alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2016341EN.01002901.xml

| 15.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 341/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 341/29

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 142/2015

of 11 June 2015

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2016/2177]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/562 of 8 April 2015 amending Regulation (EU) No 347/2012 implementing Regulation (EC) No 661/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council with respect to type-approval requirements for certain categories of motor vehicles with regard to advanced emergency braking systems (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/562 of 8 April 2015 amending Regulation (EU) No 347/2012 implementing Regulation (EC) No 661/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council with respect to type-approval requirements for certain categories of motor vehicles with regard to advanced emergency braking systems (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is added in point 45zzp (Commission Regulation (EU) No 347/2012) of Chapter I of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

‘, as amended by:

| — | 32015 R 0562: Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/562 of 8 April 2015 (OJ L 93, 9.4.2015, p. 35).’ |
| --- | --- |

—

32015 R 0562: Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/562 of 8 April 2015 (OJ L 93, 9.4.2015, p. 35).’

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EU) 2015/562 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 12 June 2015, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 11 June 2015.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Gianluca GRIPPA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 9.4.2015, p. 35.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
### §10475. Federal share

The Federal share of a grant made under this subchapter may not exceed 75 percent of the total costs of the program described in the application submitted under section 10474 of this title for the fiscal year for which the program receives assistance under this subchapter, unless the Attorney General waives, wholly or in part, the requirement of a matching contribution under this section. The use of the Federal share of a grant made under this subchapter shall be limited to new expenses necessitated by the proposed program, including the development of treatment services and the hiring and training of personnel. In-kind contributions may constitute a portion of the non-Federal share of a grant.

(Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §2205, as added Pub. L. 106–515, §3(a), Nov. 13, 2000, 114 Stat. 2401.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 3796ii–4 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2205 of title I of Pub. L. 90–351, as added Pub. L. 103–322, title V, §50001(a)(3), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1957, related to applications to request funds, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–134, title I, §101[(a)] [title I, §114(b)(1)(A)], Apr. 26, 1996, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321–21; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 104–140, §1(a), May 2, 1996, 110 Stat. 1327.
### **CHAPTER 507—LAW ENFORCEMENT SUICIDE DATA COLLECTION**

Sec.
50701.
Information on suicide in law enforcement.
### §641. Creation of Mississippi River Commission

A commission is created to be called "The Mississippi River Commission", to consist of seven members.

(June 28, 1879, ch. 43, §1, 21 Stat. 37.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

This was the first section of an act entitled "An act to provide for the appointment of a 'Mississippi River Commission' for the improvement of said river from the Head of the Passes near its mouth to its head-waters".

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

#### Appropriation for Salaries and Expenses

Act June 28, 1879, ch. 43, §7, 21 Stat. 38, omitted as temporary and executed, provided for the expenditure of an appropriation of $175,000 for salaries of the commission and necessary expenses of surveys, examinations, etc.

#### Missouri River Commission

The Missouri River Commission was created by act July 5, 1884, ch. 229, §1, 23 Stat. 144, and repealed by act July 13, 1902, ch. 1079, §1, 32 Stat. 367.
#### F. P. Smith, trading as F. P. Smith Wire & Iron Works, Defendant in Error, v. Bankers Engineering Company, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 19,035.

1. Payment, § *5*
      ***
      *—when taking of check is conditional payment.*The taking of a post-dated check of a third party for an existing debt, *held prima facie*a conditional payment, and payment of the indebtedness only when paid.

2. Payment, § *38*
      ***
      *—when defendant on review cannot complain of plaintiff’s possession of check.*On writ of error to review a judgment allowing recovery upon an indebtedness for which a check was given, *held*that defendant could not complain that plaintiff was permitted to retain possession of the check, where at the trial counsel for plaintiff put the check in evidence, and a copy thereof, with the consent of defendant, was substituted for the original in the bill of exceptions.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Henry C. Beitler, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the March term, 1913.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 4, 1914.

Pollock, Sullivan *&*Livingston, for plaintiff in error.

Breding & Gesas, for defendant in error.

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice Baker

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant corporation was indebted to the plaintiff, F. P. Smith, October 23, 1910, in the sum of $547.-20, for goods sold and delivered. On that day the defendant procured from one Fairbanks a check for $301.-50 dated November 23, 1910, and payable to the order of plaintiff. Fairbanks refused to pay the check, claiming that he had discovered an error in his account with the defendant. January 30, 1911, the defendant paid plaintiff the remainder of the sum due him after deducting the amount of the Fairbanks’ check. In an action for goods sold and delivered, plaintiff recovered *116a judgment for $301.50, to reverse which the defendant prosecutes this writ of error.

We think that the case is within the rule that the taking of a note or post-dated check of a third party for an existing debt is treated *prima, facie*as a conditional payment and is payment of such indebtedness only when paid. *Heartt v. Rhodes,*66 Ill. 356.

The contention that the plaintiff cannot insist that the check was not in payment of the amount due him from defendant because plaintiff still has the check in his possession is without merit. At the trial counsel for plaintiff put the check in evidence. This placed the check under the control of the court and it was the right of the defendant to have the original check made a part of the bill of exceptions. We find in the bill of exceptions a copy of the check, but this could have been substituted for the original only by consent of the defendant. Defendant did not ask that the check be impounded, and we think that in view of his consent that a copy be substituted for the original in the bill of exceptions, he cannot be heard to complain that the plaintiff was permitted to retain possession of the check.

We think that the plaintiff was entitled to recover and the judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
CNET Price comparisons Product reviewsTech newsDownloads

|  |
|--|
| Search Download.comIn Audio & VideoIn WindowsIn DownloadsAll CNET    The Web |  |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|
|  |  |  |
|--|--|--|
|  |  |  |  |  |
|--|--|--|--|--|
|  |  |
|--|--|
**CIPHER
HOLDING CORPORATION**
 
 EXHIBIT
32.2
 
 Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 In
connection with the Amended Annual Report of Cipher Holding Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Corey Conn, Chief
Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to my knowledge: (1) the annual report fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2)
the information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
 
 
 
 Date:
October 17, 2005
 
 /s/ Corey
Conn
 Chief
Financial Officer,
 
 
 
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
NO. 07-10-00272-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT AMARILLO 

PANEL A 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2010 

RICHARD N. PATE, APPELLANT 

v. 

CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC, APPELLEE 

 FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF PARKER COUNTY; 

NO. CA-10-004; HONORABLE JERRY BUCKNER, JUDGE 

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Appellant, Richard N. Pate, filed his notice of appeal on June 9, 2010. By letter 

dated June 14, 2010, the Second Court of Appeals notified Pate that it had received his 

notice of appeal and informed Pate of his duties regarding preparation of the court 

reporter’s record. On July 13, 2010, the Second Court Of Appeals informed Pate that 

his appeal had been transferred to this Court by order of the Texas Supreme Court and 

that all future correspondence was to be addressed to this Court. 

 On August 3, 2010, this Court provided Pate with a thorough explanation of his 

obligations under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure regarding the clerk’s and 
2 

reporter’s records. We alerted Pate of his failure to pay or make arrangements to pay 

for the preparation of the clerk’s record as well as his failure to request the reporter’s 

record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(a)(2), (b)(2). By that same letter, we also gave Pate 

the opportunity to pay or make arrangements to pay for the preparation of the clerk’s 

record and to request preparation of the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 

(c). We informed Pate that his continued failure to make the appropriate arrangements 

by September 2, 2010, could result in the dismissal of his appeal for want of 

prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). Also on August 3, we granted the clerk’s and 

court reporter’s motions for extension of time to file their respective records based on 

Pate’s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay for preparation of the clerk’s record 

and his failure to request preparation of the reporter’s record. 

 To date, Pate has not responded to our letter. Nor have we received any 

indication from either the trial court clerk or the court reporter that Pate has made 

satisfactory arrangements regarding preparation of the records. To the contrary, we 

have received a motion from the trial court clerk requesting further extension of time in 

which to file the clerk’s record based on Pate’s failure to pay or make arrangements to 

pay for the preparation of the clerk’s record. Likewise, the court reporter has sought 

further extension of time based on Pate’s failure to request preparation of the reporter’s 

record. 

 Having given Pate a reasonable opportunity to cure and having received no 

indication of his effort to do so, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. TEX. R.
3 

APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b). We deny as moot the clerk’s and court reporter’s motions for 

extension of time to file their respective records. 

 Mackey K. Hancock 

 Justice
NRC NEWS             U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION                                             Office of Public Affairs, Region I

                                        475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa.www.nrc.gov 

No. I-07-014 April 6, 2007Contact: Diane Screnci, 610/337-5330 Email: opa1@nrc.gov

Neil Sheehan, 610/337-5331

NRC FOLLOWING UP ON  UNUSUAL EVENT AT INDIAN POINT 3

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission was closely monitoring an Unusual Event at the IndianPoint 3 nuclear power plant earlier today.  An Unusual Event, the lowest of four levels of emergencyclassification, was declared at the Buchanan, N.Y., facility at 11:43 a.m. following a transformer failureand fire.  Entergy, which operates the plant, exited the Unusual Event at 12:47 p.m.

The fire was extinguished by the transformer’s deluge system and the plant’s fire brigaderesponded.  There was no radiation release associated with the event and no impact on public healthand safety.  The reactor automatically shut down and is stable.  

NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins said, “Our on-site resident inspector staff wason the site at the time of the event and closely followed the company’s response to ensure that allappropriate actions were taken.”

In addition to the Resident Inspectors, the Incident Response Center in the agency’s Region IOffice in King of Prussia, Pa., was activated to track developments and determine if plant operatorswere responding appropriately.  The incident was monitored from the NRC’s Emergency OperationsCenter in Rockville, Md., as well.

The transformer that failed carries electricity from the main generator to the electrical grid. 

This is the fourth unplanned shutdown of Unit 3 since July.  This will cause the NRC toconduct additional inspections at the unit. 

Unit 2 was unaffected by today’s events and remains at 100 percent power. 

###

News releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html .  The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.
VOC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Engine Run 0 Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Run 5 Run 6 Run 7 Run 8 Run 9 Run 10

Engine 1 2.048 1.729 1.376

Engine 2 1.877 1.531 1.079

Engine 3 1.95 1.472 1.179

Engine 4 1.834 1.043 0.922 Confidence 68 95 99.7

Engine 5 1.829 1.35 1.321 Average Std Dev 1 2 3

Engine 6 1.65 1.543 1.091 Low 1.81 0.154 1.96 2.12 2.27

Engine 7 1.588 1.042 0.916 Med+High 1.24 0.245 1.49 1.73 1.80

Engine 8 1.71 1.296 1.006

Average 1.81 1.81 1.81 1.81 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24

1 Std Dev 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49

2 Std Dev 2.12 2.12 2.12 2.12 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73

BACT-proposed 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15

Permit 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73

Ave+15% 2.08 2.08 2.08 2.08 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.43

1.81

1.24 1.24

1.96

1.49 1.49

2.12

1.73 1.73

2.15 2.15

1.73

2.08

0.5

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

g/kW-hr

VOC Scatter Plot - Stack Testing Results

Engine 1

Engine 2

Engine 3

Engine 4

Engine 5

Engine 6

Engine 7

Engine 8

Average

1 Std Dev

2 Std Dev

BACT-proposed

Permit

Ave+15%

Low (30%) Med (45%) High (60%)
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 183

To permit members of the House of Representatives to donate used computer 

equipment to public elementary and secondary schools designated by 

the members. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 7, 2003

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

A BILL

To permit members of the House of Representatives to donate used computer equipment to public elementary and 

secondary schools designated by the members.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. PERMITTING MEMBERS OF HOUSE OF REP4 RESENTATIVES TO DONATE USED COMPUTER 

5 EQUIPMENT TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 104(a)(3) of the Legisla7 tive Branch Appropriations Act, 1987 (as incorporated by 

8 reference in section 101(j) of Public Law 99–500 and 
2

•HR 183 IH 

1 Public Law 99–591) (2 U.S.C. 117e(3)) is amended to 

2 read as follows: 

3 ‘‘(3)(A) At the request of a member of the House 

4 of Representatives, in the case of equipment consisting of 

5 computers and related peripheral tools previously used by 

6 the member, the Clerk may donate the equipment to a 

7 public elementary or secondary school (as defined in sec8 tion 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education 

9 Act of 1965) without regard to whether the donation 

10 meets the requirements of the second sentence of para11 graph (2). 

12 ‘‘(B) At the request of the member who previously 

13 used the equipment, if the Clerk donates equipment under 

14 this paragraph, the Clerk shall donate the equipment to 

15 a school designated by the member.’’. 

16 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

17 subsection (a) shall take effect October 1, 2003.

Æ
§ 410.601 Reporting. ( a ) Each agency shall maintain records of training plans, expenditures, and activities in such form and manner as necessary to submit the recorded data to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) through the OPM Governmentwide Electronic Data Collection System.
( b ) Beginning December 31, 2006, each agency shall report the training data for its employees' training and development at such times and in such form as required for the OPM Governmentwide Electronic Data Collection System, which is explained in the *Guide to Personnel Recordkeeping* and the *Guide to Human Resources Reporting.*
( c ) Each agency shall establish a Schedule of Records for information required to be maintained by this chapter in accordance with regulations promulgated by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
[71 FR 28547, May 17, 2006. Redesignated and amended at 74 FR 65388, Dec. 10, 2009]
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

Wniteb $>tates {!Court of ~peaIs

for tbe jfeberaI {!Circuit

DAVIDW. MOLTZEN,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

Respondent.

2012-3145

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection

Board in case no. SF0432100994-I-1.

ON MOTION

ORDER

The Department of Labor moves for a 43-day extension of time, until November 2, 2012, to file its response

brief. Mr. Moltzen opposes.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

Case: 12-3145 Document: 14 Page: 1 Filed: 09/27/2012
DAVID MOLTZEN V. LABOR 2

The motion is granted. The Department of Labor's

response briefis due on or before November 2,2012.

FOR THE COURT

SEP 21 2012

Date

cc: David W. Moltzen

Allison Kidd-Miller, Esq.

s27

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

u.s.~L"'jpEALS FOR

THe FEDERft.!. r:!'CUIT

SEP 2/ LUll

JANHORBALY

ClERK

Case: 12-3145 Document: 14 Page: 2 Filed: 09/27/2012
# L_2015202EN.01003701.xml

| 30.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 202/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 202/37

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 186/2014

of 25 September 2014

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2015/1254]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Directive 2012/46/EU of 6 December 2012 amending Directive 97/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to measures against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Directive 2012/46/EU of 6 December 2012 amending Directive 97/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to measures against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 1a (Directive 97/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Chapter XXIV of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32012 L 0046: Commission Directive 2012/46/EU of 6 December 2012 (OJ L 353, 21.12.2012, p. 80).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32012 L 0046: Commission Directive 2012/46/EU of 6 December 2012 (OJ L 353, 21.12.2012, p. 80).’

Article 2

The text of Directive 2012/46/EU in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 26 September 2014, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 25 September 2014.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Kurt JÄGER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 353, 21.12.2012, p. 80.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---