alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffNUREG-1885

# Report to Congress on the Security Inspection Program for Commercial Power Reactors and Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities: Results and Status Update - Annual Report for Calendar Year 2014 (NUREG-1885, Revision 8)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1885, Revision 8 (PDF - 1.55 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** June 2015**Date Published:** August 2015

Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report fulfills the requirements of Section 170D.e of Chapter 14 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. §2210d.e), as amended, which states, "[n]ot less often than once each year, the Commission shall submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report, in classified form and unclassified form, that describes the results of each security response evaluation conducted and any relevant corrective action taken by a licensee during the previous year." This is the tenth annual report, which covers calendar year 2014. In addition to information on the security response evaluation program (force-on-force inspections), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is providing additional information regarding the overall security performance of the commercial nuclear power industry and Category I fuel cycle facilities to keep Congress and the public informed of the NRC’s efforts to protect public health and safety, the common defense and security, and the environment through the effective regulation of the Nation’s commercial nuclear power facilities and strategic special nuclear material.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsInspection ManualChange Notices1998

# Change Notice 98-020

Issue Date: 12/31/98

NRC INSPECTION MANUAL PIPB

 

 

----

 

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

 

END

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, April 17, 2020
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.22

                            SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
                     HEALTH CARE PROPERTY INVESTORS, INC.
                           EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN


          Health Care Property Investors, Inc., a corporation organized under
the laws of the State of Maryland (the "Company"), adopted the Health Care
Property Investors, Inc. Executive Retirement Plan (the "Plan") effective as of
May 1, 1988.  The Plan was amended effective as of January 1, 1993.

          In order to amend the Plan to eliminate the retirement benefit offset
for Social Security benefits and benefits payable under the Company's 401(k)
Savings Plan, this Second Amendment to the Plan has been adopted by a resolution
of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company effective
as of May 1, 2000.

          1.  Sections 1.2, 1.3, 1.9 and 1.14 are deleted in their entirety.

          2.  Section 3.1 of the Plan is hereby amended to read in its entirety
as follows:

              3.1  The annual retirement benefit payable to a Participant for
              ---
     his lifetime at a Normal Retirement Date under the Plan shall be equal to
     30% of Final Average Earnings plus 4% of Final Average Earnings times years
     of Service after age 60 to a maximum of 5 years.

          3.  This Second Amendment to the Plan shall be and is hereby
incorporated in and forms a part of the Plan.

          4.  Except as set forth herein, the Plan shall remain in full force
and effect.
# C_2015053EN.01000101.xml

| 13.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/1

---

DECISION

(2015/C 53/01)

THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (1), as amended by Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 723/2004 (2) and most recently by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union (3), and in particular Article 30 of those Staff Regulations,

1

2

3

Having regard to the Bureau Decision of 13 January 2014 on the delegation of the powers of the appointing authority and of the authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment,

Having regard to the expiry date of 31 December 2014 set for the following European Parliament reserve lists:

AD/4/08, AD/1/10, PE/103/S, PE/104/S, PE/106/S, PE/107/S, PE/117/S, PE/118/S, PE/124/S, AST/4/11, AST/5/11, PE/96/S, PE/119/S and PE/110/S,

Having regard to the opinion of the Joint Committee, delivered at its meeting of 22 October 2014,

HAS DECIDED:

Article 1

The period of validity of the following reserve lists:

| | AD/4/08, PE/106/S, PE/117/S, PE/118/S, PE/124/S, AST/4/11, AST/5/11, PE/96/S and PE/110/S |
| --- | --- |

AD/4/08, PE/106/S, PE/117/S, PE/118/S, PE/124/S, AST/4/11, AST/5/11, PE/96/S and PE/110/S

shall be extended until 31 December 2015.

Article 2

The period of validity of the following reserve lists:

| | AD/1/10, PE/103/S, PE/104/S, PE/107/S and PE/119/S |
| --- | --- |

AD/1/10, PE/103/S, PE/104/S, PE/107/S and PE/119/S

shall not be extended.

Done at Luxembourg, 12 December 2014.

Klaus WELLE

Secretary-General

---

(1)  OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ L 124, 27.4.2004, p. 1.

2

(3)  OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, p. 15.

3

---
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 18 (Wednesday, January 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 4592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01576]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-392]


Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: 
MALLINCKRODT LLC

ACTION: Notice of application.

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

DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and 
applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the 
issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 
1301.33(a) on or before March 30, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement 
Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODW, 
8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Request for 
hearings should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: 
Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Attorney General has delegated his 
authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of 
the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority 
to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation 
and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of 
manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of 
controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with 
suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated 
to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion 
Control (``Deputy Assistant Administrator'') pursuant to section 7 of 
28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart, R.
    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on May 
20, 2014, Mallinckrodt LLC, 3600 North Second Street, St. Louis, 
Missouri 63147, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the 
following basic classes of controlled substances:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Controlled substance                       Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid (2010)...........   I
Lisdexamfetamine (1205)....................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to manufacturer bulk active pharmaceutical 
ingredients (API) for distribution and product development to its 
customers.

    Dated: January 21, 2015.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-01576 Filed 1-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
**EXHIBIT 15.1**

 

The Partner

Duke Realty Limited Partnership

 

 

Gentlemen:

 

RE:  Registration Statement No. 333-108557-01

 

With respect to the subject registration statement, we acknowledge ourawareness of the use therein of our report dated November 14, 2005,related to our review of interim financial information.

 

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

 

 

KPMG LLP

Indianapolis, Indiana

November 14, 2005

 

----
EXHIBIT
32.1
  
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18
U.S.C. 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
 In
connection with the Annual Report of FUSA Capital Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jenifer
Osterwalder, in my capacity as President, Chief Executive Officer, Principal
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  
 /s/ Jenifer
      OsterwalderDate:  
      April 11, 2009
                Jenifer
      Osterwalder
                  President,
      Chief Executive Officer, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer and
      Director
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Radiation Accident Dose and Simulated Loss-of-Coolant Accident Test of Low Voltage Cables (NUREG/CR-7300)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7300 (PDF – 463 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** September 2022**Date Published:** August 2023

**Prepared by:**S. Burany, D. Rouison, R. Burany, and J. OwensKinectrics AES Inc.2135 City Gate Lane, Suite 100Naperville, IL, 60563Darrell Murdock, NRC Project Manager

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 29, 2023
13 August 2001

Robert Thorne
Chief Executive Officer
Fanlink Networks, Inc.
40 Exchange Place, Suite 1501
New York, NY 10005

Dear Rob:

This letter will document Planet Zanett, Inc.'s offer to
continue its involvement in Fanlink Networks, Inc. ("the
Company").

Reference is hereby made to that certain Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement, dated December 18, 2000 (the
"SPA"), pursuant to which Planet Zanett, Inc. ("PZ") purchased
shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock ("Series A
Stock") from the Company in up to three tranches, the last of
which tranche is referred to herein as the "Final Tranche".

We hereby offer the following regarding the Final Tranche:

1.	Series A Stock.  The Company shall issue to PZ an
aggregate of 3,369,863 shares of Series A Stock (with
the same rights and privileges of previously issued
Series A Stock pursuant to the SPA) in exchange for
the Final Tranche disbursements, as detailed below.

2.	Warrant Cancellation.  PZ shall return for
cancellation to the Company a Warrant for 1,394,031
shares of Common Stock of the Company.

At the conclusion of steps 1 and 2, PZ shall be the
beneficial owner of 35.0% of the issued and outstanding
share capital of the Company, on a fully diluted basis.

3.	Disbursements.  PZ shall disburse the Final Tranche
based on the documented roll-out schedule of the
fanlink network and associated cost projections
provided by the Company.  Specifically, PZ shall
disburse within the period of 20 to 30 days prior to
the disclosed launch dates.  Use of the proceeds by
the Company shall be limited to launch projects and
necessary operating expenses of the Company.  The
first disbursement will be made upon acceptance of
these terms.  In the event of additional financing
from a third party subsequent to the first
disbursement, Zanett retains the right to disburse,
under the terms described above, the difference of
$492,000 and the disbursements made up to the date of
the third party financing.

This letter assumes the accuracy and completeness of the
information previously provided by you, and assumes no material
adverse change in financial condition or business prospects of
the Company.

This letter is delivered to you with the understanding and on
the condition that neither the letter nor its substance shall be
disclosed publicly or privately, except with the prior oral
permission of The Zanett Group.
By counter-signing where indicated below, you will have
signified your acceptance of the terms of our offer and this
letter so executed will create valid and legally binding
obligations on your part and our part.

Sincerely,

Planet Zanett, Inc.

By:	/s/ Jack M. Rapport
 	Jack M. Rapport
Chief Financial Officer

Agreed to and accepted as of this 13th day of August, 2001

Fanlink Networks, Inc.

By: 	/s/ Robert Thorne
	Robert Thorne
	Chief Executive Officer
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 6330

ARTHUR JAY GOULETTE , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. ADMINISTRATOR AT CHERRY HOSPITAL; GEORGE T. SOLOMAN; C/O POWELL; J. LUCKEY WEISH, JR.; DEBORAH L. MCSWAIN , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 5:16

- ct

- 03002

- FL )

Submitted : June 22, 2017 Decided: June 2 7 , 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.
Dismissed in part, and a ffirmed in part by un published per curiam opinion

. Arthur Jay Goulette, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Arthur Goulette appeals from the district court’s order s d ismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2012) and denying his post

judgment motions. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Goule tte’s appeal of the order dismissing his § 1983 action because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period unde r Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court’s order dismissing the § 1 983 action was entered on the docket on Aug ust 4, 2016 . The notice of appeal was filed on March 7 , 2017

. * Goulette’s post

- judgment motions had no impact on the time allotted to file the notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)

. Because Goulette ’s notice of appeal was not timely as to th e August 4, 2016, order and judgment, we dismiss the appeal of this order. The notice of appeal is timely , however, for the March 2, 2017, order denying Goulette’s post

- judgment motions. W e have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. According ly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Goulette v. Adm ’r at Cherry Hosp. , No. 5:16

- ct

- 03002

- FL (E.D.N.C. Mar. 2, 2017) . We deny

* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988).3 Goulette’s motion to appoint counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contenti ons are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 12-50555 Summary Calendar

GUILLERMO EMILIO ALDANA, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

_____________________ 

### Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas, Austin

1:11-CV-614

____________________ Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * 

### We affirm for essentially the reason stated by the District Court in its order of April 5, 2012, Granting Appellees’s Summary Judgment. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

## F I L E D Novembe r 29, 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Pursuant to 5 Cir. R. 47.5, the court has de termined that this opinion should notbe * th published and is not prec edent e x cept unde r the limited circumstanc es set for the in 5 Cir. R.

th 47.5.4. Case: 12-50555 Document: 00512068180 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/29/2012
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Assessment of RELAP5/MOD3/V5m5 Against the UPTF Test No. 11 (Countercurrent Flow in PWR Hot Leg) (NUREG/IA-0116, KWU E412/91/E100)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0116 (PDF 2.67 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** May 1993

**Prepared by:** F. Curca-Tivig

Siemens AG–KWU Group D 8520 Erlangen Federal Republic of Germany

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange under the International Thermal-Hydraulic Code Assessment and Application Program (ICAP)

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Analysis of the UPTF Test No. 11 using the "best-estimate" computer code RELAP5/MOD3/Version 5M5 is presented.

Test No. 11 was a quasi-steady state, separate effect test designed to investigate the conditions for countercurrent flow of steam and saturated water in the hot leg of a PWR.

Without using the code's new countercurrent flow limitation (CCFL) model, RELAP5/MOD3/V5M5 overestimated the mass flow rate of back down flowing water up to 35 % (1.5 MPa runs) and 43 % (0.3 MPa runs). This is the most obvious difference to RELAP5/MOD2, which did not allow enough countercurrent flow. From the point of view of performing plant calculations this is certainly an improvement, because the new junction-based CCFL option could be used to restrict the flows to a flooding curve defined by a user-supplied correlation.

Very good agreement with the experimental data for 1.5 MPa - which are relevant for SBLOCA reflux condensation conditions - could be obtained using the code's new CCFL option in the middle of the inclined part (riser) of the hot leg. Using the same CCFL correlation for the simulation of 0.3 MPa test series - typical for reflood conditions -, the code underestimated by 44 % the steam mass flow rate at which complete liquid carry over occurs.

An unphysical result was received using a CCFL correlation of the Wallis type with the intercept C = 0.644 and the slope m = 0.8. The unphysical prediction is an indication of possible programming errors in the CCFL model of the RELAP5/MOD3/VSM5 computer code.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
#### R. D. WHITLEY, Guardian, and others v. A. A. ALEXANDER, Administrator, and others.

(For the Syllabus, see the preceding case.)

Civil action against the administrator of a surety on a guardian bond, tried on exceptions to the report of the Clerk, to whom it had been referred, by his Honor, Judge *Sehenek,*at Spring Term, 1875, of Mecklenburg Superior Court.

The facts in this case are like those in the preceding case between the same parlies. From the ruling of his Honor, the defendants appealed.

*Wilson (& Son*and *Jones <&*Johnston, for appellants.

*Barringer, Vanee <& Dowd*and *Shipp (& Bailey,*contra.

Hodman, J.

The questions presented in both of these appeals are the same, and the decision on the other appeal will apply to the present. A judgment may be drawn in conformity with the opinion in that appeal.

Per Curiam.

Judgment accordingly.
Other Supporting Documents

MCU Facility PSD Permit

Amendment
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff for Knowledge Management

# Historical Review and Observations of Defense-in-Depth (NUREG/KM-0009)

On this page: 
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/KM-0009 (PDF - 3.19 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** March 2016**Date Published:** April 2016

**Prepared by:** Mary Drouin, Brian Wagner; NRC John Lehner, Vinod Mubayi, BNL

Brookhaven National Laboratory PO Box 5000 Upton, NY 11973-5000

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The concept of defense-in-depth is an important element of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) safety philosophy. Though the term has been in use for many years, it has not always been used or defined consistently. This Knowledge Management NUREG documents the historical use of the term (based on NRC literature – for example, technical reports, letters, regulations, regulatory guides, speeches, SECY papers, ACRS presentations and letters) for reactors, materials, and waste for both safety and security applications. Perspectives are included from other government agencies as well as the international community. This report includes general observations in the consistencies and inconsistencies in how defense-in-depth has been defined and used.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021