alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Licensing Status of Titanium Bearing Ores and Waste Products From Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing

## HPPOS-202 PDR-9111210343

See the letter from R. L. Fonner to G. V. Johnson (E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.) dated November 2, 1984.

10 CFR Part 40.13 (c) does not authorize manufacturing of any of the products listed in Paragraph (c), reinforcing the historical view of the limited application of the exemption to products only, and not to raw materials and waste, such as waste products from titanium dioxide. HPPOS-029 contains a related topic.

NRC examined the question of exemption and licensing status for titanium bearing ores and waste products resulting from titanium dioxide manufacturing at a plant in Tennessee.

Some ores (monazite and xenotime-rare earth ores) and some waste products (barium salts in scale in piping, and some process wastewater) contain thorium and uranium in excess of 0.05% by weight, but less than 0.25% by weight. It was suggested that these materials were covered by 10 CFR 40.13 (c) (1) (vi) and should, therefore, be exempt from licensing.

10 CFR 40.13 (c) (1) (vi) provides an exemption for licensing for thorium contained in rare earth metals and compounds, mixtures, and products containing not more than 0.25% by weight of thorium, uranium, or any combination of thorium and uranium. This exemption was promulgated in 1961 upon the petition of American Potash and Chemical Company to restore a status quo ante. American Potash was then processing rare earth ores for thorium and rare earths at its facility in West Chicago, Illinois. The exemption of 10 CFR 40.13 (c) (1) (vi) can be traced to Schedule I of 10 CFR 40.60.

Schedule I was first promulgated in 1947 (12 FR 1855, March 20, 1947) in conjunction with a provision requiring unlicensed persons in possession of 10 pounds of source material ore, or 1 pound of refined source material, to register with the Atomic Energy Commission. However, products listed in Schedule I were exempted. This history indicates that the exemption applies only to products, not to raw materials or process wastes. Further, the petitioner, American Potash and Chemical Company, always proceeded under license with respect to ores exceeding 0.05% by weight thorium.

NRC emphasizes the fact that only products are involved in the several exemptions in paragraph 40.13 (c). Under the regulatory system of 10 CFR Part 40, unrefined and unprocessed ores are exempt without limit on quantity and quality pursuant to paragraph 40.13 (b). If source material ore has been refined or processed (see 10 CFR 40.4 (k)) it is subject to licensing. 10 CFR 40.13 (c) (9) states that paragraph 40.13 (c) does not authorize manufacturing of any of the products listed in paragraph (c), reinforcing the historical view of the limited application of the exemption to products only, and not to raw materials and waste.

**Regulatory references:** 10 CFR 40.13

**Subject codes:** 11.1, 11.6

**Applicability:** Source Material

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, October 17, 2017
§ 115.17 Appeal to Commissioner of Customs. ( a ) Any manufacturer, carrier, or owner may, within 30 days after he has been notified by a Certifying Authority of an adverse determination, including any review provided, appeal that determination to the Commissioner.
( b ) Any determination which is appealed remains in effect pending a decision by the Commissioner.
### Part F—Study
Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350 Certifications

I, Alan D. Feldman, hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:



| | (i) | The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 2, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Midas, Inc.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Alan D. Feldman                            
|Alan D. Feldman                                
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date: March 18, 2010                           

I, William M. Guzik, hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:



| | (i) | The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 2, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Midas, Inc.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                            
|----------------------------
|/s/ William M. Guzik        
|William M. Guzik            
|Executive Vice President and
|Chief Financial Officer     
|Date: March 18, 2010
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.1005 Importer obligations. ( a ) *General.* An importer who makes a claim for preferential tariff treatment under § 10.1003(b) of this subpart: ( 1 ) Will be deemed to have certified that the good is eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the UKFTA;
( 2 ) Is responsible for the truthfulness of the claim and of all the information and data contained in the certification provided for in § 10.1004 of this subpart; and
( 3 ) Is responsible for submitting any supporting documents requested by CBP, and for the truthfulness of the information contained in those documents. When a certification prepared by an exporter or producer forms the basis of a claim for preferential tariff treatment, and CBP requests the submission of supporting documents, the importer will provide to CBP, or arrange for the direct submission by the exporter or producer of, all information relied on by the exporter or producer in preparing the certification.
( b ) *Information provided by exporter or producer.* The fact that the importer has made a claim or submitted a certification based on information provided by an exporter or producer will not relieve the importer of the responsibility referred to in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) *Exemption from penalties.* An importer will not be subject to civil or administrative penalties under 19 U.S.C. 1592 for making an incorrect claim for preferential tariff treatment or submitting an incorrect certification, provided that the importer promptly and voluntarily corrects the claim or certification and pays any duty owing (*see* §§ 10.1031 and 10.1033 of this subpart).
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 02485**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 

### 02485\02485_Checklist_102610_version34.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 02485\02485_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 02485\02485_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 

### 02485\02485_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 02485\02485_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 02485\02485_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file



### 02485\Certification Statement_02485.pdf Plant certification statement 

### 02485\Supporting Documentation\Power Plant Layout Picture APR09.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

2Copyright documents are available from the docket. 1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database
.
9/23/21, 1:53 PM Dame Michael 

Home 

Its not 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:17 PM 

Chuck Bradley 

where is all this posted? 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:17 PM 

Chuck Bradley 

ask him why he has never provided any of the barrels or the test results to KKM? Why he is hiding it 

from them. KKM has only talked to him twice through this whole ordeal. They simply asked for a 

barrel to assess. 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:15 PM 

Chuck Bradley 

I don't make them so I don't have insurance for product liability. 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:10 PM 

Dame Michael 

Hes got to be bleeding money, all that new equipment low gun sales, parts look like shit. Must think 

you are easy pray for a pay out 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:09 PM 

Dame Michael 

Just want to make sure I dont help shays attack 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:08 PM 

Dame Michael 

Bagger already has memes qued up 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:08 PM 

Chuck Bradley 

sure why not 

file:///ClUsers/HaganW/Desktop/message_l.html 96/133 

SCI 000631 CONFIDENTIAL

Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-135 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 2
9/23/21, 1:53 PM Dame Michael 

Fiume 

Dame Michael 

Are we cleared to play with that info? 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:08 PM 

Chuck Bradley 

KKM offered to look into it and asked for a barrel. They would have replaced every one if there was 

a problem. He refused, never sent them one, or any evidence. We have had others test and not a 

single one found soft. Branden Bunker is much more reputable gunsmith than shay and he laughed 

at his postings of tests. He was doing them wrong. Brandon found none soft. KKM tested their 

inventory and all were good. Fact is shay is using the barrel in a way that isn't working ad he needs 

a scape goat. And we dont make any of the barrels. We sell KKM and have an exclusive on one 

type. And we got a letter demanding 1 million in dmaages today from his so called attorney who is 

just another shooter. 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:06 PM 

Dame Michael 

That was just a quick search in the chat group, if theres any specific keywords you think I should 

search for let me know 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:03 PM 

Dame Michael 

Talking about the kkm barrels 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:02 PM 

Dame Michael 

That's shay 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:02 PM 

Chuck Bradley 

who is it? 

Dec 9, 2019, 4:01 PM 

Dame Michael 

How can I help burn this cunt? 

file:///a/Users/HaganW/Desktop/message_1.html 97/133 

SCI 000632 CONFIDENTIAL

Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-135 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### § 122.28 Private aircraft taken abroad by U.S. residents.

An aircraft belonging to a resident of the U.S. which is taken to a foreign area for non-commercial purposes and then returned to the U.S. by the resident shall be admitted under the conditions and procedures set forth in § 148.32 of this chapter. Repairs made abroad, and accessories purchased abroad shall be included in the baggage declaration as required by § 148.32(c), and may be subject to entry and payment of duty as provided in § 148.32.
1The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 00-2263

___________

Federated Life Insurance Company, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

Cindy Roach, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Appellant, * Eastern District of Arkansas.

*

Union Planters Bank, as Administrator * [UNPUBLISHED]

of the Estate of Paxton Roach, *

Deceased; Simmons First Bank, *

*

Defendants. *

___________

 Submitted: February 21, 2001

 Filed: March 7, 2001

___________

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Cindy Roach appeals the District Court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment

on her counterclaim for penalties, attorney’s fees, and interest under ARK.CODE. ANN.
-2-

§§ 23-79-208, 23-81-118 (Michie 1999). Roach argues that Federated Life Insurance

Company improperly filed the instant interpleader action even though it was clear,

based on the relevant policy terms and Arkansas law, that she was the proper recipient

of the proceeds from her ex-husband’s life insurance policy. After careful de novo

review of the record, the applicable law, see David v. Tanksley, 218 F.3d 928, 930 (8th

Cir. 2000), and the District Court’s interpretation of state law in this diversity case, we

agree with the District Court, for the reasons explained in its order, that an award of

statutory penalties, fees, and interest was unwarranted. 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S JUNE 30, 2000 FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          18,783
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   70,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,036
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               104,092
<PP&E>                                         140,482
<DEPRECIATION>                                  77,112
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 183,942
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           66,308
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           758
<OTHER-SE>                                      75,165
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   183,942
<SALES>                                        160,545
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               160,545
<CGS>                                          140,070
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  165,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,241
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 (282)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 912
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,893)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,365
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,258)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,258)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.73)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FILED AS
PART OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>

<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                        9,072,000
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 4,528,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  2,316,000
<INVENTORY>                                     835,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             13,117,000
<PP&E>                                        3,055,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                1,955,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               15,505,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         9,268,000
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                        116,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    5,621,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 15,505,000
<SALES>                                       3,437,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              3,437,000
<CGS>                                         3,860,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 3,860,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              9,489,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                197,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (9,658,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (9,660,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (9,660,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.83)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.83)




</TABLE>
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-66 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0159

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CHAD EVERETT BALL,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 3, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 29 2024

08/29/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0159
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406

Fax: 610/337-5241

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

I-98-12 February 3, 1998

Contact: Diane Screnci (610/337-5330) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC ACCEPTING COMMENTS, HEARING REQUESTS ON YANKEE ROWE PLAN

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is inviting interested

members of the public to submit comments and/or request a hearing

on the License Termination Plan for the Yankee Rowe nuclear power

plant. The 600-megawatt pressurized-water reactor in Rowe,

Mass., was permanently shut down in October 1991 and is in the

process of being dismantled.

The deadline for submitting comments and hearing requests

is Friday, February 27.

Yankee Atomic Power Company, which owns the facility,

filed the plan with the NRC on May 15, 1997. In the document,

the utility describes how it will meet agency criteria for

termination of its operating license and release of the site for

unrestricted use. It also outlines how the remainder of the

plant’s decommissioning work will be carried out.

Copies of the plan can be viewed at the NRC’s Public

Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street NW, Washington,

D.C., and at the Local Public Document Room for Yankee Rowe, at

Greenfield Community College in Greenfield, Mass.

In order for the plan to be approved, Yankee Atomic will

have to obtain an amendment to its NRC license. A request for

the amendment was made by Yankee Atomic last December 18. On

January 13, NRC staff held a public meeting in Buckland, Mass.,

to accept public comments on the License Termination Plan and the

amendment request.

The NRC published a notice in the Federal Register on

January 28 stating that it was considering the issuance of the

amendment; that it had determined the proposed amendment posed no

significant hazards; and offering Yankee Atomic and members of

the public an opportunity to request a hearing on the amendment.

More details on how to submit comments and/or hearing requests

are available in the notice, which can be viewed on the Internet

at http://www.counterpoint.com.
2

Written comments may be submitted to: Chief, Rules and

Directives Branch, Division of Administration Services, Office of

Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,

D.C. 20555-0001. They also may be sent to: U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Room 6D22, Two White Flint North, 11545

Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD, 20852-2738.

#

ˇˇˇˇˇˇˇ

ˇˇˇˇˇˇˇ
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.715 Can a Judge reconsider his decision? ( a ) The Judge may reconsider an appeal decision within twenty (20) calendar days after issuance of the written decision. Any party who has appeared in the proceeding, or SBA, may request reconsideration by filing with the Judge and serving a petition for reconsideration on all the parties to the appeal within twenty (20) calendar days after service of the written decision. The request for reconsideration must clearly show an error of fact or law material to the decision. The Judge may also reconsider a decision on his or her own initiative.
( b ) The Judge may remand a proceeding to the D/GC for a new WOSB or EDWOSB determination if the D/GC fails to address issues of decisional significance sufficiently, does not address all the relevant evidence, or does not identify specifically the evidence upon which it relied. Once remanded, OHA no longer has jurisdiction over the matter, unless a new appeal is filed as a result of the new WOSB or EDWOSB determination.
### §191. Oaths to witnesses

The President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, or a chairman of any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or of a committee of the whole, or of any committee of either House of Congress, is empowered to administer oaths to witnesses in any case under their examination.

Any member of either House of Congress may administer oaths to witnesses in any matter depending in either House of Congress of which he is a Member, or any committee thereof.

(R.S. §101; June 26, 1884, ch. 123, 23 Stat. 60; June 22, 1938, ch. 594, 52 Stat. 942, 943.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §101 derived from acts May 3, 1798, ch. 36, §1, 1 Stat. 554, and Feb. 8, 1817, ch. 10, 3 Stat. 345.

R.S. §101 constitutes first sentence, and act June 26, 1884, constitutes second sentence.

#### Amendments

1938—Act June 22, 1938, reenacted section without change.
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1865 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



## Document

Number: 

# 19 ) IV-E- 7 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 12/3/20089:15:27

AM Sheet 19of 105P. 2 

# A-83-2 7

IV-E- 7 CONTAC TREPOR T ____^_

_Originator , CONTAC TBY : TELEPHON E tf MEETIN G D Othe r Dat e 

## M< W . ll . f W
NAME , TITL E & ORGANIZATIO N j) # , < ^ { QHK.CH DO/2M S A/>J D Ko e 1»J C ADDRES S & TELEPHON E NUMBE R „ Q fc^*^^ 1fe > £0 ' " ^^~AQO O Ol^ V 1^0 1 PURPOS E O R SUBJEC

T(Giv e project numbe ri f appropriate ) GftowiTr t T^C^">>S - //v f D/ST7e<C t rrCATlN(> SYSTC^ S SUMMAR Y 

## T)£ - Ocwcef t STATef c TH-A T

## Sud^ s /\A ^ 

## Koe - IA/SMCL S ElC^rfT OQ

. Nlrvi t "blSTdiC T /T£7mrv/< i SVSTtM S t~A<Lr / Yt"4^ . .4^ ^ 

## Ti-U rrrte Y^/^v/

e /t^ r<a

o % OF

77/ ^ /wwiicr rFO £2>/7

/ 57s7cx. ( ifcAa . CoNSC^£/OTT- V ^OO-CoO O M£V J }>/t f i?0iL.c-T2 yW/1L L /S t vn<_ L 6 c G^eArrfi . t>r/^A J /O 0 /Vj/V

l ^>^/\ r/+r*r ' iN^r . Mo?r 

## "3>/ H (IM^ S 

## M< f IA / 

## Trie tf-A^e OP A^-<{ O 

## MM/?V V it**7 

## wPuT. ,Mo5 rO F r W Ne ^ Soi L 

## e^ s (90 - 95 " /' J WL L #€ " (Us - Ft^eD j ($€c.A\iSf cTVH S PvC L /* 5 J/tftMt^S"iV e " ^ My . C/WVK17 Y fACT7)( 2 o p ^CMOS f AL c}/t f 6o/Lei2 i / S 5 0 %. ACTIO N 

# i Distribution :