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-02-051 August 14, 2002 

CONTACT: Diane Screnci, (610) 337-5330 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov

Neil A. Sheehan, (610) 337-5331

NRC, ARMY COMMAND TO DISCUSS USE AND TRACKING OF LICENSED DEVICES

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of the Department of the

Army’s U.S. Soldier and Biological Chemical Command (SBCCOM) on Tuesday, August 20, to

discuss its controls over NRC-licensed chemical-gas detectors used in Army operations. The devices

contain radioactive material.

 NRC staff plan to ask SBCCOM representatives how the command uses its NRC-licensed

devices; about its method of tracking these devices and preventing their loss; and the results of a

SBCCOM study of the accountability of these devices.

 The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m.

in the Division of Nuclear Materials Safety’s conference room at the NRC Region I office in King of

Prussia, Pa. Interested members of the public will have an opportunity to discuss the topic with NRC

staffers before the conclusion of the meeting.

 SBCCOM is headquartered at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. Among its missions is the

development and acquisition of nuclear defense technologies, systems and services. 

 ###
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

801 Warrenville Road

Lisle IL 60532

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

No. III-01-012 April 6, 2001

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC PROHIBITS A FORMER MICHIGAN NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNICIAN

FROM PARTICIPATING IN NRC-LICENSED ACTIVITIES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued an order prohibiting a former Michigan

nuclear medicine technician from involvement in NRC-licensed activities for five years due to her

violation of various NRC regulations.

In the order, the NRC said Paige Rowland conspired to deliberately violate NRC requirements

by having an unqualified individual perform a nuclear lung scan procedure on a patient at Central

Michigan Community Hospital on August 2, 1996, without the supervision of an authorized user.

The NRC investigation also found that Rowland provided false information to the NRC

regarding the incident. At the time, Rowland was a nuclear medicine technician at Central Michigan

Community Hospital in Mt. Pleasant.

Rowland was convicted on November 30, 2000, in the U.S. District Court, Western District of

Michigan, of making false statements to the NRC. Previously, Rowland had told the NRC that she had

administered technetium-99m to a patient on the day in question. She later admitted that she had

telephoned an unqualified technician, directed the individual to perform the medical procedure, and

talked the technician through the procedure by phone. The order states that while all activities were

properly performed, the second technician was not qualified and was not supervised by an authorized

user in accordance with NRC requirements. Technetium-99m, a radiopharmaceutical, is used in

medicine as an imaging agent and a diagnostic tool.

The NRC’s order specifies that Rowland is prohibited from involvement in all NRC-licensed

activities for five years from November 30, 2000, the date of her conviction. Additionally, the order

states that for another five years - or from November 2005 to November 2110 - Rowland is required to

notify the NRC the first time she accepts employment involving NRC-licensed activities or becomes

involved in any NRC-licensed activity.

#####
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DALE ANTHONY BENNETT, AKA Dale

Anthony Stephens,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 71346

Agency No. A208

- 837

- 037

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 2, 2020 * *

Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Dale Anthony Bennett, a native and citizen of Belize , petitions pro se for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. We dismiss the petition for

review.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# F ILED

JUN 5 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 71346

We lack jurisdiction to consider whether Bennett ’s waiver of the right to

appeal was considered and intelligent where he failed to raise the issue before the

BIA

. See Barron v. Ashcroft , 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (generally

requiring exhaustion of claims before the BIA) ; c f. Biwot v. Gonzales , 403 F.3d

1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 2005) (where a waiver of appeal was not considered and

intelligent , the waiver does not strip the court of jurisdiction).

To the extent Bennett challenges t he BIA’s May 16, 201 8, order dismissing

his appeal from the IJ’s order denying his motion to reopen

, that challenge is not

properly before us

. See Dela Cruz v. Mukasey , 532 F.3d 946, 948 (9th Cir. 2008)

(“Congress envisioned two separate petitions filed to review two separate final

orders .” (internal quotation marks, emphasis, and citation omitted ) ) ; Lin v.

Gonzales , 473 F.3d 979, 981 n.1 (9th Cir. 2007) (noting that denials of subsequent

motions to reop en require separate petitions for review ).

The Clerk will mail an additional copy of this memorandum disposition to

Bennett at:

17 Nurse Seay Street

Belize City

Belize, C.A.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93018, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 134.3 Delivery withheld until marked and redelivery ordered. ( a ) Any imported article (or its container) held in CBP custody for inspection, examination, or appraisement will not be delivered until marked with its country of origin, or until estimated duties payable under 19 U.S.C. 1304(f), or adequate security for those duties (see § 134.53(a)(2)), are deposited.
( b ) An authorized CBP official may demand redelivery to CBP custody of any article (or its container) previously released which is found to be not marked legally with its country of origin for the purpose of requiring the article (or its container) to be properly marked. A demand for redelivery will be made, as required under § 141.113(a) of this chapter, not later than 30 days after— ( 1 ) The date of entry, in the case of merchandise examined in public stores and places of arrival, such as docks, wharfs, or piers; or
( 2 ) The date of examination, in the case of merchandise examined at the importer's premises or such other appropriate places as determined by the port director.
( c ) Nothing in this part shall be construed as excepting any article (or its container) from the particular requirements of marking provided for in any other provision of law.
[T.D. 80-88, 45 FR 18921, Mar. 24, 1980, as amended by T.D. 90-51, 55 FR 28190, July 10, 1990; CBP Dec. 08-25, 73 FR 40726, July 16, 2008]
Exhibit 32.1



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 ARAMARK Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 1, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Neubauer, Chief Executive 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, based on my knowledge:



| | (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/    JOSEPH NEUBAUERJoseph Neubauer
#### § 18.27 Port marks.

Port marks may be added by authority of the port director and under the supervision of a CBP officer. The original marks and the port marks must appear in all documentation or the electronic equivalent must appear in electronic records pertaining to the exportation.
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I

475 Allendale Road

King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-01-008 February 23, 2001

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

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

NRC SCHEDULES TWO MEETINGS ON IP2 ON MARCH 2

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold two meetings on Friday evening , March 2, to

discuss the findings of the recently completed team inspection at Indian Point 2 in Buchanan, New

York. Both meetings will be held at the Cortlandt Town Hall in Cortlandt Manor, N.Y.

The first meeting, with Consolidated Edison Company of New York, will begin at 6 o’clock.

The NRC and the company will discuss the results of the recently completed inspection. This “exit”

meeting is open to the public for observation,

Then, at 7:30 p.m. at the Town Hall, the NRC will begin a meeting with the public. This

meeting will include a short presentation on the inspection findings followed by an opportunity for the

public and elected officials to ask questions of the NRC staff.

The 13-member team spent two weeks in the regional office preparing for the inspection and

three weeks at Indian Point 2 collecting information.

The intent of this inspection is to provide the agency with supplemental information regarding

licensee performance to determine the breadth and depth of safety, organizational and programmatic

issues. The results of this inspection will aid the NRC in determining future actions.

###
Barrow

Point Lay

Wainwright

Point Hope

Burger #1

Popcorn #1

Diamond #1

Klondike #1

Crackerjack #1

-300

-160

-3500

-60

-120

-130

-140 -150

-50

-10

-100

-40

0

-80

-2000

-90

-1200

-70

-1400

-180

-110

-600

-20

-800

-3000

-30

-1300

-190

-170

-1100 -1000

-2500

-900 -700

-200

-400 -1500

-500

-40

-50

-300

-40

-140

-30

-50

-30

-50

-200

-10

-70

-40

-30

-80

-40

-40

-40

-150

-70

-50

-500

-40

-60

-600

-20

-800

-20

-3500

-40

-100

-20

-50

-30

-40

-30

-80

-1400

-40

-50

-30

-50

-20

-50

-50

-60

-70

-1300

-50

-800

-40

-50

0

-1200

-40

-50

-1500

-50

-30

-50

-40

-120

-3000

0

-100

-50

-20

-800

-30

-30

-1000

-40

-15

-110

0

-30

-60

-50

-40

-200

-80

-180

-120

0

-130

-400

-50

-50

-60

-80

-190

-30

-50

-90

-2500

-20

-40

-1000

-50

-180

-1100

-40

-60

-50 -50

-50

-40

-160

-40

-40

-170

-30

-110

-900

-30

-50

-50

-190

-40

-40

-20

-50

-30

-60

-30

-50

-40

-700

-50

-50

-40

-40

-30

-50

-40

-1300

-50

-80

-1200

-160

-30

-50

-50

-30

-40

-40

-40

-100

-140

-40

-50

-50

0

-10

-80

-90

-50

-10

-190

-1100

-130

-700

-40

-800

0

-110

-50

-90

-2000

-700

-70

-100

-500

-600

-60

-1200

-50

NR03-07 NR03-08

NR03-05 NR03-06

NR04-03

NR03-03 NR03-04

NR04-04

NR04-02

NR04-01

NR03-01 NR03-02

NS04-08

NS04-07

NS03-07 NS03-08

NS04-06

NS04-05 NS03-05 NS03-06

NS02-06

NS02-08

NR02-02

NR02-04

NR02-06

NR02-08

NS05-05

NS05-07

NS02-04 NS03-03 NS03-04 NS04-03

NS04-04

NR05-01

NS05-03

NQ02-02

NR05-03

170°0'0"W

169°0'0"W

169°0'0"W

168°0'0"W

168°0'0"W

167°0'0"W

167°0'0"W

166°0'0"W

166°0'0"W

165°0'0"W

165°0'0"W 164°0'0"W

164°0'0"W

163°0'0"W

163°0'0"W

162°0'0"W

162°0'0"W

161°0'0"W

161°0'0"W

160°0'0"W

160°0'0"W

159°0'0"W

159°0'0"W

158°0'0"W

158°0'0"W

157°0'0"W 156°0'0"W 155°0'0"W

68°0'0"N

68°0'0"N

69°0'0"N

69°0'0"N

70°0'0"N

70°0'0"N

71°0'0"N

71°0'0"N

72°0'0"N

72°0'0"N

73°0'0"N

73°0'0"N

74°0'0"N

74°0'0"N 157°0'0"W 156°0'0"W 155°0'0"W

Completed

Geohazard

Site Specific

Surveys for the

Chukchi Sea

OCS Waters 0 20 40 80 120 160 Kilometers

Official Protraction Diagram

Proposed Sale 193 Area

April 2007

Azurite

Tourmaline

Brandt D

Ruby

Bowhead 9

Bowhead 52/53

Popcorn

Crackerjack 1

Crackerjack 2

Diamond (Estimated

Site Survey Coverage)

Burger

Klondike

Diamond

Klondike

Popcorn

Ruby

Tourmaline

Bowhead 52/53

Brandt D

Burger

Azurite

Crackerjack 1

Crackerjack 2

Bowhead 9

Chukchi Sea

Bathymetry in Meters

Chukchi Sea OCS Exploration Wells
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-130 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 1
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

801 Warrenville Road

Lisle IL 60532

No. III-00-26 June 1, 2000

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC STAFF TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING JUNE 8 IN CLINTON, ILLINOIS

TO DESCRIBE LATEST ASSESSMENT OF CLINTON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a public meeting June 8 in Clinton,

Illinois, to discuss the Clinton Nuclear Power Plant’s latest performance review results.

The meeting will be held at 10 a.m. CDT at the plant’s Energy and Environmental Center

which is located six miles east of Clinton, Illinois, on Route 54. The Clinton plant is operated by

AmerGen Energy Company.

The Plant Performance Reviews (PPRs) are an interim measure the NRC has used to assess

nuclear power plant safety while a new reactor oversight process was being developed. The primary

purpose of the PPRs is to evaluate safety performance information and identify any changes in plant

performance so the NRC can allocate inspection resources appropriately. The text of each PPR letter,

including the one on Clinton, is available from the NRC Office of Public Affairs and has been posted

at: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr on the NRC web site.

Current performance information for the plant is available on the NRC web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/index.html

A plain language summary of the new reactor inspection and assessment process is available

from the NRC Office of Public Affairs or on the web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/primer.htm

#####
### §6654. Payment of expenses of the Chaplain of the Senate from the contingent fund of the Senate

#### (a) In general

For each fiscal year there is authorized to be expended from the contingent fund of the Senate an amount, not in excess of $50,000 for the Chaplain of the Senate. Payments under this section shall be made only for expenses actually incurred by the Chaplain of the Senate in carrying out his functions, and shall be made upon certification and documentation of the expenses involved, by the Chaplain claiming payment under this section and upon vouchers approved by the Chaplain and by the Committee on Rules and Administration. Funds authorized for expenditure under this section may be used to purchase food or food related items.

#### (b) Repeal of Revolving Fund

#### (1) Omitted

#### (2) Remaining funds

Any funds in the Chaplain Expense Revolving Fund on the date of the repeal under this section shall be remitted to the general fund of the United States Treasury.

#### (c) Effective date

This section shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2004, and each fiscal year thereafter.

(Pub. L. 108–199, div. H, §155, Jan. 23, 2004, 118 Stat. 450.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 61d–4 of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Section is comprised of section 155 of div. H of Pub. L. 108–199. Subsec. (b)(1) of section 155 of Pub. L. 108–199 repealed section 61d–3 of this title.

Section is from the Miscellaneous Appropriations and Offsets Act, 2004, which is division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I

 475 Allendale Road

 King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-01-052 August 22, 2001

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

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

NRC ISSUES NOTICES OF VIOLATIONS FOLLOWING INVESTIGATION

OF IMPROPER EFFORTS TO DISPOSE OF WASTE FROM NEW JERSEY CENTER

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued several Notices of Violation in connection with

improper efforts to dispose of radioactive waste removed from a New Jersey mental health facility in

1997. Among those receiving notices are the center, the state official who authorized the incorrect

classification of the material, a Pennsylvania firm hired to dispose of the waste and the president of

that company.

 In October 1997, the NRC was notified that a tritium exit sign had been broken by a patient at

the Arthur Brisbane Child Treatment Center, which is located in Farmingdale, N.J., and operated by

the New Jersey Department of Human Services. The sign held tritium, a radioactive isotope used to

illuminate the device but one that releases a relatively weak form of radiation and is not hazardous as

long as it is contained. When the sign was ruptured, the release of the tritium created extensive

contamination that required almost 60 barrels to clean up and remove.

 Following an NRC inspection at the center, an inquiry was launched by the NRC Office of

Investigations to look at whether the material had been disposed of in a proper manner. The Office of

Investigations subsequently determined that the chief of the Bureau of Environmental Compliance for

the New Jersey Department of Human Services had deliberately and inappropriately classified the

waste as medical waste.

 The Office of Investigations also learned that the firm hired by New Jersey to dispose of the

waste, SMI East Coast Medical Waste Inc. of Morrisville, Pa., was not authorized to handle such

material. Despite this fact, SMI removed from Arthur Brisbane a barrel holding the broken exit sign,

which contained about 12 curies of tritium, and stored it at its facility awaiting disposal. SMI also

removed several other barrels containing contaminated objects and shipped them to a medical waste

incinerator in South Carolina not authorized to accept radioactive material. (The waste was retrieved

before being burned there.)

 In issuing a Notice of Violation to the Arthur Brisbane facility, the NRC notes that a fine is not

being imposed because South Carolina issued a $15,000 civil penalty against the New Jersey
Department of Human Services in January 1998 for violations related to the event. Further, all exit

signs containing radioactive material have since been removed from the facility and therefore the

center is no longer an NRC licensee.

 SMI was not fined by the NRC because there were no radioactive doses to individuals or

potential doses that would create a serious health risk, and the material was eventually disposed of in a

proper manner.

 # ##
### §65f. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 65f was editorially reclassified as section 6567 of this title.
### §7324. Special disposition of perishable goods

When any property which is seized under the provisions of section 7301 or section 7302 is liable to perish or become greatly reduced in price or value by keeping, or when it cannot be kept without great expense—

#### (1) Application for examination

The owner thereof, or the United States marshal of the district, may apply to the Secretary to examine it; and

#### (2) Appraisal

If, in the opinion of the Secretary, it shall be necessary that such property should be sold to prevent such waste or expense, the Secretary shall appraise the same; and thereupon

#### (3) Return to owner under bond

The owner shall have such property returned to him upon giving bond in an amount equal to such appraised value to abide the final order, decree, or judgment of the court having cognizance of the case, and to pay the amount of said appraised value to the Secretary, the United States marshal, or otherwise, as may be ordered and directed by the court, which bond shall be filed by the Secretary with the United States attorney for the district in which the proceedings in rem authorized in section 7323 may be commenced.

#### (4) Sale in absence of bond

#### (A) Order to sell

If such owner shall neglect or refuse to give such bond, the Secretary shall issue to any Treasury officer or employee or to the United States marshal an order to sell the same.

#### (B) Manner of sale

Such Treasury officer or employee or the marshal shall as soon as practicable make public sale of such property in accordance with such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary.

#### (C) Disposition of proceeds

The proceeds of the sale, after deducting the reasonable costs of the seizure and sale, shall be paid to the court to abide its final order, decree, or judgment.

#### (5) Form of bond and sureties

**For provisions relating to form and sureties on bonds, see section 7101.**

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 870; Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §204(9), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1429; Pub. L. 85–866, title I, §78, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1662; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1976—Pars. (1) to (4). Pub. L. 94–455 struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary" wherever appearing.

1958—Par. (3). Pub. L. 85–866 struck out "district" before "attorney".

Pub. L. 85–859 included property seized under section 7302 of this title.

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

#### Effective Date of 1958 Amendments

Amendment by Pub. L. 85–866 effective Aug. 17, 1954, see section 1(c)(2) of Pub. L. 85–866, set out as a note under section 165 of this title.

Amendment by Pub. L. 85–859 effective Sept. 3, 1958, see section 210(a)(1) of Pub. L. 85–859, set out as an Effective Date note under section 5001 of this title.
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I

475 Allendale Road

King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-01-012 March 5, 2001

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

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

NOTE TO EDITORS:

NRC POSTPONES MEETING WITH WASHINGTON, D.C. HOSPITAL

A meeting today between officials of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials and

representatives of George Washington University Hospital, in Washington, D.C., has been postponed

due to inclement weather. The meeting will be rescheduled and announced at a later date.

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss an apparent violation of agency requirements

involving the hospital’s radiation oncology program.

#