alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §7108. Payment of claims

(a) Judgments.—Any judgment against the Federal Government on a claim under this chapter shall be paid promptly in accordance with the procedures provided by section 1304 of title 31.

(b) Monetary Awards.—Any monetary award to a contractor by an agency board shall be paid promptly in accordance with the procedures contained in subsection (a).

(c) Reimbursement.—Payments made pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) shall be reimbursed to the fund provided by section 1304 of title 31 by the agency whose appropriations were used for the contract out of available amounts or by obtaining additional appropriations for purposes of reimbursement.

(d) Tennessee Valley Authority.—

(1) Judgments.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) to (c), any judgment against the Tennessee Valley Authority on a claim under this chapter shall be paid promptly in accordance with section 9(b) of the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933 (16 U.S.C. 831h(b)).

(2) Monetary awards.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) to (c), any monetary award to a contractor by the board of contract appeals of the Tennessee Valley Authority shall be paid in accordance with section 9(b) of the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933 (16 U.S.C. 831h(b)).

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3825.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 7108 | 41:612. | Pub. L. 95–563, §13, Nov. 1, 1978, 92 Stat. 2389; Pub. L. 104–106, div. D, title XLIII, §4322(b)(7), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 677. |

Section
# L_2022279EN.01004001.xml

| 27.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 279/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 279/40

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 133/2019

of 8 May 2019

amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement [2022/2030]

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) 2018/2079 of 19 December 2018 on the approval of the engine idle coasting function as an innovative technology for reducing CO2 emissions from passenger cars pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/2079 of 19 December 2018 on the approval of the engine idle coasting function as an innovative technology for reducing CO2 emissions from passenger cars pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (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

The following point is inserted after point 21aeza (Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1402) of Annex XX to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘21aezb. | 32018 D 2079: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/2079 of 19 December 2018 on the approval of the engine idle coasting function as an innovative technology for reducing CO2 emissions from passenger cars pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 331, 28.12.2018, p. 225).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘21aezb.

32018 D 2079: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/2079 of 19 December 2018 on the approval of the engine idle coasting function as an innovative technology for reducing CO2 emissions from passenger cars pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 331, 28.12.2018, p. 225).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/2079 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 1 June 2019, 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, 8 May 2019.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Claude MAERTEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 331, 28.12.2018, p. 225.

1

(*)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*

---
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Betty Hornacek, Respondent, against Alphons Custodis-Chimney Construction Company et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

All concur.
B.C.D. 02-1

JAN 1 6 2002

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

Raritan Central Railway, L.L.C.

This is the determination of the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the

status of Raritan Central Railway, L.L.C. (RCRY) as an employer under the

Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231 etseq.) (RRA) and the Railroad

Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. § 351 etseq.) (RUIA).

In Surface Transportation Board (STB) Finance Docket No. 34071 decided

July 17, 2001, RCRY filed a notice of exemption to lease and operate

approximately 14 miles of rail line, pursuant to an agreement entered into

with Federal Business Centers, Inc. and Summit Associates, Inc. The 14

mile rail line properties, easements and right-of-way, are located within the

Raritan Center Business Park, in the Townships of Edison and

Woodbridge, in Middlesex County, New Jersey. The STB decision further 

states that RCRY will interchange with the Conrail Shared Assets

Operations and that RCRY will serve as the substitute operator for Durham

Transport, Inc., the former operator of the rail line.

information concerning RCRY was provided Eyal Shapira, President of

RCRY. According to Mr. Shapira, RCRY began rail operations and first

compensated its two employees on August 15, 2001. Mr. Shapira stated

RCRY has a twenty year operating lease with Federal Business Centers,

Inc. and Summit Associates, Inc., the owners of the right-of-way.

Mr. Shapira stated that Federal Business Centers, Inc. and Summit 

Associates, Inc. are real estate development corporations and the joint

owners of Raritan Business Center. Mr. Shapira stated that RCRY

currently handles approximately 850 rail cars a year. Mr. Shapira further

stated that RCRY interchanges with CSX Transportation (B.A. No. 1524).

Mr. Shapira also stated that he owns 87.50% of the New York and

Ogdensburg Railway Co. (B.A. No. 2272) and 24% of Landisville Terminal

and Transfer Co. (B.A. No. 4410).

BA#2393
-2-

Raritan Central Railway, L.L.C.

Section 1(a)(1) of the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231(a)(1)),

insofar as relevant here, defines a covered employer as:

(i) any carrier by railroad subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface

Transportation Board under Part A of subtitle IV of title 49, United

States Code;

Section 1 of the RUIA contains essentially the same definition, as does

section 3231 of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act.

The evidence of record establishes that RCRY is a rail carrier operating in

interstate commerce. Accordingly, it is determined that Raritan Central

Railway, L.L.C. became an employer within the meaning of section

1 (a)(1 )(i) of the Railroad Retirement Act and the corresponding provision

of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act effective August 15, 2001,

the date as of which it began rail operations and first compensated its

employees.

V. M. Speakman, Jr.

Jerome F. Kever
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF**

**CHIEF      EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

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

| 1.       | Such                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30,                2007, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for                the period ending June 30, 2007, fairly presents, in all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of                Chaolei Marketing and Finance                Company. |

| */s/                Scott J. Silverman*                                                                       |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Scott                J. SilvermanChief                Executive OfficerChief                Financial Officer |
### §112. Procurement system

In this subtitle, the term "procurement system" means the integration of the procurement process, the professional development of procurement personnel, and the management structure for carrying out the procurement function.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3681.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 112 | 41:259(c)(2). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, §309(c)(2), as added Pub. L. 98–369, title VII, §2711(a)(3), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1180; Pub. L. 98–577, title V, §504(a)(4), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3086; Pub. L. 103–355, title I, §1551, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3299. |
| | 41:403(3). | Pub. L. 93–400, §4(3), Aug. 30, 1974, 88 Stat. 797; Pub. L. 96–83, §3, Oct. 10, 1979, 93 Stat. 649; Pub. L. 98–191, §4, Dec. 1, 1983, 97 Stat. 1326; Pub. L. 103–355, title VIII, §8001(b)(1)–(3), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3386. |

Section
COALITION PROVISIONAL AUTHORITY ORDER NUMBER 29

AMENDMENT TO LAW OF ESTATE LEASE

Pursuant to my authority as Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA),

under the laws and usages of war, and consistent with relevant U.N. Security Council

resolutions, including Resolution 1483 (2003),

Noting that Law No. (56) of 2000 amended the Law of Estate Lease No. (87) of 1979 to

give greater rights to residential landlords to terminate leases beginning in October of

2003,

Understanding that the current economic conditions created by the former regime limit

the ability of many Iraqi people to pay rent in a timely manner or incur significant

increases in rental rates,

Concerned that widespread eviction of tenants will have a destabilizing effect on the

security and well-being of Iraqi citizens,

Realizing that landlords can enforce rent collection through Iraqi courts,

Desiring to balance the rights and obligations between landlords and tenants in a fair

manner,

I hereby promulgate the following:

Section 1

Extension of Current Leases

Article 15 of Law No. (56) of 2000, Amendment to the Law of Estate Lease No. (87)

of 1979, is amended as follows:

(a) Article 15, Paragraph 2 is amended to provide that the right specified in Article 4,

Paragraph 5 of the Law of Estate Lease to request an assessment of the property

for the purpose of adjusting the rental rate shall not be exercisable before 16

October 2004.

(b) Article 15, Paragraph 3(A) (56) of 2000 is amended to provide that leases in

existence for 12 or more years shall not be terminated, at the instance of the

landlord, in the absence of other reasons authorized by law, before 16 October

2004.

CP A/ORD/7 September 2003/29 1
Section 2

Limitation of Eviction Remedy

1) The remedy of eviction under Article 17, Paragraph 1 of the Law of Estate Lease, as

amended by Article 10 of Law No. (56) of 2000, allowing landlords to evict tenants

who fail to pay rent when due, is suspended for failures to pay the rent due for any

period during the months of April to December 2003 inclusive.

2) Tenants remain obligated to pay rent as it becomes due. Tenants who fail to pay rent

when due violate their contractual obligations. These obligations may be enforced by

recourse to the courts for the collection of sltch debts.

Section 3

Entry into Force

This Order shall enter into force on the date of signature.

/

I

V'-

CP A/ORD/7 September 2003/29 2

L. Paul Bremer, Administrator

Coalition Provisional Authority
#### § 1500.108 OMB control number.

The control number assigned to the information collection requirement in this subpart by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.,* is OMB control number 0605-0029.
§ 908.3 Activities subject to reporting. ( a ) The following, when conducted as weather modification activities, shall be subject to reporting: ( 1 ) Seeding or dispersing of any substance into clouds or fog, to alter drop size distribution, produce ice crystals or coagulation of droplets, alter the development of hail or lightning, or influence in any way the natural development cycle of clouds or their environment;
( 2 ) Using fires or heat sources to influence convective circulation or to evaporate fog;
( 3 ) Modifying the solar radiation exchange of the earth or clouds, through the release of gases, dusts, liquids, or aerosols into the atmosphere;
( 4 ) Modifying the characteristics of land or water surfaces by dusting or treating with powders, liquid sprays, dyes, or other materials;
( 5 ) Releasing electrically charged or radioactive particles, or ions, into the atmosphere;
( 6 ) Applying shock waves, sonic energy sources, or other explosive or acoustic sources to the atmosphere;
( 7 ) Using aircraft propeller downwash, jet wash, or other sources of artificial wind generation; or
( 8 ) Using lasers or other sources of electromagnetic radiation.
( b ) In addition to the activities listed above, other similar activities falling within the definition of weather modification as set forth in § 908.1 are also subject to reporting.
( c ) The requirement for reporting shall not apply to activities of a purely local nature that can reasonably be expected not to modify the weather outside of the area of operation. This exception is presently restricted to the use of lightning deflection or static discharge devices in aircraft, boats, or buildings, and to the use of small heat sources, fans, fogging devices, aircraft downwash, or sprays to prevent the occurrence of frost in tracts or fields planted with crops susceptible to frost or freeze damage. Also expected from the requirement for reporting are religious activities or other ceremonies, rites and rituals intended to modify the weather.
( d ) All activities noted in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are subject to initial reporting. However, after the Administrator has received initial notification of a planned activity, he may waive some of the subsequent reporting requirements. This decision to waive certain reporting requirements will be based on the general acceptability, from a technical or scientific viewpoint, of the apparatus and techniques to be used.
( e ) Other reporting exceptions may be made in the future by rule of the Administrator.
#### § 719.17 Post-hearing submissions.

All parties shall have the opportunity to file post-hearing submissions that may include findings of fact and conclusions of law, supporting evidence and legal arguments, exceptions to the ALJ's rulings or to the admissibility of evidence, and proposed orders and settlements.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7518

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

FREDDIE DOUGLAS WIDENER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-90-251, CA-98-2012-AW)

Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 17, 1999

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Freddie Douglas Widener, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Lee Evans,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

August 17, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on August 18, 1998. Pursuant to Rules

58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the

date that the order is entered on the docket sheet that we take as

the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.

Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-45 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Freddie Douglas Widener seeks to appeal the district court’s

order granting the Government’s motion to dismiss, dismissing his

motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998), and

denying his motion to amend the § 2255 motion. We have reviewed

the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Widener, Nos. CR-90-251, CA-98-2012-AW (D. Md.

Aug. 18, 1998).* 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.

DISMISSED
Form of Amendment to Restricted Share Units and Dividend Equivalent Rights Award


 Exhibit 10.3 
 Form of Amendment to Restricted Share Units 
 and Dividend Equivalent Rights Award Agreement under

 Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust’s 2006 – 2008 
 and 2007 – 2009 Restricted Share Unit Program 
 Each grantee under
Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust’s 2006 – 2008 Restricted Share Unit Program and 2007 – 2009 Restricted Share Unit Program will receive a memo informing him or her that Section 1(d) of their award agreement under such
program(s) have been modified to read as follows: 
 “Pursuant to Section 4(c) of the Program, if the Grantee’s employment with the
“Employer” (as defined in the Program) (i) is terminated by the Employer for reasons other than for “Cause” (as defined in the Program), (ii) is terminated by the Grantee for “Good Reason” (as defined in the
Program), (iii) terminates on account of the Grantee’s death, or (iv) terminates as a “Disability Termination” (as defined in the Program), in each case on or before the last day of the Measurement Period, the Grantee shall
nevertheless be eligible to receive Shares under the Program (or not) as though the Grantee had remained employed by the Employer through the end of the Measurement Period. If the Grantee’s employment with the Employer terminates for any other
reason, the Grantee shall forfeit all of the Base Units (and all of the Shares that may have become deliverable with respect to such Base Units) subject to the RSUs the Participant was granted under the Program.”
### Part C—State Flexibility Relating To Exchanges
#### § 923.22 Areas for preservation or restoration.

The management program must include procedures whereby specific areas may be designated for the purpose of preserving or restoring them for their conservation, recreational, ecological, historical or esthetic values, and the criteria for such designations.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Leta Vroman et al., Respondents, against William Van Alstyne, Appellant. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

Crapser, Bliss and Sehenck, JJ., concur; Hill, P. J., and Heffernan, J., dissent, on the authority of *Matter of Glielmi*v. *Netherland Dairy Co.*(254 N. Y. 60); *Matter of Zeh*v. *St. Francis de Sales*B. *C. Church*(288 N. Y. 511).
### Part F—Police Recruitment
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-40903 Summary Calendar

ALFREDO CASTRO-ALVAREZ,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

J. DOBRE, Warden,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas

(USDC No. 1:02-CV-343)

December 4, 2002

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Alfredo Castro-Alvarez (“Castro”), federal prisoner # 00612-

196, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for writ

of habeas corpus. In his petition, Castro alleged that his

169-month sentence for conspiring to possess heroin with intent to

distribute was so excessive as to constitute cruel and unusual

punishment. Castro asserts that the district court erred when it2

denied his petition without allowing him to file a supporting

memorandum. Castro’s argument is inconsistent with the plain

language of 28 U.S.C. § 2243, which authorizes a denial of a

petition for a writ of habeas corpus when it appears from the

application that the applicant is not entitled to the writ.

Castro’s allegation in his petition is a claim that the sentence

originally imposed is unconstit utional, and thus Castro has not

shown that the district court erred in concluding that Castro was

attempting to use his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition as a means of

obtaining 28 U.S.C. § 2255 relief. See Ojo v. INS , 106 F.3d 680,

683 (5th Cir. 1997). Castro has also not shown that the district

court erred in concluding that Castro had not met the requirements

of 28 U.S.C. § 2255's savings clause and therefore that Castro was

not entitled to relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 224 1. See ReyesRequena v. United States

, 243 F.3d 893, 901 (5th Cir. 2001).

Because the district court correctly concluded that Castro was not

entitled to relief, the district court properly denied Castro’s

petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2243.

The judgment of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED.