alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No: IV-16-015 June 27, 2016 

CONTACT: Victor Dricks, 817-200-1128

NRC Names Kriss Kennedy as Region IV Administrator

Kriss Kennedy, a 28-year veteran of the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, has been named the new Administrator of the NRC’s 

Region IV office in Arlington, Texas. He succeeds Marc Dapas, who has 

been named Director of the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 

Safeguards in Rockville, Md.

“Over the course of his career, Kriss Kennedy has repeatedly 

demonstrated an exemplary commitment to technical and managerial 

excellence,” said Victor McCree, the NRC’s Executive Director for 

Operations. “The experience he has gained in a wide variety of NRC 

assignments will serve the agency well.”

Kennedy was assigned as the Deputy Regional Administrator in 

Region IV in June 2014.

NRC’s Region IV office is responsible for the inspection and safety assessment of 13 nuclear 

power plant sites (19 reactors). Region IV covers 22 states, including Alaska and Hawaii, overseeing 

the inspection and licensing of medical, academic and industrial users of radioactive materials. Sixteen 

of those states are Agreement States, which implement the NRC’s materials inspection and licensing 

programs. 

Kennedy received the Presidential Rank Meritorious Executive Award in 2015. Prior to his 

current position, Kennedy served as the Director of the Division of Reactor Projects in Region IV and 

the Director of the Division of Reactor Safety in the NRC’s Region II office in Atlanta, Ga. 

Kennedy joined the NRC in 1988 as an Operator Licensing Examiner in the NRC’s Region IV 

office. He has held positions in the Division of Reactor Safety and the Division of Reactor Projects, as 

a Resident Inspector at Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Station, Senior Resident Inspector at Arkansas 

Nuclear One, and Branch Chief. 

Prior to joining the NRC, Kennedy served as a nuclear qualified submarine officer in the United 

States Navy. He graduated from the United States Naval Academy in 1981.
No: 15-062 October 1, 2015

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200

NRC Completes Safety Review of Early Site Permit

for Southern New Jersey Location

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has completed its Final Safety Evaluation Report for 

an Early Site Permit (ESP) application from PSEG Power and PSEG Nuclear. The report concludes 

there are no safety aspects that would preclude issuing the permit for the site, adjacent to the existing 

Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plants in Salem County, N.J.

The 688-page report describes the agency's review of the application, and incorporates 

comments from the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. The NRC staff reviewed information 

on topics including:

 site seismology, geology, meteorology and hydrology;

 risks from potential accidents resulting from operation of a nuclear plant at the site;

 the site’s ability to support adequate physical security for a nuclear plant; and

 the proposed complete and integrated emergency plan PSEG would implement if a reactor

was built at the site.

The ESP process allows an applicant to address site-related issues, such as environmental impacts, for 

possible future construction and operation of a nuclear power plant at the site. The PSEG companies

submitted the application on May 25, 2010. More information on the ESP process is available on the 

NRC website. 

The staff will provide the report on the application to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

for a mandatory hearing on the permit. The staff must also finalize its Environmental Impact Statement 

on the application prior to the board’s hearing, which will determine whether the staff’s review 

supports the findings necessary to issue the permit.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Melvin J. Moore, Jr., Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 536]

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John J. Connell, J.), rendered April 25, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, assault in the second degree, menacing in the second degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of, inter alia, rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35 [1]), sodomy in the first degree (former § 130.50 [1]) and assault in the second degree (§ 120.05 [2]). Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court properly denied his motion for a mistrial based on a juror’s alleged inability to continue deliberating. The court conducted the requisite “reasonably thorough inquiry” with respect to the juror’s health and properly determined that the juror could continue deliberating (CPL 270.35 [2] [a]). Also contrary to the contention of defendant, the court properly denied his motion for a mistrial based on prosecutorial misconduct. The court twice gave appropriate curative instructions to the jury concerning the prosecutor’s attempts to introduce certain photographs in evidence and the comments made by the prosecutor on summation did not rise to the level of misconduct requiring reversal *(see generally People v Tidwell,*207 AD2d 957 [1994], *lv denied 84*NY2d 1039*[1995]).*Furthermore, defendant was not denied a fair trial based on the cumulative effect of the prosecutor’s alleged misconduct *(cf. People v Calabria,*94 NY2d 519, 523 [2000]).

*1355The court also properly denied that part of defendant’s omnibus motion seeking to dismiss the indictment under CPL 30.30 because the decision to waive certain time periods was properly made in defendant’s interests by defense counsel *(see People v Trepasso,*197 AD2d 891 [1993], *lv denied*82 NY2d 854 [1993]), and we further conclude that the court properly denied that part of defendant’s motion seeking a severance *(see*CPL 200.20 [2] [b], [d]). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Defendant failed to preserve his remaining contentions for our review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our power to review them as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see*CPL 470.15 [6] [a]).

All concur, Smith, J., not participating. Present — Kehoe, J.P., Gorski, Martoche, Smith and Pine, JJ.
#### Fleet Wing Corporation, Respondent, *v.*Oil Transfer Corporation, Appellant.

Fourth Department,

May 13, 1953.

*29
      *George J. Nier*for respondent.

*Frederick W. BiGkmann, Jr., Gerald J. McKernan*and *James N. Allen*for appellant.

*Per Curiam.*

We are satisfied that by the uro visions of the contract of affreightment the plaintiff may maintain no action against the defendant for loss or damage to the cargo of gasoline. The plaintiff on the argument and in its brief recognizes that this is so and is seeking recovery for damage to the oil in the storage tank only. However, the contract of affreightment is of no force or effect by way of release of liability, notice of claim or time limitation for commencement of suit by reason of alleged negligence of the master or crew of the barge resulting in damage to property other than the subject of the affreightment contract, i.e., the cargo of gasoline. The fact that the plaintiff was the owner of the oil in the storage tank as well as the alleged owner of the gasoline cargo is of no moment. The limitation of liability clauses in the contract of affreightment were for the benefit of the barge operator, but only in relation to the cargo transported. It would hardly be argued that such clauses would be binding upon the owner of the oil in storage had such owner been one wholly unconnected with the transportation of the gasoline. The coincidental identity of the owner of the gasoline and the owner of the oil does not change the legal effect of the contract of affreightment. Since there is a question of fact as to the party responsible for pumping the gasoline from the barge into the tank of oil on shore, the Special Term was correct in denying the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

All concur. Present — Taylor, P. J., McCurn, Vaughan, Kimbat/l and Wheeler, JJ.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### Woldemar A. Bary, Respondent, v. BFM Industries, Inc., et al., Defendants, and Daniel A. Shirk, as Receiver of the Property of Medwin Benjamin, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Breitel and Bastow, JJ.
5350.104-3 (b)(1) Action on Indemnification

Requests

See the Indemnification Guide for Unusually Hazardous or Nuclear Risks for additional information.

Upon completion of all buying activity coordination, the contracting officer must forward the

indemnification request through the SCO to the cognizant HCA Workflow to for staffing to the

SECAF.

Parent topic: Subpart 5350.104 — RESIDUAL POWERS
Part 5312 - Acquisition of Commercial Items

DAFFARS PART 5312 Knowledge Center

2019 Edition

Revised: June 2023

INTERIM CHANGE: See Policy Memo 18-C-03

Subpart 5312.1 - ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS - GENERAL

5312.102 Applicability

Subpart 5312.2 - SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS

5312.207 Contract Type

5312.272 Preference for Certain Commercial Products and Commercial Services

Subpart 5312.3 - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES FOR THE ACQUISITION

OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS

5312.302 Tailoring of Provisions and Clauses for the Acquisition of Commercial Products and

Commercial Services

Subpart 5312.4 - UNIQUE REQUIREMENTS REGARDING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR

COMMERCIAL ITEMS

5312.403 Termination

Subpart 5312.90 - PILOT PROGRAM FOR DEFENSE COMMERCIAL SOLUTIONS OPENING

Subpart 5312.1 - ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS -

GENERAL

5312.102 Applicability

(a)(ii)(B) See MP5301.601(a)(i).

(f)(1) See MP5301.601(a)(i).

Subpart 5312.2 - SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS
5312.207 Contract Type

(b)(iii) See MP5301.601(a)(i) for approval authority.

5312.272 Preference for Certain Commercial Products and Commercial

Services

(b)(2)(i) See MP5301.601(a)(i).

Subpart 5312.3 - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND

CONTRACT CLAUSES FOR THE ACQUISITION OF

COMMERCIAL ITEMS

5312.302 Tailoring of Provisions and Clauses for the Acquisition of

Commercial Products and Commercial Services

(c) See MP5301.601(a)(i).

Subpart 5312.4 - UNIQUE REQUIREMENTS REGARDING

TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

5312.403 Termination

(b) See DAFFARS 5349.101 for termination approval requirements.

Subpart 5312.90 - PILOT PROGRAM FOR DEFENSE

COMMERCIAL SOLUTIONS OPENING

INTERIM CHANGE: See Policy Memo 18-C-03 .
Part 5311 - Describing Agency Needs       DAFFARS PART 5311 Knowledge Center          **2019 Edition**          *Revised: June 2023*                                       Subpart 5311.1 - SELECTING AND DEVELOPING REQUIREMENT DOCUMENTS                                                         5311.103 Market Acceptance                                                                             Subpart 5311.2 - USING AND MAINTAINING REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENTS                                                         5311.274-2 Policy for item unique identification                                                                             Subpart 5311.5 - LIQUIDATED DAMAGES                                                         5311.501 Policy                                                                             Subpart 5311.6 - PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS                                                         5311.603 Procedures    Subpart 5311.1 - SELECTING AND DEVELOPING REQUIREMENT DOCUMENTS    5311.103 Market Acceptance       (a) See MP5301.601(a)(i).Subpart 5311.2 - USING AND MAINTAINING REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENTS    5311.274-2 Policy for item unique identification       (b)(1) See MP5301.601(a)(i).         (b)(2)(i)(A) See MP5301.601(a)(i).         (b)(2)(i)(B) See MP5301.601(a)(i).Subpart 5311.5 - LIQUIDATED DAMAGES    5311.501 Policy       (d) See MP5301.601(a)(i).Subpart 5311.6 - PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS    5311.603 Procedures       Department of the Air Force procedures associated with the Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS) are established in AFI 63-101/20-101, *Integrated Life Cycle Management.*
No: I-13-028 August 1, 2013

CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610)337-5330

 Neil Sheehan (610)337-5331

NRC Names New Senior Resident Inspector at Salem Nuclear Power Plant

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in King of Prussia, Pa., have selected 

Patrick Finney as the new Senior Resident Inspector at the Salem nuclear power plant, in 

Hancocks Bridge, N.J. The plant is operated by PSEG Nuclear.

Finney joined the NRC’s Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa., in June 2004, as a 

reactor inspector. Most recently, he served as the Senior Resident Inspector at the 

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in Berwick, Pa. He also was the Resident Inspector 

there from 2007 through 2009. Prior to joining the NRC, Finney was both a design and 

system engineer at the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Delta, Pa., and served for seven years in the 

Navy’s nuclear submarine force. He holds a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Villanova 

University, as well as a master’s degree in engineering management from Old Dominion University and a 

master’s degree in fire protection engineering from the University of Maryland.

“Pat Finney has the training and commitment to safety that will help the NRC carry out its mission of 

protecting people and the environment, and ensure the safe operation of the Salem nuclear plant,” NRC Region 

I Administrator Bill Dean.

Each U.S. commercial nuclear power plant has at least two NRC resident inspectors. They serve as the 

agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring major work projects and interacting 

with plant workers and the public. Resident inspectors can be assigned to any one site for up to seven years.

The Salem Resident Inspectors can be reached at (856) 935-3850.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3738 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3738

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase from 1 to 2 years 
      the post employment restrictions on Members of the House of 
                            Representatives.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 20, 2011

 Mr. Fitzpatrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase from 1 to 2 years 
      the post employment restrictions on Members of the House of 
                            Representatives.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. INCREASE IN POST EMPLOYMENT RESTRICTIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE 
              HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

    (a) In General.--Section 207(e)(1) of title 18, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A)--
                    (A) in the subparagraph heading, by inserting ``and 
                members of the house of representatives'' after 
                ``Senators'';
                    (B) by inserting ``or a Member of the House of 
                Representatives'' after ``who is a Senator''; and
                    (C) by inserting ``or Member of the House of 
                Representatives'' after ``such former Senator'';
            (2) in subparagraph (B)--
                    (A) in clause (i)--
                            (i) by striking ``Any person who is a 
                        Member of the House of Representatives or'' and 
                        inserting ``Any person who is'';
                            (ii) by striking ``or (iii)''; and
                            (iii) by striking ``such former Member of 
                        Congress or'' and inserting ``such former'';
                    (B) by striking clause (ii); and
                    (C) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (ii).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to individuals who leave office on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §13792. Repealed. Pub. L. 105–277, div. A, §101(f) [title VIII, §301(d)], Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–337, 2681–410

Section, Pub. L. 103–322, title III, §30402, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1852, related to family and community endeavor schools grant program.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, AS AMENDED

I, Charles Sander, certify
that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Catcher Holdings, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such
disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on
such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of
internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                        |  | 
|Date: November 14, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/ Charles Sander     
|                        |  |  |  | Charles Sander         
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
No: II-16-025 April 18, 2016

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416

NRC Schedules Meeting to Discuss Safety Performance of URENCO USA Fuel Facility

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a public meeting on Wednesday, April 

27, to discuss the results of its regulatory safety performance review of the URENCO USA commercial 

nuclear fuel fabrication plant in Eunice, N.M.

The meeting is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. MDT at the City of Eunice Community Center, 906 

12th Street in Eunice. The meeting is open to the public and the media, and NRC officials will be 

available after the formal presentation to answer questions.

The NRC staff assessed performance of URENCO USA during the assessment period beginning 

Jan. 1, 2014 and ending Dec. 31, 2015, in safety operations, radiological controls, facility support and 

other areas. The NRC staff review determined that the company continued to conduct its activities 

safely and securely, protecting public health and the environment.

The review found that none of the program areas needed improvement, which means the NRC 

will continue its normal inspection program for such facilities.

“The NRC inspects URENCO USA and other nuclear fuel facilities on a continuous basis to 

monitor their safety performance,” said NRC Region II Administrator Cathy Haney. “We post our 

inspection reports online and we also hold regular meetings near the facilities to discuss our oversight 

and answer questions from members of the public.”

A copy of the NRC letter to the company regarding the performance review is publicly 

available on the NRC website.
#### § 210.12-27 Qualified assets on deposit.1

| Column A—Name of depositary2 | Column B—Cash | Column C—Investments in securities | Column D—First mortgages and other first liens on real estate | Column E—Other | Column F—Total3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 All money columns shall be totaled. | | | | | |
| 2 Classify names of individual depositaries under group headings, such as banks and states. | | | | | |
| 3 Total of column F shall agree with note required by [§ 210.6-06(4)](/on/2024-09-16/title-17/section-210.6-06#p-210.6-06(4)) as to total amount of qualified Assets on Deposit. | | | | | |

[[59 FR 65637](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/59-FR-65637), Dec. 20, 1994, as amended at [83 FR 50208](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/83-FR-50208), Oct. 4, 2018]
#### § 1233.1 Scope.

This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for portable hook-on chairs.