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

Union Calendar No. 132 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1684 

[Report No. 115–193] 

To direct the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

to provide technical assistance to common interest communities regarding 

eligibility for disaster assistance, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 22, 2017 

Mr. NADLER (for himself and Mr. ENGEL) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

JUNE 26, 2017 

Additional sponsor: Mr. SANFORD

JUNE 26, 2017 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on March 22, 2017] 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1684 RH

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide technical assistance to common interest communities regarding eligibility for disaster assistance, and for other purposes. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1684 RH

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 ‘‘Disaster Assistance Sup5 port for Communities and Homeowners Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 

7 (a) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Administrator of 

8 the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall provide 

9 technical assistance to a common interest community that 

10 provides essential services of a governmental nature on ac11 tions that a common interest community may take in order 

12 to be eligible to receive reimbursement from a grantee that 

13 receives funds from the Agency for certain activities per14 formed after an event that results in a disaster declaration. 

15 (b) RECOMMENDATIONS.—Not later than 90 days after 

16 the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall 

17 provide to the Committee on Transportation and Infra18 structure of the House of Representatives and the Committee 

19 on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the 

20 Senate a legislative proposal on how to provide eligibility 

21 for disaster assistance with respect to common areas of con22 dominiums and housing cooperatives. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 132 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1684 

[Report No. 115–193] 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Federal Emerother purposes. garding eligibility for disaster assistance, and for assistance to common interest communities re- gency Management Agency to provide technical 

JUNE 26, 2017 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Comand ordered to be printed mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
EX-10.(a)






Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. Nonemployee Directors’ Compensation Plan (Amended and Restated
as of December 31, 2008)(filed as Exhibit 10(nnn) to Form 10-K of Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. on
February 26, 2009 and incorporated by reference)
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# OLKILUOTO 2 RELAP5/MOD3.2.1.2 Analysis of the Reactor Scram on June 13, 1997 (NUREG/IA-0204)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0204 (PDF - 1.50 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** April 2007

**Prepared by:** Heikki Sjövall

Teollisuuden Voima Oy FIN-27160 OLKILUOTO FINLAND

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange Under the International Code Assessment and Maintenance Program (CAMP)

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The reactor scram, which occurred at Olkiluoto 2 June 13 in 1997 has been analysed with the RELAP5/MOD3.2.1.2 computer program. The RELAP5 model of the Olkiluoto reactors is based on the model prepared for analysing PSA level 1 success criteria. The purpose of the analysis was to investigate how well RELAP5 is able to calculate the behaviour of process parameters after scram and validate the RELAP5 model of the Olkiluoto reactors.

The main plant features connected with the event are briefly presented. Modelling aspects are discussed regarding the RELAP5 analysis.

The RELAP5 result agrees with the measured reactor water level at the beginning of the transient when the level drops due to the collapse of steam bubbles. Later the level rise due to supply of feed water and the warming up of the reactor water inventory is slower in the RELAP5 analysis than according to the measurements.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Modeling of Radionuclide Transport in Freshwater Systems Associated with Nuclear Power Plants (NUREG/CR-7231)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7231 (PDF – 26.8 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** November 2016**Date Published:**April 2017

**Prepared by:** S. B. Yabusaki, B. A. Napier, W. A. Perkins, M. C. Richmond, C. L. Rakowski, S. F. Snyder, and L. F. Hibler

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352

Mark Fuhrmann, Project Manager

NRC Job Code V6366

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The potential consequences of radionuclides that have been directly released into a surface water body, as happened in the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident, are not well understood, especially for the lake and river settings where most U.S. nuclear power plant reactors are sited. Accordingly, hypothetical scoping analyses have been performed to better understand how radionuclide transport in freshwater systems might be affected by the interaction of radionuclide-specific decay and sorption with hydrologic and sediment conditions.

Eight radionuclides, 137Cs, 134Cs, 131I, 90Sr, 3H, 106Ru, 125Sb, and 144Ce, were selected for these analyses based on a methodology that estimated the partitioning of the reactor core inventory to water as a function of reactor type, mass of uranium fuel, and fuel burnup. Transport simulations for each radionuclide were based on the release of a 10-day pulse of 1,000 m3 of water with 1 Bq of activity into small lake, small river, and large river settings. The small lake setting was based on a reservoir impounded by a dam on a river that provided a large water volume but limited transport, which led to high concentrations at early times. The small river setting examined relatively low flow and slow average velocity conditions, which resulted in less dilution (i.e., higher concentrations) and longer transit times for the 10-day radioactive release. The large river scenario examined conditions where relatively high flow resulted in lower concentrations but faster downriver transport.

Bathymetric data and hydraulic parameters were adapted and modified from actual lake and river systems. Consistent with the scoping level of analysis, steady-state hydraulics were used with the rivers simulated in two dimensions (depth-averaged) and the lake in three dimensions. Modeled transport processes included advection, mixing/dispersion, decay, sediment transport, and sediment-radionuclide interaction (i.e., adsorption/desorption); modeled features included the impact of tributaries, dams, and impoundments.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
#### CHARLES SKINNER v. J. Y. BRYCE, and others.

The illness of the family of one ofj the defendants in an action, so that he cannot he present at the trial of the cause, is a circumstance which may properly be addressed to the discretion of the court upon a motion to continue the cause. But where such defendant is represented by counsel, who has knowledge of the fact, and does not ask for a continuance, but enters into a trial by consent upon the plaintiff's agreeing to permit certain letters to be read in evidence, and in pursuance of the agreement the letters are read, the facts do not present a case of “ surprise, mistake,” &c., contemplated by the statute, and the judgment will not be vacated.

Motion in the cause heard before Eure, J., at Spring Term, 1875, of Perquimans Superior Court.

The defendants moved to set aside a judgment theretofore rendered against them. The defendants resided in the City of Charlotte, and the plaintiff resided in Perquimans County. When the action commenced, but before the trial of the cause, he had removed to Hertford county, where he now resides.

*288The case was called for trial at Spring Term, 1875, when the counsel for the defendants stated, that he had information that the family of the defendant, Gregory, who was the managing partner, were sick, and that he did not expect him at that Court, but did not move for a continuance. By agreement of counsel, the case was put at the end of the docket, the plaintiff’s counsel consenting to the reading of certain letters, upon the trial, because of the absence of the defendants. The case was tried, and the plaintiff had a verdict and judgment.

After the adjournment of the Court, the defendants’ counsel received affidavits showing the illness of the family of the defendant, Gregory, at the time of the trial, which he forwarded to his Honor, at home, and asked him to consider at Chamber’s, as upon a motion to set aside the judgment and verdict. His Honor refused to do so, but agreed to hear evidence upon both sides at the next term of the Court.

*Fleming*and *Gray & Stamps,*for defendants.

*Gilliam & Pruden,*for the plaintiff.

Reade, J.

The sickness of the family of one of the defendants at the time of the trial, so that he could not attend,, was a circumstance which might have been addressed to the *discretion*of his Honor upon a motion to continue. But the defendant’s counsel was present, knew of the sickness, did not ask for a continuance, but went into the trial by consent, upon the plantiff’s agreeing to permit to be read in evidence certain letters which he had, and which were in fact read.

When judgment has been rendered against a party by reason of his “ surprise, mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect,” the statute allows the court to vacate it at any time within a year. But this motion was not supported by any *289of these considerations. It was a trial by consent. And we agree with his Honor that there is no ground for vacating.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.
#### Andor Group, Inc., Respondent, v David Benninghoff et al., Appellants.

[631 NYS2d 79]

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated April 14, 1994, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendant’s motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

Before a plaintiff may secure redress for the breach of an agreement, the promise made by the defendant must be sufficiently certain and specific so that the parties’ intentions are ascertainable. Thus, an agreement to agree, which leaves material terms of a proposed contract for future negotiation, is unenforceable *(see, Martin Delicatessen v Schumacher, 52*NY2d 105, 109; *Rouzani v Rapp,*203 AD2d 446; *Danton Constr. Corp. v Bonner,*173 AD2d 759; *Bernstein v Felske,*143 AD2d 863). The letter of intent executed by the plaintiff and the defendant Sports Medicine Group by its terms contemplated the execution of a formal contract, and left out material terms so that the intent of the parties cannot be ascertained. Thus, the court should have granted summary judgment to the defendants. Balletta, J. P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.
Christopher A. Prine, Clerk of the Court 

First Court of Appeals 

301 Fannin Street 

Houston, Texas 77002-2066 

1

st

. Court of Appeals 

01-15-00464-CV

To Honorable Justices of Court I am requesting an extension on filing 

my brief. My request are twofold, one I have had a flair up from my 

injuries and have been having severe back and leg pain and I had to 

obtain funds in order to pay for Documents that will be requested from 

Post Judgment Department of the District Court. 

Andrew Patterson, Pro Se, /s/ 

Andrew Patterson, Pro Se 

6207 Fondren Road 

Houston, Texas 77036 

832 276 1712 

CC Vaughan E. Waters 

vwaters@thorntonfirm.com 

ACCEPTED

01-15-00464-cv

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

10/21/2015 3:59:41 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 10/21/2015 3:59:41 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
#### Paul De Preter, as Parent and Natural Guardian of Olivia De Preter, an Infant, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.

[631 NYS2d 351]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered October 13, 1994, which denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Triable issues of fact preclude summary judgment, including whether the allegedly defective playground equipment with the protruding metal bolt was the proximate cause of plaintiff infant’s injury. The infant’s father states that he heard the infant screaming and turned immediately to see her standing next to the playground equipment with blood streaming down her face. He does not claim to have actually witnessed the accident, and even if he did so claim, the issue of credibility presented would render summary judgment inappropriate *(see, Capelin Assocs. v Globe Mfg. Corp.,*34 NY2d 338, 341). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.
# L_2015196EN.01006701.xml

| 24.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 196/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 196/67

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/1204 of 22 July 2015 on a temporary derogation from the rules of origin laid down in Annex II to Council Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 to take account of the special situation of Kenya with regard to tuna loins

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 195 of 23 July 2015
  )

On page 47, Article 5:

for:

‘
  “Derogation — Commission Implementing Decision 2015/.../EU”.’,

read:

‘
  “Derogation — Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/1204”.’

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       6,212,781
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,863,635
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,182,517
<INVENTORY>                                    222,896
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,240,493
<PP&E>                                      13,381,650
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,500,489
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              58,120,438
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,717,011
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        1,928,171
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,533
<OTHER-SE>                                  42,715,362
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                58,120,438
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            20,783,359
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,842,354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            21,132,486
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,123,742
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             368,968
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (12,684,191)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (12,684,191)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (12,684,191)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.09)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.1

 

FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF BOSTON

2011 DIRECTOR COMPENSATION POLICY

 

A fee of $5,575 per meeting shall be paid to all Directors that attend all or part of a meeting of the Board of Directors.  A fee of $6,300 per meeting shall be paid to the chair of all committees except for the chair of the Audit Committee which shall be $7,000 per meeting.  A fee of $7,000 per meeting shall be paid to the vice chair of the Board.  A fee of $7,750 per meeting shall be paid to the chair of the Board.  This fee shall also be provided to any person elected by the Board to serve as chairman pro tempore or to the vice chair if the vice chair presides for an entire meeting of the Board.  There are eight regularly scheduled meetings in 2011.

 

A fee of $2,000 per meeting shall be paid to all committee members, including ex officio members, who attend all or any part of any meeting of a committee of the Board.

 

A fee of $1,325 per meeting shall be paid to any Director for participation in telephonic conference calls or when participating by telephone for all or any part of a meeting in which the Director would be entitled to receive a meeting fee for in-person attendance at such meeting.

 

Fees shall be paid per meeting.  For example, if a Board meeting and committee meeting occur on the same day, a separate fee shall be payable for attendance at each meeting.  Additionally, in the case of a multi-day meeting, a separate fee shall be payable for each day’s attendance at the same meeting.

 

In the event that inclement weather prevents the occurrence of a planned meeting of the Board or one of its committees, the Directors shall be entitled to receive the applicable meeting fee called for in the Statement of Policy, minus any fees received if an in-person meeting is changed to a telephonic meeting.

 

Maximum Fees

 

The maximum fees for 2011 for the Chair shall be $60,000, for the Vice Chair $55,000, for the Chair of the Audit Committee $55,000, for all other Committee Chairs $50,000, and for Directors $45,000.

 

Administrative Matters

 

The Personnel Committee shall annually review this policy and shall submit its recommendation to the Board.  The Board shall consider the recommendations of the Personnel Committee and shall approve the policy no later than required to allow for submission, review and approval of the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), if required, to ensure that directors are paid timely for the first regularly scheduled meeting of the Board in which the policy shall apply.  The Board is authorized, in its sole discretion, to interpret the provisions of the policy and to address situations not anticipated or covered by this policy as it determines to be appropriate, consistent with the requirements set forth in the regulations promulgated by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, if any.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Assessment Study of RELAP5/MOD2 Cycle 36.04 Based on the DOEL-4 Manual Loss of Load Test of November 23, 1985 (NUREG/IA-0043)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0043 (PDF 1.46 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** March 1992

**Prepared by:** E.J. Stubbe, P. Deschutter

TRACTEBEL Place du Trone, 1 B-1000 Brussels Belgium

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange under the International Thermal-Hydraulic Code Assessment and Application Program (ICAP)

**Published by:** Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The loss of external load transient test conducted on the Doel-4 power plant has been analysed on the basis of a high quality data acquisition system.

A detailed numerical analysis of the transient by means of the best estimate code RELAP-5 MOD-2 is presented, covering the most important plant components and systems, and complemented by imposed boundary conditions, taken from the recordings, when necessary.

Comparison of recorded and calculated data show that
        - The RELAP-5 code is capable to simulate the basic plant behaviour which allows a deeper insight in the physical phenomena.
        - Some deficiencies affecting either the model or the code are observed, they could be attributed            - to the absence of structural heat simulation of the steam generators
          - to acoustic phenomena which influence the steam generator level sensor
          - to excessive interphase drag in the steam generator at low void regimes. 
        - Typical characteristic features of the plant can better be quantified such as            - strong thermal coupling between feedwater flow and cold leg temperature for a preheater type steam generator
          -  Delay between feedwater flow variations and level swell and shrink response. 

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Modification of USNRC's FRAP–T6 Fuel Rod Transient Code for High Burnup VVER Fuel (NUREG/IA-0164, RRC KI 2180, IPSN 99/10)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0164 (PDF 4.57 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** May 1999

**Prepared by:** A. Shestopalov, K. Lioutov, L. Yegorova, G. Abyshov, NSI–RRC K. Mikitiouk, INR–RRC

Nuclear Safety Institute of Russian Research Center "Kurchatov Institute" Institute of Nuclear Reactors of Russian Research Center "Kurchatov Institute" Kurchatov Square 1 Moscow 12382 Russia

**Prepared for:** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Institute for Protection and Nuclear Safety (France), and Ministry of Science and Technologies of Russian Federation

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The USNRC's transient fuel rod code, FRAP-T6, has been modified to analyze pulse tests with high burnup VVER fuel rods in the Impulse Graphite Reactor (IGR). New and modified models of separate phenomena have been developed, including models for heat transfer from the cladding to the stagnant coolant, the effect of fission gas swelling on the fuel–cladding gap, and the conditions of base irradiation. Thermal and mechanical properties for the VVER's Zr-1%Nb cladding were added to MATPRO-V11, which is used by the FRAP-T6 code. Changes in the input data file are described, and a sample calculation is presented with the modified code. A FORTRAN listing for the new and modified models is given in an Appendix A.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021