alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Characteristics of Combustion Products: A Review of the Literature (NUREG/CR-2658,  PNL-4174)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-2658 (PDF - 5.02 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**January 1983 **Date Published:**July 1983

**Prepared by:** M.K.W. Chan, J. Mishima Pacific Northwest Laboratory  Richland, Washington 99352

**Prepared for:** Division of Risk Analysis Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC FIN B-2287, B-2407

Availability Notice

## Abstract

 To determine the effects of fires in nuclear fuel cycle facilities, Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) has surveyed the literature to gather data on the characteristics of combustion products. This report discusses the theories of the origin of combustion with an emphasis on the behavior of the combustible materials commonly found in nuclear fuel cycle facilities. Data that can be used to calculate particulate generation rate, size, distribution, and concentration are included. Examples are given to illustrate the application of this data to quantitatively predict both the mass and heat generated from fires. As the final result of this review, information gaps are identified that should be filled for fire accident analyses in fuel cycle facilities. 

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 16 (Monday, January 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 3983]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01290]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-392]


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: Stepan 
Company

ACTION: Notice of registration.

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

SUMMARY: Stepan Company applied to be registered as a manufacturer of 
certain basic classes of controlled substances. The DEA grants Stepan 
Company registration as a manufacturer of those controlled substances.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By notice dated May 28, 2014, and published 
in the Federal Register on June 4, 2014, 79 FR 32320, Stepan Company, 
Natural Products Dept., 100 W. Hunter Avenue, Maywood, New Jersey 
07607, applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic 
classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were 
submitted to this notice.
    The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has considered the 
factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of 
Stepan Company to manufacture the basic classes of controlled 
substances is consistent with the public interest and with United 
States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or 
protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's 
maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and 
testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the 
company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the 
company's background and history.
    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 
CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk 
manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Controlled substance                       Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cocaine (9041).............................  II
Ecgonine (9180)............................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances 
in bulk for distribution to its customers.

    Dated: January 9, 2015.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-01290 Filed 1-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Benchmarking of a Generic CANDU Reactor with PARCS, MCNP and RFSP (NUREG/IA-0453)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0453 (PDF - 17.8 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**June 2015**Date Published:** September 2015

**Prepared by:** B. Arsenault, O. Shaikh, T. Downar*, D. Jabaay*, A. Ward*, Y. Xu*,

AMEC-NSS, 4th Floor, 700 University Ave, Toronto, Ontario M5G1X6, Canada

*University of Michigan, Nuclear Eng. and Rad. Science 1934 Cooley, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2104, USA

K. Tien, NRC Project Manager

Division of Systems Analysis Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange Under the Thermal-Hydraulic Code Applications and Maintenance Program (CAMP)

**Published by:** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The purpose of this project is to benchmark a generic CANDU reactor with the computer codes PARCS, MCNP and RFSP. RFSP is a diffusion code used by the Canadian nuclear industry for fuel management and for safety analyses. A number of changes were made to PARCS and GenPMAXS, the utility used to generate the fuel tables for PARCS. The changes were required to allow the modeling of specific aspects related to CANDU reactors.

More specifically, the benchmarking exercise involves an assessment of the Finite Difference Method and the hybrid NEM/ANM solvers available in PARCS against the results of Monte Carlo simulations performed with MCNP. The results of the simulations calculated with the Finite Difference Methods in PARCS and RFSP are compared to determine possible areas of improvement in RFSP.

This work is an in-kind contribution and has been funded by Amec Foster Wheeler.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED STATEMENTS OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF BERTHEL FISHER & CO. LEASING,
INC. AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND THE UNAUDITED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF
BERTHEL FISHER & CO. LEASING, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,203,415
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (560,211)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,643,204
<PP&E>                                       2,413,558
<DEPRECIATION>                               (137,749)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,919,013
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,965,214
<BONDS>                                      8,451,167
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    720,899
<OTHER-SE>                                   (219,267)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,919,013
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            20,616,686
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,671,543
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               324,363
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,247,151
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (626,371)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (217,240)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (409,131)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (409,131)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.02)
        

</TABLE>
ZUCKERT SCOUTT ft-RASENBERGER, LLP 

ATTOKNKYS A'. I.AW '" 3^\RTMENT OF 

888 Seventeenth Street, NTVy Washington, DC 20006-5309 ' ^-.t'lSPORTATION 

Telephone [2021298-8660 Fax [2021542-0685 ' /''; OP£RATjQj\l§ 

wvsovzsrlawcom 

T? !3 P ^- OS 

September 13, 2010 

By Hand 

Ms. Renee Wright 

Program Manager, Docket Operations 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Office of Transportation Disaster Assistance 

National Transportation Safety Board 

490 L'Enfant Plaza East, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20594 

Attention: Mr. Eric Grosof 

Re: ANA WINGS CO., LTD. Family Assistance Plan 

In connection with the August 27, 2010 application of ANA WINGS CO., LTD. ("ANA 

WINGS") (docket OST-2010-0217, presently doing business as Air Nippon Network Co., Ltd.), 

this letter will confirm that ANA WINGS has adopted the Family Assistance Plan of All Nippon 

Airways Co., Ltd. ("ANA"), which is on file with the Department. ANA WINGS is a subsidiary 

of ANA. 

Sincerely, 

David M. Endersbee 

Counsel for ANA WINGS CO., LTD.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

           In connection with the Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q of Kensey Nash
Corporation (the "Company") for the three months ended December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Joseph W. Kaufmann, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

           (1)        the Report fully complies with the requirements of section
                      13(a) or section 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.



Dated: February 14, 2003                         /s/ Joseph W. Kaufmann
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Joseph W. Kaufmann
                                                 Chief Executive Officer



                                       23
EXHIBIT 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation
by reference in the following Registration Statements:



|(1) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-134741) pertaining to the Union Drilling, Inc. Amended and Restated 2000 Stock Option Plan, 2005 Stock Option Plan and
Stock Option Plan and Agreement of Christopher D. Strong, and
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-161996) of Union Drilling, Inc.;
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated March 4, 2011, with respect to the financial statements of Union Drilling, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Union Drilling, Inc.
included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Union Drilling, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2010.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Fort Worth, Texas

March 4, 2011
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1828 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for payments 

for certain rural health clinic and Federally qualified health center services furnished to hospice patients under the Medicare program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 30, 2017 

Ms. JENKINS of Kansas (for herself and Mr. KIND) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 

for payments for certain rural health clinic and Federally 

qualified health center services furnished to hospice patients under the Medicare program. 

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 ‘‘Rural Access to Hos5 pice Act of 2017’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1828 IH

1 SEC. 2. MEDICARE PAYMENT FOR CERTAIN RURAL HEALTH 

2 CLINIC AND FEDERALLY QUALIFIED HEALTH 

3 CENTER SERVICES FURNISHED TO HOSPICE 

4 PATIENTS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1812(d)(2) of the Social 

6 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395d(d)(2)) is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (A)— 

8 (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by 

9 striking ‘‘subparagraphs (B) and (C)’’ and in10 serting ‘‘the succeeding provisions of this para11 graph’’; 

12 (B) in clause (ii)(II), by striking the semi13 colon and inserting a period; and 

14 (C) by striking ‘‘except that’’ and all that 

15 follows through ‘‘hospice program.’’; and 

16 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub17 paragraph: 

18 ‘‘(E) Subparagraph (A)(ii) shall not apply to— 

19 ‘‘(i) physicians’ services furnished by the indi20 vidual’s attending physician (as defined in section 

21 1861(dd)(3)(B)), if the physician is not an employee 

22 of the hospice program; 

23 ‘‘(ii) services provided by (or under arrange24 ments made by) the hospice program; or 

25 ‘‘(iii) rural health clinic services (as defined in 

26 paragraph (1) of section 1861(aa)) and Federally 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1828 IH

1 qualified health center services (as defined in para2 graph (3) of such section) if such services— 

3 ‘‘(I) would otherwise be physicians’ serv4 ices if furnished by an individual not affiliated 

5 with a rural health clinic (as defined in para6 graph (2) of such section) or a Federally quali7 fied health center (as defined in paragraph (4) 

8 of such section); and 

9 ‘‘(II) are furnished by the individual’s at10 tending physician (as so defined), if such physi11 cian is not an employee of the hospice program, 

12 or are provided under arrangements made by 

13 the hospice program.’’. 

14 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

15 this section shall apply to services furnished on or after 

16 the date that is 6 months after the date of the enactment 

17 of this Act. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsBrochures Prepared by NRC StaffThe Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Fire of 1975 and the History of NRC Fire Regulations (NUREG/BR-0361)

# The Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Fire of 1975 and the History of NRC Fire Regulations:Printed Brochure(NUREG/BR-0361)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Introduction

Download complete document
        - NUREG/BR-0361 (PDF - 2.17 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published**: February 2009

**Prepared by**: David Stroup, Jessica Kratchman, Felix E. Gonzalez, Mark Henry Salley

Fire Research Branch Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

## Introduction

Fire events provide a unique source of historical data, but only when the lessons learned provide advancements in safety. When these lessons are learned but not preserved, they are often repeated.

The purpose of this brochure and DVD (Supplement 1 to NUREG/BR-0361) is to preserve the history of the fire at the Browns Ferry Nuclear (BFN) Power Plant and its impact on regulations, and to educate future generations of safety professionals.

Fire protection in commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs) has been a longstanding challenge since operations began. In the 1960s and 1970s, when most of today's nuclear power reactors were being constructed, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) predecessor—the Atomic Energy Commission—began adopting rules and regulations to ensure fire safety. The first adopted fire protection regulation was General Design Criterion (GDC) 3, "Fire Protection," as Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 50 in February 1971. The GDC 3, in part, states that:
> 
*Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed and located to minimize, consistent with other safety requirements, the probability and effect of fires and explosions. Noncombustible and heat-resistant materials shall be used wherever practical throughout the unit, particularly in such locations as the containment and control room.*

During this time, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) also developed several standards for fire protection safety in the nuclear industry. These first standards were:
        - IEEE 279-1971, "Criteria for Protection Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations."
        - IEEE 383-1974, "IEEE Standard for Type Test of Class 1E Electric Cables,Field Splices, and Connections for Nuclear Power Generating Stations."
        - IEEE 384-1974, "IEEE Standard Criteria for Independence of Class 1E Equipment and Circuits."

NRC published Regulatory Guide 1.75 in February 1974 and provided the basis for complying with the IEEE 384-1974 standard. Since that time, the agency has updated RG 1.75 to Revision 3, dated February 2005.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsInterim Staff Guidance

# Interim Staff Guidance Associated with Research and Test Reactors

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, June 05, 2023
*May 25, 1937.*

#### Spindler, Respondent, vs. Prissel and another, Appellants : General Casualty Company, Interpleaded Defendant.

For the appellants : *Farr & MacLeod*of Eau Claire, attorneys, and *Richmond, Jackman, Wilkie & Toebaas*of Madison of counsel.

For the respondent: *Willis E. Donley*and *A. M. Jelik,*both of Menomonie.

For the interpleaded defendant: *Bundy, Beach & Holland*of Eau Claire.

*By the Court.*—

Judgment affirmed.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsBrochures Prepared by NRC Staff

# United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Organizational Values(NUREG/BR-0456)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Introduction

Download complete document
        - NUREG/BR-0456 (PDF - 1.14 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** September 2009

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

## Introduction

NRC Organizational Values In conducting all our work, we at the NRC adhere to the following fundamental organizational values. These values guide every action we take; from a decision on a safety, security or environmental issue; to how we perform an administrative task; to how we interact with our fellow employees and other stakeholders.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
No. 82-5925.

#### McColpin *v.*United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 10.3

 

2011 PERFORMANCE SHARE PROGRAM

AWARD CALCULATION METHODOLOGY

(Exhibit A to the 2011 Performance Share Program)

 

	
Parameter
    	
 
    	
Description
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Designated Participants
    	
 
    	
Senior Vice Presidents and above (or   equivalent) as designated by the Committee.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Performance Period
    	
 
    	
The Company’s 2011 fiscal year.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Award Agreement
    	
 
    	
A Maximum Award (in addition to a target   award) for each Designated Participant will be approved by the Committee and   set forth in each Designated Participant’s Award Agreement.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Performance Goal
    	
 
    	
The Company must achieve an initial   threshold level of performance (the “Performance Goal”) in order for any   Performance Shares to be earned.  The   Performance Goal is the achievement of at least 80% of the GAAP revenue   target set forth in the Board-approved 2011 annual operating plan.

 

·                        If the Performance Goal is not met, no Performance Shares will be   earned under the Program.

·                        If the Performance Goal is met, Designated Participants will be   credited with their Maximum Awards, subject to a reduction based on the   achievement of Other Performance Goals which will determine the Actual Award   earned.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Other Performance Goals
    	
 
    	
The Other Performance Goals are the five   strategic objectives approved by the Committee.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Actual Award Determination
    	
 
    	
The Maximum Award will be reduced to equal   the number of Performance Shares earned as an Actual Award based on the   achievement of the Other Performance Goals.    For each set of Other Performance Goals:
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
	
Other
   Performance Goal
   Weight 
    	
 

x 
    	
Number of
   Performance Shares
   in Target Award
    	
 

x
    	
Other
   Performance Goal
   Achievement %
    	
 

=
    	
Actual
   Performance
   Shares
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
·                        All five sets of Other Performance Goals are weighted equally (20%   each)

·                        The Other Performance Goal Achievement % for each Other Performance   Goal is capped at 150%.

 

The Actual Award earned equals the sum of   the Actual Performance Shares determined using the equation above for all of   the Other Performance Goals.  Any   partial share of an Actual Award shall be rounded up to the next whole share.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Spent Nuclear Fuel Transportation Package Performance Study Issues Report (NUREG/CR-6768,SAND2001-08211P)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Introduction

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6768 (PDF - 7.01 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**January 2001**Date Published:** June 2002

**Prepared by:** J.L. Sprung, D.J. Ammerman, J.A. Koski, R.F. Weiner Transportation Risk and Packaging Organization 6141, MS 0718 P.O. Box 5800 Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-0744

R. Lewis, NRC Project Manager

**Prepared for:** Spent Fuel Project Office Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission****Washington, DC 20555-0001 

NRC Job Code J5285

Availability Notice

## Introduction

This report presents the results of the scoping phase of the Package Performance Study which Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) is performing for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The report presents SNL's evaluation of the research that could be undertaken to address stakeholder concerns about the safety performance of spent fuel and spent fuel packages during the unlikely but severe transportation accidents and thereby increase public confidence in the safety of spent fuel shipments. The Package Performance Study will reexamine the level of protection provided by NRC certified spent fuel transportation package designs under severe accident conditions. The study will update the methods and results of a 1987 study of package performance under severs accident conditions, commonly referred to as the Modal Study (NUREG/CR-4829), and the extensions of those methods used in a recently completed study (NUREG/CR-6672), which estimates the risks of transporting spent fuel by truck and rail.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021