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 nas@nrc.gov

I-97-55 May 15, 1997

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan

NRC STAFF TO MEET WITH NU, PUBLIC ON MILLSTONE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Special Projects Office

will meet with officials of Northeast Utilities on Wednesday

afternoon, May 21, to discuss plans, schedules and progress

toward recovery of the Millstone units. Topics will include an

overview of organizational roles and responsibilities; the

integrated schedule; definitions of critical terms such as ready

for restart and ready for ICAVP; progress on preparations for the

ICAVP; and performance indicators. The meeting, which begins at

1:00, will be held in the Leland F. Sillin Training Center at the

Millstone site. It is open to the public for observation.

The NRC staff will meet with the public that night, at the

Waterford Town Hall, to provide an update on the status of

Northeast Utilities' recovery efforts at Millstone Station. A

formal presentation will be made on the NRC allegation process.

The meeting begins at 7 p.m.

#
Editorial Note on Part 124
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 124 appear at 72 FR 50040, Aug. 30, 2007, and 76 FR 8253, Feb. 11, 2011.

§ 124.1001 What is a Small Disadvantaged Business? ( a ) *General.* A Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) for purposes of any Federal subcontracting program is a concern that qualifies as small under part 121 of this title for the size standard corresponding to the six-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code that is assigned by the contracting officer to the procurement at issue, and that is owned and controlled by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. Unless specifically stated otherwise, the phrase “socially and economically disadvantaged individuals” includes Indian tribes, ANCs, CDCs, and NHOs. A firm may represent that it qualifies as an SDB for any Federal subcontracting program if it believes in good faith that it is owned and controlled by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.
( b ) *Reliance on 8(a) criteria.* In determining whether a firm qualifies as an SDB, the criteria of social and economic disadvantage and other eligibility requirements established in subpart A of this part apply, including the requirements of ownership and control and disadvantaged status, unless otherwise provided in this subpart. All current Participants in the 8(a) BD program qualify as SDBs.
[85 FR 27292, May 8, 2020]
§ 75.13 Review by the Federal Insurance Administrator. ( a ) The Federal Insurance Administrator may return the application for exemption upon finding it incomplete or upon finding that additional information is required in order to make a determination as to the adequacy of the self-insurance plan.
( b ) Upon determining that the State's plan of self-insurance is inadequate, the Federal Insurance Administrator shall in writing reject the application for exemption and shall state in what respects the plan fails to comply with the standards set forth in § 75.11 of this subpart.
( c ) Upon determining that the State's plan of self-insurance equals or exceeds the standards set forth in § 75.11 of this subpart, the Federal Insurance Administrator shall certify that the State is exempt from the requirement for the purchase of flood insurance for State-owned structures and their contents located or to be located in areas identified by the Federal Insurance Administrator as A, AO, AH, A1-30, AE, AR, AR/A1-30, AR/AE, AR/AO, AR/AH, AR/A, A99, M, V, VO, V1-30, VE, and E Zones. Such exemption, however, is in all cases provisional. The Federal Insurance Administrator shall review the plan for continued compliance with the criteria set forth in this part and may request updated documentation for the purpose of such review. If the plan is found to be inadequate and is not corrected within ninety days from the date that such inadequacies were identified, the Federal Insurance Administrator may revoke his certification.
( d ) Documentation which cannot reasonably be provided at the time of application for exemption shall be submitted within six months of the application date. The Federal Insurance Administrator may revoke his certification for a State's failure to submit adequate documentation after the six month period.
[41 FR 46991, Oct. 26, 1976. Redesignated at 44 FR 31177, May 31, 1979, as amended at 48 FR 44544, Sept. 29, 1983; 49 FR 4751, Feb. 8, 1984; 49 FR 5621, Feb. 14, 1984; 50 FR 36029, Sept. 4, 1985; 59 FR 53601, Oct. 25, 1994; 62 FR 55719, Oct. 27, 1997]
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 18

**Question 18:** For power reactors, the Technical Specification instantaneous release rate limits are based on old Part 20 doses and concentrations (relative to an implied 500 mrem/yr limit). Will changes in the Technical Specifications and ODCMs be required as a result of the explicit 100-mrem/yr limit in the revised Part 20?

**Answer:** The instantaneous release rate limits for airborne releases will not be changed because they are imposed on licensees as a control to ensure that licensees meet Appendix I requirements. However, the instantaneous release rates for liquid effluents, to the extent that they directly reference Appendix B concentration values, will need to be changed. The corresponding bases and certain alarm set-points will have to be changed by license amendment. 

(Reference: Reactor Technical Specifications)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 08, 2017
### §3212. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this part—

(1) $1,688,155,000 for fiscal year 2015;

(2) $1,818,548,000 for fiscal year 2016;

(3) $1,856,283,000 for fiscal year 2017;

(4) $1,897,455,000 for fiscal year 2018;

(5) $1,942,064,000 for fiscal year 2019; and

(6) $1,983,236,000 for fiscal year 2020.

(Pub. L. 113–128, title I, §162, July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1559.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective on the first day of the first full program year after July 22, 2014 (July 1, 2015), see section 506 of Pub. L. 113–128, set out as a note under section 3101 of this title.
UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

101 Marietta St., Suite 2900, Atlanta, GA 30323

Tel. 404-331-5503 or 7878

No. II-96-60 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contacts: Ken Clark 404-331-5503 (Monday, July 15, 1996)

Roger Hannah 404-331-7878

NRC ATLANTA OFFICE POSTS NEW HOURS DURING OLYMPICS

EDITORS:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Region II office in Atlanta will operate

from 6:00 A.M. (EDT) until 2:00 p.m. (EDT) from July 15 until August 9 to

accommodate crowds expected during the Olympic and Paraolympic Games.

You may reach a Region II information officer during emergencies at other times

by calling Ken Clark at home at (770) 458-5780 or by beeper at 1-800-636-2670.

Roger Hannah may be contacted at home at (770) 271-4167 or by beeper at 1-800-

636-2734.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s information office in Washington,D.C. will

remain open from 8:15 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. (EDT) at (305) 415-8200.

The NRC’s 24-hour emergency number in Washington is (305) 816-5100.

####
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2



                                  CERTIFICATION

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

        (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
                               United States Code)

            Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States
Code), the undersigned officer of Telstra Corporation Limited, an Australian
company (the "Company"), hereby certifies that:

            The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended June 30, 2003 (the
"Report") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.


Dated: August 11, 2004                  /s/ John V Stanhope
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Name:  John V. Stanhhope
                                        Title: Chief Financial Officer


                                      -1-
#### Irving Silverstein, Respondent, v. Board of Education of the City of New York, Appellant.

Determination unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Callahan and Shientag, JJ. [190 Mise. 588, affd. 190 Mise. 990.] [See 274 App. Div. 763.]
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov

Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 00-060 April 6, 2000

NOTE TO EDITORS: NRC CHAIRMAN TO HOLD NEWS CONFERENCE

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Richard A. Meserve will hold a news conference to

discuss current NRC initiatives at 11 a.m. (Thursday) April 13, in the Commissioners' Conference

Room at the One White Flint North building, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The

building is located across the street from the White Flint station on the Washington Metro Red Line.

Dr. Meserve was sworn in as Chairman of the NRC on October 29. A brief biography can

be found at: www.nrc.gov/NRC/WHATIS/meserve.vitae.html on the NRC's web site.

##
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.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 15, 2004, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors (“NAFED”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.                

Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization is: National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors, Chicago, IL. The nature and scope of NAFED's standards development activities are: certification testing for individuals involved in the sale, service, maintenance, training, and testing of fire extinguishers, fire extinguishing systems, and life safety equipment.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-22893 Filed 10-12-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
### §104c. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 104c was editorially reclassified as section 5562 of this title.
§ 315.9 Loss of certification benefits. EDA may terminate a Firm's certification or refuse to extend Adjustment Assistance to a Firm for any of the following reasons: ( a ) The Firm failed to submit an acceptable Adjustment Proposal within two years after date of certification. While approval of an Adjustment Proposal may occur after the expiration of such two-year period, a Firm must submit an acceptable Adjustment Proposal before such expiration.
( b ) The Firm failed to submit documentation necessary to start implementation or modify its request for Adjustment Assistance consistent with its Adjustment Proposal within six months after approval of the Adjustment Proposal, where two years have elapsed since the date of certification. If the Firm anticipates needing a longer period to submit documentation, it should indicate the longer period in its Adjustment Proposal. If the Firm is unable to submit its documentation within the allowed time, it should notify EDA in writing of the reasons for the delay and submit a new schedule. EDA has the discretion to accept or refuse a new schedule.
( c ) EDA has denied the Firm's request for Adjustment Assistance, the time period allowed for the submission of any documentation in support of such request has expired, and two years have elapsed since the date of certification.
( d ) The Firm failed to diligently pursue an approved Adjustment Proposal, and five years have elapsed since the date of certification.
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. 96-137 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Wednesday, October 9, 1996)

NRC REQUESTS INFORMATION FROM ALL LICENSEES ON MAINTAINING

PLANT DESIGN

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission today issued letters requiring commercial

nuclear power plants to submit comprehensive information on their programs for

maintaining accurate and accessible design information on their plants.

NRC team inspections and reviews at a number of plants over the past several

months have turned up discrepancies between the plant's original design and its actual

configuration and operating procedures. There were instances where procedures, practices

and drawings did not match the design and where the original design installation was

incorrect, modifications did not reflect design or were based on incorrect assumptions.

In some instances, these deficiencies could adversely affect the operability of

required safety systems. Because of the potential impact on public health and safety if

safety systems do not respond when needed, the NRC requires each licensee to provide,

under oath or affirmation:

Information documenting current practices for concluding that the plant is

consistent with its design and processes for identification of problems and implementation

of corrective actions. The program descriptions should also address how design

requirements are applied to operating, maintenance and testing procedures; and the

overall effectiveness of the current processes in concluding that the plant is consistent with

its design.

In responding to this letter, licensees are asked to indicate whether they have

undertaken any design review programs. If so, they must describe how these programs

ensure that they have accurate information and are using it and that this information is

being kept up to date. If not, they are asked to provide the rationale for not implementing

such a program.

Responses from the licensees are required within 120 days from receipt of the

letters.
The NRC intends to use this information from licensees to plan its sample

inspections of design controls verifying compliance with the terms and conditions of

licenses and agency regulations.

The NRC letters do not apply to the Millstone nuclear plants in Connecticut, since

Northeast Utilities is under a confirmatory order to contract for a third-party, independent

corrective action verification program for Millstone which will address essentially the same

issues.

####
§ 130.820 Records and recordkeeping. ( a ) *Records.* ( 1 ) The recipient organization will ensure that all financial and programmatic records, whether prepared by itself or another entity, are adequately maintained in accordance with Federal regulations in order to corroborate its performance and financial reports to the SBA, as well as to support SBA examinations or other audits. These records must include adequate documentation to support the expenditures claimed and activities performed under the cooperative agreement. The documentation should provide the means to verify proper separation of costs among various Federal awards and non-Federal spending. See also 2 CFR 200.333 through 200.337.
( 2 ) The recipient organization will ensure complete and accurate detailed financial and programmatic documentation by all SBDC service center organizations and service centers. The recipient organization will monitor and oversee its SBDC service center organizations and SBDC service centers each budget period to ensure compliance with the OMB guidelines and regulations. See 2 CFR part 200, subpart D. ( i ) The recipient organization and Lead Center will ensure that: ( A ) All funds received throughout the SBDC network, both Federal and non-Federal, including program income, are properly accounted for, adequately safeguarded, accurately reported, and properly used to further program objectives.
( B ) Each SBDC service center organization has reviewed all charges made to its SBDC accounts, including program income, to ensure that they are allowable.
( ii ) The recipient organization's Lead Center monitoring and oversight activities must include annual on-site or virtual visits to all its SBDC service center organizations. ( A ) These review procedures must ensure that SBDCs are in compliance with the terms and conditions of the cooperative agreement.
( B ) The Lead Center will document the results of annual reviews of the financial and program records of its SBDC service center organizations.
( C ) An in-person monitoring review must be conducted the same year that there is a change in leadership or a record of problems in that year and must be conducted not less than every 4 years.
( 3 ) The recipient organization must keep records on the amount, source, and purpose of all funding under the overall management of the SBDC network, including Federal programs.
( b ) *Availability of records.* ( 1 ) All SBDC network records must be made available to the SBA for review upon request.
( 2 ) All SBDC network records, financial and programmatic, must be maintained for a period of three years following the date SBA accepted the annual performance report and final financial status report from the recipient organization.
( 3 ) The recipient organization will maintain sufficiently detailed program and financial documentation to facilitate transition and provide continuous SBDC services when changes occur in SBDC service center organizations, as well as to support reviews and audits authorized by the SBA.
[88 FR 76651, Nov. 7, 2023]
#### Harriet Oliver et al., Respondents, v. City of Lackawanna, Appellant.

Present—Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.
### §7211. False statements to purchasers or lessees relating to tax

Whoever in connection with the sale or lease, or offer for sale or lease, of any article, or for the purpose of making such sale or lease, makes any statement, written or oral—

(1) intended or calculated to lead any person to believe that any part of the price at which such article is sold or leased, or offered for sale or lease, consists of a tax imposed under the authority of the United States, or

(2) ascribing a particular part of such price to a tax imposed under the authority of the United States,

knowing that such statement is false or that the tax is not so great as the portion of such price ascribed to such tax, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000, or by imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 854.)
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 13

**Question 13:** Why was a 2-hour half-life chosen as a time of reference for noble gases or short-lived radionuclides, as used in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B and its footnotes?

**Answer:** As indicated in Footnote 2 to Appendix B, the radionuclides that have half-lives of less than 2 hours "might include a significant contribution from external exposure." "Significant contribution from external exposure" in this footnote means that the contribution to the dose equivalent from external irradiation exceeds that from inhalation. Two hours is the half-life value below which the contribution to the dose equivalent from external exposure exceeds that from inhalation for virtually all radionuclides. 

 A more detailed explanation is provided below. For a given radionuclide, the ratio of the dose from external irradiation to that from internal irradiation (from inhalation) depends on the half-life of the radionuclide, the characteristics of the radiations emitted in the decay of the radionuclide, the physical and chemical properties of the radioactive material containing the radionuclides, and the physiological response of the body to intakes of this material. However, considering the effect of half-life alone, and in general, the value of this ratio increases as the half-life decreases. The Statement from the 1983 Meeting of the ICRP includes the following paragraph:
> 
"In ICRP Publication 30 the values of DAC for occupational exposure to short-lived nuclides (other than isotopes of noble gases) are based on the dose equivalent to organs and tissues as the result of inhalation. The Commission wishes to draw attention to the fact that there is an additional contribution to these dose equivalents from external irradiation. In situations where short-lived materials are widely distributed in the workplace, this additional contribution may be greater than that due to inhalation by a factor that increases from about 1 to 100 as the half-life of the radionuclide decreases from 1 day to 10 min. Such contributions should be assessed as part of the external irradiation."

 Actually, for radionuclides with half-lives of roughly 2 hours, the values of this factor fall within the range of about 1 to 10. Thus, for virtually all radionuclides with half-lives less than 2 hours, the value of this factor is greater than one. Values of this factor greater than one were selected as values indicating "a significant contribution from external exposure." 

(References: Part 20 Appendix B Footnote 2)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 01, 2017
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Lathrop Brown, Respondent, v. W. H. Hallock and Others, as Members of and Together Constituting the Board of Inspectors of Elections of Election District No. 12, Town of Huntington, Suffolk County, and Others, Respondents. Frederick C. Hicks, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 8.)

The parties hereto having stipulated in open court that this case may be disposed of by a court of four, the decision is as follows: Order modified in accordance with opinion in *People ex rel. Brown*v. *Freisch, No. 1 (ante,*p. 370), decided herewith, and as so modified unanimously affirmed, without costs. Jenks, P. J., Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred. Order to be settled before the presiding justice.