alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2014309EN.01002801.xml

| 30.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 309/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 309/28

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1155/2014

of 29 October 2014

correcting the Swedish language version of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 564/2013 on the fees and charges payable to the European Chemicals Agency pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products (1), and in particular Article 80(1) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | There is an error in the Swedish language version of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 564/2013 (2) which should be corrected. The other language versions are not affected. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

There is an error in the Swedish language version of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 564/2013 (2) which should be corrected. The other language versions are not affected.

| (2) | Implementing Regulation (EU) No 564/2013 should therefore be corrected accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 564/2013 should therefore be corrected accordingly.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Implementing Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Implementing Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Concerns only the Swedish language version.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 29 October 2014.

For the Commission

The President

José Manuel BARROSO

---

(1)  
  OJ L 167, 27.6.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 564/2013 of 18 June 2013 on the fees and charges payable to the European Chemicals Agency pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products (OJ L 167, 19.6.2013, p. 17).

2

---
Exhibit 31



CERTIFICATION



I, Robert Freiheit, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Ameralink, 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. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiary, 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 small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and



5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer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 small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



Date:  May 11, 2005



/s/ Robert Freiheit



Robert Freiheit, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

1

20111209.1
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Generic Aging Lessons Learned for Subsequent License Renewal (GALL-SLR) Report  (NUREG-2191)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 11, 2023
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Influence of the Wetting State of a Heated Surface on Heat Transfer and Pressure Loss in an Evaporator Tube (NUREG/IA-0003)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0003 (PDF - 4.35 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:**September 1986

**Prepared by:** W. Kdhler, D. Hein

Kraftmerk Union AG Erlangen, Federal Republic of Germany

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

**Published by:** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The influence of the wetting state of a heated surface on heat transfer and pressure loss in an evaporator tube was investigated for a parameter range occurring in fossil-fired steam generators. Included in the analysis are quantities which determine the wetting state in steady and transient flow.

The experimental work consists of the following:
        - occurrence of critical heat flux (CHF) and post-CHF heat transfer in a vertical upflow evaporator tube
        - influence of pressure and enthalpy transients on heat transfer in the unwetted region
        - influence of pipe orientation on heat transfer
        - two phase flow pressure loss in wetted and unwetted region.

Based on these experiments a method of predicting CHF for a vertical upflow evaporator tube was developed. The heat transfer in the unwetted region was newly formulated taking into account thermal nonequilibrium between the water and steam phases. Wall temperature excursions during pressure and enthalpy transients are interpreted with the help of the boiling curve and the Leidenfrost phenomenon. A method is developed by means of which it is possible to determine the influence of the pipe orientation on the location of the boiling crisis as well as on the heat transfer in the unwetted region. The influence of the wetting state of the heated surface on the two phase flow pressure loss is interpreted as "Wall effect" and is calculated using a simplified computer model.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Frank Hinshaw, SKYDIVING 

SCHOOL, INC., d/b/a SKYDIVE 

HA WAil AND ISLAND SKYDIVING, 

LLC 

COMPLAINANT 

v. 

THE STATE OF HAWAII 

RESPONDENT 

Docket No. 16-12-04 

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME 

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the above-referenced 

complaint, ftled in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport 

Enforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR Part 16 (Rules of Practice). Pursuant to the Rules of Practice, 

§16.11(a), the date by which the Director, FAA Office of Airport Compliance and Field 

Operations will issue a Director's Determination in this matter is hereby extended to on or before 

December 10, 2012. 

An extension of time is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination in this 

case. Accordingly, pursuant to 14 CFR § 16.11 (a), the Director's Determination will be issued 

on or before December 10, 2012. 

Randall S. Fiertz 

Director, Office of Airport Compliance 

and Management Analysis 

S~(f ulz 

Date 

--------·······-·-·-----
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September -!f-:::, 2012 I placed in the United States mail (first 

class, postage paid), a true copy of the Notice of Extension of Time addressed to: 

Frank Hinshaw 

Skydiving School Inc., 

d/b/a Skydive Hawaii 

PO Box 75520 

Honolulu, HI 96836 

Complainant 

Richard J. Durden 

Attorney at Law 

27987 Richmond Hill Road 

Conifer, CO 80433 

Counsel for Complainant 

Glenn I. Kimura 

Deputy Attorney General 

Department of the Attorney General, State of Hawaii 

465 S. King Street, Room 300 

Honolulu, HI 96813 

Counsel for Respondent 

Copy to: 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

FAA Airport Compliance and Management Analysis (A CO-l 00) 

~~~ e Torgerson 

Office of Airport Compliance and 

Management Analysis 

------------------------
Officer and Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.1 
 2011 Executive Officer Compensation 
 On January 21, 2011, the Compensation Committee
of the Board of Directors of Volterra Semiconductor Corporation (the “Company”) approved certain compensation matters for its executive officers. 
 The Compensation Committee did not change base salaries for the executive officers from existing levels, but did approve: (i) 2011 option grants; (ii) bonuses under the Company’s 2010
Management Bonus Plan and (iii) additional performance based bonuses for individual performance in 2010: 
  

													
	 Name and Title
	  	2011 Option
Grants	 	  	2010
Bonus	 	  	Additional
Performance
Bonus	 
	 Jeff Staszak
	  				  				  			
	 President and Chief Executive Officer
	  	 	140,000	  	  	$	346,500	  	  	$	75,000	  
				
	 Mike Burns
	  				  				  			
	 Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
	  	 	33,000	  	  	$	150,000	  	  			
				
	 Bill Numann
	  				  				  			
	 Senior Vice President, New Product Development
	  	 	40,000	  	  	$	141,000	  	  	$	40,000	  
				
	 Craig Teuscher
	  				  				  			
	 Senior Vice President, Operations, Mnfg. Eng. & Quality Assurance
	  	 	40,000	  	  	$	144,000	  	  	$	30,000	  
				
	 Tom Truman
	  				  				  			
	 Vice President, World Wide Sales
	  	 	33,000	  	  	$	107,625	  	  	$	25,000	  

 Under the Company’s standard
option grant procedures, these option grants shall be made on the fourth business day following the release of the Company’s Q4 2010 earnings information. 
 2011 Non-Employee Director Compensation 
 On January 21, 2011, the Company’s Board
of Directors, upon the recommendation of the Compensation Committee, revised the cash compensation of the non-employee directors, to increase the annual cash retainer for the Chairman of the Board of Directors from $10,000 to $20,000 and to increase
the annual cash retainer for each member of the Board of Directors from $25,000 to $35,000. 
 Following these approvals, the annual cash
retainer for service on the Company’s Board and Committees shall be: 
  

					
	 Chairman of the Board of Directors:
	  	$	20,000	  
	 Member of Board of Directors:
	  	$	35,000	  
	 Member of Audit Committee: *
	  	$	7,000	  
	 Member of Compensation Committee: *
	  	$	3,500	  
	 Member of Nominating and Governance Committee:*
	  	$	2,500	  
	 Audit Committee Chair:*
	  	$	15,000	  
	 Compensation Committee Chair:*
	  	$	7,000	  
	 Nominating and Governance Committee Chair:*
	  	$	5,000	  

  

	*	represents no change from previously approved compensation
Exhibit 13.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANTTO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
     In connection with the report of Claxson Interactive Group Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 20-F as furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Roberto Vivo-Chaneton, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adoptedpursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and result ofoperations of the Company.
Dated: July 15, 2004         By:                                           /s/ Roberto Vivo-Chaneton    Name:  Roberto Vivo-Chaneton    Title:  Chief Financial Officer
# L_2015329DE.01002802.xml

| 15.12.2015 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 329/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2015

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 329/28

---

Berichtigung der Delegierten Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1382/2014 der Kommission vom 22. Oktober 2014 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 428/2009 des Rates über eine Gemeinschaftsregelung für die Kontrolle der Ausfuhr, der Verbringung, der Vermittlung und der Durchfuhr von Gütern mit doppeltem Verwendungszweck

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 371 vom 30. Dezember 2014
  )

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 371 vom 30. Dezember 2014

Seite 128, Anhang zur Änderung des Anhangs I der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 428/2009, Kategorie 3 — Allgemeine Elektronik, Nummer 3E201:

Kategorie 3 — Allgemeine Elektronik

Anstatt:

„‚Technologie‘ entsprechend der Allgemeinen Technologie-Anmerkung für die ‚Verwendung‘ bis 3A233.“

muss es heißen:

„‚Technologie‘ entsprechend der Allgemeinen Technologie-Anmerkung für die ‚Verwendung‘ von Ausrüstung, erfasst von Unternummern 3A001e2, 3A001e3, 3A001g und Nummern 3A201, 3A225 bis 3A234.“

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Omar Williams, Appellant.

[773 NYS2d 110]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County *515Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), rendered June 23, 2000, convicting him of kidnapping in the second degree, assault in the second degree, and grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of imprisonment of 25 years on the conviction of kidnapping in the second degree, 7 years on the conviction of assault in the second degree, and SVs to 7 years on the conviction of grand larceny in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by providing that the terms of imprisonment imposed on the convictions of kidnapping in the second degree and assault in the second degree shall run concurrently with each other, and by vacating the sentence imposed on the conviction of grand larceny in the fourth degree; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for resentencing in accordance herewith.

Pursuant to Penal Law § 70.25 (2), “[w]hen more than one sentence of imprisonment is imposed on a person for two or more offenses committed through a single act or omission . . . the sentences . . . must run concurrently.” This section applies to acts committed during the course of a kidnapping *(see People v Gonzalez,*80 NY2d 146 [1992]). Here, the defendant assaulted his former girlfriend as he kidnapped her. Accordingly, the sentences imposed on the convictions of kidnapping in the second degree and assault in the second degree must run concurrently.

In addition, pursuant to Penal Law § 70.06 (3) (e) and (4) (b), a second felony offender convicted of grand larceny in the fourth degree, a class E nonviolent felony, must be sentenced to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of three to four years and a minimum of one half of the maximum. As the sentence imposed here was not within these statutory guidelines, it must be vacated.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are not properly preserved for appellate review and, in any event, are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., H. Miller, Crane and Rivera, JJ., concur.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffHuman Factors Engineering Program Review Model (NUREG-0711, Revision 3)

# Contact Us About Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model (NUREG-0711)

If you need to report a safety concern, please do not use this page. Instead, please see Report a Safety or Security Concern.

Would you like to remain anonymous?:*

YesNo

Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION 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-Q of Open Text Corporation
(the "Company") for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, P.
Thomas Jenkins, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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


                                                         /s/ P. Thomas Jenkins
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         P. Thomas Jenkins
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

Dated: February 14, 2003
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. VIVIAN A. CRAIG, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division

Argued May 23, 1977

Decided June 16, 1977.

*514Before Judges Fritz, Ard and Pressler.

*Mr. Henry E. Rzemieniewski*argued the cause for appellant *(Messrs. Chase, Rzemieniewski & Gorney,*attorneys).

*Mr. Peter H. Brennan,*Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent *(Mr. William F. Hyland,*Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; *Mr. Solomon Bosengarten,*Deputy Attorney General, of counsel and on the brief).

Per Curiam.

While we have not been furnished with a *copy*of the complaint *(R. 2:6-1*(a) (2)), the parties agree in their briefs that appellant was charged with speeding, and more specifically, traveling 40 miles an hour in a 25-mile-an-hour zone. *(N. J. S. A.*39:4-98.) Found guilty on trial in the municipal court, she appealed to the County Court *515where she was again convicted on trial *de novo*on the record. She now appeals to us from the County Court judgment.

The essence of the first point urged is that the State failed to prove the speed limit at the place where the speeding took place. Appellant argues that in establishing the speed limit the State should be required to introduce evidence relating to the character and type of the zone. We are satisfied that where, as here, the police officer testifies under oath to the speed limit, enough has been produced that a judgment against defendant cannot be said to be fatally defective if that testimony remains uncontroverted and is believed. We are persuaded that sworn testimony from a police officer relating the speed limit in a zone in the municipality in which he is employed carries with it the presumption, rebut-table though it may be, that that speed limit was legally ordained. Cf*. State v. Cooper,*129 *N. J. Super.*229 (App. Div. 1974), certif. den. 66 *N. J.*329 (1974).

Appellant relies heavily on *State v. Tropea,*142 *N. J. Super.*288 (App. Div. 1976), petition and cross-petition for certif. granted, 71 *N. J.*502 (1976), 73 *N. J.*50 (1977). In that case, *“[n]o*evidence of the applicable speed limit was offered.” (At 290; emphasis supplied.) There we refused to substitute reference by the trial judge to the charge for evidence. That is not the situation here where there was some hard evidence as to the speed limit.

Appellant’s other ground, that “the proof of calibration presented in the State’s case was insufficient, and was allowed to be presented with improper testimony,” lacks merit. *Cf. State v. Cardone,*146 *N. J. Super.*23 (App. Div. 1976).

Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket Nos. CP15-22-000; CP15-24-000]

                    On January 5, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) issued a                     *Notice of Intent (NOI) to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed St. Charles Transportation and Keys Energy Projects and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues.*                     The notice solicited comments on the potential environmental impacts of the planned project, and listed the close of the public comment period as February 4, 2015.                

Due to a limited printing delay in the mailing of the notice, we are extending the comment period. Please note that the scoping period will now close on February 20, 2015.

Please refer to the NOI for how to participate in the environmental proceeding.

Dated: January 23, 2015.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2015-01731 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P