alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# Draft Enclosures 95003.02 A-F.

Accession Number: ML081020291

Date Released: Friday, April 11, 2008

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.
    - ML081020608 - Draft Enclosure 95003.02-A, Sample Inspection Requirements for Safety Culture Components - for 4/17/08 Public Meeting. (18 page(s), 4/11/2008)
    - ML081020675 - Draft Enclosure 95003.02-B, Sample Questions for Safety Culture Components - for 4/17/08 Public Meeting. (16 page(s), 4/11/2008)
    - ML081020682 - Draft Enclosure 95003.02-C, Guidance for Focus Groups and Individual Interviews - for 4/17/08 Public Meeting. (7 page(s), 4/11/2008)
    - ML081020688 - Draft Enclosure 95003.02-D, Guidance for Structured Behavioral Observations - for 4/17/08 Public Meeting. (13 page(s), 4/11/2008)
    - ML081020715 - Draft Enclosure 95003.02-E, Guidance for Safety Culture Event Follow-Up Studies - for 4/17/08 Public Meeting. (2 page(s), 4/11/2008)
    - ML081020821 - Draft Enclosure 95003.02-F, Guidance for Evaluating Safety Culture Surveys - for 4/17/08 Public Meeting. (4 page(s), 4/11/2008)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-40718 Summary Calendar

JESSE RAY MILES, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ROGER WEST ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:95-CV-90

- - - - - - - - - - July 17, 1996 Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jesse Ray Miles, Jr., TDCJ No. 638526, appeals the dismissal with prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action following a bench trial conducted by the magistrate judge. The magistrate judge did not err by entering a dismissal with prejudice in this action instead of a dismissal without prejudice. See Baris v. Sulpicio Lines, Inc. , 74 F.3d 567, (5th Cir. 1996). Since Miles received a bench trial, the magistrate judge obviously construed Miles’ pleadings to state a claim against the defendants.No. 95-40718 - 2 - The magistrate judge did not err by refusing to appoint counsel for Miles. See Ulmer v. Chancellor , 691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982). Because Miles participated in the bench trial without objecting and reminding the magistrate judge of his jury request, he is barred from raising the issue on appeal. Matter of Wynn , 889 F.2d 644, 646 (5th Cir. 1989). The defendants did not violate Miles’ due process rights by placing him into solitary confinement for two months. See Sandin v. Conner , 115 S. Ct. 2293, 2300 (1995). Miles’ appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We warn Miles that the filing of future frivolous appeals will result in sanctions. E.g. , Smith v. McCleod , 946 F.2d 417, 418 (5th Cir. 1991); Jackson v. Carpenter , 921 F.2d 68, 69 (5th Cir. 1991). If Miles has any other appeals pending in this court at this time, he should review them in light of the foregoing warning and move to withdraw any appeal that is frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
Faulk, Scott (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Hi Scott, 

Patricia Alexander < palexanderl @ymail.com > 

Tuesday, April 07, 2015 11:53 PM 

Faulk, Scott (OST) 

mreeve@reevecorp.com 

reeve air to Tatitlek 

,~ •~: . .-,n 8 D i'l· 2 ' l·:d .. :-.1 - ' IL" I 

My name is Patty Alexander and I am Doris Kompkoffs daughter. My mom is elderly and having to get supplies to her in 

the village of Tatitlek is essential. All of my dealings with Mike have been positive experiences. He is professional, 

dependable, and a very nice man. You can see he cares about people and their needs in Tatitlek. I am always in need of 

sending my mom stuff and I so appreciate Mike Reeves Air Services. Please allow him to continue, as he benefits the 

whole village with the service. 

Thank you, 

Patricia Alexander (Patty) 

11707 Birch Knoll Loop 

Anchorage,Ak 99515 

Phone#907 -230-67 54
#### § 847.901 What information is in this subpart?

This subpart contains OPM's regulations describing the computation of a CSRS or FERS retirement annuity when an employee elects to use NAFI service to qualify for immediate retirement under subpart H of this part.
**PANEL CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS**  June 25, 2013

This afternoon, Drs. Mary Christman and Dallas Johnson, asked EPA to clarify the 1
- way ANOVA and the repeated measures 2
- way ANOVAs as used in the Medaka multigeneration test (MMT) and Larval amphibian growth and development assay (LAGDA). 1) In the 1
- way

ANOVA corrected code, does the correction for MMT: a) Use the mean value for all individuals in a tank and the weights proportional to sample size as was done to calculate th e mean for the tank in the LAGDA? O r b) Use individual observations as the experimental units and add a random effect for the tank within treatment and include denominator degrees of freedom adjusted according to the Kenward
- Roger (KR) (or Satterthwaite) meth od? or c) Something else? 2) In the repeated measures ANOVA for MMT , the fixed effects are treatment and time, BUT that alone does not account for the repeated observations on the same experimental unit. a) How were repeated observations handled? That is what is the covariance among the error terms? b) How were repeated observations handled if a non
- parametric ANOVA was performed because of lack of normality ? 3) If the residuals show normality , but unequal variances among treatments, was a usual ANOVA and KR method or a nonparametric ANOVA done?
**Exhibit 15.2**

 

[PricewaterhouseCoopers Letterhead] 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated April 27, 2005, which appears in NetEase.com, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the yearended December 31, 2004, in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-100069) and the Registration Statement on Form F-3 (No. 333-109628), as amended, of NetEase.com, Inc. 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers Zhong Tian CPAs Limited Company 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers Zhong Tian CPAs Limited Company 

 

Beijing, China 

 

June 27, 2005
### §3214. Mailing privilege of former President; surviving spouse of former President

A former President and the surviving spouse of a former President may send nonpolitical mail within the United States and its territories and possessions as franked mail. Such mail of a former President and of the surviving spouse of a former President marked "Postage and Fees Paid" in the manner prescribed by the Postal Service shall be accepted by the Postal Service for transmission in the international mails.

(Pub. L. 91–375, Aug. 12, 1970, 84 Stat. 754; Pub. L. 93–191, §4(a), Dec. 18, 1973, 87 Stat. 742; Pub. L. 103–123, title IV, §6(b), Oct. 28, 1993, 107 Stat. 1246; Pub. L. 105–61, title IV, §409(b), Oct. 10, 1997, 111 Stat. 1299.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1997—Pub. L. 105–61 struck out subsec. (a) designation, substituted "A former President" for "Subject to subsection (b), a former President", and struck out subsec. (b) which read as follows: "Subsection (a) shall cease to apply—

"(1) 5 years after the effective date of this subsection, in the case of any individual who, on such effective date—

"(A) is a former President (including any individual who might become entitled to the mailing privilege under subsection (a) as the surviving spouse of such a former President); or

"(B) is the surviving spouse of a former President; and

"(2) 4 years and 6 months after the expiration of the period for which services and facilities are authorized to be provided under section 4 of the Presidential Transition Act of 1963 (3 U.S.C. 102 note), in the case of an individual who becomes a former President after such effective date (including any surviving spouse of such individual, as described in the parenthetical matter in paragraph (1)(A))."

1993—Pub. L. 103–123 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), substituted "Subject to subsection (b), a former" for "A former", and added subsec. (b).

1973—Pub. L. 93–191 limited the mailing privilege to nonpolitical mail, extended the privilege to surviving spouse of former President and provided for acceptance of such mail marked "Postage and Fees Paid" by the Postal Service for transmission in the international mails.

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

#### Effective Date of 1993 Amendment

Pub. L. 103–123, title IV, §6(c), Oct. 28, 1993, 107 Stat. 1247, provided that: "The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) [amending this section and provisions set out as a note under section 102 of Title 3, The President] shall take effect on October 1, 1993."

#### Effective Date of 1973 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 93–191 effective Dec. 27, 1972, see section 14 of Pub. L. 93–191, set out as a note under section 3210 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective July 1, 1971, pursuant to Resolution No. 71–9 of the Board of Governors. See section 15(a) of Pub. L. 91–375, set out as a note preceding section 101 of this title.
### §4327. Noncompliance of Federal officials with deadlines; inapplicability of statutes of limitations

(a) Effect of Noncompliance of Federal Officials With Deadlines.—(1) The inability of the Secretary, the Attorney General, or the Special Counsel to comply with a deadline applicable to such official under section 4322, 4323, or 4324 of this title—

(A) shall not affect the authority of the Attorney General or the Special Counsel to represent and file an action or submit a complaint on behalf of a person under section 4323 or 4324 of this title;

(B) shall not affect the right of a person—

(i) to commence an action under section 4323 of this title;

(ii) to submit a complaint under section 4324 of this title; or

(iii) to obtain any type of assistance or relief authorized by this chapter;

(C) shall not deprive a Federal court, the Merit Systems Protection Board, or a State court of jurisdiction over an action or complaint filed by the Attorney General, the Special Counsel, or a person under section 4323 or 4324 of this title; and

(D) shall not constitute a defense, including a statute of limitations period, that any employer (including a State, a private employer, or a Federal executive agency) or the Office of Personnel Management may raise in an action filed by the Attorney General, the Special Counsel, or a person under section 4323 or 4324 of this title.

(2) If the Secretary, the Attorney General, or the Special Counsel is unable to meet a deadline applicable to such official in section 4322(f), 4323(a)(1), 4323(a)(2), 4324(a)(1), or 4324(a)(2)(B) of this title, and the person agrees to an extension of time, the Secretary, the Attorney General, or the Special Counsel, as the case may be, shall complete the required action within the additional period of time agreed to by the person.

(b) Inapplicability of Statutes of Limitations.—If any person seeks to file a complaint or claim with the Secretary, the Merit Systems Protection Board, or a Federal or State court under this chapter alleging a violation of this chapter, there shall be no limit on the period for filing the complaint or claim.

(Added Pub. L. 110–389, title III, §311(f)(1), Oct. 10, 2008, 122 Stat. 4163.)
THE ATMOSPHERIC M

THE ATMOSPHERIC M

EVALUATION TOOL (A

EVALUATION TOOL (A

METEOROLOGY MO

METEOROLOGY MO

Robert Gilliam

1, Wyat Appel

1 and Sha

1Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division, National Ocean

Administration, Air Resources Laboratory, on assignment tProtection Agency’s National Exposure Research Lab.

2Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, R

NC.
Outline Outline

• AMET Overview• Observation-Model Match

Module

• The Relational Database• Statistical Analysis Module• Examples of Analysis Pro• Future plans
AMET Overview AMET Overview

• AMET is composed of a MET and 

component

• Each component consists of an o

model matching module, relationaand analysis module

• Evaluations can be automated by 

manually generated, or generated interactive web-based interface
Observation Observation-Mode

Matching Module Matching Module

• Cycles through model output and match

space the model values with observatiopairs into database

• Coding is in Perl, but several external ut

to translate non-NetCDF model output (

• Observation classes currently implemen

based (NWS, FAA, Buoy, Mesonet), NOprofiler and rawinsonde datasets 

• Web-based interface to configure new p

generate script to execute the observatimatching module
Relational Databa

Relational Databa

• MySQL• Open Source, quick and efficient 

observation-model paired data

• Observation-model pairs are inse

the database

• Observation site metadata are ins

database

• Analysis module queries observat

pairs with numerous user criteria generates various plots and statis
Statistical Analysis Mo

Statistical Analysis Mo

• Collection of utilities that take 

criteria, query database, and gstatistical plots

• Statistics and plotting are don

open source “R” statistical pac

• Web-based (PHP) interactive 

takes user criteria and executcode, then display results
Examples of the Statis

Examples of the Statis

Analysis Products Analysis Products
Model Performance Summary Model Performance Summary

Summer N.C. Temperature Summer N.C. W
Diurnal Statistics
2-m Mixing Ratio

2-m Temperature2-m Wind Speed2-m Wind Dir.

Time Series Time Series
Daily 

Spatial Spatial Statistics Statistics
Daily, 

Weekly, Weekly,Monthly MonthlyPrecipitation PrecipitationEvaluation Evaluation
Diurnal Diurnal Insolation Insolation Compariso

Comparis
Wind Profile Comparison Wind Profile Comparison
Mean Diurnal Wind Profile Com

Mean Diurnal Wind Profile Com
Rawinsonde Rawinsonde-Model, Mean Bias ( Model, Mean Bias (L
Mean (layer Mean (layer-time) Rawinsonde Rawinsonde-Model C

Model C
Future 

Additions/Improveme

Additions/Improveme

• Various coding improvements• Improved installation procedures• Improved documentation• Additional observation “classes” to 

model output

• More flexibility in “look-and-feel” of 

plots

• Merge certain MET evaluations wi

evaluations
Exhibit 32.2

             CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE, ACCOUNTING AND
             FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the Quarterly Report of New Pacific Ventures, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended April 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I
Gerry Jardine, President of the Company, hereby 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 results of operations
         of the Company.


/s/Gerry Jardine
------------------
Gerry Jardine
President/Director
June 11, 2004
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 7, 2018

NO. 03-17-00114-CV

Texas Department of Public Safety, Appellant

v.

A. M., Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES FIELD AND BOURLAND 

REVERSED AND RENDERED—OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the order for expunction signed by the district court on August 17, 2016. 

Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was reversible 

error in the court’s order. Therefore, the Court reverses the district court’s order and renders 

judgment that A.M. take nothing by her petition for expunction of criminal records. The 

appellee shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 24, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40828 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MELVIN MOTA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:05-CR-22-ALL

-------------------- Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Melvin Mota appeals his conviction and sentence for being illegally present in this country following a deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Mota challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000)
.No. 05-40828 -2- Mota’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Mota contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi , we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Mota properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.
AFFIRMED.
§ 1110.105 Renewal of certification. ( a ) A Certified Person may renew its certification status by submitting, on or before the date of expiration of the term of its certification, a completed certification statement in accordance with § 1110.101, together with the required fee, indicating on the form NTIS FM161 that it is a renewal, and also indicating whether or not there has been any change in any basis previously relied upon for certification.
( b ) Except as may otherwise be required by NTIS, where a Certified Person seeking certification status renewal has, within a three-year period preceding submission under paragraph (a) of this section, previously submitted a written attestation under § 1110.101(b), or has within such period been subject to a satisfactory audit under § 1110.201, such Certified Person shall so indicate on the form NTIS FM161, and shall not be required to submit a written attestation under § 1110.101(b).
( c ) A Certified Person who submits a certification statement, attestation (if required) and fee pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section shall continue in Certified Person status pending notification of renewal or non-renewal from NTIS.
( d ) A Person who is a Certified Person before November 28, 2016 shall be considered a Certified Person under this part, and shall continue in Certified Person status until the date which is one year from the date of acceptance of such Person's certification by NTIS under the Temporary Certification Program, provided that if such expiration date falls on a weekend or a federal holiday, the term of certification shall be considered to extend to the next business day.
[81 FR 34892, June 1, 2016]
### §11316. Accountability

The head of each executive agency, in consultation with the Chief Information Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of that executive agency (or, in the case of an executive agency without a chief financial officer, any comparable official), shall establish policies and procedures to ensure that—

(1) the accounting, financial, asset management, and other information systems of the executive agency are designed, developed, maintained, and used effectively to provide financial or program performance data for financial statements of the executive agency;

(2) financial and related program performance data are provided on a reliable, consistent, and timely basis to executive agency financial management systems; and

(3) financial statements support—

(A) assessments and revisions of mission-related processes and administrative processes of the executive agency; and

(B) measurement of the performance of investments made by the agency in information systems.

(Pub. L. 107–217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1242.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 11316 | 40:1426. | Pub. L. 104–106, div. E, title LI, §5126, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 686. |

Section
#### Le Roy Mikels, Respondent, v. Packard Motor Car Company of New York, Inc., et al., Appellants.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. The date for the examination to proceed shall be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Peck, P. J., Dore, Callahan, Breitel and Bastow, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32



(Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350)

The undersigned hereby certify that:

      (i)   This Form 10-KSB, Annual Report, for the period ended December 31,
            2003, as filed by Chestatee Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") with
            the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
            "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

      (ii)  the information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.


Date: March 28, 2004           BY: /s/ J. Philip Hester, Sr.
      --------------               -----------------------------
                                   J. Philip Hester, Sr., President and C.E.O.
                                   (Principal Executive Officer)


Date: March 28, 2004           BY: /s/ Deborah F. McLeod
      --------------               -----------------------------
                                   Deborah F. McLeod, C.F.O. and Treasurer
                                   (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
NRC TO USE WEB SURVEY TO MEASURE 

PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF AGENCY TRANSPARENCY 

 As part of its Open Government initiative, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is 

adopting a new web survey model to help measure and assess the public’s perception of the 

agency’s transparency. The survey, from ForeSee Results, will pop up at random on the NRC’s 

website and ask a brief series of questions about the user’s experience with and perceptions of 

various aspects of the website, including transparency. Other federal government agencies are 

using the same survey questions to provide metrics on transparency. 

 The new survey model provides an accurate and precise way to measure how citizens 

view government transparency and quantify the relationships between online transparency, trust, 

and the likelihood to participate and collaborate with government agencies. Studies have found 

that satisfaction with federal websites, in turn, drives increased trust in government, as well as 

future participation and collaboration. 

The NRC encourages visitors to the website to participate in the survey if it appears on 

their screen to help the agency better serve the public and promote participation in the regulatory 

process. 

 

### 

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. 10-124 July 9, 2010