alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001

June 27, 2016

MEMORANDUM TO: Victor M. McCree

Executive Director for Operations

FROM: Rochelle C. Bavol, Acting Secretary /RA/

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS MEMORANDUM – DISCUSSION OF 

SECURITY ISSUES, 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2016,

SECURE CONFERENCE INFORMATION FACILITY, ONE 

WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (CLOSED TO 

PUBLIC ATTENDANCE)

The Commission held a meeting with external stakeholders to discuss security issues at nuclear 

power plants on June 23, 2016. In Part I of the meeting, Anthony Pietrangelo (Nuclear Energy 

Institute), Christopher Mudrick (Exelon Corporation), and Edward O’Neil (Duke Energy Corp.) 

presented industry views on; proposed revisions to Regulatory Guide 5.69 - adversary 

characteristics, force-on-force exercises – realism of tactics and techniques, and proposed 

revisions to Regulatory Guide 5.77 - treatment of insider mitigation for cyber threat. Edwin 

Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists also presented his insights on the same security 

issues above.

In Part two of the meeting, Anthony Pietrangelo discussed the cyber security rule scope (access 

authorization systems including Personal Access Data System).

Part three of the meeting was conducted with NRC participants only. NRC staff briefed the 

Commission on; overview of proposed revision to Regulatory Guide 5.69, force-on-force 

exercises, force-on-force tactics, techniques and procedures, cyber security regulatory 

documents and current issues, insider mitigation threat program and Regulatory Guide 5.77 

proposed revision, and potential future program improvements.

The staff should complete interactions with stakeholders regarding any guidance updates and 

submit them to CRGR for review. After CRGR review is complete, staff shall provide its 

proposed final revisions to Regulatory Guides 5.69, “Guidance for the Application of

Radiological Sabotage Design-Basis Threat in the Design, Development and Implementation of 

a Physical Security Program that Meets 10 CFR 73.55 Requirements” and 5.77, “Insider 

Mitigation Program,” to the Commission for review and approval. In providing the proposed final 

revisions, staff shall include its regulatory basis for the proposed revisions as well as a 

documented evaluation or backfitting analysis, as applicable, in accordance with 10 CFR § 

50.109. 

cc: Chairman Burns

Commissioner Svinicki 

Commissioner Ostendorff 
Commissioner Baran

OGC

EDO
### §§1361 to 1364. Repealed. Pub. L. 89–554, §8(a), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 658, 660, 661

Section 1361, act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XV, §1501, as added Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1212, §4(a), 68 Stat. 1130; amended Aug. 28, 1958, Pub. L. 85–848, §2, 72 Stat. 1087; July 12, 1960, Pub. L. 86–624, §30(g), 74 Stat. 420; Sept. 13, 1960, Pub. L. 86–778, title V, §§531(e), 542(d), 74 Stat. 984, 986, defined terms used in this subchapter. See section 8501 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Pub. L. 90–248, title IV, §403(f), Jan. 2, 1968, 81 Stat. 932, amended section 1361(a)(6), (9), without reference to repeal of such section by Pub. L. 89–554, §8(a).

Section 1362, act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XV, §1502, as added Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1212, §4(a), 68 Stat. 1131; amended Sept. 13, 1960, Pub. L. 86–778, title V, §543(b)(1)(A), 74 Stat. 985, provided for compensation of Federal employees under State agreements. See section 8502 of Title 5.

Section 1363, act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XV, §1503, as added Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1212, §4(a), 68 Stat. 1132; amended Sept. 13, 1960, Pub. L. 86–778, title V, §543(b)(1)(B), (C), (c)(1), 74 Stat. 986, provided for compensation of Federal employees in absence of State agreement. See section 8503 of Title 5.

Section 1364, act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XV, §1504, as added Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1212, §4(a), 68 Stat. 1133; amended Sept. 13, 1960, Pub. L. 86–778, title V, §542(b)(2), 74 Stat. 986, related to assignment to State of Federal service and wages. See section 8504 of Title 5.
###### Editorial Note on Part 200

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 76 FR 60371, Sept. 29, 2011.

#### § 200.66 Investigations.

The power to investigate carries with it the power to defame and destroy. In determining to exercise their investigatory power, members should concern themselves only with the facts known to them and the reasonable inferences from those facts. A member should never suggest, vote for, or participate in an investigation aimed at a particular individual for reasons of animus, prejudice or vindictiveness. The requirements of the particular case alone should induce the exercise of the investigatory power, and no public pronouncement of the pendency of such an investigation should be made in the absence of reasonable evidence that the law has been violated and that the public welfare demand it.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 on Form 10-QSB (the "Report")
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of Narrowstep Inc. (the "Company"), I,
Steven Crowther, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Section 78m(a) or
78o(d); and

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


Dated:  June 28, 2006                       /s/ Steven Crowther
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Steven Crowther
                                            Chief Financial Officer
exv10w1



 






Exhibit 10.1




	 	 	 	 	 
	

	 	10 South Wacker Drive

Suite 3175

Chicago, Illinois 60606
	 	312.876.3945 Telephone

312.876.3854 Facsimile

awcode@chsonline.com






 




Andrew W. Code

Partner






 







January 10, 2006




 




Mr. Mark W Legg

Chief Financial Officer

American Reprographics Company

700 North Central Avenue Suite 550

Glendale, CA 91203




Mark:



Please accept this letter as my resignation from the American Reprographic Inc. Board of Directors
effective January 20, 2006. I have truly enjoyed serving on your board and greatly value the
relationships that I have built with Mohan, Suri and other managers and directors of ARC.




Thank you –




      








Andrew W. Code
§ 23.610 Clearing member acceptance for clearing. ( a ) Each swap dealer or major swap participant that is a clearing member of a derivatives clearing organization shall coordinate with each derivatives clearing organization on which it clears to establish systems that enable the clearing member, or the derivatives clearing organization acting on its behalf, to accept or reject each trade submitted to the derivatives clearing organization for clearing by or for the clearing member as quickly as would be technologically practicable if fully automated systems were used; and
( b ) Each swap dealer or major swap participant that is a clearing member of a derivatives clearing organization shall accept or reject each trade submitted by or for it as quickly as would be technologically practicable if fully automated systems were used; a clearing member may meet this requirement by: ( 1 ) Establishing systems to pre-screen orders for compliance with criteria specified by the clearing member;
( 2 ) Establishing systems that authorize a derivatives clearing organization to accept or reject on its behalf trades that meet, or fail to meet, criteria specified by the clearing member; or
( 3 ) Establishing systems that enable the clearing member to communicate to the derivatives clearing organization acceptance or rejection of each trade as quickly as would be technologically practicable if fully automated systems were used.
[77 FR 21308, Apr. 9, 2012]
### SUBCHAPTER IV—MISCELLANEOUS BIOMASS PROVISIONS
No: II-15-043 November 10, 2015

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416 

NRC Schedules Meeting in Metropolis to Discuss Inspection of Honeywell Event 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a public meeting in Metropolis, Ill., 

for Nov. 19 to discuss the agency’s inspection findings related to an August event at the Honeywell

uranium conversion plant in Metropolis.

On Aug. 1, the facility experienced a uranium hexafluoride leak during maintenance activities 

and declared an Alert, the lower of the NRC’s two emergency classification levels for fuel facilities. 

The event prompted the NRC to launch a special inspection and the results of that inspection will be the 

focus of the meeting. 

No one was injured and the NRC inspection confirmed that no members of the public were 

exposed to the material. However, the NRC considers any release of uranium hexafluoride a potentially 

serious event, and the special inspection looked at the sequence of events, the company’s response, and 

information about the material including the performance of the plant’s detection and sampling 

systems. The NRC inspectors also reviewed any corrective actions the company has taken or is 

planning to take. 

The Nov. 19 meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. local time in the Community Center located at

900 West 10th Street in Metropolis. After the NRC staff presents the results of the inspection, they will 

be available to answer questions about the inspection or other aspects of the agency’s regulatory 

oversight of the facility.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Luis Torres, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 206]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.), rendered April 21, 2005, and amended May 12, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant was properly convicted of robbery in the first degree under Penal Law § 160.15 (2) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree under Penal Law § 265.03 (2). The only reasonable inference that could be drawn from the chain of evidence in this fast-paced incident was that the loaded, operable pistol recovered by the police immediately after the crime was the same weapon that was used by one of the robbers *(see e.g. People v Danzler,*288 AD2d 5 [2001], *lv denied*97 NY2d 753 [2002]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Nardelli and McGuire, JJ.
### §10509. Repealed. Pub. L. 105–362, title X, §1001(a), Nov. 10, 1998, 112 Stat. 3291

Section, Pub. L. 98–473, title II, §609U, Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2106, related to Attorney General's annual report to Congress and the President on emergency Federal law enforcement assistance.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 4093

_____________________________
J AMES E. W ILSON , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. Mark W. Moseley , Judge

. June 12, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OBERTS , R AY , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

___ __________________________2 James E. Wilson, pro se
, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
#### § 802.31 Acquisitions of convertible voting securities.

Acquisitions of convertible voting securities shall be exempt from the requirements of the act.

# Example:

This section applies regardless of the dollar value of the convertible voting securities held or to be acquired. Note, however, that subsequent conversions of convertible voting securities may be subject to the requirements of the act. See § 801.32.

[43 FR 33544, July 31, 1978, as amended at 66 FR 8694, Feb. 1, 2001]
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3836 

To amend the Small Business Act to make permanent the Small Loan 

Advantage program, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 27, 2012 

Ms. HAHN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Small Business 

A BILL 

To amend the Small Business Act to make permanent the 

Small Loan Advantage program, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘SBA Loan Paperwork 

5 Reduction Act of 2012’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SMALL LOAN ADVANTAGE PROGRAM. 

7 Section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

8 636(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(36) SMALL LOAN ADVANTAGE.— 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3836 IH

1 ‘‘(A) PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENT.—The 

2 Administrator shall carry out a Small Loan Ad3 vantage program in accordance with this para4 graph. 

5 ‘‘(B) ADMINISTRATION OF PROGRAM.—Ex6 cept as otherwise provided under this para7 graph, the Administrator shall carry out the 

8 Small Loan Advantage program in the same 

9 manner as the Small Loan Advantage loan ini10 tiative of the Administration— 

11 ‘‘(i) under which lenders were eligible 

12 to begin submitting loans on February 15, 

13 2011; and 

14 ‘‘(ii) as in effect on January 24, 

15 2012. 

16 ‘‘(C) NONAPPLICABILITY OF PILOT PRO17 GRAM LIMITATIONS.—No limitation under para18 graph (25)(A) applies to the Small Loan Ad19 vantage program under this paragraph.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
No: 16-073 December 16, 2016

Contact: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200

NRC Renews Operating License of Fermi 2 Nuclear Plant in Michigan

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has renewed the operating license of the Fermi 2 nuclear 

power plant for an additional 20 years, through March 20, 2045.

The Fermi 2 plant is a boiling-water reactor, located in Newport, Mich., about 25 miles 

northeast of Toledo, Ohio. The operator, DTE Electric Co., submitted the renewal application 

April 30, 2014.

The NRC staff’s review of the application proceeded on two tracks. A safety evaluation report 

was issued July 12. A supplemental environmental impact statement was issued Sept. 16. These 

documents, as well as other information about the Fermi 2 license renewal application, are available on 

the NRC website. The NRC’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards also reviewed the staff’s 

work. 

On Dec. 14, the Commission authorized the director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation to issue the renewed license despite a pending motion before the NRC’s Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board to reopen the adjudicatory hearing. The Commission’s direction does not reflect 

judgment on that motion or a proposed new contention challenging the renewal.

Renewal of Fermi 2’s operating license brings to 87 the number of commercial nuclear power 

reactors with renewed licenses (three of those have since permanently shut down). Applications for an 

additional eight renewals are currently under review. Information about these reviews can be found on 

the NRC website.
### §17390. Voluntary model pathways

#### (a) Establishment of voluntary model pathways

#### (1) Establishment

Not later than 90 days after December 27, 2020, the Secretary of Energy (in this section referred to as the "Secretary"), in consultation with the steering committee established under paragraph (3), shall initiate the development of voluntary model pathways for modernizing the electric grid through a collaborative, public-private effort that—

(A) produces illustrative policy pathways encompassing a diverse range of technologies that can be adapted for State and regional applications by regulators and policymakers;

(B) facilitates the modernization of the electric grid and associated communications networks to achieve the objectives described in paragraph (2);

(C) ensures a reliable, resilient, affordable, safe, and secure electric grid; and

(D) acknowledges and accounts for different priorities, electric systems, and rate structures across States and regions.

#### (2) Objectives

The pathways established under paragraph (1) shall facilitate achievement of as many of the following objectives as practicable:

(A) Near real-time situational awareness of the electric system.

(B) Data visualization.

(C) Advanced monitoring and control of the advanced electric grid.

(D) Enhanced certainty of policies for investment in the electric grid.

(E) Increased innovation.

(F) Greater consumer empowerment.

(G) Enhanced grid resilience, reliability, and robustness.

(H) Improved—

(i) integration of distributed energy resources;

(ii) interoperability of the electric system; and

(iii) predictive modeling and capacity forecasting.

(I) Reduced cost of service for consumers.

(J) Diversification of generation sources.

#### (3) Steering committee

Not later than 90 days after December 27, 2020, the Secretary shall establish a steering committee to help develop the pathways under paragraph (1), to be composed of members appointed by the Secretary, consisting of persons with appropriate expertise representing a diverse range of interests in the public, private, and academic sectors, including representatives of—

(A) the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;

(B) the National Laboratories;

(C) States;

(D) State regulatory authorities;

(E) transmission organizations;

(F) representatives of all sectors of the electric power industry;

(G) institutions of higher education;

(H) independent research institutes; and

(I) other entities.

#### (b) Technical assistance

The Secretary may provide technical assistance to States, Indian Tribes, or units of local government to adopt or implement one or more elements of the pathways developed under subsection (a)(1), including on a pilot basis.

(Pub. L. 116–260, div. Z, title VIII, §8008, Dec. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 2586.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Energy Act of 2020, and not as part of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 which comprises this chapter.
#### § 230.438 Consents of persons about to become directors.

If any person who has not signed the registration statement is named therein as about to become a director, the written consent of such person shall be filed with the registration statement. Any such consent, however, may be omitted if there is filed with the registration statement a statement by the registrant, supported by an affidavit or affidavits, setting forth the reasons for such omission and establishing that the obtaining of such consent is impracticable or involves undue hardship on the registrant.

[Reg. C, 12 FR 4074, June 24, 1947]
NRC NEWS

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION IV

1450 Maria Lane, Walnut Creek, CA 94596

CONTACT: Mark Hammond (510) 975-0254/E-mail: mfh2@nrc.gov

RIV-6696

December 31, 1996 

CONTACT: Mark Hammond 

Office: (510) 975-0254 

(415) 674-1024

Pager: (800) 916-4952

email: mfh2@nrc.gov

NRC, SCE OFFICIALS TO DISCUSS APPARENT VIOLATIONS AT SAN ONOFRE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a predecisional enforcement conference this 

week with officials of the Southern California Edison Co. to discuss apparent violations of NRC 

requirements at the San Onofre nuclear power plant.

The conference will begin at 9 a.m. on Friday, Jan. 3, at the NRC Region IV office in Arlington, 

Texas. SCE operates the San Onofre plant near San Clemente, California. The meeting will be 

open to the public for observation; NRC officials will be available afterwards for questions.

An NRC inspection conducted in October found three apparent violations of a requirement 

known as the maintenance rule, under which plant operators must have in place programs to 

monitor the effectiveness of maintenance on certain structures, systems and components.

The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement conference does not mean that NRC has made 

a final determination that a violation did occur or that enforcement action, such as a monetary 

fine, will be taken. The purpose is to discuss the apparent violation, its cause and safety 

significance; to provide SCE an opportunity to challenge or correct portions of the NRC 

inspection report; and for the licensee to outline its corrective actions.

No decision on the apparent violations or any enforcement action will be made at the conference. 

Those decisions will be made later by senior NRC officials.

####
3408.871 Paperwork reduction.

The contracting officer must insert the clause at 3452.208–72 (Paperwork Reduction Act) in all

solicitations and contracts in which the contractor will develop forms or documents for public use.

Parent topic: Subpart 3408.8—Acquisition of Printing and Related Supplies
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 31, 2017

a0522

Order 

Clerk

May 31, 2017

153974(32)

MATTHEW J. BRAZYS and MARY

ELIZABETH BRAZYS,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 153974

COA: 330391

Allegan CC: 12-049809-CH

DAVID ASHEN, d/b/a D.A.’S PAINTING

COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s March 7, 

2017 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
### §1490t. Indian tribes

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) and title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) shall not apply to actions by federally recognized Indian tribes (including instrumentalities of such Indian tribes) under this Act.

(July 15, 1949, ch. 338, title V, §544, as added Pub. L. 109–136, §4, Dec. 22, 2005, 119 Stat. 2644.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 88–352, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 241. Title VI of the Act is classified generally to subchapter V (§2000d et seq.) of chapter 21 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2000a of this title and Tables.

The Civil Rights Act of 1968, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 90–284, Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 73. Title VIII of the Act, known as the Fair Housing Act, is classified principally to subchapter I (§3601 et seq.) of chapter 45 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3601 of this title and Tables.

This Act, referred to in text, is act July 15, 1949, ch. 338, 63 Stat. 413, known as the Housing Act of 1949, which is classified principally to this chapter (§1441 et seq.). For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1441 of this title and Tables.