alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Spent Fuel Pool Safety Analysis of TRACE in Chinshan NPP (NUREG/IA-0452)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0452 (PDF - 1.04 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**November 2014**Date Published:** March 2015

**Prepared by:** Chunkuan Shih*, Jong-Rong Wang*, Hao-Tzu Lin, Hui-Chen Wang*, Show-Chyuan Chiang**, Chia-Chuan Liu**

Institute of Nuclear Energy Research, Atomic Energy Council, R.O.C. 1000, Wenhua Rd., Chiaan Village, Lungtan, Taoyuan, 325, Taiwan

*Institute of Nuclear Engineering and Science, National Tsing Hua University 101 Section 2, Kuang Fu Rd., HsinChu, Taiwan

**Department of Nuclear Safety, Taiwan Power Company 242, Section 3, Roosevelt Rd., Zhongzheng District, Taipei, Taiwan

K. Tien, NRC Project Manager

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

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange Under the Thermal-Hydraulic Code Applications and Maintenance Program (CAMP)

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

In this research, loss of spent fuel pool cooling system and loss of pool coolant inventory accident in Chinshan nuclear power plant (NPP) were simulated by using TRACE code, the latest best-estimate thermal-hydraulic system code developed by the U.S.NRC. Besides, the mitigation capability of spray system during the accidents was discussed.

In TRACE input model, the calculation of decay thermal power of spent fuel was based on ASB 9-2 decay heat correlation of U.S. NRC standard review plan report. To simulate the accident mitigation, spray system initiation time, spray flow rate, and spray flow temperature sensitivity studies were performed in the loss of pool cooling system accident simulation. In the simulation of concurrent loss of pool cooling system and pool inventory, the focus was mainly on the excessive inventory loss which the initial leakage rate was beyond 500 gpm.

The capability of mitigation strategy was evaluated by using simulation results including spent fuel pool water level and fuel cladding temperature variation. The results depicted that in the loss of pool cooling system cases, the earlier the spray system initiated, the shorter pool inventory recover time was needed, and the cladding temperature was lowered effectively by performing a larger spray flow rate. In the loss of both pool cooling system and pool inventory cases, the cladding temperature was controlled even the fuels were partially uncovered, and the spray flow should not less than 200 gpm to avoid the sharp increase of cladding temperature.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsRulemaking Documents

# Rulemaking Activities  by Fiscal Year

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Rulemaking Dockets
          - Petition  for Rulemaking Dockets
          - Unified Agenda and Regulatory Plan
          - Rulemaking Activities  by Fiscal Year
          - Rulemaking Highlights

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, November 10, 2020
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffPerformance and Accountability Report (NUREG-1542)

# Performance and Accountability Report — NRC Summary of Performance And Financial Information Fiscal Year 2010 (NUREG-1542, Volume 16, Supplement 1)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1542, Volume 16, Supplement 1 (PDF - 8.64 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published**: February 2011

Resource Management and Support StaffOffice of the Chief Financial OfficerU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Fiscal Year 2010 NRC Summary of Performance and Financial Information provides performance results and audited financial statements that enable Congress, the President, and the public to assess the performance of the agency in achieving its mission and stewardship of its resources.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          28,614
<SECURITIES>                                    27,772
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,317
<ALLOWANCES>                                       379
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,945
<PP&E>                                           5,456
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,644
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  69,396
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,135
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            17
<OTHER-SE>                                      62,753
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    69,396
<SALES>                                          8,214
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,833
<CGS>                                            3,328
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,658
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                18,369
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    26
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,239
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,009)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (13,009)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  7,453
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (20,462)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.54)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.54)


</TABLE>
<Page>




                                                                   Exhibit 31.2



                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Robert M. Dennerlein, Chief Financial Officer of Globix Corporation, certify
that:

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Globix Corporation for
the period ended March 31, 2002;

Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.

Date:    August 25, 2003
                                                 /s/ Robert M. Dennerlein
                                                 Robert M. Dennerlein
                                                 Title:  Chief Financial Officer
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 Defense

###### Department of the Air Force

# ACTION:

 Notice of Availability (NOA) Record of Decision (ROD).

# SUMMARY:

 On January 16, 2015, the United States Air Force signed the ROD for the Powder River Training Complex, Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota, Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). This ROD states the Air Force decision to select Modified Alternative A and adopts specified mitigation measures. The Air Force will request the Federal Aviation Adminsitration (FAA) to chart the Modified Alternative A airspace to implement the decision.

                        The decision was based on matters discussed in the Final EIS; inputs from the public, Native American tribes, and Federal, State and local units of government, and regulatory agencies; and other relevant factors. The Final EIS was made available to the public on November 28, 2014, through a NOA in the                         **Federal Register**                         (Volume 79, Number 229, Page 70865) with a post-filing waiting period that ended on December 29, 2014. This ROD documents only the Air Force decision on the proposed actions analyzed in the Final EIS. Authority: This NOA is published pursuant to the regulations (40 CFR Sec. 1506.6) implementing the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321,                         *et seq.*) and the Air Force's Environmental Impact Analysis Process (32 CFR Secs. 989.21(b) and 989.24(b)(7)).                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                         Judith Keith, AFCEC/CZN 2261 Hughes                               ( print page 5740)                            Ave, Ste 155, JBSA Lackland, TX 78236, 210-925-3367.                    

Henry Williams, 

Civ, DAF, Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2015-02066 Filed 2-2-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-10-P
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Evaluations of NRC Seismic-Structural Regulations and Regulatory Guidance, and Simulation-Evaluation Tools for Applicability to Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) (NUREG/CR-7193)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7193 (PDF - 810.52 KB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** February 2013**Date Published:** March 2015

**Prepared by:** Robert J. Budnitz, Dismitrios Konstantinidis*

Earth Sciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720

Zhiguang Zhou**

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720

*Now at Department of Civil Engineering McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, ON L8S 4L7, Canada

**Now at College of Civil Engineering Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092 China

Thomas J. Herrity, NRC Technical Monitor

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report consists of two different evaluations sponsored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and performed by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The first evaluation covers NRC regulatory guidance in the seismic-structural area. The second evaluation covers several seismic-structural simulation tools used in NRC regulatory applications. Each evaluation examines the appropriateness of the regulatory guidance (provided in regulations, guidance, review plans, etc.), or of the simulation tool for its applicability to small modular reactors (SMRs). The objective of each evaluation is to address the following: The bulk of NRC’s regulatory work on nuclear power reactor safety has been concentrated for decades on large light-water reactors (LWRs). While the regulations are technology neutral, many of the agency’s positions have evolved with large LWRs as the sole technology of interest. Also, the technical analysis tools (computer codes) used in reactor safety guidance, either by the NRC itself or by its licensees and applicants, including structural analysis tools as well as those used to determine ground motion and to analyze soil structure interaction (SSI) effects, have been used to analyze large LWRs. This report examined whether regulatory guidance, or the analysis tools currently used in the seismic-structural area, could benefit from modification to better address small modular reactors (SMRs). It concluded that most documents reviewed do not need any modifications and are acceptable as currently written.

Recommendations for modifications are presented as appropriate. Also, it concluded that the software packages reviewed should yield acceptable results when applied to an SMR. The report can be used to inform the NRC’s efforts to update regulatory guidance in support of licensing reviews of SMR applications.

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 97-6310

ANTHONY D. HAWKS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge.

(CR-94-206-S, CA-97-61-S)

Submitted: May 19, 1998

Decided: November 16, 1998

Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Anthony D. Hawks, Appellant Pro Se. Jamie M. Bennett, Assistant

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Anthony D. Hawks appeals from the district court's order denying

his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998) motion. Finding

no reversible error, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss.

Hawks contends on appeal that the district court improperly denied

his motion to amend his § 2255 motion. We disagree. Our review of

the record discloses that although the court denied this motion, it

treated it as a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 or Fed. R. Civ. P. 60.

As such, the court reviewed all claims contained therein and properly

found none to survive summary dismissal under Rule 4 of the Rules

Governing § 2255 Proceedings. We agree with the district court's

conclusion.

Hawks also asserts that his federal trial, following an alleged

acquittal of the charges in state court, violated the Double Jeopardy

Clause. Hawks did not raise this argument below and therefore may

not assert it for the first time on appeal absent plain error or a fundamental miscarriage of justice. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246,

250 (4th Cir. 1993). Because successive charges of this type are permitted under the dual sovereignty doctrine, Hawks fails to demonstrate either of these prerequisites. See Abbate v. United States, 359

U.S. 187 (1959). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability

and dismiss this appeal. We also deny Hawks' motion to proceed in

forma pauperis and his motion to amend and supplement his pleadings. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

 2
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffImplementation Guidance for 10 CFR Part 37, "Physical Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 Quanti

# Implementation Guidance for 10 CFR Part 37, "Physical Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material", Final (NUREG-2155, Revision 2)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-2155, Revision 2  (PDF - 4.35 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**March 2022**Date Published:**March 2022

**Prepared by:**M. CerveraA. CogginsP. GoldbergB. JuranJ. KatanicW. LeeD. PiskuraG. PurdyR. ReglandG. Smith

Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and SafeguardsU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This technical report is intended to provide guidance for applicants and licensees in implementing Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations* (10 CFR) Part 37, "Physical protection of category 1 and category 2 quantities of radioactive material." This document describes methods that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) finds acceptable for implementing the regulations.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, April 04, 2022
No. 82-6022.

#### Harp *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
March 28, 2013



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

PARTNERS IN BUILDING , L

. P

. , Appellant
NO. 14

- 12

- 00123

- CV V.
DARLEEN EURE , Appellee

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the order in favor of appellee Darleen Eure, signed, October 10, 2011, was heard on the transcript of the record. The record shows that th e trial court lacked jurisdiction to render this order. We therefore order the trial court’s order of October 10, 2011, VACATED , and we order this appeal DISMISSED

. We order appell ee DARLEEN EURE to pay all costs incurred in this appeal

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
          I, Katherine Greenberg, certify that:
          1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Endocare, Inc.;
          2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
          3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
          4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
          a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
          b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
          c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
          5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
          a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
          b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   Date: May 10, 2004 /s/ Katherine Greenberg   Katherine Greenberg Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (principal accounting officer)