alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 16 (Monday, January 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 3988]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01289]



[[Page 3988]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-392]


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: Boehringer 
Ingelheim Chemical, Inc.

ACTION: Notice of registration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Boehringer Ingelheim Chemical, Inc. applied to be registered 
as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. 
The DEA grants Boehringer Ingelheim Chemical, Inc. registration as a 
manufacturer of the controlled substances.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By notice dated May 28, 2014, and published 
in the Federal Register on June 4, 2014, 79 FR 32321, Boehringer 
Ingelheim Chemical, Inc., 2820 N. Normandy Drive, Petersburg, Virginia 
23805-9372, applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic 
classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were 
submitted to this notice.
    The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has considered the 
factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of 
Boehringer Ingelheim Chemical, Inc. to manufacture the basic classes of 
controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with 
United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or 
protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's 
maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and 
testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the 
company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the 
company's background and history.
    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 
CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk 
manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Controlled substance                       Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphetamine (1100).........................  II
Methylphenidate (1724).....................  II
Methadone (9250)...........................  II
Methadone Intermediate (9254)..............  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances 
in bulk for sale to its customers for formulation into finished 
pharmaceuticals. In reference to methadone intermediate (9254) the 
company plans to produce methadone HCL active pharmaceutical 
ingredients (APIs) for sale to its customers.

    Dated: January 9, 2015.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-01289 Filed 1-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Assessment of RELAP5/MOD3.2 for Thermohydraulic Processes in Heated Rod Bundles with Tight Lattice at CKTI Test Facility (NUREG/IA-0168)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0168 (PDF 1.33 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** October 1999

**Prepared by:** A. S. Devkin

Nuclear Safety Institute Russian Research Center "Kurchatov Institute" 123182, Moscow Russia

**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

The assessment of RELAP5/MOD3.2 for two-phase hydrodynamics and heat transfer processes in the rod bundle model with tight lattice are presented. This experiments have been carried out at the bundle with non-standard geometrical characteristics - close packed assembly and small hydraulic diameters. The investigations have been carried out at the following range of parameters: pressures P = 0.23-2.0 MPa, inlet water flowrate from zero up to G=17-18.3 kg/c, heat fluxes q–up to 0.96 kW/m2 and void fractions α = 0.03 –0.89.

RELAP5/MOD3.2 assessment for processes at steady state conditions at small or zero flowrates at the inlet of the tube bundle showed that for such processes code gives rather good results. The comparison of computed and experimental results for process of boil-off and reflooding shows that there is a good coordination between computed and experimental values between temperatures of pipe bundle walls for upper part of the bundle. For lower part of the bundle there are some discrepancies between computed and experimental values of temperature, the later being some lower than experimental ones. The calculated values of shroud temperature were rather less than experimental ones.

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

# Technical Bases for Regulatory Guide for Soil Liquefaction (NUREG/CR-5741)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-5741 (PDF - 6.57 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** October 1999**Date Published:** March 2000

**Prepared by:** J. P. Koester, M. K. Sharp, M. E. Hynes

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199

E. G. Zurflueh, NRC Project Manager

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

NRC Job Code W6246

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This document provides technical bases for development of a new U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide for evaluation of the potential for earthquake-induced liquefaction at nuclear facility sites, compiling current and state of the art techniques. The report summarizes the processes of acquiring and using geological, geophysical, geotechnical, and other kinds of relevant information that support design considerations with respect to liquefaction hazard and that may affect the construction or performance of a building or other engineered structure at selected sites. A historical perspective is provided to define liquefaction phenomena observed during earthquakes and to support identification of soil characteristics associated with liquefaction. Guidance is presented for site characterization studies, including the various in situ tests available for liquefaction potential evaluation. Screening techniques are described for preliminary hazard assessment; progressively more detailed procedures are presented to provide for investigations that are judged necessary once screening procedures identify soils that may pose a hazard to important facilities. Deterministic procedures are treated in this report; probabilistic approaches are detailed in a separate report, prepared by Dr. Mary E. Hynes of the U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.

This document is not intended to serve as a definitive manual; some specific recommendations are offered, however, it was the purpose of the authors to allow for engineering judgment, thus it is more comprehensive as a reference document. An example problem is included to illustrate the evaluation of liquefaction triggering and estimation of residual strength of liquefied soils. Current practice for evaluation and estimation of permanent deformations caused to earthen structures is discussed; deformations accompanying liquefaction are included, but limited to those resulting from inertial movements during shaking. Large, permanent deformations that may result from gravity slumping are not discussed; estimation of very large deformations is not a well-established process and is a subject of ongoing research.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
**Exhibit 21.1**

 

**TransmeridianExploration, Inc.**

List of Subsidiaries

December 31, 2003

 

 
| **Name**                                 |   | **Jurisdiction**       |
|------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------|
|                                     |   |                   |
| Transmeridian Exploration, Inc           |   | Delaware               |
|                                     |   |                   |
| TMEI Operating, Inc.                     |   | Texas                  |
|                                     |   |                   |
| Transmeridian Exploration, Inc. (BVI)    |   | British Virgin Islands |
|                                     |   |                   |
| Transmeridian (Kazakhstan), Inc.         |   | British Virgin Islands |
|                                     |   |                   |
| SOJSC Caspi Neft TME                     |   | Republic of Kazakhstan |
|                                     |   |                   |
| SOJSC Transmeridian Caspi Petroleum Ltd. |   | Republic of Kazakhstan |

 

 

Notes:

 

1)              All subsidiaries are 100% owned, directlyor indirectly

2)              “SOJSC” stands for Subsidiary Open JointStock Company

 

----
P u rsuan t t o 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5, t h e courtha s det erm i n ed that t h i s opi n i on * shou l d n otbe pu bl i shed an d i s not preceden texcept u n der t h e l i m i t ed c i r c um s t anc e s s e tf

o r t h i n 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5. 4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 10074 C onfer enc e C al endar

N IC A N D R O P U C C IF E R R I, Pet i t i o ne r - Appe l l ant

v. R O D N E YC H A N D L E R , W a r d e n B igS p r in gF e d e r a l C o r r e c tio n a l In s tit u tio n , R espon den t
- A pp el l ee
A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e N ort h ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 5: 08- C V

- 131

B ef ore W IE N E R , B E N AV ID E S , an d S T E W A R T , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * N i c andro P. U c c i fer r i , fede r al pri so ner# 10 339- 018, appeal s t he di sm i ss al f or l ack of

j u ri sdi ct i on of

hi s 28 U
. S

. C

. § 224 1 peti t i on chal l en gi n g h i s s en t en ce form a i nt a i ni ngab uil d i ngf o rt he p ur p o s e o f

m a nu fa c t ur i ngm a r ij ua na. U cciferriargu es t h at he i s act u al l y i n n ocent, ha vi n g been con vi ct ed of condu ct th a t d idn o t c o n s tit u te afe d e r a l cr im in a l o ffe n s e . United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 20, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 09- 10074

2 U ccif er r im ay br i ng t hi s c l ai m i n a § 2241 pr oc ee di ng onl y by de m o ns t r at i ng unde rt he “ s av i ngs c l aus e ” tha tt he 2 8 U
. S. C. § 2 25 5 r e m e dy
w ou l dbe “i n a d eq u a te or i n effective.” R eyes - R equ enav. Un i t ed S t ate s , 243 F. 3d 8 9 3 , 9 0 0 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). “[T ]h e s a v in g s cla u s e o f § 2 2 5 5 a p p lie s to acla im (i) t h at i s based on a ret roact ivel ya p p l i cabl e Su prem e C ou rtdeci si on w h i ch est abli shed t h at th e petit i on er m ay h ave been convi ct ed of a non exi st en tof

fen se a n d(ii) th a t w a s fo r e c lo s e db ycir c u it la w a t t h e tim e w h e n th e cla im s h o u ld h a ve be en raisedi n the pe ti ti on er’ s tri a l , ap p ea l , or first § 22 5 5 m oti on . ” I d. at 90 4. Con c e di ng t hathi s a c t uali nno c e nc e c l ai m m eet s n ei t he rpr o ng o f t he R ey e s - R e que nat est , U cc ifer rinev ert h el ess u rges us t o hol d the savi n gs cl au se i n ap pl i cabl e un der t h e fa cts of hi s c ase. Th e R ey e s - R e que naact u ali n n ocence te s t, h o w e v e r , is b in d in gp r e c e d e n t in th is cir c u it. Se e We s s on v . U. S. Pe ni t e nt i a r

yBe a um o nt, TX, 3 0 5 F .3 d3 4 3 , 3 4 7 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ); s e e als o In re B r o w n , 4 5 7 F .3d 3 9 2 , 3 9 4 n .1 (5 th C ir. 2 0 0 6 ). AF F I RMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Statement of Financial Condition at September 30, 1996 (Unaudited) and
the Statement of Income for the year ended September 30, 1996 (Unaudited)
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                91,842
<PP&E>                                       1,703,439
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,716,349
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,638,357
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,607
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,077,992
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,716,349
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  229,259
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (229,259)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (229,259)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)
        

</TABLE>
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# RELAP5/MOD3.2.2 Gamma Assessment for Pressurized Thermal Shock Applications (NUREG/CR-6857)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6857 (PDF - 5.29 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**October 2004**Date Published:**

Prepared by: C. D. Fletcher†, D. A. Prelewicz†, W. C. Arcieri†

Contributors: M. A. Bolander†, D. L. Mlynarczyk†, K. C. Wagner§, R. Anderson‡, J. Cajigas‡

Michael B. Rubin, NRC Project Manager

†ISL, Inc. 11140 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852

‡Applied Analysis Corp. 2525 N. Fremont Ave. Idaho Falls, ID 83415

§Innovative Technology Solutions, Inc.. 400 West Gowe St. Kent, WA 98032

Division of Systems Analysis and Regulatory Effectiveness Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The RELAP5/MOD 3.2.2 Gamma computer code has been used to simulate overcooling and/or pressurization events that have the potential to result in pressurized thermal shock (PTS) in the reactor vessels of pressurized water reactors. An assessment of this code version is reported here to establish the suitability of the computer code for analyzing transients that may be significant PTS risk contributors. Code assessment principally consists of performing calculations for a specific test in an experimental facility and comparing the calculated results to the measured data from the experimental facility.

Prior assessment of the RELAP5 code series has been performed for a wide variety of transients over the 20-year development history of the code. Many of these assessments focused on loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs) where the purpose of the analysis is to demonstrate core integrity during postulated licensing basis transients. For LOCAs, conditions in the core region are of principal interest. In contrast, for PTS related transients the focus is on the temperature and pressure conditions in the reactor vessel downcomer. Hence the assessment reported here focuses on comparing RELAP5 results with experimental data for conditions in the downcomer. Note that LOCA can be an important risk contributor to PTS and so assessments using LOCA tests remain relevant.

This report presents assessments that demonstrate the suitability of the code for analyzing PTS transients.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
No: II-19-001 January 30, 2019

Contact: Roger Hannah, 404-997-4417

 Joey Ledford, 404-997-4416

NRC Issues Confirmatory Order to Farley Nuclear Power Plant

to Address Issues Related to the Handling of Safeguards Information

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a confirmatory order to Southern Nuclear 

Operating Co.’s Farley nuclear power plant near Columbia, Ala., located approximately 18 miles south 

of Dothan.

The order is the result of an agreement reached during an Alternative Dispute Resolution 

mediation session completed on Sept. 22, 2018, involving the handling of safeguards documents 

containing restricted plant security information.

Southern Nuclear officials chose to participate in the agency’s alternative dispute resolution 

program to resolve the enforcement issues. The NRC ADR process is facilitated by a neutral third party 

with no decision-making authority, who assists the NRC and the company in reaching an agreement.

The ADR session resulted in two agreements: that deliberate misconduct of a former employee 

represented a violation of NRC requirements; and on corrective actions to preclude recurrence of the 

violation.

The actions outlined in the confirmatory order apply to the Farley site as well as all other

Southern Nuclear sites.

The NRC will not issue violations or civil penalties because of the corrective actions and

improvements contained in the confirmatory order. Southern Nuclear is required to provide the NRC 

with a letter discussing its basis for concluding that the terms of the order have been satisfied.
Exhibit 13.1

ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES (Bermuda) LTD.

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned, Shih-Jye Cheng, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES (Bermuda)
LTD. (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that the Companys Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company, as of, and for, the periods
presented in the Report.

The foregoing certification is being furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 solely for purposes
of complying with the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, is not intended to be used or relied upon for any other purpose and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

Date: April 26, 2012



/s/ Shih-Jye ChengName:

Shih-Jye ChengTitle:

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
================================================================================


                                  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




I, J. Earl  Terris,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB of Foothills  Resources,  Inc.,  for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB  fairly  presents  in all  material  respects  the
financial condition and results of operations of Foothills Resources, Inc.





Date: June 9, 2004                             /s/ J. Earl Terris
                                               --------------------------------
                                               J. Earl Terris
                                               President, C.E.O. and Director
                                               (Principal Executive Officer)
No. 91-6357.

#### Gilkey *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNews Releases1999

# NRC Finds Performance 'Acceptable' at Point Beach Nuclear Plant in Latest Review

----

----

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-99-24 April 6, 1999

 

**NRC FINDS PERFORMANCE 'ACCEPTABLE' AT POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT IN LATEST REVIEW**

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has found that safety performance remains acceptable in the NRC's latest plant performance review at the Point Beach Nuclear Power Station, located near Two Rivers, Wisconsin.

The review covers the period from November 1997 through January 31.

In a letter to Wisconsin Electric Co., which operates the plant, Geoffrey Grant, Division Director in the NRC's Region III Office, said, "Overall, performance at Point Beach was acceptable, with some improvement noted in the area of self-assessment. For example, the use of industry peers for an assessment of operations was highly beneficial."

He continued, "However, secondary-side equipment material condition problems, including several involving the main feedwater system, and problems with the freeze protection system challenged routine reactor operations. Operator response to secondary-side equipment problems, including the sudden failure of a main feedwater pump bearing, was good. In contrast, problems with the freeze protection system, identified in December, were not properly assessed by operators resulting in the freezing of the safety injection minimum recirculation flow line."

The text of the plant performance review letter is available from the NRC Region III Office of Public Affairs and on the NRC web site.

NRC reviews safety performance twice a year at every licensed nuclear power plant in the nation. These reviews give the agency staff an integrated assessment of plant performance and provide a basis for planning inspection activities.

Plant performance reviews are an interim measure NRC is using to monitor nuclear power plant safety. The agency began using it for this purpose after suspending the Systematic Assessment of License Performance (SALP) process until a new assessment program is developed. Previously, SALP reports were issued every 12 to 24 months.

The new reactor oversight and assessment program being developed will provide quarterly performance reports, based on a number of performance indicators and on inspection findings. This program will be tested at eight plants beginning in June and will be extended to all plants next January. A full description of the new program is available on the NRC web site.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021