alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2020210EN.01008001.xml

| 2.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 210/80 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 210/80

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 94/2019

of 29 March 2019

amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement [2020/842]

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 Decision (EU) 2018/1590 of 19 October 2018 amending Decisions 2012/481/EU, 2014/391/EU, 2014/763/EU and 2014/893/EU as regards the period of validity of the ecological criteria for the award of the EU Ecolabel for certain products, and of the related assessment and verification requirements (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Decision (EU) 2018/1590 of 19 October 2018 amending Decisions 2012/481/EU, 2014/391/EU, 2014/763/EU and 2014/893/EU as regards the period of validity of the ecological criteria for the award of the EU Ecolabel for certain products, and of the related assessment and verification requirements (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

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

(2)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Annex XX to the EEA Agreement shall be amended as follows:

| (1) | The following indent is added in point 2zf (Commission Decision 2012/481/EU):






  ‘— | 32018 D 1590: Commission Decision (EU) 2018/1590 of 19 October 2018 (OJ L 264, 23.10.2018, p. 24).’ |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

The following indent is added in point 2zf (Commission Decision 2012/481/EU):

‘—

32018 D 1590: Commission Decision (EU) 2018/1590 of 19 October 2018 (OJ L 264, 23.10.2018, p. 24).’

| (2) | The following is added in point 2w (Commission Decision 2014/391/EU), 2y (Commission Decision 2014/893/EU) and 2zo (Commission Decision 2014/763/EU):

  ‘, as amended by:






  — | 32018 D 1590: Commission Decision (EU) 2018/1590 of 19 October 2018 (OJ L 264, 23.10.2018, p. 24).’ |
| --- | --- | --- |

(2)

The following is added in point 2w (Commission Decision 2014/391/EU), 2y (Commission Decision 2014/893/EU) and 2zo (Commission Decision 2014/763/EU):

‘, as amended by:

—

32018 D 1590: Commission Decision (EU) 2018/1590 of 19 October 2018 (OJ L 264, 23.10.2018, p. 24).’

Article 2

The text of Decision (EU) 2018/1590 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 30 March 2019, 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, 29 March 2019.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Claude MAERTEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 264, 23.10.2018, p. 24.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
No. I-09-025 

Contact: Diane Screnci, 610/337-5330 

 Neil Sheehan, 610/337-5331 

April 25, 2009 

E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov

NRC REDUCES CIVIL PENALTY LEVIED AGAINST YORK, PA., FIRM 

After consideration of additional information, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has 

reduced a $6,500 civil penalty initially proposed against a York, Pa., company last year. The 

amount of the fine levied against Precision Calibration and Testing Corp. for willful violations of 

NRC requirements has been cut to $3,250. 

Last July, the NRC notified Precision Calibration and Testing that it had identified 

several violations during inspections conducted from March 2007 through February 2008. The 

violations included a failure to implement security requirements in a timely manner; a failure to 

provide complete and accurate information to the NRC regarding the implementation of such 

requirements; and a failure to report the firm’s bankruptcy to the NRC, as required. 

While the NRC noted at the time that the violations did not pose a threat to public health 

and safety, and had been appropriately addressed through prompt and comprehensive corrective 

actions, the agency concluded the violations were willful and proposed the $6,500 fine. Details 

of the violations were withheld because of their relation to the York facility’s security. 

Precision Calibration and Testing was allowed an opportunity to respond to the Notice of 

Violation and did so on Aug. 18, 2008. Based on a review of that response, the NRC has 

determined that a reduction of the civil penalty to $3,250 is appropriate because of the financial 

condition of the company, which has been under bankruptcy protection since July 31, 2008. 

The company is required to pay the $3,250 civil penalty or request a hearing on the action 

within 30 days. The letter forwarding the information to the company and any response from the 

firm will not be placed in the Public Document Room because of their sensitive nature. 

### 

News releases are available through a free listserv 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. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region I 

475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 

Site: http://www.nrc.gov
§ 430.305 System standards for SES performance management systems. ( a ) Each agency performance management system must incorporate the following system standards: ( 1 ) Use critical elements based on OPM-validated executive competencies to evaluate executive leadership and results, including the quality of the executive's performance;
( 2 ) Align performance requirements with agency mission and strategic planning initiatives;
( 3 ) Define performance standards for each of the summary rating performance levels, which also may be used for the individual elements or performance requirements being appraised;
( 4 ) Appraise each senior executive's performance at least annually against performance requirements based on established performance standards and other measures;
( 5 ) Derive an annual summary rating through a mathematical method that ensures executives' performance aligns with level descriptors contained in performance standards that clearly differentiate levels above fully successful, while prohibiting a forced distribution of rating levels for senior executives;
( 6 ) Establish five summary performance levels as follows: ( i ) An outstanding level;
( ii ) An exceeds fully successful level;
( iii ) A fully successful level;
( iv ) A minimally satisfactory level; and
( v ) An unsatisfactory level;
( 7 ) Include equivalency statements in the system description for agency-specific terms for the five summary performance levels aligning them with the five performance levels required in § 430.305(a)(6); and
( 8 ) Use performance appraisals as a basis to adjust pay, reward, retain, and develop senior executives or make other personnel decisions, including removals as specified in § 430.312.
( b ) An agency may develop its own performance management system for senior executives in accordance with the requirements of this section.
( c ) OPM may establish, and refine as needed, a basic performance management system incorporating all requirements of this section, which agencies may adopt, with limited adaptation, for performance management of its senior executives.
**Exhibit 13.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Fibria Celulose S.A. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Carlos Augusto Lira Aguiar, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(i)            the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| By:    | /s/ Carlos Augusto Lira Aguiar       |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name: Carlos Augusto Lira Aguiar     |   |
|   | Title:  Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

Dated: March 31, 2011

 

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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
No. II-09-050 September 15, 2009 

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

 Joey Ledford (404) 562-4416 

NRC ASSIGNS NEW SENIOR RESIDENT INSPECTOR 

TO ROBINSON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials have selected 

Jim Hickey as the new senior resident inspector at Progress 

Energy’s Robinson nuclear power plant, located near Hartsville, 

S.C. 

Hickey joined the NRC in December 2003 as a project 

engineer in the Resident Inspector Development Program in the 

Region II office in Atlanta. He later served as a resident 

inspector and then senior resident inspector at Southern 

Nuclear’s Hatch nuclear power plant near Baxley in south Georgia. Before joining the agency, he 

was a submarine reactor operator in the U.S. Navy and held a number of positions at FPL’s 

Turkey Point nuclear plant in south Florida. 

Hickey received a Bachelor of Science degree, specializing in electrical engineering, 

from Tulane University in New Orleans in 1987. He held a senior reactor operator license at the 

Turkey Point plant from 1992 until he joined the NRC in 2003. 

“Jim Hickey has the experience and commitment to safety to carry out the NRC mission 

of protecting people and the environment, and to help ensure the safe operation of the Robinson 

plant,” said NRC Region II Administrator Luis Reyes. 

At least two NRC resident inspectors are assigned to each U.S. commercial nuclear plant. 

They serve as the agency's eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring major 

work projects and interacting with plant workers and the public. Resident inspectors can serve at 

one site for up to seven years. 

The Robinson resident inspectors can be reached at 843-383-4571. 

 ### 

News releases are available through a free listserv 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. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II 

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303 

Web Site: www.nrc.gov
#### Maurice I. Jacobs, Appellant, v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, Respondent.

Orders unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present- — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Callahan and Shientag, JJ.
### §20712. Annual report

The corporation shall submit an annual report to Congress on the activities of the corporation during the prior fiscal year. The report shall be submitted at the same time as the report of the audit required by section 10101 of this title. The report may not be printed as a public document.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1290.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 20712 | 36:1911. | June 1, 1982, Pub. L. 97–192, §12, 96 Stat. 111. |

Section
§ 838.232 Suspension of payments. ( a ) Payments from employee annuities under this part will be discontinued whenever the employee annuity payments are suspended or terminated. If employee annuity payments to the retiree or phased retiree are restored, payments to the former spouse will also resume, subject to the terms of any court order acceptable for processing in effect at that time.
( b ) Paragraph (a) of this section will not be applied to permit a retiree or phased retiree to deprive a former spouse of payment by causing suspension of payment of employee annuity.
[79 FR 46626, Aug. 8, 2014]
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-16-0000326

28-JUL-2016

08:13 AM
**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**

|   | 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                Registrant. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                 |   |   |                                                                                                   |
|------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:                October 20,                2006 |   |   | /s/ Richard                D. Gaines                                                         |
|                                                      |   |   | Name: Richard                D. Gaines                                                            |
|                                                 |   |   | Title: Acting                  Principal Executive OfficerSecretary                  and Director |

----
### §104. Carl Garner Federal Lands Cleanup Day

(a) Designation.—The first Saturday after Labor Day is Carl Garner Federal Lands Cleanup Day.

(b) Proclamation.—The President shall issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe Carl Garner Federal Lands Cleanup Day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities. However, activities may be undertaken in individual States on a day other than the first Saturday after Labor Day if a manager of Federal land decides that an alternative date is more appropriate because of climatological or other factors.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1255.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 104(a) | 36:169i (1st sentence). | Aug. 27, 1986, Pub. L. 99–402, §3, 100 Stat. 910; Nov. 12, 1996, Pub. L. 104–333, §806, 110 Stat. 4188. |
| 104(b) | 36:169i (last sentence). | |

Section

In subsection (b), the words "associated with Carl Garner Federal Lands Cleanup Day" are omitted as unnecessary.
No: II-08-007 Feb. 13, 2008 

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov 

 Roger Hannah (404)562-4417 

BROWNS FERRY UNIT 1 NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 

TO RECEIVE ADDITIONAL NRC OVERSIGHT 

Unit 1 at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Browns Ferry nuclear power plant, near 

Athens, Ala., will receive additional oversight from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as a 

result of one of the indicators used by the agency to assess plant performance becoming 

“yellow.” The “yellow” designation came after the plant experienced several unplanned 

shutdowns during 2007, crossing the NRC’s threshold for that performance indicator. 

Color-coded performance indicators and inspection findings are used by the NRC to 

evaluate performance at all nuclear power plants. The colors start with “green” and then increase 

to “white,” “yellow” or “red,” commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved. 

In the case of performance indicators, they are updated on a quarterly basis as new plant data 

becomes available, with any changes reflected on the NRC’s web site: www.nrc.gov . 

Browns Ferry Unit 1 restarted in May 2007 after an extended shutdown. During the 

fourth quarter of 2007, the performance indicator for unplanned scrams (shutdowns) became 

effective for Browns Ferry Unit 1 after the reactor had been critical for 2400 hours. Five 

unplanned scrams or shutdowns between the May restart and the fourth quarter led to the 

"yellow" performance indicator. 

 “Our oversight process uses both inspections and performance indicators to ensure 

safety,” NRC Region II Administrator Victor McCree said. “Any change in a performance 

indicator leads to additional NRC oversight, especially in that particular area.” 

In November, the NRC conducted a focused inspection to evaluate the causes of the 

shutdowns and did not identify any significant findings that would impact plant safety. 

With this change, the plant will move from the Licensee Response column of the NRC’s 

Action Matrix to the Degraded Cornerstone column. The Action Matrix, which is available at: 

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/actionmatrix_summary.html , is used by the agency 

to determine the appropriate level of oversight for nuclear power plants. The change will result 

in an increase in the NRC’s inspection and assessment oversight at Browns Ferry Unit 1. This 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II 

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303 

Web Site: www.nrc.gov 
increased oversight will include a supplemental inspection to provide assurance that the issues 

have been adequately addressed. 

###
#### § 892.103 What can I do if I disagree with my agency's decision about my pre-or post-tax election?

You may use the reconsideration procedure set out at §§ 890.104 of this chapter to request an agency to reconsider its initial decision affecting your participation in the premium conversion plan.
§ 451.301 Ranks for the Senior Executive Service. ( a ) The circumstances under which the President may award the rank of Distinguished Executive and Meritorious Executive to a Senior Executive Service (SES) career appointee are set forth in 5 U.S.C. 4507.
( b ) To be eligible for a rank award, a senior executive must: ( 1 ) Hold a career appointment in the SES, as defined at 5 U.S.C. 3132(a)(4), on the nomination deadline set by OPM;
( 2 ) Be an employee of the agency, as defined at 5 U.S.C. 3132(a)(1), on the nomination deadline set by OPM; and
( 3 ) Have at least 3 years of career or career-type Federal civilian service at the SES level. Service need not be continuous. ( i ) Qualifying service includes appointments in the SES, the Senior Foreign Service, the Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service, and similar senior executive systems.
( ii ) Qualifying service does not include noncareer, limited term, or limited emergency appointments in the SES or their equivalent, Scientific and Professional (ST) appointments, and Senior-Level (SL) appointments.
( c ) Each agency may nominate up to 9 percent of its SES career appointees for rank awards.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 248 (Friday, December 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 67282]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28208]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9043-1]


Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General 
Information 202-564-5632 or https://www.epa.gov/nepa/

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 12/17/2018 Through 12/20/2018
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public 
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment 
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search

EIS No. 20180320, Final, BLM, WY, Lost Creek Uranium In-Situ Recover 
Project Modifications, Review Period Ends: 01/28/2019, Contact: Annette 
Treat 307-328-4314
EIS No. 20180321, Final, DOE, CA, Remediation of Area IV and the 
Northern Buffer Zone of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Review 
Period Ends: 01/28/2019, Contact: Stephanie Jennings 805-842-3864
EIS No. 20180322, Draft, APHIS, PRO, Rangeland Grasshopper and Mormon 
Cricket Suppression Program, Comment Period Ends: 02/11/2019, Contact: 
Jim Warren 202-316-3216
EIS No. 20180323, Draft Supplement, DOE, KY, Disposition of Depleted 
Uranium Oxide Conversion Product Generated from DOE's Inventory of 
Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride, Comment Period Ends: 02/11/2019, 
Contact: Jaffet Ferrer-Torres 202-586-0730
EIS No. 20180324, Draft, BLM, AK, Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing 
Program, Comment Period Ends: 02/11/2019, Contact: Nicole Hayes 907-
271-4354

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20180272, Draft, USN, NV, Fallon Range Training Complex 
Modernization, Comment Period Ends: 02/14/2019, Contact: Sara Goodwin 
619-532-4463 Revision to FR Notice Published 11/16/2018; Extending the 
Comment Period from 01/15/2019 to 02/14/2019.

    Dated: December 21, 2018.
Robert Tomiak,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2018-28208 Filed 12-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P