alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 252

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the period for 

filing for a credit or refund of individual income taxes to 7 years. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 8, 2003

Mr. BAKER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the period for filing for a credit or refund of individual 

income taxes to 7 years.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tax Refund Statute 

5 of Limitation Extension Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) Every individual taxpayer should receive a 

9 credit or refund for the overpayment of Federal in10 come taxes if the taxpayer’s claim for a credit or re-
2

•HR 252 IH 

1 fund can be verified by the Internal Revenue Serv2 ice. 

3 (2) In order to provide for more accurate and 

4 complete individual income tax records, Congress 

5 should provide an incentive to taxpayers that encour6 ages the filing of amended tax returns. 

7 SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF PERIOD FOR FILING FOR CREDIT 

8 OR REFUND OF INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) of section 6511 of 

10 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to limitations 

11 on credit or refund) is amended by adding at the end the 

12 following new sentence: ‘‘For purposes of applying this 

13 section with respect to tax imposed by subtitle A on an 

14 individual—

15 ‘‘(1) the references to 2 years and to 3 years 

16 in the first sentence, in subsection (b)(2), and in 

17 paragraphs (2) and (4) of subsection (d) shall be ap18 plied by treating such references as references to 7 

19 years, and 

20 ‘‘(2) the references to 3-year periods in sub21 paragraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (b)(2) and in 

22 paragraphs (2) and (4) of subsection (d) shall be ap23 plied by treating such references as references to the 

24 7-year period from the time the return was filed.’’
3

•HR 252 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) shall apply to taxes paid for taxable years 

3 ending after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1


                       Performance Capital Management, LLC

                CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                           PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Performance Capital
Management, LLC (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 as
filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  David  J.  Caldwell, as Chief Operations Officer of the Company, and
Edward  M.  Rucker, as Accounting Manager of the Company, each hereby certifies,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Sec.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to Sec. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

     (1)  The  Report  fully  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



   /s/ David J. Caldwell
------------------------
David J. Caldwell
Chief Operations Officer
May 14, 2004



   /s/ Edward M. Rucker
-----------------------
Edward M. Rucker
Accounting Manager
May 14, 2004



The material contained in this exhibit is not deemed "filed" with the Commission
and  is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under
the  Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any
general  incorporation  language  contained in such filing, except to the extent
that  the  Company  specifically  incorporates  it  by  reference.


<PAGE>
Exhibit
32 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350)   In connection with
the Quarterly Report of Beeston Enterprises Ltd, a Nevada corporation (the
Company), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Michael Upham,
President/Treasurer/CEO/CFO of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my knowledge:  (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 result of operations of the Company.      /s/ Michael
Upham Michael Upham, President, Treasurer,
CEO, CFO Dated:  May 20, 2010
William HolstonDivision of License RenewalDivision of License Renewal

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

April 4, 2012

CHANGES TO THE GENERIC AGING LESSONS LEARNED (GALL) REPORT REVISION 2 AGING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM XI.M41, “BURIED AND 

UNDERGROUND PIPING AND TANKS” 

LR-ISG-2011-03

Contains an option to demonstrate that CP is not needed or not practical – basis to be provided in LRA

3

provided in LRA.Revises OE search for buried piping from five years to 20 years and includes components not in scope of LR that have similar materials and environment.Revises inspection quantities.

Removes SR/Code Class and hazardous material classifications – utilities use risk ranking

4

g

Increasing inspections through each ten-year period

Inspection quantities are percentage based with minimum and not to exceed values.

5

Removes recommendation to volumetrically inspect underground piping to detect internal corrosion – will be covered by an ISG in development, public comment mid Summer 2012.

6

Revises the existing expansion of inspection size due to discovering adverse indications to:◦ initial doubling of the sample size◦ followed by an analysis of extent of cause and 

extent of condition to determine final sample size.

Adds a recommendation that when damage to the coating is significant and the damage was caused by non-conforming backfill:

7

was caused by non conforming backfill:◦ an extent of condition evaluation should be 

conducted ◦ ensure that the as-left condition of backfill in the 

vicinity of observed damage will not lead to further degradation.

Added specific acceptance criteria for cathodic protection surveys

8

Revises SRP-LR Table 3.0-1, FSAR 

9

Supplement, Description of Program, to require inclusion of specific preventive and mitigative actions utilized by the AMP.

Public comment period ends April 9, 2012

10

Staff will review public comments and publish final ISG by June 2012.
# L_2023164EN.01008601.xml

| 29.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 164/86 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 164/86

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 338/2022

of 9 December 2022

amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement [2023/1280]

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 Delegated Directive (EU) 2021/1716 of 29 June 2021 amending Directive 2014/47/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards modifications to the vehicle category designations stemming from amendments to the type-approval legislation (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2021/1716 of 29 June 2021 amending Directive 2014/47/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards modifications to the vehicle category designations stemming from amendments to the type-approval legislation (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

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

(2)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is added in point 17ha (Directive 2014/47/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement:

‘, as amended by:

| — | 32021 L 1716: Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2021/1716 of 29 June 2021 (OJ L 342, 27.9.2021, p. 45).’ |
| --- | --- |

—

32021 L 1716: Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2021/1716 of 29 June 2021 (OJ L 342, 27.9.2021, p. 45).’

Article 2

The text of Delegated Directive (EU) 2021/1716 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 10 December 2022, 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, 9 December 2022.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Kristján Andri STEFÁNSSON

---

(1)  
  OJ L 342, 27.9.2021, p. 45.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed March 16, 2016

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D15-1886

Lower Tribunal No. 11-230 -M

________________



### Marathon Sunsets, Inc., etc.

, Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

vs.



### Greg Coldiron, et al.

, Appellees/Cross-Appellants.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Timothy J. Koenig

, Judge.

Franklin D. Greenman (Marathon)

, for appellant/cross-appellee.

Horan, Wallace & Higgins, LLP, and Darren M. Horan (Key West)

, for

appellees/cross-appellants.

Before WELLS, SHEPHERD and LAGOA, JJ.

SHEPHERD, J.Dissatisfied with the results obtained below in an action brought by

neighbors to enforce certain deed restrictions imposed on property in Marathon,

Florida, both parties appeal. The property owner, Marathon Sunsets, Inc.,

challenges the trial court’s injunction directing it to construct and maintain a traffic

control device on Kyle Way East. Greg and Michelle Coldiron ask this Court to

overturn the trial court’s decision that the Tiki Hut bar, added to the restaurant site,

does not violate the deed restriction authorizing use solely as a restaurant, defined

as “a food service establishment deriving no less than fifty percent of its revenue

from the sale of food and non-alcoholic beverages.” Because substantial,

competent evidence supports the trial court’s ruling as to the restaurant only

restriction, we affirm without further discussion. We reverse, however, the portion

of the final judgment ordering Marathon Sunsets to reconstruct the previously

dismantled gate on Kyle Way East.

Under the doctrine of impossibility of performance or frustration of purpose,

a party is discharged from performing a contractual obligation which is impossible

to perform and the party neither assumed the risk of impossibility nor could have

acted to prevent the event rendering the performance impossible. See, e.g.

, Shore

Inv. Co. v. Hotel Trinidad, Inc.

, 29 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1947); Ferguson v. Ferguson

,

54 So. 3d 553 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011); Leon Cnty. v. Gluesenkamp

, 873 So. 2d 460

(Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Am. Aviation, Inc. v. Aero-Flight Serv., Inc.

, 712 So. 2d 809

2(Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Evidence presented below clearly demonstrated Marathon

Sunsets sought permission to reconstruct the gate to Kyle Way East after it was

damaged and taken down as a result of certain sewer work in the area. A permit

for the gate was categorically denied by the governing authorities. Under these

circumstances, the doctrine of impossibility of performance applies, and the trial

court erred in ordering Marathon Sunsets to do that which it may not do without

the necessary permit.

Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the final judgment ordering

construction of the gate, and affirm in all other respects.

3
```

PHARMACEUTICALS RESEARCH IN MOSCOW

A number of U.S. companies use intermediaries in obtaining technology or
establishing relationships with scientists or research institutions in the NIS. 
Intermediary companies provide a variety of services in locating technologies,
identifying partners, and even managing research once a relationship has been
established. 

The Cambrex Corporation, of East Rutherford, New Jersey, is one U.S.
manufacturer that has developed a successful relationship with a Russian research
institute through an intermediary.  Cambrex is working with the Zelinsky Institute
of Organic Chemistry in Moscow to develop new reagents to reduce the creation
of toxic or unusable by-products in pharmaceutical manufacturing.  According to
Cambrex Technical Manager Dr. Glenn Heise, cooperation with the Zelinsky
Institute "has allowed us to reduce the scope of the project and has allowed
Cambrex to focus on the most useful reagents."  If the company's Russian
research is successful, the result will be reagents that either are reusable or are
consumed in the manufacturing process.  Cambrex and the Zelinsky Institute have
been working together on this project for approximately 18 months.  

Cambrex Corporation manufactures bulk active ingredients for generic drugs, and
specialty and fine chemicals.  The company's five product lines are performance
chemicals, coatings, health and pharmaceuticals, agriculture intermediates and
additives, and specialty and fine chemicals.  Cambrex was attracted by the
possibility of doing research in Russia by the historical strength Russian science
has shown in fields related to the company's interests in specialty and fine
chemistry.

Cambrex recently renewed its contract with Scientific Applications International
Corporation (SAIC), which brokered the relationship and manages logistics for
Cambrex and the Institute.  Similar services are offered by other U.S. firms
including Science Solutions, Inc., East/West Technology Partners, Kiser Research
and others.  For more information on developing contacts with Russian scientific
research organizations, call BISNIS at (202) 482-4655, and ask for a trade
specialist.
```
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 3.5


              CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT TO CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION

                                       OF

                       EOTT Energy General Partner, L.L.C.


         EOTT Energy General Partner, L.L.C. (hereinafter called the "company"),
a limited liability company organized and existing under and by virtue of the
Limited Liability Company Act of the State of Delaware, does hereby certify:

         1. The name of the limited liability company is: EOTT Energy General
Partner, L.L.C.

         2. The certificate of formation of the company is hereby amended by
striking out Article 1. thereof and by substituting in lieu of said Article the
following new Article:

            1. The name of the limited liability company is: Link Energy General
               Partner LLC

         3. This Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Formation shall be
effective on October 1, 2003.

Executed on this 15th day of August, 2003.


/s/ Thomas M. Matthews
--------------------------------------
Thomas M. Matthews - Authorized Person
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Great LakesBancorp, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Andrew W. Dorn, Jr., Chief Executive Officer, certify to the bestof my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 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. |

                August 12, 2005

 

                   /s/ Andrew W. Dorn, Jr.                                               Andrew W. Dorn, Jr.                President & Chief Executive Officer
§ 292.5 Proposal selection process. The proposal evaluation and selection process will consist of three principal phases: Proposal qualifications; proposal review and selection of finalists; and award determination as follows: ( a ) *Proposal qualification.* All proposals will be reviewed by NIST to assure compliance with the proposal content and other basic provisions of this part. Proposals which satisfy these requirements will be designated qualified proposals; all others will be disqualified at this phase of the evaluation and selection process.
( b ) *Proposal review and selection of finalists.* NIST will appoint an evaluation panel to review and evaluate all qualified proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria and values set forth in this part. Evaluation panels will consist of NIST employees and in some cases other federal employees or non-federal experts who sign non-disclosure agreements. A site visit may be required to make full evaluation of a proposal. From the qualified proposals, a group of finalists will be numerically ranked and recommended for award based on this review.
( c ) *Award determination.* The Director of the NIST, or her/his designee, shall select awardees based on total evaluation scores, geographic distribution, and the availability of funds. All three factors will be considered in making an award. Upon the final award decision, a notification will be made to each of the proposing organizations.
### SUBCHAPTER III—PROTECTION OF PATIENT RIGHTS
### §7283. Disposition of fees

Except for amounts received pursuant to section 7285 of this title, all fees received by the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims shall be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.

(Added Pub. L. 100–687, div. A, title III, §301(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4118, §4083; renumbered §7283 and amended Pub. L. 102–40, title IV, §402(b)(1), (d)(1), May 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 238, 239; Pub. L. 105–368, title V, §512(a)(1), Nov. 11, 1998, 112 Stat. 3341.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1998—Pub. L. 105–368 substituted "Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims" for "Court of Veterans Appeals".

1991—Pub. L. 102–40 renumbered section 4083 of this title as this section and substituted "7285" for "4085".

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

#### Effective Date of 1998 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 105–368 effective on first day of first month beginning more than 90 days after Nov. 11, 1998, see section 513 of Pub. L. 105–368, set out as a note under section 7251 of this title.
§ 301.3 Application for duty-free entry of scientific instruments. ( a ) *Who may apply.* An applicant for duty-free entry of an instrument under subheading 9810.00.60, HTSUS must be a public or private nonprofit institution which is established for educational or scientific purposes and which has placed a bona fide order or has a firm intention to place a bona fide order for a foreign instrument within 60 days following a favorable decision on the institution's application.
( b ) *Application forms.* Applications must be made on form ITA-338P which may be obtained from the Statutory Import Programs Staff, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, the Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/sips/index.html ,* or from the various District Offices of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
( c ) *Where to apply.* Applications must be filed with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, at the address specified on page 1 of the form.
( d ) Five copies of the form, including relevant supporting documents, must be submitted. One of these copies shall be signed in the original by the person in the applicant institution under whose direction and control the foreign instrument will be used and who is familiar with the intended uses of the instrument. The remaining four copies of the form may be copies of the original. Attachments should be fully identified and referenced to the question(s) on the form to which they relate.
( e ) A single application (in the requisite number of copies) may be submitted for any quantity of the same type or model of foreign instrument provided that the entire quantity is intended to be used for the same purposes and provided that all units are included on a single purchase order. A separate application shall be submitted for each different type or model or variation in the type or model of instrument for which duty-free entry is sought even if covered by a single purchase order. Orders calling for multiple deliveries of the same type or model of instrument over a substantial period of time may, at the discretion of the Director, require multiple applications.
( f ) An application for components of an instrument to be assembled in the United States as described in § 301.2(f) may be filed provided that all of the components for the complete, assembled instrument are covered by, and fully described in, the application. See also § 301.2(k).
( g ) Failure to answer completely all questions on the form in accordance with the instructions on the form or to supply the requisite number of copies of the form and supporting documents may result in delays in processing of the application while the deficiencies are remedied, return of the application without processing, or denial of the application without prejudice to resubmission. Any questions on these regulations or the application form should be addressed to the Director.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0625-0037) [47 FR 32517, July 28, 1982, as amended at 50 FR 11501, Mar. 22, 1985; 66 FR 28833, May 25, 2001; 74 FR 30463, June 26, 2009]