alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I

475 Allendale Road

King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-00-65 August 31, 2000

CONTACT: Diane Screnci, (610)337-5330/ e-mail: dps@nrc.gov

Neil A. Sheehan, (610)337-5331/e-mail: nas@nrc.gov

NRC ISSUES INDIAN POINT 2 STEAM GENERATOR INSPECTION REPORT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a report to Consolidated Edison Company

of New York detailing the findings of a special inspection that reviewed the cause of the February 15th

steam generator tube failure at the Indian Point 2 nuclear power plant. The team inspection was

conducted from March 7 through July 20 at the Buchanan, N.Y., facility and focused on Con Ed’s

performance during its 1997 inspection of the plant’s four steam generators.

The NRC team has preliminarily concluded that the overall direction and execution of the

1997 steam generator in-service examinations were deficient in several respects. Deficiencies in the

steam generator inspection program resulted in the company’s failure to adequately account for

conditions which adversely affected the detectability of, and increased the susceptibility to, tube flaws.

The team concluded that these failures resulted in tubes with flaws being left in service following the

1997 inspection.

Under the NRC’s revised reactor oversight process, the agency assesses the inspection

findings and characterizes their risk significance by color, specifically green, white, yellow or red. (A

green finding results in normal NRC oversight, while white, yellow, or red assessments are considered

progressively more serious and receive commensurately greater oversight.) That process assessed the

potential impact of running the plant for an operating cycle with the steam generators in a degraded

condition. The NRC determined the issue to be of potentially high risk significance. As such, the staff

has preliminarily characterized the findings as “red.”

While the NRC staff has identified these areas of concern, it is important to note that a

review of the February 15th event by an NRC Augmented Inspection Team (AIT) earlier this year found

that the plant’s licensed operators appropriately responded to the situation, that plant equipment

performed as expected and that there were no public health and safety consequences associated with

the event itself.

The NRC will meet with Con Ed at a Regulatory Conference, tentatively scheduled for

September 26, to discuss the finding. At the conference, which will be held in the NRC’s Region I

office in King of Prussia, Pa., Con Ed will have an opportunity to provide NRC staff with additional
information, including its position on the significance of the issues discussed in the report. This

information will be used by the NRC in determining its final characterization of the issues.

The inspection report is posted on the NRC’s web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/REACTOR/IP/index.html

##
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

FEMA gives notice that the countywide per capita impact indicator under the Public Assistance program for disasters declared on or after October 1, 2004 will be increased.

# DATES:

 Effective October 1, 2004 and applies to major disasters declared on or after October 1, 2004.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        James A. Walke, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management                               ( print page 61506)                            Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3834.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Response and Recovery Directorate Policy No. 9122.1 provides that FEMA will adjust the countywide per capita impact indicator under the Public Assistance program to reflect annual changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Department of Labor.

FEMA gives notice of an increase in the countywide per capita impact indicator to $2.84 for all disasters declared on or after October 1, 2004.

FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers of 2.7 percent for the 12-month period ended in August 2004. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor released the information on September 16, 2004.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Public Assistance Grants.)

Michael D. Brown,

Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of Homeland Security.

[FR Doc. 04-23320 Filed 10-18-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
### §199. Member of commission, board, etc., appointed by President pro tempore of Senate; recommendation process; applicability

(a) Any provision of law which provides that any member of a commission, board, committee, advisory group, or similar body is to be appointed by the President pro tempore of the Senate shall be construed to require that the appointment be made—

(1) upon recommendation of the Majority Leader of the Senate, if such provision of law specifies that the appointment is to be made on the basis of the appointee's affiliation with the majority political party,

(2) upon the recommendation of the Minority Leader of the Senate, if such provision of law specifies that the appointment is to be made on the basis of the appointee's affiliation with the minority party, and

(3) upon the joint recommendation of the Majority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the Senate, if such provision of law does not specify that the appointment is to be made on the appointee's affiliation with the majority or minority political party.

(b) The provisions of subsection (a) shall be applicable in the case of appointments made after December 22, 1980, pursuant to provisions of law enacted on, before, and after, December 22, 1980.

(Pub. L. 96–576, §3, Dec. 22, 1980, 94 Stat. 3355.)
(October 11, 1951.)

#### Enrique Gonzalez, Respondent, v. Herman Cohen, Appellant.

Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 560.]
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

              CERTIFICATION 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 Distribution y Servicio D&S S.A. (the
"Company") on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, as filed
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Miguel Nunez, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) 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.

/s/ MIGUEL NUNEZ

Miguel Nunez
Chief Financial Officer
Distribucion y Servicio D&S S.A
Dated: June 30, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1997 FILED WITH THIS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           8,723
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,348
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (390)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,988
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                25,634
<PP&E>                                          40,752
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,909)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  74,913
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,120
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           157
<OTHER-SE>                                      44,428
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    74,913
<SALES>                                         49,591
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                49,591
<CGS>                                           36,302
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   41,424
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,866
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,338
<INCOME-TAX>                                       403
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,935
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     84
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,851
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .47


</TABLE>
§ 101.2 Authority of Customs officers. ( a ) *Supremacy of delegated authority.* Action taken by any person pursuant to authority delegated to him by the Secretary of the Treasury, whether directly or by subdelegation, shall be valid despite the existence of any statute or regulation, including any provision of this chapter, which provides that such action shall be taken by some other person. Any person acting under such delegated authority shall be deemed to have complied with any statute or regulation which provides or indicates that it shall be the duty of some other person to perform such action.
( b ) *Consolidation of functions.* Any reorganization of the Customs Service or consolidation of the functions of two or more persons into one office which results in the failure of a designated Customs officer to perform an action required by statute or regulation, shall not invalidate the performance of that action by any other Customs officer.
( c ) *Customs supervision.* Whenever anything is required by the regulations in this chapter or by any provision of the customs or navigation laws to be done or maintained under the supervision of Customs officers, such supervision shall be carried out as prescribed in the regulations of this chapter or by instructions from the Secretary of the Treasury or the Commissioner of Customs in particular cases. In the absence of a governing regulation or instruction, supervision shall be direct and continuous or by such occasional verification as the principal Customs field officer shall direct if such officer shall determine that less intensive supervision will ensure proper enforcement of the law and protection of the revenue. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to warrant any failure to direct and furnish required supervision or to excuse any failure of a party in interest to comply with prescribed procedures for obtaining any required supervision.
[T.D. 77-241, 42 FR 54937, Oct. 12, 1977, as amended by T.D. 98-22, 63 FR 11825, Mar. 11, 1998]
NRC NEWS

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. II-00-59 October 26, 2000

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416/e-mail: kmc2@nrc.gov

Roger D. Hannah (404)562-4417/e-mail: rdh1@nrc.gov

NRC BARS FORMER PUERTO RICO COMPANY EMPLOYEES

FROM NRC-LICENSED ACTIVITIES AND CITES COMPANY

The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued an order to the former president and

radiation safety officer of NDT Services, Inc. (NDTS) of Caguas, Puerto Rico, prohibiting involvement

in NRC-licensed activities for five years. The NRC has also issued orders to two former NDTS senior

radiographers prohibiting their involvement in NRC-licensed activities for one year. The orders were

based on deliberate violations of NRC requirements by the three employees.

The NRC is also citing the company for these former company employees failing to comply

with NRC regulations numerous times between 1994 and 1999. Many of those failures involved

deliberate actions and the NRC is issuing the highest severity level enforcement action the agency can

issue against NDTS. The company had been licensed to use radioactive sources in mobile radiography

equipment at sites in Puerto Rico, but NDTS is now out of business, and has transferred its licensed

material. With this NRC enforcement action, the company’s NRC license is also terminated.

While the company was still operating, the NRC found that NDTS radiation safety officers

failed to adequately oversee licensed activities, which resulted in NDTS employees failing to meet

NRC regulations by creating excessive radiation levels in unrestricted areas, failing to do proper

surveys and post radiation areas, failing to control access to areas, permitting unqualified employees to

conduct radiographic operations without direct supervision, failing to report an incident and providing

inaccurate information to the NRC regarding that incident.

###
#### § 162.5 Search of arriving vehicles and aircraft.

A customs officer may stop any vehicle and board any aircraft arriving in the United States from a foreign country for the purpose of examining the manifest and other documents and papers and examining, inspecting, and searching the vehicle or aircraft.

[T.D. 72-211, 37 FR 16488, Aug. 15, 1972, as amended by T.D. 90-34, 55 FR 17597, Apr. 26, 1990]
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. 98-29 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Wednesday, February 18, 1998)

NRC WITHDRAWS RULE ON INADVERTENT CRITICALITY

REQUIREMENTS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has withdrawn a direct final rule that would

have given operators of nuclear power plants greater flexibility in demonstrating their ability to

ensure against an inadvertent criticality involving fresh fuel. NRC has taken this action after

analyzing public comments received since the rule was announced in December.

The new rule would have provided operators of nuclear plants three ways of meeting

NRC requirements designed to safeguard against a criticality incident - that is, an uncontrolled

chain reaction - with new fuel being handled or stored outside the reactor. Operators could

have installed criticality monitors in areas where they are required; demonstrated through

analyses and procedural controls that adequate measures had been taken to prevent

inadvertent criticality incidents; or elected to comply with certain requirements that would have

been incorporated into NRC regulations.

The NRC requires that licensees authorized to possess certain quantities of special

nuclear material maintain in each area where these materials are handled, used, or stored, a

monitoring system capable of detecting an inadvertent criticality. The purpose of the

requirement is to ensure that if such a criticality occurs, personnel would be alerted and would

take appropriate action.

Most nuclear power plants were granted exemptions to this requirement during their

construction under the terms of the licenses issued to them that permitted the receipt of the

initial fuel load for their reactors. Sometimes, these exemptions were not explicitly renewed

when operating licenses were issued.

NRC anticipated that the requirements for criticality monitors, designed for fuel

fabrication facilities where greater opportunity exists for an inadvertent criticality, might be

unnecessary at power reactors because fresh fuel assemblies cannot go critical unless placed

in a special configuration in the presence of a moderator, or material that slow down neutrons,

thus increasing the likelihood of fission. But the NRC staff decided to withdraw the rulel after

receiving significant adverse comments from several utilities and the Nuclear Energy Institute,

the nuclear industry’s Washington-based policy institute. Many licensees complained that the

requirements of the rule were not clear.
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. 01-093 July 27, 2001

NRC ANNOUNCES OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING 

FOR LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATIONS FOR NORTH ANNA, SURRY 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has announced the opportunity to request a hearing on an

application for renewal of the operating licenses for the North Anna Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, and

the Surry Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. Virginia Electric & Power Company (VEPCO), operator of

the four units, submitted the application on May 29. 

The deadline for hearing requests is August 27, 30 days after publication of a Federal Register

notice on this subject. By that time, petitions must be filed by anyone whose interest might be affected

by the license renewals and who wishes to participate as a party to the proceeding. 

The North Anna nuclear facility is located 40 miles northwest of Richmond, Virginia, in Louisa

County. The current operating licenses expire on April 1, 2018, for Unit 1 and August 21, 2020,

for Unit 2. 

The Surry nuclear facility is located 17 miles northwest of Newport News, Virginia, in Surry

County. The operating license for Unit 1 expires on May 25, 2012, and the license for Unit 2 on

January 29, 2013. 

VEPCO submitted applications for 20-year extensions to the operating licenses for all four

plants on May 29. A notice of receipt was published by NRC in the Federal Register on June 28. The

staff has determined that VEPCO has submitted sufficient information for the NRC to formally

ìdocket,î or file, the applications.

Petitions for a hearing must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications

Staff. They may also be delivered to the NRC Public Document Room in Rockville, Maryland. A copy

of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and to David A. Christian, Sr. Vice President and Chief

Nuclear Officer, Virginia electric Power Company, Innsbrook Technical Center, 5000 Dominion

Boulevard, Glen Allen, VA 23060-6711. Additional information about the opportunity for hearing may

be found in the Federal Register notice.
Copies of the application are available on the NRC web site at

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/REACTOR/LR/index.html , and are also available through the NRC's

Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). Help in using ADAMS is

available by contacting the NRC Public Document Room staff at 301/415-4737 or

1/800/397-4209, or by sending a message to pdr@nrc.gov via e-mail. The application is available for

public inspection at the NRCís Public Document Room.

In addition, a copy of the license renewal application for the North Anna plant is available at the

Alderman Library of the University of Virginia, and a copy of the Surry application at the Swem

Library of the College of William and Mary.

###
• Contact Us •

CCS Project Database

Overview

Map of Projects

Power Plant CCS Projects

Non­Power Plant CCS Projects

Commercial EOR Projects

Pilot Projects

Project: Puertollano

Announced Projects

Cancelled and Inactive Projects

Recent Updates and News

Regional CCS Financing

Summaries

Other Online Databases

Puertollano Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project

Company/Alliance: ELCOGAS, S.A

Location: Puertollano, Spain

Feedstock: Coal and pet­coke

Size: 14 MW of 335 MW plant; 100 tons/day

Capture Technology: Pre­combustion IGCC (90% capture)

CO2 Fate: Recycled back to the IGCC process

Timing: Construction permit (December 2008); Commissioning (May­October 2010); First CO2 captured (September 2010

End of characterisation tests (June 2011)

Motivation/Economics:

The objectives of the project are to: 1) Demonstrate at industrial scale the technical viability of precombustion carbon

capture technology in a IGCC power plant, and 2) Obtain economic data about CO2 capture cost representative enough to

scale it to full size.

The budget of the project (engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning) has reached €13.4 Million. The

Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation together with the Regional Government (JCCM) subsidized the project with €7

Million.

Comments:

ELCOGAS offers both the Puertollano IGCC and the pilot plant for CO2 capture and H2 production as technical platforms t

develop of process, equipment, components, or even pre­engineering of new plants with CCS and zero emissions.

The 14 MW pilot plant for CO2 capture and H2 coproduction is integrated in the Puertollano IGCC Plant, and treats 3,600

Nm3/h of syngas, equivalent to 2% of the total syngas generated in the IGCC power plant. The feeding gas can be either

sweet (design conditions) or sour. The process is composed by three units: CO to CO2 conversion unit (using water gas

shift technology), CO2 and H2 separation unit (using chemical absorption technology), and H2 purification unit (PSA). The

pilot captures 100 tons per day of CO2 using the pre­combustion technology, being the capture rate higher than 90%.

pilot also produces 2 tons per day of 99.99% purity hydrogen.

Project Link: ELCOGAS project website

Other Sources and Press Releases:

ELCOGAS project presentations

Spain pioneers pre­combustion carbon capture (February 2008)

Date Modified January 5, 2015

Please send any comments, additions or corrections to csi@mit.edu

|| || ||

Home Bibliography Research C.S.I. CCS Project

Database

Tools About Us
#### § 171.0 Scope.

This part contains provisions relating to petitions for relief from fines, forfeitures, and certain penalties incurred, and petitions for the restoration of proceeds from sale of seized and forfeited property. This part does not relate to petitions on claims for liquidated damages or penalties which are guaranteed by the conditions of the International Carrier Bond (*see* § 113.64 of this Chapter).

[T.D. 00-57, 65 FR 53576, Sept. 5, 2000]