alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model (NUREG-0711, Revision 3)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-0711, Revision 3 (PDF - 1.54 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**September 2012**Date Published:**November 2012

**Prepared by:** J.M. O'Hara*, J.C. Higgins* S. A. Fleger, P. A. Pieringer

*Brookhaven National Laboratory Energy Sciences and Technology Department Upton, NY 11973-5000

S. A. Fleger, NRC Project Manager

NRC Job Code Number N6765

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This document is used by the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to review the human factors engineering (HFE) programs of applicants for construction permits, operating licenses, standard design certifications, combined operating licenses, and license amendments. The purpose of these reviews is to verify that the applicant’s HFE program incorporates HFE practices and guidelines accepted by the staff as described within the twelve elements of an HFE program: HFE Program Management, Operating Experience Review, Functional Requirements Analysis and Function Allocation, Task Analysis, Staffing and Qualifications, Treatment of Important Human Actions, Human-System Interface Design, Procedure Development, Training Program Development, Human Factors Verification and Validation, Design Implementation, and Human Performance Monitoring. Each element encompasses five sections: Background, Objective, Applicant Products and Submittals, Review Criteria, and Bibliography.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021

#### Related Information

            - Contact us aboutNUREG-0711

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

T

o

n

s/D

a

y

SO2 Trend 2009-2024

Jefferson

Shelby

Jefferson + Shelby

Walker

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

2009 2015 2024

Year
2009 2015 2024

Jefferson 0.35 0.24 0.27

Shelby 0.08 0.05 0.06

Jefferson + Shelby 0.43 0.28 0.32

Walker 0.003 0.002 0.002
Month 2015 Jefferson--SO2 (tons/day) 2015 Shelby--SO2 (tons/day)

1 0.21 0.043

2 0.22 0.045

3 0.22 0.046

4 0.23 0.048

5 0.24 0.05

6 0.25 0.052

7 0.26 0.054

8 0.26 0.054

9 0.24 0.049

10 0.24 0.049

11 0.22 0.046

12 0.23 0.047

Average Tons/Day 0.235 0.048583333
2015 Jefferson + Shelby--SO2 (tons/day) 2015 Walker--SO2 (tons/day)

0.253 0.001

0.265 0.001

0.266 0.001

0.278 0.002

0.29 0.002

0.302 0.002

0.314 0.002

0.314 0.002

0.289 0.002

0.289 0.002

0.266 0.001

0.277 0.002

0.283583333 0.001666667
Month 2024 Jefferson--SO2 (tons/day) 2024 Shelby--SO2 (tons/day)

1 0.24 0.05

2 0.25 0.05

3 0.25 0.05

4 0.26 0.05

5 0.28 0.06

6 0.29 0.06

7 0.3 0.06

8 0.3 0.06

9 0.27 0.06

10 0.27 0.06

11 0.26 0.05

12 0.26 0.05

Average Tons/Day 0.269166667 0.055
2024 Jefferson + Shelby--SO2 (tons/day) 2024 Walker--SO2 (tons/day)

0.29 0.002

0.3 0.002

0.3 0.002

0.31 0.002

0.34 0.002

0.35 0.002

0.36 0.002

0.36 0.002

0.33 0.002

0.33 0.002

0.31 0.002

0.31 0.002

0.324166667 0.002
2009 2015 2024

SO2 (tons/day) SO2 (tons/day) SO2 (tons/day)

Jefferson County 0.35 0.24 0.27

Shelby County 0.08 0.05 0.06

Jefferson County + Shelby County 0.43 0.28 0.32

Walker County 0.003 0.002 0.002
Month 2009 Jefferson--SO2 (tons/day) 2009 Shelby--SO2 (tons/day)

1 0.3 0.06

2 0.31 0.07

3 0.33 0.07

4 0.35 0.07

5 0.36 0.08

6 0.39 0.08

7 0.4 0.09

8 0.4 0.09

9 0.37 0.08

10 0.35 0.08

11 0.34 0.07

12 0.33 0.07

Average Tons/Day 0.3525 0.075833333
2009 Jefferson + Shelby--SO2 (tons/day) 2009 Walker--SO2 (tons/day)

0.36 0.002

0.38 0.003

0.4 0.003

0.42 0.003

0.44 0.003

0.47 0.003

0.49 0.003

0.49 0.003

0.45 0.003

0.43 0.003

0.41 0.003

0.4 0.003

0.428333333 0.002916667
NOx (tons/day) SO2 (tons/day) PMFine (tons/day)

Jefferson County 58.8 0.35 1.7

Shelby County 12.7 0.08 0.4

Jefferson County + Shelby County 71.5 0.43 2.1

Walker County 0.55 0.003 0.02

2009
NOx (tons/day) SO2 (tons/day) PMFine (tons/day) NOx (tons/day) SO2 (tons/day)

35.5 0.24 0.96 20.6 0.27

7.6 0.05 0.21 4.4 0.06

43.1 0.28 1.2 25 0.32

0.33 0.002 0.009 0.2 0.002

2015 2024
PMFine (tons/day)

0.52

0.11

0.63

0.005
##### 



Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE PUBLIC COMPANY
ACCOUNTING REFORM AND INVESTOR PROTECTION ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED)
  1.
    
    The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K, as
amended by Amendment No. 1 to Form 10-K, for the year
ended December 31, 2006, to which this Certification is
attached as Exhibit 32 (the Annual Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Annual Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition of the Company at the end of the period
covered by the Annual Report and results of operations
of the Company for the period covered by the Annual
Report.
  /s/ Christian Itin

Christian Itin
    
    
    
    /s/ Christopher P. Schnittker

Christopher P. SchnittkerChief Executive Officer
    
    
    
    Chief Financial Officer
|   | (1)         The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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 D. Pougnet     |   |
|----------------|-------------------------|--------|
|           | John D. Pougnet         |
|           | Chief Financial Officer |
|           |                    |
| March 31, 2011 |                    |
October 21, 2015

Mr. Todd Livdahl

PO Box 27602

Anaheim, CA 92809

Dear Mr. Livdahl:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from 

sections of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot

process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We received your exemption request filed in Docket No. FAA−2015−2870, but we are unable 

to process your request any further. Your petition does not comply with the requirements of

§ 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of 

the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.
2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosures
3
4
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffNUREG-1650

# The United States of America National Report for the 2012 Convention on Nuclear Safety Extraordinary Meeting, July 2012 (NUREG-1650, Revision 4)

On this page:
        - Publication Information 
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1650, Revision 4, July 2012 (PDF - 1.18 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed**: May 2012**Date Published**: July 2012

**Prepared by:** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO)

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The United States (U.S.) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), in coordination with the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of Energy, and the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, prepared this report, “The United States of America National Report for the 2012 Convention on Nuclear Safety Extraordinary Meeting,” and will submit it for peer review at the 2012 Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS) Extraordinary Meeting to be held at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Austria, in August 2012. This report addresses the actions taken by the U.S. to improve nuclear safety in response to the March 11, 2011, accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. It demonstrates how the U.S. contributes to achieving and maintaining a high level of nuclear safety worldwide by enhancing national measures and international cooperation and by meeting the obligations of all the articles established by CNS. It describes how the U.S. addressed six topics in relation to the Fukushima accident: (1) external events, (2) design issues, (3) severe accident management and recovery, (4) national organizations, (5) emergency preparedness and response and postaccident management, and (6) international cooperation. Similar to the U.S. National Report for the fifth CNS issued in 2010, this report includes a section developed by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations describing work done by the U.S. nuclear industry in response to the Fukushima accident.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsRegulatory Guides (by Division)Division 3 - Fuels and Materials Facilities

# Fuels and Materials Facilities (Division 3): Regulatory Guides 3.1 - 3.20

This page lists the number, title, publication date, and revisions for each regulatory guide in Division 3, "Fuels and Materials Facilities," with references to draft guides and related documents (where applicable).

See also Draft Regulatory Guides for Public Comment.

See NRC Regulatory Guides for more general information.

Regulatory Guides are reviewed about every 10 years, although a guide may be reviewed more frequently if the staff believes an emerging issue affects the guide. The NRC began these reviews in 2010, and began posting the results of its reviews on this site in 2013. The review dates are hyperlinked to the review memorandum, which provide useful information about the status and any known issues with the associated regulatory guide.

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

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, April 8, 2024

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Regulatory Guides 3.1 - 3.20
          - Regulatory Guides 3.21 - 3.40
          - Regulatory Guides 3.41 - 3.60
          - Regulatory Guides 3.61 - 3.77

#### 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 Monday, April 8, 2024
EXHIBIT 99.1

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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of UnitedGlobalCom, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2002,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gene W. Schneider, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



|Date: April 10, 2003 |  | /s/GENE W. SCHNEIDERGene W. Schneider
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
I, Craig T. Davenport, 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 thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by 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 ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; 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 designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely 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 orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.    /s/ CRAIG T. DAVENPORT    Craig T. Davenport *Chief Executive Officer* *(principal executive officer)*
Date: November 8, 2004
Exhibit 15

 

The PartnersDuke-Weeks Realty Limited Partnership

 

Gentlemen:

RE: Registration Statements No. 333-37920

With respect to the subject registrationstatements, we acknowledge our awareness of the use therein of our report datedApril 25, 2001 related to our review of interim financial information.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under theSecurities Act of 1933, such report is not considered a part of a registrationstatement prepared or certified by an accountant, or a report prepared orcertified by an accountant within the meaning of sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

 

KPMG LLPIndianapolis, IndianaMay 11, 2001
#### Stoflet, Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error.

*December 6, 1929*

January *7, 1930.*

*440For the plaintiff in error there was a brief by *Rush & Devos*of Neillsville and *Goggins, Braseau & Graves*of Wisconsin Rapids, and oral argument by *T. W. Braseau.*

*For*the defendant in error there was a brief by *V. W. Nehs,*district attorney of Clark county, the *Attorney General,*and *J. E. Messer schmidt,*assistant attorney general, and oral argument by *Mr. Nehs.*

Fowler, J.

The sole question raised is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction. We are clearly of the opinion that it is not. The evidence was wholly circumstantial and falls far short of the quantum of evidence necessary to support conviction, as stated in *Colbert v. State,*125 Wis. 423, 104 N. W. 61; *Kollock v. State,*88 Wis. 663, 60 N. W. 817, and other cases that might be cited.

*By the Court.*— The judgment is reversed, and the warden of the state reformatory will forthwith discharge the defendant, W. A. Stoflet.
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 of Duke Realty Limited Partnership (the Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dennis D. Oklak, Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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; and

(2) The information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.



/s/ Dennis D. OklakDennis D. OklakChairman and Chief Executive Officer of the General PartnerDate: August 13, 2010


A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has
been provided to Duke Realty Limited Partnership, and will be retained by Duke Realty Limited Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Boehlke and others, Respondents, vs. Wallschlaeger and another, Administrators, and others, Appellants.

*April 5*

October *9, 1928.*

For the appellants there were briefs by *M. H. Sell*and *Carbys & Kenney,*all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Mr. Sell*and *Mr. J. O. Carbys.*

*Edwin W. Knappe*of Milwaukee, for the .respondents.

The following opinion was filed May 8, 1928:

Stevens, J.

Mr. Chief Justice Vinje did not participate in the decision of this case. The other members of the court are equally divided in opinion upon the questions presented upon this appeal. Mr. Justice Rosenberry, Mr. Justice Eschweiler, and Mr. Justice Owen are of the opinion that the judgment should be reversed. Mr. Justice Doerfler, Mr. Justice Crownhart, and the writer are of the opinion that the judgment should be affirmed. Under the well established rule it follows that the judgment appealed from is affirmed. *Fox River Paper Co. v. Railroad Comm.*189 Wis. 626, 628, 208 N. W. 266.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.

A motion for a rehearing was denied, with $25 costs, on October 9, 1928.
Table of Contents







Exhibit
32.02






Certification
of Principal Financial Officer






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 of Silicon Image, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Harold Covert, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:




(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 result of operations of the Company
      for the periods presented therein.









Date:
      October 26, 2009
              /s/ Harold CovertHarold
      Covert
                President,
      Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial
  Officer
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsRulemaking DocumentsPetition  for Rulemaking Dockets

# Petition for Rulemaking Dockets for 2009

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

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, February 24, 2022

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Open Petition for Rulemaking Dockets
          - 2024
          - 2023
          - 2022
          - 2021
          - 2020
          - 2019
          - 2018
          - 2017
          - 2016
          - 2015
          - 2014
          - 2013
          - 2012
          - 2011
          - 2010
          - 2009
          - 2008
          - 2007
          - 2006
          - 2005
          - 2004
          - 2003
          - 2002
          - 2001
          - 2000
          - 1999

#### 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 Thursday, February 24, 2022