alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2013312EN.01002001.xml

| 26.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 312/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 312/20

---

Notification of the German Government pursuant to Article 10(2) of Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Electricity Directive’) concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity regarding the designation of 50 Hertz Transmission GmbH, Amprion GmbH and TransnetBW GmbH as transmission system operators in Germany

2013/C 312/09

Following the German regulatory authority's final decision of 9 November 2012 and 11 April 2013 regarding the certification of Amprion GmbH and TransnetBW GmbH as independent transmission operators (Chapter V of the Electricity Directive) and the certification of 50 Hertz Transmission GmbH as ownership unbundled transmission system operator (Article 9 of the Electricity Directive), Germany has notified to the Commission the official approval and designation of these companies as a transmission system operator operating in Germany in accordance with Article 10 of the Electricity Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Any additional information can be obtained at the following address:

| Bundesnetzagentur |
| --- |
| Referat 313 — International Coordination Energy |
| Tulpenfeld 4 |
| 53113 Bonn |
| DEUTSCHLAND |
| E-mail: 313-Postfach@bnetza.de |
| http://www.bundesnetzagentur.de |

Bundesnetzagentur

Referat 313 — International Coordination Energy

Tulpenfeld 4

53113 Bonn

DEUTSCHLAND

E-mail: 313-Postfach@bnetza.de

http://www.bundesnetzagentur.de

---
§ 169.117 What form of monetary compensation is acceptable under a right-of-way? ( a ) If payments are made to us on behalf of the Indian landowners, our preferred method of payment is electronic funds transfer payments. We will also accept: ( 1 ) Money orders;
( 2 ) Personal checks;
( 3 ) Certified checks; or
( 4 ) Cashier's checks.
( b ) We will not accept cash or foreign currency.
( c ) We will accept third-party checks only from financial institutions or Federal agencies.
( d ) The grant of right-of-way will specify the payment method if payments are made by direct pay.
#### Mei Kay Chan et al., Respondents-Appellants, v City of Yonkers et al., Appellants-Respondents.

[824 NYS2d 380]

*541In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Murphy, J.), entered March 14, 2005, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the plaintiffs cross-appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of the same order as denied their cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The infant plaintiff was allegedly injured while playing basketball during gym class at the defendants’ school, when he struck the concrete wall of the gym, after colliding with another player as both chased the ball out-of-bounds. His mother, suing individually and on behalf of the injured plaintiff, subsequently commenced this action against the defendants, alleging negligent supervision and negligent design in failing to install padding on the walls of the gym. After discovery was completed, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the plaintiffs cross-moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The Supreme Court properly denied the motion and cross motion because neither the defendants nor the plaintiffs established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by eliminating the existence of triable issues of fact.

“Schools are under a duty to adequately supervise the students in their charge and they will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision” *(Mirand v City of New York,*84 NY2d 44, 49 [1994]). Whether a student is properly supervised “depends largely on the circumstances attending the event” *(Farrukh v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y.,*227 AD2d 440, 441 [1996]). Here, there is a question of fact as to whether the infant plaintiff’s gym teacher gave adequate safety instructions, given that the teacher had earlier expressed concern as to the lack of padding on the gym walls *(see Merkley v Palmyra-Macedon Cent. School Dist.,*130 AD2d 937 [1987]; *Dorrow v West Genesee Cent. School*
      *542
      *Dist.*41 AD2d 897 [1973]). There is also an issue of fact as to whether the defendants were negligent in failing to install padding on the walls of the gymnasium.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied summary judgment to both parties. Schmidt, J.P., Adams, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.
First Edition Rev 1

Printed in U.S.A.

STICK WITH THE SPECIALISTS®

16KL74-126-AA

©2015 FCA US LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Jeep is a registered trademark of FCA US LLC.
• Increased risk for fuel system component corrosion.
#### Marion Davidson, an Infant, by Her Guardian ad Litem, George Davidson, Respondent, v. New York City Railway Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event, unless plaintiff stipulates to reduce verdict to §12,000;-in which event judgment as so modified and order affirmed, without costs. Ho opinion. Settle order on notice.
#### § 26.4 Who administers the Job Placement and Training Program?

The Job Placement and Training Program is administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs or a tribal service provider. Tribes are encouraged to provide services directly to Indians by either entering into a Public Law 93-638 contract with the Bureau or a compact with the Office of Self—Governance. Tribes may also consolidate Job Placement and Training Program funds in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992, Public Law 102-477.
#### § 214.15 Homesteads.

Lessees and those acting under them shall not conduct prospecting or mining operations within or upon any homestead selection without written consent of the Secretary of the Interior.
# C_2014083EN.01000701.xml

| 21.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 83/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/7

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)

(2014/C 83/02)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 23.01.2014 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.37827 (2013/N) |
| Member State | Ireland |
| Region | — | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Advertising Activities By Bord Bia (Irish Food Board) |
| Legal basis | An Bord Bia Acts 1994-2004 |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Advertising (AGRI) |
| Form of aid | Other |
| Budget | Overall budget: EUR 18 (in millions)
  Annual budget: EUR 6 (in millions) |
| Intensity | 100 % |
| Duration (period) | until 31.12.2016 |
| Economic sectors | Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food |
| Kildare street, Dublin 2 |

Date of adoption of the decision

23.01.2014

Reference number of State Aid

SA.37827 (2013/N)

Member State

Ireland

Region

—

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Advertising Activities By Bord Bia (Irish Food Board)

Legal basis

An Bord Bia Acts 1994-2004

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Advertising (AGRI)

Form of aid

Other

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 18 (in millions)

Annual budget: EUR 6 (in millions)

Intensity

100 %

Duration (period)

until 31.12.2016

Economic sectors

Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities

Name and address of the granting authority

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

Kildare street, Dublin 2

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm.

---
Joint Task Force – Red Hill

Defueling Update

As of March 31, 2023

JTF-RH is currently ON PLAN to begin gravity defueling on October 16, 2023

DoD Repairs Completed

252/253

Start Complete

Number of Validated Repairs 

Submitted to DOH for Review/Approval

August 7: Repairs Approved by DOH

August 16-17: Firefighting Drill

August 28-30: Repacking

August 31: NEPA

1 Complete

Next 90 Days June 2023 July 2023 August 2023

June 5: Tank Tightness Testing Begins

June 6: FTAC1 – Hosted by DOH

June 8: Response Drill

June 9: NEPA1 Public Comment Period Begins 

June 15: NEPA1 Public Meeting

June 30: NEPA1 Public Comment Period Ends

July 1-31: Fire Watch Training

July 21: Tank Tightness Testing Complete

July 13: Response Drill

July 26: DISF

1 Meeting

3

rd Party Quality Validation Completed 

158/253

Start Complete

Joint Task Force – Red Hill

Defueling Dashboard

As of June 5, 2023

Subject to Revision

Dashboard Legend 1

DISF: Defueling Information Sharing Forum

FTAC: Fuel Tank Advisory Committee

NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act

What is Tank Tightness Testing?

Click on the image above to learn about Tank 

Tightness Testing.

Joint Task Force – Red Hill App!

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ 

jtf-red-hill/id6449555275

Start Complete

Key Events

158/253

DOH Conditional Approval

Start Complete

56/253

Check out our new App 

currently available for iOS 

users! Android coming soon.
# C_2014092EN.01003901.xml

| 29.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/39

---

Corrigendum to Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 50 of 21 February 2014
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 50 of 21 February 2014

2014/C 92/12

On page 29, the text referring to the State Aid No SA.37692 is cancelled and replaced by the following:

‘Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 9.12.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.37692 (2013/N) |
| Member State | Latvia |
| Region | — | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Setting up of buffer zones |
| Legal basis | Ministru kabineta 2010.gada 23.marta noteikumi Nr.295 "Noteikumi par valsts un Eiropas Savienības lauku attīstības atbalsta piešķiršanu, administrēšanu un uzraudzību vides un lauku ainavas uzlabošanai" |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Agri-environmental commitments |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | — |
| Intensity | 0 % |
| Duration (period) | 1.1.2014 - 30.12.2015 |
| Economic sectors | AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Lauku atbalsta dienests |
| Republikas laukums 2 LV-1981 |

Date of adoption of the decision

9.12.2013

Aid number

SA.37692 (2013/N)

Member State

Latvia

Region

—

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Setting up of buffer zones

Legal basis

Ministru kabineta 2010.gada 23.marta noteikumi Nr.295 "Noteikumi par valsts un Eiropas Savienības lauku attīstības atbalsta piešķiršanu, administrēšanu un uzraudzību vides un lauku ainavas uzlabošanai"

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Agri-environmental commitments

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

—

Intensity

0 %

Duration (period)

1.1.2014 - 30.12.2015

Economic sectors

AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING

Name and address of the granting authority

Lauku atbalsta dienests

Republikas laukums 2 LV-1981

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm’

---
# C_2016294EN.01004101.xml

| 12.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/41

---

P8_TA(2014)0075

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) ***

European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 December 2014 on the draft Council decision concerning the accession of the European Union to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (09412/2014 — C8-0042/2014 — 2013/0418(NLE))

(Consent)

(2016/C 294/12)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (09412/2014), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (09412/2014),

| — | having regard to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES),

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 192(1) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0042/2014), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 192(1) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0042/2014),

| — | having regard to Article 192(1), Article 207 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 192(1), Article 207 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

| — | having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,

| — | having regard to Rule 99(1), first and third subparagraphs, Rule 99(2), Rule 108(7) and Rule 39 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 99(1), first and third subparagraphs, Rule 99(2), Rule 108(7) and Rule 39 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A8-0036/2014), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A8-0036/2014),

| 1. | Gives its consent to accession to the Convention; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Gives its consent to accession to the Convention;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

---
#### § 162.593 Will late payment charges or special fees apply to delinquent payments due under a WSR lease?

(a) Late payment charges will apply as specified in the lease. The failure to pay these amounts will be treated as a lease violation.

(b) We may assess the following special fees to cover administrative costs incurred by the United States in the collection of the debt, if compensation is not paid in the time and manner required, in addition to late payment charges that must be paid to the Indian landowners under the lease:

| The lessee will pay . . . | For . . . |
| --- | --- |
| (1) $50.00 | Any dishonored check. |
| (2) $15.00 | Processing of each notice or demand letter. |
| (3) 18 percent of balance due | Treasury processing following referral for collection of delinquent debt. |
### §8686. Support for transfers of decommissioned vessels and shipboard equipment

(a) Authority To Provide Assistance.—The Secretary of the Navy may provide an entity described in subsection (b) with assistance in support of a transfer of a vessel or shipboard equipment described in such subsection that is being executed under section 2572, 8676, 8677, or 8765 of this title, or under any other authority.

(b) Covered Vessels and Equipment.—The authority under this section applies—

(1) in the case of a decommissioned vessel that—

(A) is owned and maintained by the Navy, is located at a Navy facility, and is not in active use; and

(B) is being transferred to an entity designated by the Secretary of the Navy or by law to receive transfer of the vessel; and

(2) in the case of any shipboard equipment that—

(A) is on a vessel described in paragraph (1)(A); and

(B) is being transferred to an entity designated by the Secretary of the Navy or by law to receive transfer of the equipment.

(c) Reimbursement.—The Secretary may require a recipient of assistance under subsection (a) to reimburse the Navy for amounts expended by the Navy in providing the assistance.

(d) Deposit of Funds Received.—Funds received in a fiscal year under subsection (c) shall be credited to the appropriation available for such fiscal year for operation and maintenance for the office of the Navy managing inactive ships, shall be merged with other sums in the appropriation that are available for such office, and shall be available for the same purposes and period as the sums with which merged.

(Added Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, §1015(a), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1591, §7316; renumbered §8686 and amended Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §§807(d)(2), 809(a), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1836, 1840.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 8686, acts Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 536; Sept. 24, 1980, Pub. L. 96–357, §5(a), 94 Stat. 1182; Oct. 19, 1984, Pub. L. 98–525, title IV, §414(a)(7)(B), 98 Stat. 2519, related to credit to members of Air National Guard of United States for service as members of Air National Guard, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §1662(g)(2), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2996. See section 12602 of this title.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232, §807(d)(2), renumbered section 7316 of this title as this section.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 115–232, §809(a), substituted "section 2572, 8676, 8677, or 8765" for "section 2572, 7306, 7307, or 7545".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.
# C_2006165EN.01003003.xml

| 15.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/30

---

Action brought on 5 May 2006 — Nasuf v Council

(Case T-138/06)

(2006/C 165/61)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Taher Nasuf (Manchester, United Kingdom) (represented by: N. Garcia, Solicitor, S. Cox, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annulment of Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 561/2003 of 27 March 2003 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 246/2006 of 10 February 2006 and of the reference to the applicant in Annex I; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annulment of Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 561/2003 of 27 March 2003 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 246/2006 of 10 February 2006 and of the reference to the applicant in Annex I;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments relied on by the applicant are identical to those relied on in Case T-135/06 Al-Faqih v Council.

Al-Faqih v Council

---
1Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 96-20996

Summary Calendar

MARILYN HERRINGTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

GULF STATES TOYOTA, INCORPORATED; THE FRIEDKIN CORPORATION, 

doing business as Gulf States Distributors,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

(H-94-CV-2268)

June 30, 1997

Before SMITH, DUHÉ and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

Herrington sued her employer, Gulf States Distributors, and an

affiliated company, Gulf States Toyota, under Title VII of the

Civil Rights Act of 1964 claiming employment discrimination based

on retaliation, and for intentional infliction of emotional

distress under Texas law. The district court granted summary

judgment for Defendants on all claims. Herrington appeals. We

affirm.
2

To avoid summary judgment Appellant must create an issue of

material fact as to the elements necessary to prove a prima facie

case of employment discrimination based on retaliation. One

element of that claim is that she suffered an adverse employment

decision. The district court held that she had not created a fact

issue on this point and we agree. Her employment was terminated

because of the dissolution of the department in which she worked.

No evidence challenges that fact. The other incidents to which

Appellant points as adverse employment decisions do not, as a

matter of law, qualify as such. See Dolis v. Rubin, 77 F.3d 777,

781 (5th Cir. 1995). 

Since Appellant has created no issue of fact as to her prima

facie case, there is no need to consider the legitimacy of the

reasons advanced by Appellees for the action taken.

The district court granted summary judgment for Appellees on

Appellant’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claim

because no issue of fact was created that the conduct complained of

was extreme or outrageous. Indeed, there is no factual dispute.

Taking the facts as put forward by Appellant, they do not create a

fact issue. Those facts are not outrageous or extreme as defined

by this Court. Johnson v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 965

F.2d 31, 33 (5th Cir. 1992).

AFFIRMED.