinsville, 

approximately 26 miles northwest of Columbia. The NRC approved the first license renewal in 

2004, which extended the license through Aug. 6, 2042. 

NRC staff members will conduct two public meetings, an online webinar and an inperson meeting near the Summer site, to describe the environmental review process and accept 

comments from the public about environmental review topics. The virtual meeting will be held 

Nov. 9 from 2-4 p.m. Eastern time on Microsoft Teams. The in-person meeting will be held Nov. 

14 from 6-8 p.m. Eastern time at the McCrorey-Liston School of Technology, 1978 State 

Highway 215, in Blair, South Carolina. There will be a one-hour “open house” just prior to the 

in-person meeting for those interested in having informal discussions with the NRC staff. 

The public also can submit comments by email at SummerEnvironmental@nrc.gov, or 

online at regulations.gov, using Docket ID NRC-2023-0152. Comments may also be mailed to 

the Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff. 

The deadline for comments is Dec. 4; comments received after this date will be considered if it is 

practical to do so. 

The Summer subsequent license renewal application is available on the NRC website and 

at the Fairfield County Library, 300 West Washington St., in Winnsboro, South Carolina. 

Information about the Summer subsequent license renewal review is available on the NRC 

website.
###### Editorial Note on Part 10

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 10.50 [Reserved]
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Natividad GONZALEZ-PARDO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-41144.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 24, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, John Richard Berry, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Jose Natividad Gonzalez-Pardo, Big Spring, TX, pro se.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Natividad Gonzalez-Pardo (Gonzalez) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Gonzalez has received a copy of counsel’s motion and brief, but he has not filed a response. Our review of the brief filed by counsel and of the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
EXHIBIT 4.1A**Waiver**I understand that a question has been raised by the Australian Stock ExchangeLimited (**“ASX”) with regard to clause 8.8 of mycontract of employment (**“Contract”)and compliance with ASX Listing Rule 10.18.I have been advised that Listing Rule 10.18 requires Telstra to ensure that noofficer of Telstra will be entitled to termination benefits (or any increase inthem) if a change occurs in the shareholding or control of Telstra.Clause 8.8 of my Contract effectively provides that if I terminate ray employment asa result of a “change of control” of Telstra, within 6 months of such change ofcontrol, I would be entitled to receive termination benefits which are equivalent tothose that would have been payable had the Board elected to terminate my agreementwithout cause. In those circumstances, I would be entitled to receive a highertermination payment (calculated in accordance with clause 8.4) than I would otherwisehave been entitled to had I chosen to terminate the contract without “Good Reason”(as defined in clause 8.4).At Telstra’s request and in order to ensure that the terms of my Contract conformwith ASX Listing Rule 10.18, I hereby waive (in accordance with clause 15 of theContract) my rights under clause 8.8.This waiver is provided strictly on the basis that I reserve all my other rightsunder the Contract including, in particular, my right to receive the full paymentsprovided for under clause 8.4 in the event that I terminate my employment for GoodReason as defined in that clause.Dated: 25 September 2005   ****
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 nas@nrc.gov

I-97-122 September 15, 1997

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan 

NRC STAFF, N.J. HOSPITAL TO DISCUSS FOUR APPARENT VIOLATIONS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff and representatives of St. Peterís Medical

Center, New Brunswick, N.J., will meet on Thursday, September 18, to discuss apparent

violations of agency requirements regarding the use and handling of radioactive medical

materials.

Scheduled to begin at 1 p.m., the predecisional enforcement conference will be

held in the public meeting room at the NRC Region 1 office in King of Prussia, Pa. It will

be open to the public for observation.

During an inspection conducted at the hospital on August 14, NRC staff

determined there had been four apparent violations at the facility: failure to immediately

report to the NRC Operations Center that a radioactive source had been lost, transported

through unrestricted areas and discovered at another hospital; failure to maintain control

of licensed material; failure to take an inventory of sources after the sources were

returned to the centerís shielded storage location; and failure to conduct surveys to

evaluate the presence of potential radiological hazards during and after source calibration

procedures.

An incident in November 1995 in which a cesium-137 brachytherapy source was

inadvertently transported to another hospital led to the apparent violations.

The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement conference does not mean that

the NRC has determined a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be taken. 

Rather, the purpose is to discuss apparent violations, their causes and safety significance;

to provide the licensee with an opportunity to point out any errors that may have been

made in the NRC inspection report; and to enable the licensee to outline its proposed

corrective action.

No decision on the apparent violations will be made at this conference. That

decision will be made by NRC officials at a later time.

#
From: Kurpius, Meredith

To: CHANG, RANDALL

Cc: Hoag, Katherine

Subject: FW: Washoe County Health District - AQMD "2014 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan" Submittal

Date: Tuesday, July 1, 2014 8:18:45 AM

Attachments: Washoe County 2014 Annual Network Plan.pdf

Randy,

Here’s another one – please file. Thanks!

Meredith

From: Inouye, Daniel [mailto:DInouye@washoecounty.us] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 7:57 AM

To: Kurpius, Meredith

Cc: Hoag, Katherine; Albee, Charlene; Petersen, Craig

Subject: Washoe County Health District - AQMD "2014 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan"

Submittal

Hi Meredith,

Attached is the “2014 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan” for the Washoe County Health District,

Air Quality Management Division (AQMD). The Plan was available for public inspection from June 1

through June 30, 2014 at the AQMD website (OurCleanAir.com) and office. No written comments

were received during the public inspection period. Feel free to contact Mr. Craig Petersen or me if

you have any questions or comments. Thank you.

Dan

Daniel K. Inouye

Chief, Monitoring and Planning Branch

Air Quality Management Division

Washoe County Health District

1001 East Ninth Street, Suite B171

Reno, NV 89512

P.O. Box 11130

Reno, NV 89520-0027

(775) 784-7214

(775) 784-7225 (fax)

dinouye@washoecounty.us

www.OurCleanAir.com

ü Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
§ 142.18 Can the reviewing official or ALJ be disqualified? ( a ) A reviewing official or an ALJ may disqualify himself or herself at any time.
( b ) Upon motion of any party, the reviewing official or ALJ may be disqualified as follows: ( 1 ) The motion must be supported by an affidavit containing specific facts establishing that personal bias or other reason for disqualification exists, including the time and circumstances of the discovery of such facts;
( 2 ) The motion must be filed promptly after discovery of the grounds for disqualification, or the objection will be deemed waived; and
( 3 ) The party, or representative of record, must certify in writing that the motion is made in good faith.
( c ) Once a motion has been filed to disqualify the reviewing official, the ALJ will halt the proceedings until resolving the matter of disqualification. If the ALJ determines that the reviewing official is disqualified, the ALJ will dismiss the complaint without prejudice. If the ALJ disqualifies himself or herself, the case will be promptly reassigned to another ALJ.
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Technical Assistance Request, Interpretation of 10 CFR Part 40 and Certain Decommissioning Issues Regarding Fixed Contamination

## HPPOS-284 PDR-9306170040

See the memorandum from J. E. Glenn to D. M. Collins dated May 26, 1992, and the memorandum from J. H. Austin to J. E. Glenn dated April 29, 1992.

ITT made a telephone request concerning interpretation of 10 CFR Part 40 and certain decommissioning issues related to equipment with fixed contamination. The licensee, ITT, was proposing to terminate a specific license and transfer the material (e.g., a contaminated grinder and saw) to themselves as a general licensee.

The maximum fixed contamination is 15,000 disintegrations per minute (dpm) per 100 square centimeters (100 cm2) on the grinder and 10,000 dpm/100 cm2 on the saw. The equipment was to be used with a thorium oxide polishing compound containing 0.16 to 0.20 percent thorium by weight. It was later determined that the licensee disposed of the grinder at an authorized burial site and intended to use only the saw and the polishing compound. The Th-232, which was previously used at this facility in a grinding operation, is a rare earth compound that is exempt under 10 CFR Part 40.13 (c) (1) (vi).

In view of this information, NRC recommended that ITT decontaminate the saw according to the current guidelines for decontamination of equipment (average and maximum fixed Th-232 surface contamination of 1000 dpm/100 cm2 and 3000 dpm/100 cm2, respectively) before termination of the specific license and release of the saw for unrestricted use. If this level of cleanup is not achievable, ITT should decontaminate the saw to an alternative level that is "As Low As Reasonably Achievable" (ALARA). If the licensee decontaminates the saw to ALARA levels (in excess of existing guidelines), there should be no reason to object to transfer of the saw from a specific license to a general license.

**Regulatory references:** 10 CFR Part 40.13

**Subject codes:** 3.5, 5.8, 11.3, 11.4, 11.6, 12.4

**Applicability:** Source Material

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, October 30, 2017
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.867 Maintenance of records. ( a ) *General.* An importer claiming preferential tariff treatment for a good under § 10.863 of this subpart must maintain, for five years after the date of the claim for preferential tariff treatment, all records and documents necessary for the preparation of the declaration.
( b ) *Applicability of other recordkeeping requirements.* The records and documents referred to in paragraph (a) of this section are in addition to any other records required to be made, kept, and made available to CBP under Part 163 of this chapter.
( c ) *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.
### §1535. Least burdensome option or explanation required

#### (a) In general

Except as provided in subsection (b), before promulgating any rule for which a written statement is required under section 1532 of this title, the agency shall identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and from those alternatives select the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule, for—

(1) State, local, and tribal governments, in the case of a rule containing a Federal intergovernmental mandate; and

(2) the private sector, in the case of a rule containing a Federal private sector mandate.

#### (b) Exception

The provisions of subsection (a) shall apply unless—

(1) the head of the affected agency publishes with the final rule an explanation of why the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome method of achieving the objectives of the rule was not adopted; or

(2) the provisions are inconsistent with law.

#### (c) OMB certification

No later than 1 year after March 22, 1995, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall certify to Congress, with a written explanation, agency compliance with this section and include in that certification agencies and rulemakings that fail to adequately comply with this section.

(Pub. L. 104–4, title II, §205, Mar. 22, 1995, 109 Stat. 66.)