alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                               THREE MONTHS                 SIX MONTHS
                                                               ENDED JUNE 30,              ENDED JUNE 30,
                                                          ------------------------     -----------------------
                                                              1997        1996             1997       1996   
                                                          (UNAUDITED)  (UNAUDITED)     (UNAUDITED) (UNAUDITED)
                                                          -----------  -----------     ----------- -----------
<S>                                                       <C>         <C>              <C>         <C>
Net income available to common stockholders               $  867,723  $  499,424       $1,431,200  $  585,244

Accrued dividends on preferred stock                               -           -                -      82,346
                                                          ----------  ----------       ----------  ----------
Net income for computing net income per share             $  867,723  $  499,424       $1,431,200  $  667,590
                                                          ==========  ==========       ==========  ==========
Weighted average common shares outstanding,                                                                  
     assuming conversion of all preferred stock            5,387,981   5,261,443        5,370,472   4,628,413
                                                                                                             
Shares of common stock assumed to be issued upon                                                             
     exercise of common stock options and warrants to                                                        
     purchase common stock using treasury stock method       441,019     498,557          440,528     489,587
                                                          ----------  ----------       ----------  ----------
Weighted average number of common and common                                                                 
     equivalent shares outstanding during the period       5,829,000   5,760,000        5,811,000   5,118,000
                                                          ==========  ==========       ==========  ==========
Net income per share                                      $     0.15  $     0.09       $     0.25  $     0.13
                                                          ==========  ==========       ==========  ==========
</TABLE>


                                      14
P. 1



# OAR Box 1338 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 17 ) ll-F- 2
Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 6/17/20081:48:06

PM Sheet 17 of 105P. 2 

# A-89-1 0

II-F- 2

CJxr.' j Ki^--
-


### JUL 2 1 

### 19* 9

.4

/ The Honorabl e • F . Henr y Habich t I I ; , f^ B | j M Deputy Administrato r ^ Environmenta l Protectio n Agency

-»

— ' _^,, r .. r Washington , D

C 2046 0 - ^ A?^DOCKt£

_ Dea r Mr . Habicht : Thi s lette r confirms th e Committe e Managemen t Secretariat' s verba l respons e o f Jul y 3 , 1989 , t o Actin g Deputy Administrato r Joh

n A . Moore' s correspondenc e o f Ma y 11 , proposin

g t o establis hth

e Volatil e Organgi c Chemica l (VOC ) Equipmen t Lea k Rul e Negotiated Rulemakin g Advisor

y Committe e for a period o f 1 0 months . The Genera l Service s Administratio n (GSA ) ha s reviewe d the consultation a s provided b y th e Federa l Advisor

y Committe e Act , a s amended , an d th e GSA Fina l Rul e o

n Federa l advisor

y committe e management . The Committe e meet s the objective s identified b

y th e agenc y an d the requirement s o f th e statute , includin

g appropriat e certification s o f necessity , balance , lac k o f duplication , an d othe r applicabl e information . Fro

m thi s revie

w the Committe e appear s t o b e a n effective wa

y o f obtainin

g th e technica l an

d progra

m advic e you seek . Accordingly , GSA

concur s in the establishmen t o f thi s Committee . Shoul d you r staf f nee

d additiona l informatio n or assistance , pleas e contac t thi s offic e a t 523-4884 . Sincerely ,

Jame s L . Dean Directo r Committe e Managemen t Secretaria t CTM : CLChisholm:523-1343:7/18/89:cl c bcc : Officia l Fil e - CT M Chron Fil e - CT

M //Mar y Beatty - CMO/EP

A
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Glossary of Security Terms for Nuclear Power Reactors (NUREG-2203)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-2203 (PDF – 685.77 KB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed: **March 2015**Date Published: **February 2017**Prepared by:**Amy RoundtreeWayne ChalkKris Jamgochian, NRC Project ManagerOffice of Nuclear Security and Incident ResponseU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This is a glossary of security terms specifically for nuclear power reactors that are commonly used in the nuclear industry and regulatory community. These terms were compiled from U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and nuclear industry sources. This is published to assist agency authors, readers, and stakeholders in understanding common terms used in security.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, December 05, 2022
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC ContractorsRod Bundle Heat Transfer Facility Steam Cooling with Droplet Injection Experiments Data Report (NURE

# Rod Bundle Heat Transfer Facility Steam Cooling with Droplet Injection Experiments Data Report (NUREG/CR-7192, Volume 2)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7192, Volume 2 (PDF - 16.2 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** October 2014**Date Published:** May 2015

**Prepared by:** L.E. Hochreiter, F.B. Cheung, T.F. Lin, D.J. Miller, B.R. Lowery

The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802

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

K. Tien, Project Manager

NRC Job Code N6154

Availability Notice

## Abstract

As part of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission safety analysis computer code development efforts, the Rod Bundle Heat Transfer (RBHT) test facility has been designed and constructed at The Pennsylvania State University. The test series described in this report is the steam cooling tests with droplet injection. A total of 85 steady-state steam cooling experiments with prescribed droplet injection was performed in the RBHT. The purpose of the experiments was to examine steady-state dispersed flow film boiling in prototypical rod bundle geometry for computer code model development and validation.

The Rod Bundle Heat Transfer facility is a full length, 3.66 m (12 ft.), 7 by 7 rod array with typical Pressurized Water Reactor rod diameters of 9.49 mm (0.374 in.) and a rod pitch of 12.59 mm (0.496 in.). The heater rods have a top skewed power shape with a peak to average power of 1.5 at the 2.74 m (9 ft.) elevation. The RBHT facility has been designed using prototypical mixing vane spacer grids.

The bundle inlet steam Reynolds number ranged from 2000 to 15,000 with most of the experiments at the lower Reynolds number range. The droplets were injected upward in the center of the sub-channels at the 1.295 m (51 in.) elevation using two or four injection tubes. The injection tubes used a single row, linear hole pattern of four holes per sub-channel and four sub-channels per tube in the center of the bundle. One additional hole was located at the center of the rod gap location to minimize the chance of local boiling in the injection tube. The hole sizes used were 0.381 mm (0.015 in.) and 0.254 mm (0.01 in.). The injection tubes were bench tested before the bundle tests to optimize the performance of the liquid jets such that the injected droplets would flow upwards in the center of the sub-channel. The droplet sizes issuing from the holes were also measured. The selected hole sizes would produce drops that were typical of the drop sizes observed in the RBHT and FLECHT-SEASET reflood experiments.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
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 State

          - [Delegation of Authority No. 381]

                    By virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of State, including Section 1 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2651a), and Executive Order 13567 of March 7, 2011 (the Executive Order), I hereby delegate to the Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure the authority to serve as a member of the Review Committee described in Section 3(d) of the Executive Order for the review of file reviews only, together with any authority necessary to carry out such function.                          ( print page 4332)    

Any act, executive order, regulation, or procedure subject to, or affected by, this delegation shall be deemed to be such act, executive order, regulation, or procedure as amended from time to time.

Notwithstanding this delegation of authority, the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, and the Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources may at any time exercise any authority or function delegated by this delegation of authority.

                    This delegation of authority shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Dated: January 7, 2015.

John F. Kerry,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2015-01450 Filed 1-26-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
OMB Control Number: 3170

- XXXX Expiration Date: XX/XX/XXXX

Page 1 

## Instrument 3A : Case Manager Training Pre

- Test
Respondents: Case Managers Collection Strategy: Paper Form

Thank you for completing this survey as part of our evaluation of training on the FET Toolkit. Please note that your responses will be kept confidential, and when survey results are reported none of your answers will be connected to your organization.

You r organization/agency: ______________________________________

How confid ent are you in your ability to...

Very
Confident Confident Somewhat
Confident Not at All
Confident
Understand core financial management topics, such as budgeting, saving, and setting financial goals?    

Discuss core financial management topics with your clients?    

Assess your clients’ f inancial condition or
situation?    

Get help if you or your clients have questions about financial issues?    

Refer clients to community resources such
as credit

- debt counseling and tax filing
assistance?    

Know where to go for unbiased information or help in working with clients?    

Help clients manage their financial challenges?    

Provide the right financial content at the right time in the context of your case work
with clients?    

Access and use tools and materials from the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) through its consumer website?    OMB Control Number: 3170

- XXXX Expiration Date: XX/XX/XXXX

Page 2 Paperwork Reduction Act

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control
number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3170

- XXXX . It expir es on MM/DD/YYYY . The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average approximately 5 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing any instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the dat a needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection of information is voluntary. Comments regarding this collection of information, including the estimated response time, suggestions for improv ing the usefulness of the information, or suggestions for reducing the burden to respond to
this collection should be submitted to Bureau at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552, or by em ail to CFPB_Public_PRA@cfpb.gov.

The Bureau will not disclose any personally identifiable information collected except to the extent that it is required to do so by law and as provided in the Privacy Act Statement listed below. Additionally, the Bureau will treat the information collected consistent with its confidentiality regulations at 12 C.F.R. Part 1070, et seq.
#### Will of Nieft: Nieft and others, Appellants, vs. Nieft, Respondent.

For the appellants : *C. G. Cannon*of Appleton.

For the respondent: *McGillan, Aik, Kresky & Cohen*of Green Bay.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
#### James Poggiali, Respondent, v Town of Babylon, Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[631 NYS2d 415]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.), entered March 24, 1994, which, upon a jury verdict finding the defendant 90% at fault in the happening of the accident, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the interlocutory judgment is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the complaint is dismissed.

In the early evening of March 20, 1988, the plaintiff was operating his motor scooter in the eastbound lane of Long Island Avenue in Babylon when his motor scooter collided with another eastbound vehicle operated by the third-party defendant Elestine M. Brown. The impact caused the plaintiff to be thrown from the motor scooter. Before landing, the plaintiff struck the metal post of a school crosswalk sign. The impact severed his leg above the knee. The plaintiff commenced suit against the Town of Babylon (hereinafter the Town), alleging that it was negligent in its placement of the sign. The jury found the Town was negligent and that the negligence was a proximate cause of the accident.

We find that the evidence presented is insufficient to establish that the Town was negligent in its placement of the school *627crossing sign. The plaintiff’s expert testified that placement of the crosswalk sign 123 feet from the crosswalk violated the standards set forth in the New York State Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual (hereinafter the Manual) and constituted a "deviation] from accepted practices”. There was no testimony that the placement created a hazard. In this case, although a deviation from the standards set forth in the Manual might be a factor in determining negligence, the deviation alone is insufficient to establish negligence *(see, Price v Hampson,*142 AD2d 974). In any event, even if the placement of the sign was negligent, the Town cannot, as a matter of law, be found liable, unless the alleged negligence was a proximate cause of the accident *(see, Applebee v State of New York,*308 NY 502; *see also, Levitt v County of Suffolk, 145*AD2d 414). Under the facts of this case, we find, as a matter of law, that the placement of the sign was not a proximate cause of the accident *(see, Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51*NY2d 308, 314).

The plaintiff also alleges that the Town is liable because the plaintiff’s "second collision”, with the crosswalk sign, was a "substantial factor in the aggravation of the plaintiff’s injuries”. We reject this argument. The negligence of the plaintiff and the third-party defendant merely furnished the occasion for an unrelated act to cause injuries not ordinarily anticipated *(see, Ventricelli v Kinney Sys. Rent A Car, 45*NY2d 950; *cf., Lacey v Horan,*119 AD2d 806). Copertino, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Human Reliability Analysis-Informed Insights on Cask Drops (NUREG/CR-7016, SAND2010-8463P)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7016 (PDF - 8.74 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** November 2011**Date Published:** February 2012

**Prepared by:**J. Brewer,1 S. Hendrickson,1 S. Cooper, R. Boring,1

1Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM 87185 Operated by Sandia Corporation for the U.S. Department of Energy

NRC Program Manager: S. Cooper NRC Technical Lead: S. Cooper

 NRC Job Code N6026

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report documents human reliability analysis-informed insights on cask drops that may be used as an initial technical basis for activities aimed at reducing the potential for cask drops. The report provides the following:
        - Description of the analysis approach used.
        - Overview of human reliability analysis (HRA) as applied to dry cask storage operations (DCSOs).
        - Overview of human error.
        - Description of selected items from the behavioral science technical basis used in analyzing DCSOs.
        - Decomposition of DCSOs in a manner that emphasizes human performance contributions.
        - Summary of recent concerns related to handling spent fuel casks.
        - Set of terms that clarify subtle distinctions related to human performance and cask handling.
        - Set of detailed cask-handling scenarios showing various types of human performance vulnerabilities contributing to hypothetical cask drops.
        - Collection of insights on how the potential for a cask drop due to human actions may be reduced.

Although performed without the benefit of the context provided by a plant-specific probabilistic risk assessment (PRA), this report builds on previous analyses and subject matter expert interviews to provide an improved understanding of human performance in DCSOs. The study accomplished three goals: (1) investigated what should be included in a qualitative HRA for spent fuel and cask-handling operations to understand the potential for cask drops, (2) demonstrated that the qualitative analysis tasks in the ATHEANA (A Technique for Human Event Analysis) HRA method can be usefully applied to non-control room operations, and (3) began building a technical basis for potential improvements to DCSO procedures and practices to reduce the likelihood of cask drops resulting from unsafe human actions. This analysis was performed after the completion of a preliminary qualitative HRA of spent fuel handling tasks, which is documented in NUREG/CR-7017 (NRC, 2012).

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
JOHN TATUM 990 S. Sherman

ATTORNEY AT LAW Richardson, Texas 75081 ( 972) 705-9200

February 27, 2015
Court of Criminal Appeals c/o Abel Acosta Chief Deputy Clerk P.O. Box 12308 Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711

Re: Oral argument in Cause No. AP-77,031 Franklin Davis v. The State of Texas

Dear Mr. Acosta: Pursuant to Rule 71.3 Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, I am advising this Honorable Court that I, on behalf of Appellant in the above referenced cause, am requesting oral argument on issue No. 4 which argues that the dismissal of Juror Bigley from the jury was error and No. 11, the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for capital murder. I believe oral argument would help present these issues in full context and help present a comparative analysis of the issues raised. Therefore, I respectfully request oral argument on these issues. Sincerely, /s/ John Tatum
John Tatum
JT:mt AP-77,0031 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 8/10/2015 12:01:57 PM Accepted 8/10/2015 12:58:45 PM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERK
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         239,540                 334,387
<SECURITIES>                                   200,000                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,382                  31,538
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     64,208                  64,208
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               601,218                 454,248
<PP&E>                                         683,330                 282,277
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,609                  10,538
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,261,939                 725,987
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          103,539                  86,258
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                         5,710                   5,500
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,317,150               2,199,234
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,261,939                 725,987
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,744                  37,980
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  314,852                 180,945
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (312,108)               (142,965)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       180                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (312,288)               (142,965)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (312,288)               (142,965)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)                  (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)                  (0.03)
        

</TABLE>