alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2023106EN.01005301.xml

| 20.4.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 106/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 106/53

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 253/2022

of 23 September 2022

amending Annex XI (Electronic communication, audiovisual services and information society) to the EEA Agreement [2023/782]

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 Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/173 of 7 February 2022 on the harmonisation of the 900 MHz and 1 800 MHz frequency bands for terrestrial systems capable of providing electronic communications services in the Union and repealing Decision 2009/766/EC (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/173 of 7 February 2022 on the harmonisation of the 900 MHz and 1 800 MHz frequency bands for terrestrial systems capable of providing electronic communications services in the Union and repealing Decision 2009/766/EC (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/173 repeals Commission Decision 2009/766/EC (2), which is incorporated into the EEA Agreement and which is consequently to be repealed under the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/173 repeals Commission Decision 2009/766/EC (2), which is incorporated into the EEA Agreement and which is consequently to be repealed under the EEA Agreement.

| (3) | Annex XI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The text of point 1a (Commission Decision 2009/766/EC) of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement is replaced by the following:

‘
  32022 D 0173: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/173 of 7 February 2022 on the harmonisation of the 900 MHz and 1 800 MHz frequency bands for terrestrial systems capable of providing electronic communications services in the Union and repealing Decision 2009/766/EC (OJ L 28, 9.2.2022, p. 29).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/173 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 24 September 2022, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*).

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, 23 September 2022.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Kristján Andri STEFÁNSSON

---

(1)  
  OJ L 28, 9.2.2022, p. 29.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 274, 20.10.2009, p. 32.

2

(*)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*

---
§ 831.503 Retirement based on involuntary separation. ( a ) *General.* An employee who would otherwise be eligible for retirement based on involuntary separation from the service is not entitled to an annuity under section 8336(d)(1) of title 5, United States Code, if the employee has declined a reasonable offer of another position.
( b ) *Criteria for reasonable offer.* For the purposes of determining entitlement to annuity based on such involuntary separation, the offer of a position must meet all of the following conditions to be considered a reasonable offer: ( 1 ) The offer must be made in writing;
( 2 ) The employee must meet established qualification requirements; and
( 3 ) The offered position must be— ( i ) In the employee's agency, including an agency to which the employee with his or her function is transferred in a transfer of functions between agencies;
( ii ) Within the employee's commuting area as defined in § 831.1202 of this part, unless geographic mobility is a condition of the employee's employment;
( iii ) Of the same tenure and work schedule; and
( iv ) Not lower than the equivalent of two grades or pay levels below the employee's current grade or pay level, without consideration of the employee's eligibility to retain his or her current grade or pay under part 536 of this chapter or other authority. In movements between pay schedules or pay systems, the comparison rate of the grade or pay level that is two grades below that of the current position will be compared with the comparison rate of the grade or pay level of the offered position. For this purpose, “comparison rate” has the meaning given that term in § 536.103 of this chapter, except paragraph (2) of that definition should be used for the purpose of comparing grade or levels of work in making reasonable offer determinations in all situations not covered by paragraph (1) of that definition.
[48 FR 38786, Aug. 26, 1983. Redesignated and amended at 58 FR 49179, Sept. 22, 1993; 70 FR 31315, May 31, 2005; 73 FR 66156, Nov. 7, 2008]
EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

Cooperstown and Charlotte Valley Railway Corporation

This is the determination of the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the continued status of

Cooperstown and Charlotte Valley Railway Corporation (CCVR), B.A. No. 2240, as an 

employer under the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. §231 et seq.KRRA) and the Railroad

Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. §351 et seq.HRUIA).

In Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Docket No. AB-418, dated June 2, 1995, CCVR

filed a notice of exemption in connection with the abandonment of its 15.49 mile railroad line

located between milepost 16.0, at Cooperstown Junction and milepost 0.51, at Cooperstown, in

Otsego County, New York. Information regarding CCVR was provided by Mr. Nathan R.

Fenno, vice-president-law of CCVR. According to Mr. Fenno, CCVR ceased operations and

last compensated its employees in 1992. He stated that subsequent rail operations were

performed by CCVR’s affiliate, the New York, Susquehanna and Western Railway Corporation

(NSWR) (B.A. No. 3251). He further stated that all payroll reports for CCVR were being filed

by NSWR. NSWR filed an annual report stating that CCVR has zero employees. Mr. Fenno 

stated that CCVR’s assets are currently being sold to a non-carrier. CCVR has not dissolved 

as a corporation.

Section 202.11 (20 CFR §202.11) of the Board’s regulations states:

The employer status of any company or person shall terminate whenever such

company or person loses any of the characteristics essential to the existence of an

employer status.

According to ICC Docket No. AB-418, CCVR abandoned its 15.49 mile railroad line. Mr. 

Fenno stated that CCVR ceased operations and last compensated employees in 1992. He further

stated that CCVR is selling its assets and that subsequent rail operations were being handled by

CCVR’s affiliate, NSWR. Since CCVR no longer possesses the characteristics of an operating

railroad company, CCVR is no longer a covered employer under the RRA and RUIA.

The Board finds that effective with the close of business December 31, 1992, the Cooperstown

and Charlotte Valley Railway Corporation ceased being a covered employer under the RRA and

the RUIA.

Glen L. Bower

V. M. Speakman, Jr.

BCD 1995-116 BA # 2240
LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR COOPER 

NUCLEAR PLANT AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced today that an application for a 20-year 

renewal of the operating license for the Cooper nuclear power plant is available for public 

review. 

 The Cooper plant has one boiling water reactor, and is located 23 miles south of 

Nebraska City, Neb. The current operating license expires Jan. 18, 2014. 

 

 Cooper’s owner, the Nebraska Public Power District, submitted the application Sept. 30. 

The application is available on the NRC Web site at this address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications.html. A copy is also 

available at the Auburn Memorial Library, 1810 Court House Ave., in Auburn, Neb.

 The NRC staff is currently conducting its initial review of the application to determine 

whether it contains sufficient information required for the safety and environmental reviews. If 

the application has sufficient information, the NRC will formally “docket,” or file it and will 

announce an opportunity for the public to request an adjudicatory hearing on the renewal request. 

Additional information about the NRC’s process for reviewing reactor license renewal 

applications is available on the NRC Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html. 

### 

 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 Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 08-202 November 6, 2008
Department of Environmental 

Conservation

DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY

Director’s Office

410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 303

PO Box 111800

Juneau, AK 99811-1800

Main: 907-465-5100

Toll free: 866-241-2805

fax: 907-465-5129

http://dec.alaska.gov/air/index.htm

June 4, 2014

Donna Deneen

U.S. EPA Region 10

Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT-107)

1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900

Seattle, WA 98101

Docket ID: EPA-R10-OAR-2011-0916

Dear Ms. Deneen:

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) has reviewed the Environmental Protection 

Agency’s (EPA) proposed “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alaska”, published in the Federal 

Register on May 5, 2014 (79 Federal Register 25533). ADEC appreciates EPA’s work on approving Alaska’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions from 2008 – 2013 in this action. ADEC also appreciates the opportunity to 

comment on the proposed approval and provides the following comments.

ADEC supports EPA’s proposed approval of revisions to Alaska’s SIP. ADEC does, however, have comments on 

some of the provisions EPA is proposing to disapprove.

18 AAC 50.345(l): EPA states that this section gives ADEC unbounded discretion to change source testing 

requirements in Federally-enforceable permits without changing the permit. ADEC staff assert that it is unreasonable 

to expect ADEC to do a permit revision and get EPA approval when ADEC can’t know a permittee will need an 

extension to source testing requirements (usually involved with the timing of them) until it happens. ADEC needs 

the flexibility provided by 18 AAC 50.345(l) to account for unique logistical situations such as when a permittee is 

unable to get a source test contractor on site by the permit deadline due to such issues as contractor shortages or 

extreme-weather-related scheduling problems. When ADEC receives a request for an extension, staff grants 

extensions and requires that the source test be conducted as expeditiously as possible. ADEC staff estimates we may

receive only a dozen or so such requests annually. Therefore ADEC requests that EPA approve 18 AAC 50.345(l).

18 AAC 50.346(a): EPA asserts that this subsection only requires corrective action after the permittee or ADEC 

determines a violation has occurred and therefore cannot be construed as monitoring to assure compliance. 18 AAC 

50.346(a) deals with the adoption by reference and use of Standard Operating Permit Condition II – Air Pollution 

Prohibited. ADEC believes that EPA may have incorrectly interpreted the conditions in Standard Operating Permit 

Condition II. Condition II.2.1 addresses situations in which emissions present a potential threat to human health and 

safety and require that such emissions be reported. Actual impacts are, therefore, monitored. Additionally, Conditions 

II.2.1 and II.2.2 require reporting and investigation of emissions that are believed to have caused or are causing a 

violation of Condition II.1, and Condition II.2.4 requires permittees to keep records, all of which constitute 

Clean Air
§ 880.203 Missing annuitant status and suspension of annuity. ( a ) Upon receipt of information concerning the possibility that an annuitant has disappeared, the Associate Director will conduct such inquiry as he or she determines to be necessary to determine whether the annuitant is alive and whether the annuitant's whereabouts can be determined.
( b ) If during an inquiry under paragraph (a) of this section, or upon subsequent receipt of additional information, the Associate Director finds substantial evidence (as defined in § 1201.56(c)(1) of this title) to believe that an annuitant is either not alive or that the annuitant's whereabouts cannot be determined, the annuitant acquires the status of missing annuitant. The Associate Director will then— ( 1 ) Suspend payments to the missing annuitant; and
( 2 ) Notify individuals who may be able to qualify for payments under § 880.302 that— ( i ) OPM has suspended the annuity payments to the missing annuitant;
( ii ) Payment may be made under § 880.302, including the amount available for payment, how that amount was determined, and the documentation required (if any) to qualify for such payments; and
( iii ) In response to an inquiry from any person seeking CSRS, FERS, FEHBP, or FEGLI benefits, OPM will provide information about documentation necessary to establish a claim for such benefits.
No. III-08-021 

Contacts: 

Viktoria Mitlyng 630-829-9662 

Prema Chandrathil 630-829-9663 

 May 15, 2008 

 E-Mail: opa3@nrc.gov 

Web site: www.nrc.gov

 

NRC PROPOSED $3,250 FINE AGAINST MICHIGAN HOSPITAL 

FOR FAILURE TO PROPERLY SECURE RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $3,250 fine against Dickinson 

County Memorial Hospital, Iron Mountain, Mich., for failing to properly secure a medical device 

containing radioactive material while in storage. 

 In August 2007, the NRC conducted a routine inspection at Dickinson County Memorial 

Hospital. An NRC inspector found that a device containing radioactive material used for medical 

procedures was unsecured and unattended while in storage. NRC regulations require that NRClicensed radioactive material be secured from unauthorized access or removal while in storage or 

unattended. As a result, the NRC issued a Notice of Violation to the hospital. 

 Dickinson County Memorial Hospital provided the NRC with a letter responding to the 

violation which included the hospital’s proposed corrective actions to address the violation 

identified by the NRC. 

 During a follow-up inspection at the hospital in January 2008, the NRC inspector 

identified a similar violation. While no fine was proposed for the earlier incident, the NRC 

proposed a fine after the second violation occurred because the hospital’s corrective actions did 

not prevent recurrence of the security issue. 

 “While no one actually had access to the radioactive material in this particular instance, 

the NRC requires that the hospital and its employees strictly adhere to good security practices to 

prevent unauthorized removal of the material,” said James Caldwell, NRC Regional 

Administration. “This incident also shows how important it is to take a thorough approach to 

correcting problems to prevent their recurrence.” 

 The hospital has taken extensive corrective actions to strengthen the security of 

radioactive materials. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region III 

2443 Warrenville Road 

Lisle IL 60532 
 The hospital has until June 6 to pay the fine or to protest it. If the fine is protested and 

subsequently imposed by the NRC staff, the hospital may request a hearing. 

# # # 

 

 NRC 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.
§ 890.1015 Minimum and maximum length of permissive debarments. ( a ) *No mandatory minimum or upper limit on length of permissive debarment.* There is neither a mandatory minimum debarment period nor a limitation on the maximum length of a debarment under any permissive debarment authority.
( b ) *Debarring official's process in setting period of permissive debarment.* The debarring official shall set the period of each debarment issued under a permissive debarment authority after considering the factors set forth in § 890.1016 and the factors set forth in the applicable section from among §§ 890.1017 through 890.1021.
| 1. | Form      S-8 No. 333-104426 and 333-59058 pertaining to Global Sources Equity      Compensation Plans Numbers I, II, III, IV, V, VI and VII of Global Sources      Ltd., |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Form      S-8 No. 333-138474 pertaining to Global Sources Equity Compensation (2007)      Master Plan and Global Sources Ltd. Directors Purchase Plan (as of      November 5, 2005), |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Form      F-3/A No. 333-114411 pertaining to the prospectus of Global Sources Ltd.      and |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | Form      F-3 No. 333-154960 pertaining to the prospectus of Global Sources      Ltd. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### § 894.513 Do I have to elect FEDVIP coverage each year in order to remain covered?

No. If you do not change or cancel your enrollment, and if your enrollment does not terminate pursuant to this part, then your current enrollment will continue into the next year. Before open season, you should review the plan brochure for any changes in benefits and premiums for the next year.

[83 FR 58180, Nov. 19, 2018]
REMARKS OF NRC CHAIRMAN GREGORY B. JACZKO AT CONCLUSION 

OF TWO-WEEK INTEGRATED REGULATORY REVIEW SERVICE VISIT 

 

Good morning. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has had the honor of hosting 20 of our 

international counterparts for the past two weeks. I want to thank Jukka Laaksonen, Director 

General of Finland’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, for leading the Integrated Regulatory 

Review Service team, and I also thank IAEA Deputy Director General Denis Flory for joining us as 

we wrap up this effort. 

Our staff is proud to have had the opportunity to sit with our colleagues and review with 

them details of our regulatory structure, as well as to look at how our activities compare with 

International Atomic Energy Agency guidelines for regulatory agencies. We asked for this mission, 

and our staff has spent more than two years assembling information and performing a tough selfassessment to give the IRRS team everything it needed to do its job well. 

Among the hallmarks of this agency are openness and transparency, and our staff has 

demonstrated these qualities in sharing our approach with the IRRS. I believe the team’s visit sends 

an important signal internationally – this sort of examination of a nation’s regulatory system can 

advance the cause of nuclear safety not just in one nation but across the globe.

 We’re gratified the IRRS team has recognized many aspects of our mature, vigorous 

approach to ensuring U.S. nuclear power plants operate safely. The NRC is justifiably proud that 

the team has noted our staff’s competence, our effective inspection program, the agency’s strong 

drive for improving its performance, and the effort we put into including the public in our licensing 

and rulemaking processes. 

Of course, the IRRS report also outlines areas where we may be able to further strengthen 

our regulatory system. I believe we can be proud of the rigor our regulatory structure imposes and 

its strong focus on safety. One of our senators, Tom Carper from Delaware, likes to say that if 

something isn’t perfect, make it better. That’s what we want to accomplish, so we’ll look at the 

suggestions in the final IRRS report for opportunities to strengthen a system we believe is already a 

global leader in nuclear safety. Thank you. 

### 

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 Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 10-195 October 29, 2010
§ 849.303 Individuals who may not serve as a representative payee. A representative payee applicant may not serve as a representative payee if he or she: ( a ) Is under the age of 18, unless he or she is the custodial parent of the minor child applying for or receiving the annuity;
( b ) Is found by a court to be incompetent or receives benefits under title II or title XVI of the Social Security Act through a representative payee or receives a retirement annuity pursuant to CSRS or FERS through a representative payee;
( c ) Has previously served as a representative payee and has been found by a court of competent jurisdiction to have misused benefits;
( d ) Has been convicted of a violation of: ( 1 ) 5 U.S.C. 8345a or 8466a;
( 2 ) Section 208 or 1632 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 408, 1383a); or
( 3 ) 38 U.S.C 6101; or
( e ) Has been convicted of an offense resulting in imprisonment for more than one year. The agency may make exception to the prohibition in this paragraph (e) if the nature of the conviction is such that selection of the applicant poses no risk to the annuitant and the exception is in the best interest of the annuitant.
# L_2020209EN.01000101.xml

| 2.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 209/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 209/1

---

Information relating to the entry into force of the Agreement between the European Union and Montenegro on actions carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in Montenegro

The Agreement between the European Union and Montenegro on actions carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in Montenegro will enter into force on 1 July 2020, the procedure provided for in Article 12(2) of the Agreement having been completed on 26 May 2020.

---
#### § 919.990 Preponderance of the evidence.

*Preponderance of the evidence* means proof by information that, compared with information opposing it, leads to the conclusion that the fact at issue is more probably true than not.