alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. IV-10-001 

Contact: Victor Dricks 

Phone: (817) 860-8128 

 

 January 11, 2010 

 E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS RESULTS OF SPECIAL 

INSPECTION AT THE DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR PLANT 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public meeting on Jan. 26 to 

discuss the results of a special inspection conducted at the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, 

located near San Luis Obispo, Calif. 

 

The NRC staff will hold the exit meeting with Pacific Gas & Electric Co. at 7 p.m. The 

public is invited to observe the meeting and will have an opportunity to communicate with the 

NRC staff after the business portion and before the meeting is adjourned. 

 

The meeting will be held at the Embassy Suites Hotel, 333 Madonna Road, in San Luis 

Obispo. 

On Oct. 23, 2009, during a maintenance procedure at Diablo Canyon, workers discovered 

that a set of switches intended to allow control room operators to remotely open cooling water 

valves were misaligned. The valves are part of a system that would collect water from the floor 

of the containment building for recirculation to cool the reactor during severe accidents. If the 

valves could not be opened remotely, operators would be required to manually open them or use 

a different system to provide cooling water for the reactor. 

A four-person team of NRC specialists conducted an inspection from Nov. 30 through Dec. 3, 

2009 to determine how two switches were misaligned, potentially impairing the operators’ ability 

to respond in the event of a severe accident.

 

### 

 NRC news releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400 

 Arlington, TX 76011-4125 

Telephone: (817) 860-8128
---

Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350 Certifications

CERTIFICATE OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I,Jerry Dibble, a Director and President, who also performs the function of Principal Chief Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of Capital Mineral Investors, Inc. (the Corporation), certify that the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB (the "Report") for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof:

|1. | fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and                                 
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.

|            |                                                                                              | 
|----------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|(Signature) | /s/ Jerry Dibble                                                                           | 
|            | Jerry Dibble                                                                                 | 
|(Title)     | President and Director (also performs the function of Principal Executive Officer, Principal | 
|            | Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)                                          | 
|            |                                                                                             
|(Date)      | March 25, 2009                                                                               | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Corporation and will be retained by the Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 223 (Friday, November 19, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 67775]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25481]



[[Page 67775]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 34513]


Union Pacific Railroad Company--Trackage Rights Exemption--The 
Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company

    The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) has 
agreed to grant overhead trackage rights to Union Pacific Railroad 
Company (UP), between BNSF milepost 141.73 near Rockview, MO, and BNSF 
milepost 186.14 near Lilbourn, MO, a distance of approximately 44.41 
miles.
    BNSF indicates that the transaction was to be consummated on 
November 8, 2004.
    The purpose of the trackage rights is to allow UP to use the BNSF 
Rockview-Lilbourn line for traffic originating from or destined to 
industries on UP's line between Lilbourn and New Madrid, instead of its 
existing route between Malden Junction, MO, and Lilbourn, which will 
enable UP to avoid rebuilding the latter route.
    As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the 
trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in Norfolk 
and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as 
modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 360 I.C.C. 
653 (1980).
    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If the notice 
contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab 
initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may 
be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not 
automatically stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 34513, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, a 
copy of each pleading must be served on Robert T. Opal, 1400 Douglas 
Street, Stop 1580, Omaha, NE 68179.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov.

    Decided: November 9, 2004.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-25481 Filed 11-18-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
NRC FINDS VALVE FAILURE AT BROWNS FERRY

TO BE OF HIGH SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE

The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has concluded that the failure of a low 

pressure coolant injection valve last fall at the Browns Ferry nuclear plant was of “high safety 

significance” and will result in increased NRC inspection and oversight of the facility.

The three-unit plant, operated by The Tennessee Valley Authority, is located near 

Athens, Ala., about 32 miles west of Huntsville.

NRC inspection findings are evaluated using a safety significance scale with four levels, 

ranging from “green” for minor significance, through “white” and “yellow” to “red” for high 

significance.

On Oct. 23, 2010, the valve failed to open when operators attempted to use the residual 

heat removal shutdown cooling loop during Unit 1 refueling. TVA later determined that the last 

time the valve had definitely worked as required was on March 12, 2009 when the loop was 

placed in service.

The public was never endangered because no actual event occurred. However, the system 

is counted on for core cooling during certain accident scenarios and the valve failure left it 

inoperable, which potentially could have led to core damage had an accident involving a series of 

unlikely events occurred.

A regulatory conference was held on April 4 to discuss the issue. TVA stated that the 

failed valve was the result of defective manufacturing but still would have opened and supplied 

the necessary cooling water. The NRC review disagreed and concluded the violation was “red”

or of “high safety significance.”

“The valve was repaired prior to returning the unit to service and Browns Ferry continued 

to operate safely,” said Victor McCree, NRC Region II administrator. “However, significant 

problems involving key safety systems warrant more extensive NRC inspection and oversight.” 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II

245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 1200

Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No: II-11-034

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 997-4417

 Joey Ledford (404) 997-4416

 May 10, 2011

E-mail: OPA2.Resource@nrc.gov
The finding results in increased NRC oversight at Browns Ferry including a supplemental 

inspection to evaluate safety, organizational and programmatic issues at the plant. The 

inspection, which has not yet been scheduled, will include extensive reviews of programs and 

processes not inspected as part of the NRC’s baseline inspection program. The facility’s safety 

culture will also be assessed.

The final significance letter issued to TVA with more information on the issue will be

available through the Region II office or via the NRC webpage at www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. The number to access the letter is ML111290482.

###

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC’s website.
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

 34

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 1000

18 12 06 00

06/19

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 19 Jun 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.86 N 77.06 W Meters AGL
§ 17.5 Personnel exchanges to a Federal laboratory. For exchanges in which a Federal laboratory provides funds for the non-federal personnel— ( a ) Outside personnel with expertise in scientific commercialization may be brought in to a Federal laboratory through the Presidential Innovation Fellows program or related programs (see 5 CFR 213.3102(r)) for Entrepreneur-In-Residence programs or similar, related programs run by the General Services Administration (GSA) or other Federal Agencies.
( b ) A laboratory may engage with the GSA or other relevant Agency to transfer funding for exchanged personnel, and may work with such agency to select and place Entrepreneurs-In-Residence at the laboratory for the purposes of evaluating the laboratory's technologies, and providing technical consulting to facilitate readying a technology for commercialization by an outside entity.
#### § 1500.6 Concrete masonry unit.

*Concrete masonry unit* means a concrete masonry product that is a manmade masonry unit having an actual width of 3 inches or greater and manufactured from dry-cast concrete using a block machine. Such term includes concrete block and related concrete units used in masonry applications.
FEB 0 4 2003

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

Ohio Operation Lifesaver

This is the decision of the Railroad Retirement Board regarding the

continued status of the Ohio Operation Lifesaver, as an employer under

the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231, et seq.) (RRA) and the

Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. § 351, et seep)

(RUIA).

Ohio Operation Lifesaver was held to be a covered employer effective

June 24, 1986, in Legal Opinion L-87-21 (B.A. Number 7325). Its

purpose is to serve, educate, and inform the general public about

highway/railroad grade crossing laws and to promote highway/railroad

grade crossing safety throughout the state of Ohio in an effort to reduce

crashes, injuries and fatalities. It has one employee. Formerly, onehalf of its board of directors consisted of representatives of the four

railroads that funded Ohio Operation Lifesaver.1 Consequently, Ohio

Operation Lifesaver was held to be under common control with two or

more railroad employers. Effective December 10, 2002, the bylaws of 

Ohio Operation Lifesaver changed so that the board of directors is now

composed of thirteen voting members, of which seven are from nonrailroad organizations.

Section 202.11 of the Board’s regulations provides that:

The employer status of any company or person shall

terminate whenever such company or person loses any of the

characteristics essential to the existence of an employer status.

A majority of the Board finds that through the change in its bylaws and

composition of its board of directors, Ohio Operation Lifesaver is no

longer under common control with two or more railroad employers.

1 L-87-21 noted that the four funding railroads were CSX Transportation, Conrail, Norfolk 

Southern Corporation, and Grand Trunk Western Railroad.

BA#7325
Ohio Operation Lifesaver

Accordingly, a majority of the Board holds that Ohio Operation

Lifesaver ceased to be an employer under the Railroad Retirement and

Railroad Unemployment Insurance Acts effective with the close of

business on December 10, 2002.

Cherryl/T. Thomas

V. M. Speakman, Jr. (Dissenting)

J^iZr

(/Jerome F. Kever
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-06-0106 - Consolidation of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Decommissioning Program in the Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.

Accession Number: ML061450229

Date Released: Thursday, May 25, 2006

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML061450231 - SECY-06-0106 - Consolidation of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Decommissioning Program in the Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. (6 page(s), 5/9/2006)
    - ML060940144 - SECY-06-0106 - Enclosure 1 - Summary of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Decommissioning Program. (2 page(s), 5/9/2006)
    - ML060940193 - SECY-06-0106 - Enclosure 2 - Decommissioning Reactors to Transfer to the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards. (1 page(s), 5/9/2006)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
### §15504. Program development criteria

In considering programs and projects to be provided assistance by a Commission under this subtitle, and in establishing a priority ranking of the requests for assistance provided to the Commission, the Commission shall follow procedures that ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, consideration of—

(1) the relationship of the project or class of projects to overall regional development;

(2) the per capita income and poverty and unemployment and outmigration rates in an area;

(3) the financial resources available to the applicants for assistance seeking to carry out the project, with emphasis on ensuring that projects are adequately financed to maximize the probability of successful economic development;

(4) the importance of the project or class of projects in relation to the other projects or classes of projects that may be in competition for the same funds;

(5) the prospects that the project for which assistance is sought will improve, on a continuing rather than a temporary basis, the opportunities for employment, the average level of income, or the economic development of the area to be served by the project; and

(6) the extent to which the project design provides for detailed outcome measurements by which grant expenditures and the results of the expenditures may be evaluated.

(Added Pub. L. 110–234, title XIV, §14217(a)(2), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1476, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title XIV, §14217(a)(2), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2238.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 enacted identical sections. Pub. L. 110–234 was repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective on the first day of the first fiscal year beginning after June 18, 2008, see section 14217(d) of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as a note under section 15101 of this title.
#### § 894.603 Is there a temporary extension of coverage and conversion right when my coverage stops or when a covered family member loses eligibility?

No. There is no temporary extension of coverage, or Temporary Continuation of Coverage (TCC), or right to convert to an individual dental or vision policy when your FEDVIP coverage stops or when a *family member* or *TEI family member* loses eligibility under FEDVIP.

[83 FR 58180, Nov. 19, 2018]
### §8128. Small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans: contracting priority

(a) Contracting Priority.—In procuring goods and services pursuant to a contracting preference under this title or any other provision of law, the Secretary shall give priority to a small business concern owned and controlled by veterans, if such business concern also meets the requirements of that contracting preference.

(b) Definition.—For purposes of this section, the term "small business concern owned and controlled by veterans" means a small business concern that is included in the small business database maintained by the Administrator of the Small Business Administration under section 36 of the Small Business Act.

(Added Pub. L. 109–461, title V, §503(a)(1), Dec. 22, 2006, 120 Stat. 3435; amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title VIII, §862(b)(3)(B), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3779.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 36 of the Small Business Act, referred to in subsec. (b), is classified to section 657f of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.

#### Amendments

2021—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 116–283 substituted "maintained by the Administrator of the Small Business Administration under section 36 of the Small Business Act" for "maintained by the Secretary under section 8127(f) of this title".

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

#### Effective Date of 2021 Amendment

Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title VIII, §862(b)(3), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3778, provided that the amendment made by section 862(b)(3)(B) shall take effect on the transfer date, which is 2 years after Jan. 1, 2021, see section 862(a) of Pub. L. 116–283, set out as a note under section 657f of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 109–461, title V, §503(b), Dec. 22, 2006, 120 Stat. 3436, provided that: "This section [enacting this section] and the amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 22, 2006]."
LICENSING BOARD TO HEAR ORAL ARGUMENT OCT. 21 IN BAY CITY, TEXAS, 

ON SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT NEW NUCLEAR REACTOR APPLICATION 

An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) panel will hear oral argument in the South 

Texas Project Combined License (COL) proceeding on Oct. 21 in Bay City, Texas. The ASLB is 

the independent body within the NRC that presides over proceedings involving the licensing of 

civilian nuclear facilities, such as nuclear power plants. 

Oral argument will begin at 9 a.m. CDT on Thursday, Oct. 21, in the Main Hall of the Bay 

City Civic Center, 201 7th St. in Bay City. The session is open for public observation, but 

participation will be limited to the parties admitted to the proceeding (several public interest groups, 

the applicant – STP Nuclear Operating Company – and NRC staff). Early arrival is suggested to 

allow for security screening for all members of the public interested in attending. NRC policy 

prohibits signs, banners, posters or displays in the hearing room. 

STP Nuclear Operating Company submitted a COL application Sept. 20, 2007, seeking 

permission to construct and operate two new nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project site near 

Bay City. The ASLB granted intervenor status and an opportunity for a hearing to the Sustainable 

Energy and Economic Development Coalition, the South Texas Association for Responsible 

Energy, and Public Citizen. The groups have submitted objections, or contentions, challenging the 

COL application. The ASLB panel will hear oral argument on several matters: two motions to 

dismiss the groups’ admitted contention; the groups’ request to file additional contentions based on 

the NRC staff’s draft Environmental Impact Statement; and the groups’ request for access to a draft 

NRC document regarding new reactor reviews. 

Documents related to the South Texas Project COL application are available on the NRC 

website at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/col/south-texas-project.html. Documents 

pertaining to the ASLB proceeding are available in the agency’s electronic hearing docket at: 

http://ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD. 

More information about the ASLB can be found at: http://www.nrc.gov/aboutnrc/organization/aslbpfuncdesc.html. 

### 

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 10-178 October 6, 2010
#### § 730.7 License requirements and exceptions.

A relatively small percentage of exports and reexports subject to the EAR require an application to BIS for a license. Many items are not on the Commerce Control List (CCL) (supplement no. 1 to § 774.1 of the EAR), or, if on the CCL, require a license to only a limited number of countries. Other transactions may be covered by one or more of the License Exceptions in the EAR. In such cases no application need be made to BIS.
#### Elizabeth McLean, Appellant, v. Triboro Coach Corporation et al., Respondents.

*845The plaintiff, having been nonsuited, is entitled to the benefit of every fact that the jury could have found from the evidence, in the most favorable view that a jury would be warranted in taking of that evidence, as well as every reasonable inference that may be drawn therefrom. *(McNally*v. *Phoenix Ins. Co.,*137 N. Y. 389, 394; *Kraus*v. *Birnbaum,*200 N. Y. 130, 133; *African Metals Corp.*v. *Bullowa,*288 N. Y. 78, 81; *Pollard*v. *Trivia Bldg. Corp.,*291 N. Y. 19, 22.) So viewed, the proof adduced was sufficient to warrant a finding by the jury that the accident occurred as alleged in the complaint and bill of particulars and there was presented a prima facie case within plaintiff’s pleadings which should not have been taken from the jury. Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Sneed, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Alexander International Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
Tsuida, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of
          the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
5th day of May 2004.


/s/ Robert Tsuida
--------------------------
Chief Executive Officer