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

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 181 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to count portions of income 

from annuities of a community spouse as income available to institutionalized spouses for purposes of eligibility for medical assistance, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2017 

Mr. MULLIN (for himself and Mr. GUTHRIE) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to count 

portions of income from annuities of a community spouse 

as income available to institutionalized spouses for purposes of eligibility for medical assistance, and for other 

purposes. 

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


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 181 IH

1 SECTION 1. COUNTING PORTIONS OF INCOME FROM ANNU2 ITIES OF A COMMUNITY SPOUSE AS INCOME 

3 AVAILABLE TO INSTITUTIONALIZED SPOUSES 

4 FOR MEDICAID ELIGIBILITY. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1924(b)(2) of the Social 

6 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r–5(b)(2)) is amended by 

7 adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

8 ‘‘(E) ANNUITY INCOME.— 

9 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—In the case of 

10 payment of income from a qualifying annu11 ity— 

12 ‘‘(I) if payment of income is 

13 made solely in the name of the com14 munity spouse, one-half of the income 

15 shall be considered available to the in16 stitutionalized spouse and one-half to 

17 the community spouse; 

18 ‘‘(II) if payment of income is 

19 made in the names of the institu20 tionalized spouse and the community 

21 spouse, one-half of the income shall be 

22 considered available to the institu23 tionalized spouse and one-half to the 

24 community spouse; and 

25 ‘‘(III) if payment of income is 

26 made in the names of the community 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 181 IH

1 spouse and another person or persons, 

2 one-half of the proportion of the com3 munity spouse’s interest in such in4 come shall be considered available to 

5 the institutionalized spouse. 

6 ‘‘(ii) QUALIFYING ANNUITY.—In this 

7 subparagraph, the term ‘qualifying annu8 ity’ means an annuity that— 

9 ‘‘(I) is purchased after the date 

10 that is 60 months before the date 

11 specified in subparagraph (B)(ii) of 

12 section 1917(c)(1) for an amount that 

13 is equal to or greater than fair market 

14 value; and 

15 ‘‘(II) is not described in clause 

16 (i) of subparagraph (G) of such sec17 tion. 

18 ‘‘(iii) INAPPLICABILITY OF OTHER

19 RULES.—The rules of subparagraphs (A) 

20 and (B) shall not apply with respect to in21 come from a qualifying annuity.’’. 

22 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

23 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to annuities purVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:52 Jan 11, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H181.IH H181

smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 181 IH

1 chased or established on or after the date of the enactment 

2 of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

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 March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John Shackleton, President and 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/ JOHN SHACKLETONJohn ShackletonPresident and Chief Executive Officer


Dated: May 5, 2006
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Analysis of the RELAP5/MOD3.2.2beta Critical Flow Models and Assessment Against Critical Flow Data From the Marviken Tests (NUREG/IA-0186)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0186 (PDF 6.34 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** July 2000

**Prepared by:** C. Queral, J. Mulas, C. G. de la Rúa

Energy Systems Department School of Mining Engineering Polytechnic University of Madrid SPAIN

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

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

In this report the critical flow models of RELAP5/MOD3.2.2beta have been analized. Firstly, an analysis of the implementation of the RELAP5/MOD3.2.2beta models have been performed in which it has been proved that the transition from the critical to the non-critical flow model is not well done for the Ransom-Trapp model. Secondly, a sensitivity analysis of both models (Ransom-Trapp and Henry-Fauske) in subcooled, two-phase and vapor conditions has been taken with respect to temperature, pressure, void-fraction, discharge coefficients, energy loss coefficient and disequilibrium parameter. Finally, seven Marviken tests have been simulated and compared with the experimental data in order to validate both models. As a part of this assessment, an adjustment of the discharge coefficients for the Ransom-Trapp model with different nodalizations has been done and also it has been checked which are the best values of the disequilibrium parameter for the Henry-Fauske model in subcooled and two-phase conditions. Conclusions indicate that the behaviour of the Henry-Fauske model is better than that of the Ransom-Trapp. In this sense, the new model is an improvement with respect to the Ransom-Trapp.

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

# Investigation of Fire Stop Test Parameters Final Report  (NUREG/CR-2321)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-2321 (PDF - 7.59 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** September 1981

**Prepared by:** Leon Przybyla

Underwriters Laboratories 333 Pfingsten Road Northbrook, IL 60062

Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 operated by Sandia Corporation for the US Department of Energy

Sandia Project Officer: L. J. Klamerus

NRC FIN A-1010

**Prepared for:** Division of Engineering Technology  Office of Nuclear Reactor Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Under Memorandum of Understanding DOE 40-550-75

Availability Notice

## Abstract

An experimental investigation was performed to determine the effects of pressure differential, fire exposure conditions and sample construction on the performance of fire stops used to seal electric cable and conduit penetrations through concrete fire barriers. Experiments were conducted using a differential pressure of -12 to +125 Pa, various sample constructions and two fire exposure conditions. Results indicate that the effect of pressure differential is not significant for those fire-stop materials which do not have cracks or other through openings that allow passage of gases during fire-exposure. However, if the material allows passage for gases through cracks or other holes, such as those left open after a cable pull, the pressure differential affects fire stop performance. Effects of the size of the opening; size, location and type of the penetrating items installed through the opening; and severity of fire exposure on the performance of fire stops are demonstrated.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
No. 91-6158.

#### Joyce *v.*Walker et al.

Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsBrochures Prepared by NRC Staff

# NRC Telephone Directory (NUREG/BR-0046, Revision 29)

On this page:
        - Publication Information

Download complete document
        - NUREG/BR-0046 (PDF - 10.48 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** March 2000

 Office of the Chief Information Officer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

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

# The Programmable Logic Controller and ItsApplication in Nuclear Reactor Systems (NUREG/CR-6090, UCRL-ID-112900)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6090 (PDF - 5.6 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**August 1993**Date Published:**September 1993

**Prepared by:** J. Palomar, R. Wyman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory P.O. Box 808 Livermore, California 94550

**Prepared for:** Division of Reactor Controls and Human Factors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission****Washington, DC 20555-0001 

NRC FIN L-1867

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This document provides recommendations to guide reviewers in the application of Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) to the control, monitoring and protection of nuclear reactors. The first topics addressed are system-level design issues, specifically including safety. The document then discusses concerns about the PLC manufacturing organization and the protection system engineering organization. Supplementing this document are two appendices. Appendix A summarizes PLC characteristics. Specifically addressed are those characteristics that make the PLC more suitable for emergency shutdown (ESD) systems than other electrical/electronic-based systems, as well as characteristics that improve reliability of a system. Also covered are PLC characteristics that may create an unsafe operating environment. Appendix B provides an overview of the use of programmable logic controllers in emergency shutdown systems. The intent is to familiarize the reader with the design, development, test, and maintenance phases of applying a PLC to an ESD system. Each phase is described in detail and information pertinent to the application of a PLC is pointed out.

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

# Assessment of Wireless Technologies and Their Application at Nuclear Facilities (NUREG/CR-6882,ORNL/TM-2004/317)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6882 (PDF - 4.06 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**July 2005**Published:**July 2006

**Prepared by:** B.J. Kaldenbach, M.R. Moore, P.D. Ewing, W.W. Manges, C.L. Dillard, K. Korsah, R.A. Kisner Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2008 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6283 Managed by UT-Battelle, LLC

Christina E. Antonescu, NRC Project Manager

**Prepared for:** Division of Fuel, Engineering and Radiological Research Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission****Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC Job Code Y6475

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has been engaged by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES), to identify and assess the safety-related issues that may be posed by the implementation of wireless systems in nuclear facilities. This work is being performed in response to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) User Need Request NRR-2002-017 for investigating emerging technologies and their application in nuclear facilities. Currently, wireless technology is not used as an integral element of safety-related systems in nuclear facilities. The most prevalent introductory use is for in-facility communications among personnel and for supplemental information transmission. However, further system upgrades and implementations at new facilities may introduce wireless communication into safety-significant applications.

 This report documents the technology considerations, deployment issues, and implementation considerations that could contribute to the technical basis for comprehensive guidance on wireless systems. It is expected to help future instrumentation and controls designers select compatible wireless systems for nuclear facilities. The report also provides considerations regarding wireless system deployments.

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

# Probabilistic Modules for the RESRAD and RESRAD-BUILD Computer Codes: User Guide (NUREG/CR-6692)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6692 (PDF - 4.76 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** October 2000**Date Published:** November 2000

**Prepared by:** D. LePoire, J. Amish, E. Gnanapragasam, S. Kamboj, B.M. Biwer, J.-J. Cheng, C. Yu, S.Y. Chen

Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439

T. Mo, NRC Project Manager

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

NRC Job Code Y6112

Availability Notice

## Abstract

RESRAD and RESRAD-BUILD codes are part of the RESRAD family of codes developed by the U.S. Department of Energy. For many years these deterministic codes have been used as dose assessment tools for cleanup efforts at sites contaminated with radioactive materials. The RESRAD code applies to the cleanup of soil, and the RESRAD-BUILD code applies to the cleanup of buildings and structures.

RESRAD and RESRAD-BUILD codes are part of the RESRAD family of codes developed by the U.S. Department of Energy. For many years these deterministic codes have been used as dose assessment tools for cleanup efforts at sites contaminated with radioactive materials. The RESRAD code applies to the cleanup of soil, and the RESRAD-BUILD code applies to the cleanup of buildings and structures.

This report includes a user's guide for the probabilistic modules included in RESRAD version 6.0 and RESRAD-BUILD version 3.0. It should be used in conjunction with the technical reference manuals for the deterministic RESRAD and RESRAD-BUILD codes (Yu et al., 1993, 1994, respectively, or future updates of these manuals). These manuals describe the technical basis (models and methods) and the input parameters for the models. This report also includes background information and summaries of the previous tasks accomplished in this project, a description of the software design and requirements, and description of a sample case for probabilistic dose analysis. A detailed discussion of the Latin hypercube sampling method, a summary of parameter distributions, and a "guided tour" that demonstrates the use of the probabilistic modules are included in the appendices.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALY TAMBOURA,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

ROBERT L. AYERS, Jr., Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 11-17243

D.C. No. 5:08-cv-01143-JF

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Jeremy D. Fogel, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted December 3, 2013

San Francisco, California

Before: GOULD and PAEZ, Circuit Judges, and HUFF, District Judge.

** 

FILED

DEC 23 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The Honorable Marilyn L. Huff, United States District Judge for the

Southern District of California, sitting by designation.
Petitioner Aly Tamboura (“Petitioner”) appeals the district court’s denial of

his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Tamboura contends that the state trial court

violated his due process right to an impartial decisionmaker at his probation

revocation hearing.

We have jurisdiction to review the final order of the district court pursuant to

28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. We review the underlying state court ruling pursuant

to the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), 28

U.S.C. § 2254.

The trial court judge conducted an in-depth probation revocation hearing to

explore whether Petitioner violated the conditions of his probation and whether

those violations were willful. After determining that Petitioner’s conduct

constituted a willful violation by a preponderance of the evidence, see People v.

Rodriguez, 795 P.2d 783, 789 (Cal. 1990), the trial court judge imposed the

suspended sentence.

Petitioner has not demonstrated that the trial court judge predetermined the

result of the probation revocation hearing. The trial court judge’s statements

during the proceedings did not display the type of deep-seated antagonism that

would make fair judgment impossible. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540,

555 (1994) (“[J]udicial remarks during the course of a trial that are critical or

2
disapproving of, or even hostile to, counsel, the parties, or their cases, ordinarily do

not support a bias or partiality challenge.”).

On the basis of the record, and taking into account the high degree of

deference that the court must afford to the findings of the state appellate court, see

Hibbler v. Benedetti, 693 F.3d 1140, 1146 (9th Cir. 2012), cert denied, 133 S. Ct.

1262 (U.S. 2013), we affirm the district court’s denial of the petition.

AFFIRMED. 

3
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. § 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 906), Vincent A Wasik and Edward W. Stone, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of Velocity Express Corporation, certify that (i) the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and (ii) the information contained in such report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Velocity Express Corporation.



/s/ Vincent A. WasikVincent A. WasikChairman of the Board and Chief Executive OfficerDate: November 20, 2006/s/ Edward. W. StoneEdward. W. StoneChief Financial OfficerDate: November 20, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF BERTHEL FISHER & COMPANY LEASING, INC. AS OF
MARCH 31, 1999, AND THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         263,474
<SECURITIES>                                 2,180,806
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,569,002
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (329,726)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,511,129
<DEPRECIATION>                               (782,002)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,412,683
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          596,673
<BONDS>                                      6,310,880
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,621,422
<COMMON>                                       876,305
<OTHER-SE>                                   (992,597)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,412,683
<SALES>                                        412,108
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               412,108
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               324,455
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,764
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             148,452
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (66,563)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (23,388)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (43,175)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (43,175)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.17)
        

</TABLE>