alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 24 (Thursday, February 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 6500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02235]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Ports and Marine Technology Trade Mission to India

February 2-6, 2015.
AGENCY: International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; Recruitment Suspension.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade 
Administration, Industry and Analysis is amending a notice for the 
Ports and Marine Technology Trade Mission to India scheduled for 
February 2-6, 2015, published November 19, 2014, to notify potential 
applicants that recruitment has been suspended until further notice.
    Additional Information: On November 19, 2014, the International 
Trade Administration published a notice in the Federal Register (79 FR 
68862) announcing an Executive-led ports and marine technology trade 
mission to India to be held February 2-6, 2014. The notice provided 
delegates that the trade mission application deadline is extended to 
November 21, 2014 and to add a second optional stop to an Easter port, 
Visakhapatnam, India. This notice suspends recruitment for the mission 
until further notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Spector, Office of Industry and 
Analysis, Trade Promotion Programs, Phone: 202-482-2054; Fax: 202-482-
9000, Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1c5a6e7d7277324f6c797f68736e5c686e7d7879327b736a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9efdbc8c7c287fad9cccaddc6dbe9dddbc8cdcc87cec6df">[email protected]</span></a>.

Frank Spector,
Senior International Trade Specialist.
[FR Doc. 2015-02235 Filed 2-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 4331]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01459]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 9011]


Texas-New Mexico Regional Meeting of the Binational Bridges and 
Border Crossings Group

SUMMARY: Delegates from the United States and Mexican Governments, the 
states of Texas and New Mexico, and the Mexican states of Chihuahua, 
Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas will participate in the Texas-New 
Mexico Regional meeting of the U.S.-Mexico Binational Bridges and 
Border Crossings Group on February 5, 2015, in Austin Texas. The 
purpose of this meeting is to discuss operational matters involving 
existing and proposed international bridges and border crossings and 
their related infrastructure, and to exchange views on policy as well 
as technical information. This meeting includes a public session on 
Thursday, February 5, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. until 11:00 a.m. This 
session allows proponents of proposed bridges and border crossings and 
related projects to make presentations to the delegations and members 
of the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the meeting 
and to attend the public session, please contact the Mexico Desk's 
Border Affairs Unit, via email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f5a2bdb4d8b79a87919087b49393949c8786b58681948190db929a83"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7a2d323b573815081e1f083b1c1c1b1308093a090e1b0e1f541d150c">[email protected]</span></a>, by phone 
at 202-647-9894, or by mail at Office of Mexican Affairs--Room 3924, 
Department of State, 2201 C St. NW., Washington, DC 20520.

Rachel M. Poynter,
Deputy Director, Office of Mexican Affairs, Bureau of Western 
Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2015-01459 Filed 1-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-29-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Natural Circulation (Interruption) Analysis with MELCOR 2.2 during Asymmetric Cooldown Transients(NUREG/IA-0507)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0507 (PDF – 4.88 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** September 2018**Date Published:** March 2019

**Prepared by:** Martina Adorni, Anis Bousbia Salah, and Jacques Vlassenbroeck

Bel V Rue Walcourt 148 Walcourtstraat 1070 Brussels, Belgium 

Hossein Esmaili, 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 Cooperative Severe Accident Research Program (CSARP) 

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This document describes the analysis carried out with MELCOR 2.2 computer code of the natural circulation (interruption) phenomena during asymmetric cooldown transients in a 3-loop nuclear power plant (NPP) configuration. Indeed, thermal-hydraulic analysis is an important issue for severe accident codes, it constitutes the starting point of the analysis before the occurrence of the core degradation.

The considered accident scenario consists in a feedwater line break (FWLB) combined with loss of offsite power (LOOP) in a generic 1000 MWe 3-loop pressurized water reactor (PWR).

For this study, a Bel V MELCOR 3-loop PWR model has been developed. The main goal is to verify the capabilities of the MELCOR code in predicting the establishment of the natural circulation flow regime, the eventual occurrence of the natural circulation interruption (NCI) phenomena and to compare to the results from an equivalent analysis performed using the thermal-hydraulic system code CATHARE. The activity is completed by carrying out sensitivity analyses in order to identify the key MELCOR modeling parameters.

The calculation results confirm the Bel V MELCOR 3-loop plant model capability and suitability for its intended purpose in support of regulatory activities. 

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

# Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to Certification of the AP600 Standard Design (NUREG-1512)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-41162 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ALEJANDRO JIMENEZ-SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-98-CR-274-1

-------------------- September 27, 1999 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Alejandro Jimenez-Sanchez (Jimenez) argues that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress because the facts presented at the suppression hearing show that Agent O’Riley did not have a reasonable suspicion that Jimenez was involved in criminal activity. In the context of the denial of a motion to suppress, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and the ultimate conclusion, that the facts supported a reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatoryNo. 98-41162 -2- stop, de novo. United States v. Inocencio , 40 F.3d 716, 721 (5th Cir. 1994). A roving Border Patrol agent may stop a vehicle if the agent’s observations lead him reasonably to suspect that the occupants of a particular vehicle may be involved in criminal activity. See United States v. Brignoni-Ponce , 422 U.S. 873, 881 (1975). The factors to be taken into account in determining whether “reasonable suspicion” exists, include: the characteristics of the area; its proximity to the border; the usual patterns of traffic on a particular road and previous experience with alien traffic; information about recent illegal border crossings; the driver’s behavior; and the vehicle’s appearance, including the type vehicle, appearance of being heavily loaded, number of passengers, or passengers’ behavior. Brignoni-Ponce , 422 U.S. at 884-885. The facts articulated by Agent O’Riley show that Jimenez’s truck was not a vehicle normally in the area, was carrying unusable welding equipment, and could have been recently altered. The road on which the stop was made was a known path for contraband and Jimenez was traveling it at an unusual hour for workmen. Finally, a check of the license showed that the truck was registered to an automobile shop located 100 miles from the scene. These facts are specific and were articulated in clear terms. The district court did not err in concluding that all of the specific facts considered together supported the stop. See United States v. Aldaco , 168 F.3d 148, 150 (5th Cir. 1999).No. 98-41162 -3- The government has filed an unopposed motion to substitute replacement photographs for exhibits missing from the record. The motion is granted.

AFFIRMED; MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE GRANTED.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Seismic Margin Reviewof the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station (NUREG/CR-4826, UCID-20948, Vols. 1, 2 & 3)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-4826 (PDF - 20.84 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** March 1987**Date Published:** March 1987

**Prepared by:** P. G. Prassinos, R. C. Murray, G. E. Cummings

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 7000 East Avenue Livermore, CA 94550

 NRC FIN A0461

**Prepared for:** Division of Engineering Safety Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This Summary Report is the first of three volumes for the **Seismic Margin Review of the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station**. Volume 2 is fhe Systems Analysis of the first trial seismic margin review. Volume 3 documents the results of the fragility screening for the review. The three volumes demonstrate how the seismic margin review guidance (NUREG/CR-4482) of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Seismic Design Margins Program can be applied.

The overall objectives of the trial review are to assess the seismic margins of a particular pressurized water reactor, and to test the adequacy of this review approach, quantification techniques, and guidelines for performing the review. Results from the trial review will be used to revise the seismic margin methodology and guidelines so that the NRC and industry can readily apply them to assess the inherent quantitative seismic capacity of nuclear power plants.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                               CERTIFICATE OF THE
                   CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL
                          OFFICER OF NORTH BANCORP INC.

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350):

Each of William A. Kirsten, Chief Executive Officer, and Susan A. Norris, Chief
Financial Officer, of North Bancorp Inc., certify, to the best of my knowledge
and belief, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
1350) that:

(1) The annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003,
which this statement accompanies, fully complies with requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and;

(2) The information contained in this annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of North Bancorp Inc.

                                          NORTH BANCORP, INC.

Dated: March 26, 2004                     By: /s/ William A. Kirsten
                                              -------------------------------
                                              William A. Kirsten
                                              President and Chief Executive
                                              Officer

                                          By: /s/ Susan A. Norris
                                              -------------------------------
                                              Susan A Norris
                                              Vice President and Chief Financial
                                              Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Kensey Nash Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph W. Kaufmann, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to 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 Company.



|                        |  |                        
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 10, 2008 |  | /s/ Joseph W. Kaufmann 
|                        |  | Joseph W. Kaufmann     
|                        |  | Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

**Solelyfor the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned ChiefExecutive Officer of AML Communications, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify,to the best of my knowledge, that:**

 

•                          the Quarterly Report of the Company onForm 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003 fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

•                          the information contained in such reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operation of the Company.

 

 

Dated:  November 12, 2003

 

 
| /s/  Jacob Inbar                  |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                                   |
| Jacob Inbar,                           |
|                                   |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
#### Layton, Special Administratrix, Respondent, vs. Rowland, Administrator, and others, imp., Appellants.

*December 4, 1928*

January *8, 1929.*

*536For the appellants there was a brief by *Hoyt', Bender, McIntyre & Hoyt*of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Eugene L. McIntyre.*

For the respondent there was a brief fiy *Kearney, Kearney & Koelbel*of Racine, and oral argument by *Thomas M. Kearney, Jr.*

Crownhart, J.

As to the demurrer to the first cause of action, the case is ruled by *Mesar v. Southern Surety Co., post,*p. 578, 222 N. W. 809, decided herewith, and the order of the trial court must be affirmed.

The second cause of action involves a single question of law, which is decisive of the issue, and that is, whether an action for. death by wrongful act, under sec. 331.01, Stats., survives the death of the wrongdoer.

It was admitted on the argument, as the fact is, that *Kranz v. Wis. Trust Co.*155 Wis. 40, 143 N. W. 1049, holding that the action does not survive, rules this case, and in order to sustain a . cause of action such case must be overruled.

The rule there stated is held by the weight of authorities. Besides the cases cited in the *Kranz Case,*see L. R. A. 1916 A, p. 1143m, and *Mellon v. Goodyear, 277*U. S. 335, 48 Sup. Ct. 541, 72 Lawy. Ed. 906,

*537Massachusetts holds to the contrary, *Putnam v. Savage,*244 Mass. 83, 138 N. E. 808; also Illinois, *Devine v. Healy,*241 Ill. 34, 89 N. E. 251; and New Jersey, *Hackensack Trust Co. v. Vandenberg,*88 N. J. L. 518, 97 Atl. 148.

The decision in the *Kranz Case, supra,*has been the law of this state for over fifteen years. It was suggested in the opinion in that case that “if a different rule should be desired the legislature can easily provide for it.” The legislature has taken no action to that effect. That being so, we do not deem it proper to reconsider the matter.

The distinction between the two causes of action is pointed out in the *Kranz Case, supra,*where it is stated:

> “The ground upon which it has been held that an action for wrongful death does not survive the death of the wrongdoer is that it does not accrue until the death of the injured party, and it is then not a devolution of any pre-existing cause of action, but is purely a statutory creation given not for any damage to the person or to the property rights or interests of the beneficiaries, but as a new and independent cause of action unknown to the common law. Hence survival statutes using terms applicable only to common-law actions do not include the action for death by wrongful act.”

*By the Court.*— The order of the municipal court is affirmed as to the first cause of action, and reversed as to the second cause of action. No costs to be allowed either párty, appellant to pay clerk’s fees in this court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       2,480,790
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 40,363,426
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            44,501,877
<PP&E>                                       7,872,689
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,484,813
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              84,658,138
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,574,862
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    50,747,026
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,779,517
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                84,658,138
<SALES>                                        957,524
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            50,315,117
<CGS>                                          740,713
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,543,568
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            32,689,671
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             503,384
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,578,494
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,851,490
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,727,004
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,727,004
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jacob Inbar, ChiefExecutive Officer of AML Communications Inc., (the “Company”), certify that:

1.             Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AML Communications, Inc.;

2.             Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material  fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.             Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.             Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)        Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)         Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)        Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.             Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)        Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

(b)       Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
| Date: February 14, 2007 |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |   |
| /s/ Jacob Inbar         |   |
| By: Jacob Inbar         |   |
| Chief Executive  Office |   |
|                         |        |  |  |

 

----