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

# Reporting Safety Concerns to the NRC (NUREG/BR-0240,  Revision 8)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Introduction

Download complete document
        - NUREG/BR-0240, Revision 8 (PDF – 2.63 MB)  |  Spanish translation (PDF – 2.12 MB)
        - Notice to Employees (NRC Form 3)  |  Aviso a los Empleados (NRC Form 3A)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:**August 2017

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

## Introduction

Anyone should feel free to communicate any safety concern to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). It is the NRC's policy to encourage workers at NRC-regulated facilities to take safety concerns to their own management first, since the facility operator has the primary responsibility for, and is most able to ensure, safe nuclear operations. However, workers and other members of the public can bring safety concerns directly to the NRC at any time. It is the agency's responsibility to respond to those concerns in a timely manner and to protect the identity of the individual to the greatest degree possible.

This brochure discusses how you as a nuclear industry worker or a concerned member of the public can report safety concerns to the NRC, the degree to which the NRC can protect your identity, and the NRC process for handling allegations of discrimination against workers by licensees, their contractors, or subcontractors.

For the purpose of this brochure, the term "licensee" refers to an organization or an individual – or a contractor, subcontractor, or vendor to an organization or an individual – that is an applicant for, or holder of, a license, permit, or certificate issued by the NRC.

Safety concerns may be potential or actual safety issues associated with the NRC's jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, the areas of design, construction, operation, maintenance, radiation protection, safeguards, security, emergency preparedness, harassment, intimidation, retaliation, discrimination, wrongdoing, a work environment that discourages workers from raising safety concerns, and other matters related to NRC-regulated activities.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Verification of RESRAD-OFFSITE (NUREG/CR-7038, ANL-10/27)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7038 (PDF - 2.44 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** October 2010**Date Published:** October 2011

**Prepared by:** C. Yu, E.K. Gnanapragasam, J. J. Cheng, S. Kamboj, B.M. Biwer, and D.J. LePoire

Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439

John D. Randall, NRC Project Manager

NRC Job Code N6731

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report documents the procedures used and the results obtained regarding the verification of the RESRAD-OFFSITE computer code. The RESRAD-OFFSITE code is an extension of the original RESRAD (onsite) code. The RESRAD-OFFSITE and RESRAD (onsite) codes share the same database and many models and modules. The RESRAD (onsite) code has already been extensively tested, verified, and validated. Many parameter values used in the RESRAD-OFFSITE code were taken from the RESRAD (onsite) database. These parameters include soil-plant transfer factors, meat and milk transfer factors, bioaccumulation factors, dose conversion factors, decay half-lives, and scenario-specific occupancy factors. The RESRAD (onsite) database is well documented and verified. Components of the RESRAD-OFFSITE code were verified by separately developed spreadsheets or benchmarked against the RESRAD (onsite) code. Independent verification was performed using calculations external to the RESRAD-OFFSITE code. Microsoft Excel® spreadsheets were used to verify all the major portions of the RESRAD-OFFSITE code, including the source term model, groundwater transport model, air dispersion model, and accumulation in offsite soil and in food models.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
#### NANCY MILLER v. L. F. CHURCHILL and W. H. MILLER, Administrators of Martha T. Miller.

*Will*— Construction *of*— Natural *Heirs.*

tWhere a testatrix bequeathed a certain sum each to her two sisters M ;and N, “ and in the event of the death of either without *natural ..heirs,*the amount I have bequeathed shall go to the survivor *Held*ithat the words natural heirs ” mean children or issue ; and upon ••-.the -death of M, the bequest to her goes to 3ST.

¿CONTROVERSY without action (C. C. P. § 315) involving the *373Construction of a Will submitted at Fall Term, 1877, of Ruthebroud Superior Court, to *Kerr, J.*

The only part of the will of the testatrix (Ann E. Birchett), material for the decision of the Court, is as follows: “ I bequeath to my sisters Nancy (plaintiff) and Martha (defendants’ intestate) each one thousand dollars * * * and in. the event of the death of either without leaving *natural heirs,.*the amount I have bequeathed, shall go to the survivor.”' Martha died without issue, and the question to be decidedi is, — -whether Nancy takes her legacy as her survivor.

Ills Honor being of opinion with the plaintiff gave judgment in her favor for the amount of said legacy to be paid by the defendants out of the assets in their hands belonging to the estate of their intestate. From which judgment the: defendants appealed.

*Messrs. Shipp <J-*Bailey, for plaintiff.

*Mr.*7F. *J.*Montgomery, for defendants.

Fairoloth, J.

(After stating the case as above.) The-word *“*heirs” is *nomen generalissimum*and in a comprehensive sense may'include all kinds of heirs; and so, *natural'*heirs may do the same thing. The common understanding, would say at once that natural heirs meant children, andi looking at the situation and relation of the parlies and alF the circumstances, we think this was the meaning of the-testatrix. She well understood that no one could have unnatural heirs; and as the word heirs alone might include-both lineal and collateral, we think she intended something less than the whole class, and that she meant, children or-issue, by the term *natural*heirs.

Again, if it be understood to mean heirs generally, then, the proposition is fatal to itself, inasmuch as it was impossible for either to die without an heir. Upon the death of. *374■either one, the other was her collateral heir. *Reductio ad absurdum.*Our conclusion derives force from Battle’s Revisal, ch. 42 § § 3, 5.

No error.

Per CuRIAm. Judgment affirmed.
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-202-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
---

CERTIFICATION 
  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF 
  TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
  Code), each of the undersigned officers of Medicure Inc. (the "Company"), does
  hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 20-F
  for the year ended May 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
  on the date hereof (the "Form 20-F") that, to the best of their knowledge:

(1)
       the Form 20-F 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 Form 20-F fairly
  presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
  of the Company.

|Date: September 10, 2004 | /s/ Albert D. Friesen         | 
|------------------------ | ----------------------------- | 
|                         | Chief Executive Officer       | 
|                         | (Principal Executive Officer) | 

|Date: September 10, 2004 | /s/ Derek Reimer              | 
|------------------------ | ----------------------------- | 
|                         | Chief Financial Officer       | 
|                         | (Principal Financial Officer) | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
  906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting
  the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
  written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company
  and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
  Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification is furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b)
  (17 CFR 240.13a -14(b)) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United
  States Code (18 U.S.C. 1350) as an exhibit to the Report.

---
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Available in Adams

# Publications Available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) – 2007

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - 2024
          - 2023
          - 2022
          - 2021
          - 2020
          - 2019
          - 2018
          - 2017
          - 2016
          - 2015
          - 2014
          - 2013
          - 2012
          - 2011
          - 2010
          - 2009
          - 2008
          - 2007
          - 2006
          - 2005
          - 2004
          - 2003
          - 2002
          - 2001
          - 2000
          - 1999
          - 1998
          - 1997
          - 1980-1996

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

#### Search NUREG Pubs

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
**Exhibit 10.57**
**Second Extension Agreement**
     This Second Extension Agreement is dated August 16, 2004 between TollgradeCommunications, Inc., having an address at 493 Nixon Road, Cheswick, PA 15024(“Tollgrade”) and Dictaphone Corporation, acting through its ElectronicManufacturing Services Division, with an address at 3900 W. Sarno Rd.,Melbourne, FL 32934 (“Dictaphone”).
     **WHEREAS**, Tollgrade (as successor in interest to Acterna Corporation) andDictaphone are parties to a Supply Agreement dated July 25, 2002, which setsforth the terms pursuant to which Dictaphone manufactures and supplies toTollgrade, and Tollgrade purchases from Dictaphone, certain products (the“Supply Agreement”);
     **WHEREAS**, the Supply Agreement was scheduled to expire on July 24, 2004,and pursuant to that certain Extension Agreement dated July 21, 2004, theparties extended the term of the Agreement through August 20, 2004;
     **WHEREAS**, Tollgrade and Dictaphone desire to replace the Supply Agreementwith a new supply agreement, but have not yet completed negotiations withrespect to such new supply agreement; and
     **WHEREAS**, Tollgrade and Dictaphone desire to further extend the term of theSupply Agreement through September 30, 2004 or until a new supply agreement isexecuted, if sooner;
     **NOW THEREFORE**, in consideration of the premises contained herein and forother good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows:
     **1. Extension of Supply Agreement.**The parties hereby agree that theSupply Agreement is hereby extended through September 30, 2004 or until suchtime as the parties execute a new supply agreement, if sooner.
     **2. Miscellaneous.**Except as extended hereby, the provisions of theSupply Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This Second ExtensionAgreement will be governed in all respects by the laws of the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania without reference to any choice of law provisions. This SecondExtension Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by thedifferent parties hereto on separate counterparts, each of which, when soexecuted, shall be deemed an original, but all such counterparts shallconstitute but one and the same instrument.
     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands the datefirst above written.           **TOLLGRADE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.** **DICTAPHONE CORPORATION**           By: /s/ Jennifer M. Reinke By: /s/ James Davis            Name: Jennifer M. Reinke Name: James Davis    Title: Assistant Secretary Title: Sr. VP, Operations
EXHIBIT 32.2





Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Dennis Harkins, President and Chief Financial Officer of Zanett, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-K/A of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2010 (“the Company Form 10- K/A”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the Company Form 10- K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Dennis Harkins

June 8, 2011Dennis Harkins – President and Chief Financial Officer

Date
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Hazards to Nuclear Power Plants from Large Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Spills on Water (NUREG/CR-2490,ANL-CT-81-17)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-2490 (PDF - 6.40 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed**: March 1981**Date Published**: November 1981

**Prepared by:** C.A. Kot, T.V. Eichler*+, A.H. Wiedermann*+, R. Pape,* and M.G. Srinivasan Components Technology Division Department of Nuclear Energy  Argonne National Laboratory  9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439

*Staff of IIT Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois +Currently affiliated with ATResearch Associates, Glen Ellyn, Illinois 

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

Under Interagency Agreement DOE 40-550-75

NRC FIN A-2072

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The hazards to nuclear power plants arising from large spills of liquefied natural gas (LNG) on water transportation routes are treated by deterministic analytical procedures. Global models, which address the salient features of the LNG spill phenomena are used in the analysis. A coupled computational model for the combined LNG spill, spreading, and fire scenario is developed. To predict the air blast environment in the vicinity of vapor clouds with "pancake-like" geometries, a scalable procedure using both analytical methods and hydrocode calculations is synthesized. Simple response criteria from the fire and weapons effects literature are used to characterize the susceptibility of safety-related power plant systems. The vulnerability of these systems Is established either by direct comparison between the LM threat and the susceptibility criteria or through simple response calculations.

The analysis and results indicate that the spreading of LNG vapor clouds up to the lower flammability limit Is dominated by gravitational effects. Severe fire and blast hazards occur only at locations directly engulfed by the LNG vapor cloud or in its immediate vicinity. Thermal loads resulting from an LNG fire are of short duration and can in general be tolerated by the safety-related power plant systems and components. On the other hand, blast loads from LNG vapor cloud explosions can cause severe damage to those systems. The safety standoff distance between the power plant site and the LNG spill location is primarily dependent on the wind- Induced LNG vapor cloud drift. Under strong wind conditions (8.96 m/s) it is estimated, that severe effects on the power plant may be experienced at distances in excess of 10 km in the down wind direction. To reach a no damage level under these adverse conditions a standoff distance of approximately 15 km may be required.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
### (nungrPSs nf t4P Uni#eb ^$ :ttt#es wtts4ingtait, BT 20515

March 2, 2015 The Honorable Gina McCarthy Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Administrator McCarthy, We understand the EPA has scheduled one public hearing in Washington, DC on March 10, 2015 on the proposed rule regarding 40 CFR Part 192 Health and Environmental Protection Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings. We respectively request you schedule ar additional public hearing in a geographically central location relative to uranium production, Given the substantial uranium production in Wyoming, we request that you hold a hearing i^ Casper, Wyoming. The State of Wyoming accounts for the largest share of any state in total production of uranjur, As such, the Wyoming Mining Association requested a public hearing be held in Casper, Wyoming so participation by industry and local interests can be maximized. All of Wyomi g' uranium is produced by in-situ recovery, which is directly impacted by this rulemaking. additional hearing in the leading uranium producing state would allow for public input fro those most likely to be impacted and would provide an opportunity for clarifying the rule. e have heard many concerns with the underlying proposed rule and believe our constituents shot have the opportunity to express them prior to the comment period closing. i We also request a 90 day extension to the comment period, currently closing onApri127, 2 15. The costs associated with this rulemaking need to be properly analyzed prior to finalization and state environmental regulators need time to determine how the rule would change their c nt groundwater protection laws. Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to receiving a timely response.

Sincerely,

. 

### • .^, ^ 

# OR
r* .S.' Mike Enzi John Barrasso . L i^ U.S. Senator U.S. Senator esent tive

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
EXHIBIT 10.2

 

ENDORSEMENT TO 10% SENIOR SECURED CONVERTIBLE NOTE

 

Precision Optics Corporation, Inc.
 New York, New York
 January 10, 2011

 

The 10% Senior Secured Convertible Note dated June 25, 2008 and amended December 11, 2008, June 25, 2010 July 26, 2010, September 15, 2010, October 15, 2010, November 15, 2010, November 30, 2010, December 1, 2010, December 3, 2010 and December 17, 2010 (the “Note”) of Precision Optics Corporation, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), payable to the order of Special Situations Private Equity Fund, L.P. (the “Holder”) in an aggregate principal amount of $275,000 and to which the Endorsement is affixed is hereby amended in the following respects:

 

1.             The term “Stated Maturity Date” is hereby restated to be “January 24, 2011.”

 

2.             Except as expressly amended by this Endorsement, the Note remains in full force and effect and the Company hereby reconfirms its obligations thereunder.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Endorsement to be duly executed, and the Holder has caused this Endorsement to be duly accepted, by their respective duly authorized representatives as of the day and year first above written.

 

 

	
 
  	
PRECISION OPTICS CORPORATION, INC.
  
	
 
  	
 
  	
 
  
	
 
  	
By
  	
/s/ Richard E. Forkey
  
	
 
  	
 
  	
 
  
	
 
  	
 
  	
Name: Richard E. Forkey
  
	
 
  	
 
  	
Title: Chief Executive Officer
  


 

	
Accepted:
  	
 
  
	
 
  	
 
  	
 
  
	
SPECIAL SITUATIONS PRIVATE EQUITY FUND, L.P.
  	
 
  
	
 
  	
 
  	
 
  
	
By:
  	
/s/ David Greenhouse
  	
 
  
	
 
  	
 
  	
 
  
	
 
  	
Name: David Greenhouse
  	
 
  
	
 
  	
Title: General Partner
No. 82-5937.

#### Ford *v.*Superintendent, Kentucky State Penitentiary.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
From: "James Bell" <jbell@shin

- tech.com>

To: RCG

- VCM@EPA, Jodi

Howard/RTP/USEPA/US@ EPA

Cc: "Michael Bracy" <mkbracy@819eagle.com>

Date: 09/15/2011 11:36 AM

Subject: Shintech EDC/VCM 114 Submittals

Ms. Howard,

Attached are EDC/VCM 114 submittals; the excel sp readsheet with the

required information as stated in the EDC/VCM 114 request, along with

the EDC

- VCM 114 stack testing final report.

Please contact me if you have any further questions or concerns.

Regards,

James S. Bell

Environmental Supervisor

Shint ech Louisiana, LLC

P.O. Box 358, Addis, LA 70710

jbell@shin

- tech.com

225

- 685

- 1199 ext. 4420

(See attached file: Shintech_VCM_EDC_Emissions_Test_Data.xls)(See

attached file: Shintech_ EDC

- VCM 114_Stack Testing Final

Report_9

- 13

- 2011.pdf)
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before 

STEPHENS, STARITA, and DEERWESTER

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Christian M. EPPS

Corporal (E-4), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

No. 202100197

_________________________

Decided: 13 December 2021

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 

Military Judges: 

John P. Norman (arraignment)

Derek A. Poteet (trial)

Sentence adjudged 18 February 2021 by a special court-martial convened at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California, consisting of 

a military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment:

reduction to E-1, confinement for 100 days, a fine of $200, forfeiture of 

$900 pay per month for 6 months, and a bad-conduct discharge.

For Appellant: 

Lieutenant Commander Daniel O. Moore, JAGC, USN
United States v. Epps, NMCCA No. 202100197

Opinion of the Court

2

_________________________

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under 

NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

_________________________

PER CURIAM:

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law 

and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial 

rights occurred.1

The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR.

Clerk of Court

 

1 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.