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

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2338 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2338

 To prevent loans for Iraq from the International Monetary Fund or the 
 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development from being used 
                      to pay off Iraq's creditors.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 4, 2003

  Mr. Saxton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prevent loans for Iraq from the International Monetary Fund or the 
 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development from being used 
                      to pay off Iraq's creditors.

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

SECTION 1. PREVENTION OF LOANS FROM IRAQ FROM THE INTERNATIONAL 
              MONETARY FUND OR THE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR 
              RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT FROM BEING USED TO PAY OFF 
              IRAQ'S CREDITORS.

    The Bretton Woods Agreements Act (22 U.S.C. 286-286oo) is amended 
by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 64. PREVENTION OF INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND LOANS FOR IRAQ 
              FROM BEING USED TO PAY OFF IRAQ'S CREDITORS.

    ``The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States 
Executive Director at the Fund and at the Bank to use the voice, vote, 
and influence of the United States to oppose the making of a loan by 
the Fund or the Bank, respectively, to the government of Iraq unless 
the Secretary of the Treasury determines that there are sufficient 
safeguards in place to prevent the loan proceeds from being used to 
reimburse persons or governments holding debt arising from credit 
extended to the government of Iraq, and outstanding as of the date of 
the enactment of this section, for any losses with respect to the 
debt.''.
                                 <all>
```
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

September 20, 2023

No. 04

- 23

- 00811

- CR

IN RE JOHN GILBERT CENTENO JR. , RELATOR

Original Proceeding 1

ORDER

Relator’s writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

It is so ORDERED on September 20, 2023

.

_ ____________________________ Beth Wat kins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 20th day of September, 2023

.

_____________________________ Michael A. Cruz

, Clerk of Cour t

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2021

- CR

- 11020 , styled State v. John Gilbert Centeno, Jr. , pending in the 186th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Andrew Carruthers presiding.
RUSSIAN  TRADE  FINANCE CRUNCH  EASING  SLOWLY

----

by Padraic J. Sweeney
**August 1997**
Trade finance may become easier to obtain in Russia as foreign lenders gain confidence in thecountry's economy.  The gradual improvement of Russia's macroeconomic situation--fallinginterest rates, declining inflation, and a stabilized currency--followed by favorable reactions frominternational financial institutions and credit agencies have bolstered this confidence.  The resulthas been a dramatic increase in capital flowing into the Russian markets.  As reported by theInterfax News Agency, foreign investment in the first quarter of 1997 totaled $2.4 billion, up 153percent from the first quarter of 1996.   This money will not find its way into importers' handsquickly, however, and U.S. exporters still need to work closely with their clients to financetransactions.
 Russia's successful placement of three eurobond issues and the fall in Russian treasury bill(GKO) yields to below 20 percent have caused a merging of financial interests.  Foreign investors,until now active almost exclusively in equity markets, have begun to enter the debt market as well. Likewise, Russian investors, previously focusing on the debt markets, have begun to invest inequities.
**More International Lending**
§ 847.442 Effective date. ( a ) An election under § 847.441 is effective on the first day of FERS-covered employment following NAFI employment subject to retirement coverage.
( b ) Deductions and contributions for NAFI retirement system coverage begin effective on the first day of the next pay period after the agency receives the employee's election under § 847.441(a).
( c ) An election under § 847.441 is irrevocable when received by the employing agency.
TURKMENISTAN'S TAX SYSTEM

----

**June 1998**
**by Irina  Begjanova**
Knowing what taxes to expect and how they are calculated is a challenge in most NIS countries,where tax regulations are  usually in transition and difficult to interpret.  Turkmenistan is noexception. The country's  tax code is currently being revised and existing tax legislation is basedon several laws and regulations amended by presidential decree.  It is possible, though, to identifysome key pieces of the tax puzzle which are most relevant to foreign companies.  Until the newtax law is adopted, legislation of importance to the foreign investor includes: value-added, profit,and property taxes; special taxation for small enterprises; and favorable taxation in free economiczones. Foreign investors should also be prepared to register with the **State Chief TaxInspectorate** (SCTI) before beginning operations in the country. 
**State Tax Service**
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 7 D0 15 3 . W I LHY HARPO v . BROADSTONE MAPLE, LLC.

On Sep tem

b er 2 8

, 2 0 1 6

, t h e s u p eri o r co u rt en tere d an o rd er d i s m is s i n g t h e

ap p eal o f “ Les l i e On n a an d al l o t h er o ccu p an t s” fro m a m ag i s t rat e co u rt d efau l t
ju d g m en t i n th is d i s p o s s es s o ry act i o n

. On O ct o b er 27

, 2 0 1 6

, W i l hy Harp o fi l ed t h i s

ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal

. Ap p eal s fro m ju dg m en t s i n d i s po s s es s o ry

act i on s , h o wev er, m

us t b e fi l ed wi t h i n s ev en d ay s o f t h e d at e t h e ju d g m en t was

en t ered

. See O C G A § 4 4 -7 -5 6 ; Ra d i o S an d y S pr i n g s
, In c. v. Al l en Ro a d Jo i nt

Ven tu r e , 3 1 1 Ga. A p p. 3 3 4

, 3 3 5 -3 3 6 (7 1 5 SE2 d 7 5 2 ) (2 01 1 ). Harp o f i l e d t h i s

ap p li cat io n 29 d ay s aft er en t ry o f t h e s up eri o r co u rt o rd er h e wi s h e s t o ap p eal

. Acco rd i n g l y, t h e ap p l i cat i o n i s u n t im el y , an d i t i s h ereb y DISM ISSED fo r l ack o f
ju ri s d i ct i o n

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 11/28/2016 November 28, 2016
###### Editorial Note on Subpart G of Part 9701

#### Editorial Note:

At 73 FR 58435, Oct. 7, 2008, the application of subpart G to part 9701 was rescinded.

#### § 9701.703 Definitions.

In this subpart:

*Adjudicating official* means an administrative law judge, administrative judge, or other employee designated by MSPB to decide an appeal.

*Day* means calendar day.

*Harmful error* means error by the Department in the application of its procedures that is likely to have caused it to reach a conclusion different from the one it would have reached in the absence or cure of the error. The burden is on the appellant to show that the error was harmful, *i.e.*, that it caused substantial harm or prejudice to his or her rights.

*Mandatory removal offense (MRO)* means an offense that the Secretary determines in his or her sole, exclusive, and unreviewable discretion has a direct and substantial adverse impact on the Department's homeland security mission.

*Mandatory Removal Panel (MRP)* means the three-person panel composed of officials appointed by the Secretary for fixed terms to decide appeals of removals based on a mandatory removal offense.

*MSPB* means the Merit Systems Protection Board.

*Petition for review* means a request for review of an initial decision of an adjudicating official.

*Preponderance of the evidence* means the degree of relevant evidence that a reasonable person, considering the record as a whole, would accept as sufficient to find that a contested fact is more likely to be true than untrue.
INTERNATIONAL SAFETY REVIEW TEAM VISITS SEABROOK NUCLEAR PLANT

An international team of nuclear safety experts will visit the Seabrook nuclear power 

plant from June 7 through 23 to review operational safety practices at the facility, located in 

Seabrook, N.H.

The voluntary peer review, known as an Operational Safety Review Team (OSART) 

visit, is being coordinated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is based in 

Vienna, Austria. It was scheduled before the events involving the reactors at the Fukushima 

Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The 14-member team will include reviewers from France, 

the United Kingdom, Sweden, Canada, China, Spain, Brazil, Russia, the Czech Republic and 

other countries.

Established by IAEA in 1982, the OSART program is designed to assist member states in 

enhancing the operational safety of nuclear power plants and fostering continuous improvement 

through the dissemination of information on best practices. This will be the seventh OSART 

review of a U.S. nuclear power plant since the program was initiated.

Areas to be covered during the review include, but are not limited to, management and 

organization, training, operations, maintenance, technical support, operating experience, 

radiation protection, chemistry and emergency planning.

“While the NRC does not conduct the OSART review, it does closely follow it and any 

outcomes, both for their safety significance and any possible safety improvements,” said Bill 

Borchardt, the NRC’s Executive Director for Operations.

Once the OSART reviewers have completed their work, they will produce a report 

identifying best practices and suggesting possible safety improvements. This report will be 

provided to the plant’s operator, NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, and the U.S. government.

###

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 website.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region I 

475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No. I-11-020

Contact: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330

 Neil Sheehan (610) 337-5331

June 7, 2011

Email: OPA1.RESOURCE@nrc.gov
```

[Federal Register: September 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 187)]
[Notices]               
[Page 59679]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28se10-28]                         

========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================

[[Page 59679]]

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION

 
Board of Directors Meeting

Meeting: African Development Foundation, Board of Directors Meeting.

Time: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.

Place: African Development Foundation, Conference Room, 1400 I Street, 
NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20005

Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010.

Status:
    1. Open session, Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m.; 
and
    2. Closed session, Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 12 p.m. to 1 p.m.
    Due to security requirements and limited seating, all individuals 
wishing to attend the open session of the meeting must notify Michele 
M. Rivard at (202) 673-3916 or mrivard@usadf.gov of your request to 
attend by 5 p.m. on Thursday, October 14, 2010.

Lloyd O. Pierson,
President & CEO, USADF.
[FR Doc. 2010-24325 Filed 9-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Douglas G. Bryant, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Network Engines, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying
officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be
designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;



b) [Paragraph omitted in
accordance with SEC transition instructions contained in SEC Release 34-47986]



c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and



5. The
registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and



b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|Date: December 23, 2003 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    DOUGLAS G.
BRYANT
|----------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ------------------------
|                        |  |  |  |  |  |
1 

### Medina, Dayana

From: Kristen P Gaus <kpgaus@aep.com>

Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 9:18 AM

To: 'Pettyjohn, Mary (PETTYJOHN@adeq. state.ar.us)'; Medina, Dayana

Cc: Bruce W Moore; Brian Bond; Kevi n J Munson; Bill Mast; Janet J H enry 'Legal Dept'; 'Jeremy Jewell

(JJewell@trinityconsultants.com)'

Subject: Flint Creek BART response

Attachments: flc_bart_report_cov_ltr_9-9-13.pdf; Consolidated Spr eadsheet_2013-09-09.xlsx;

Flint_Creek_BART_Analysis_2013-09-09_compiled.pdf

Categories: Red Category

Mary and Dayana, attached are responses to the questions/requests received from the EPA on August 21, 2013. Please

contact me if you have questions.



### Kris Gaus, QEP

American Electric Power

Air Quality Services

214/777

‐ 1113

P.O. Box 660164

Dallas, TX 75266

‐ 0164
AGENCY SPOTLIGHT

----

**September 1997**
**Export-Import Bank of the United States**The Export-Import Bank of the UnitedStates (Ex-Im Bank) has signed agreements to ease financing of U.S. exports with thegovernments of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan.  The four "ProjectImplementation Agreements" (PIAs) provide a framework for financing based on export revenuesgenerated by  importers as a result of their purchase of American goods.  Repayment is viaoffshore collateral accounts established for the purpose.  PIAs enable Ex-Im Bank to financetransactions without recourse to sovereign guarantees from the countries' governments.  Ex-ImBank has already financed a $15.6 million sale of air-traffic control equipment under its PIA withGeorgia.  Ex-Im Bank had not previously financed transactions in any of the four countries.  Formore information contact Marianna Ohe of Ex-Im Bank at 202-565-3200.
**University of Arizona**The University of Arizona will hold its fourth annual "Russiaand the CIS Business Forum" in Tuscon  October 31--November 1, 1997.  The theme of thisyear's forum is "Success in the CIS."  The forum will provide an up-to-date analysis of political,economic, and legal aspects of business ventures in the former Soviet Union and will present casestudies of successful American businesses and strategies for success.  The Consul General of theRussian Federation in San Francisco will address the forum.  Representatives of various U.S.Government programs that support American business ventures in the NIS will makepresentations and answer questions as well.  For more information contact Dr. Roza Simkhovichof the University of Arizona, at 520-626-4007, or visit the forum's website:http//russian.arizona.edu/cis97.htm.
***This report is provided courtesy of the Business Information Service for the NewlyIndependent States (BISNIS)***
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7486
ANDREW NICHOLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EARL BESHEARS, Warden; PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INCORPORATED; DOCTOR CALDERON; JOSEPH GRIFFIN, M.D.; KEVIN JOHNSON; DAVID BLOOM, Director, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-95-374-WMN) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 4, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew Nichols, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Kushner Kline, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Joseph Barry Chazen, Gina Marie Smith, MEYERS, BILLINGSLEY, SHIPLEY, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, Riverdale, Maryland; Daniel Karp, Kevin Bock Karpinski, ALLEN, JOHNSON, ALEXANDER & KARP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).23 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nichols v. Beshears , No. CA-95-374-WMN (D. Md. Sept. 1, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# L_2022246EN.01011601.xml

| 22.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 246/116 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 246/116

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 152/2022

of 29 April 2022

amending Annex XI (Electronic communication, audiovisual services and information society) to the EEA Agreement [2022/1596]

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 Regulation (EU) 2021/2228 of 14 December 2021 setting the weighted average of maximum mobile termination rates across the Union and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2082 (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2228 of 14 December 2021 setting the weighted average of maximum mobile termination rates across the Union and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2082 (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

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

(2)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The text of point 5cub (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2082) of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement is replaced by the following:

| ‘32021 R 2228: | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2228 of 14 December 2021 setting the weighted average of maximum mobile termination rates across the Union and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2082 (OJ L 448, 15.12.2021, p. 50).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘32021 R 2228:

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2228 of 14 December 2021 setting the weighted average of maximum mobile termination rates across the Union and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2082 (OJ L 448, 15.12.2021, p. 50).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2228 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 April 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, 29 April 2022.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Nicolas VON LINGEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 448, 15.12.2021, p. 50.

1

(*)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*

---
#### Seafire, Incorporated, Respondent, v. H. Ward Ackerson et al., Appellants.

Present — Adel, Sneed, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ.; Johnston, Acting P. J., not voting.
#### § 630.503 Leave from former leave systems.

An employee who earned leave under the leave acts of 1936 or any other leave system merged under subchapter I of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, is entitled to a recredit of that leave under that subchapter if he would have been entitled to recredit for it on reentering the leave system under which it was earned. However, this section does not revive leave already forfeited.