alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Jurnalul Oficial L 199/2018

| | ISSN 1977-0782 |
| --- | --- |
| Jurnalul Oficial
  al Uniunii Europene | L 199 |
| | |
| Ediţia în limba română | Legislaţie | Anul 617 august 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0782

Jurnalul Oficial

al Uniunii Europene

L 199

Ediţia în limba română

Legislaţie

Anul 617 august 2018

---

| Cuprins | | II   Acte fără caracter legislativ | Pagina |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | ACORDURI INTERNAŢIONALE |
| | * | Informații privind intrarea în vigoare a Acordului dintre Uniunea Europeană și Regatul Norvegiei privind cooperarea administrativă, combaterea fraudelor și recuperarea creanțelor în domeniul taxei pe valoarea adăugată | 1 |

Cuprins

II   Acte fără caracter legislativ

Pagina

ACORDURI INTERNAŢIONALE

*

Informații privind intrarea în vigoare a Acordului dintre Uniunea Europeană și Regatul Norvegiei privind cooperarea administrativă, combaterea fraudelor și recuperarea creanțelor în domeniul taxei pe valoarea adăugată

1

| RO | Actele ale căror titluri sunt tipărite cu caractere drepte sunt acte de gestionare curentă adoptate în cadrul politicii agricole şi care au, în general, o perioadă de valabilitate limitată.
  Titlurile celorlalte acte sunt tipărite cu caractere aldine şi sunt precedate de un asterisc. |
| --- | --- |

RO

Actele ale căror titluri sunt tipărite cu caractere drepte sunt acte de gestionare curentă adoptate în cadrul politicii agricole şi care au, în general, o perioadă de valabilitate limitată.

Titlurile celorlalte acte sunt tipărite cu caractere aldine şi sunt precedate de un asterisc.

---

II Acte fără caracter legislativ

ACORDURI INTERNAŢIONALE

| 7.8.2018 | RO | Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene | L 199/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2018

RO

Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene

L 199/1

---

Informații privind intrarea în vigoare a Acordului dintre Uniunea Europeană și Regatul Norvegiei privind cooperarea administrativă, combaterea fraudelor și recuperarea creanțelor în domeniul taxei pe valoarea adăugată

În urma semnării la 6 februarie 2018, Uniunea Europeană și Regatul Norvegiei și-au notificat reciproc (la 9 iulie 2018 și, respectiv, 26 iunie 2018) finalizarea procedurilor lor juridice interne menționate la articolul 44 alineatul (1) din acord (1).

1

Acordul intră în vigoare la 1 septembrie 2018 în temeiul articolului 44 alineatul (2) din acesta.

---

(1)  Acord între Uniunea Europeană și Regatul Norvegiei privind cooperarea administrativă, combaterea fraudelor și recuperarea creanțelor în domeniul taxei pe valoarea adăugată (JO L 195, 1.8.2018, p. 3).

1

---
Part 524 - Protection of Privacy and Freedom of Information       Subpart 524.1 - Protection of Individual Privacy                                                         524.103 Procedures.                                                                             Subpart 524.2 - Freedom of Information Act                                                         524.203 Policy.    **Parent topic:** General Services Administration Acquisition ManualSubpart 524.1 - Protection of Individual Privacy 	  524.103 Procedures. 		    (a) See 41 CFR 105-64, GSA Order CIO 2201.1, Privacy Act Program, and Privacy Act Program information available on Insite, when contracting for the design, development, or operation of a system of records on individuals. 				         				         					          (b)  The Office of the Chief Acquisition Officer (OCAO) will review every two years a random sample of contracts that provide for the maintenance of a system of records pursuant to OMB Circular A-130, Appendix 1.Subpart 524.2 - Freedom of Information Act 	  524.203 Policy. 		    (a)  See 41 CFR 105-60 and GSA FOIA procedures available on Insite, for requirements on making records available under FOIA. 				         				         					          (b)  The contracting officer shall notify the appropriate FOIA officer of the request.
#### Paul OVERSTREET, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.

Court, of Appeals of Kentucky.

April 25, 1950.

Montgomery & Montgomery for appellant. ''

A. E. Funk, Attorney General, and Wm. F. Simpson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Motion for an appeal from a judgment of the Casey Circuit Court, convicting movant of selling whisky in local option territory and imposing a $50 fine and confinement in the County Jail for thirty days. The motion is overruled, appeal denied, and the judgment is affirmed;
Subpart 5318.0 – SCOPE OF PART               **5318.001 Definition****Parent topic:** Part 5318 - Emergency Acquisitions
§ 23.159 Special rules for affiliates. ( a ) *Initial margin.* ( 1 ) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, a covered swap entity shall not be required to collect initial margin from a margin affiliate provided that the covered swap entity meets the following conditions: ( i ) The swaps are subject to a centralized risk management program that is reasonably designed to monitor and to manage the risks associated with the inter-affiliate swaps; and
( ii ) The covered swap entity exchanges variation margin with the margin affiliate in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section.
( 2 ) ( i ) A covered swap entity shall post initial margin to any margin affiliate that is a swap entity subject to the rules of a Prudential Regulator in an amount equal to the amount that the swap entity is required to collect from the covered swap entity pursuant to the rules of the Prudential Regulator.
( ii ) A covered swap entity shall not be required to post initial margin to any other margin affiliate pursuant to §§ 23.150 through 23.161.
( b ) *Variation margin.* Each covered swap entity shall post and collect variation margin with each margin affiliate that is a swap entity or a financial end user in accordance with all applicable provisions of §§ 23.150 through 23.161.
( c ) *Foreign margin affiliates.* ( 1 ) For purposes of this section, the term outward facing margin affiliate means a margin affiliate that enters into swaps with third parties.
( 2 ) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, each covered swap entity shall collect initial margin in accordance with all applicable provisions of §§ 23.150 through 23.161 from each margin affiliate that meets the following criteria: ( i ) The margin affiliate is a financial end user;
( ii ) The margin affiliate enters into swaps with third parties, or enters into swaps with any other margin affiliate that, directly or indirectly (including through a series of transactions), enters into swaps with third parties, for which the provisions of §§ 23.150 through 23.161 would apply if any such margin affiliate were a swap entity; and
( iii ) Any such outward facing margin affiliate is located in a jurisdiction that the Commission has not found to be eligible for substituted compliance with regard to the provisions of §§ 23.150 through 23.161 and does not collect initial margin for such swaps in a manner that would comply with the provisions of §§ 23.150 through 23.161.
( 3 ) The custodian for initial margin collected pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section may be the covered swap entity or a margin affiliate of the covered swap entity.
#### § 171.11 Sanctions.

In the event a party fails to fulfill his obligations under these Rules, the Commission may impose appropriate sanctions including dismissal of the appeal or summary reversal of the decision under appeal. Sanctions may be imposed on the motion of a party or on the Commission's own motion.
#### Domenick Fulco, Respondent, v. Jennie Fulco, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Holán, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ.
#### Renee R. Motyka, as Administratrix of the Estate of Michael Motyka, Deceased, Respondent, v. City of Oswego, Appellant.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted and question for review certified. Present — McCurn, P. J., Vaughan, Kimball, Wheeler and Van Duser, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 1013.]

6
§ 23.434 Recommendations to counterparties—institutional suitability. ( a ) A swap dealer that recommends a swap or trading strategy involving a swap to a counterparty, other than a swap dealer, major swap participant, security-based swap dealer, or major security-based swap participant, must: ( 1 ) Undertake reasonable diligence to understand the potential risks and rewards associated with the recommended swap or trading strategy involving a swap; and
( 2 ) Have a reasonable basis to believe that the recommended swap or trading strategy involving a swap is suitable for the counterparty. To establish a reasonable basis for a recommendation, a swap dealer must have or obtain information about the counterparty, including the counterparty's investment profile, trading objectives, and ability to absorb potential losses associated with the recommended swap or trading strategy involving a swap.
( b ) *Safe harbor.* A swap dealer may fulfill its obligations under paragraph (a)(2) of this section with respect to a particular counterparty if: ( 1 ) The swap dealer reasonably determines that the counterparty, or an agent to which the counterparty has delegated decision-making authority, is capable of independently evaluating investment risks with regard to the relevant swap or trading strategy involving a swap;
( 2 ) The counterparty or its agent represents in writing that it is exercising independent judgment in evaluating the recommendations of the swap dealer with regard to the relevant swap or trading strategy involving a swap;
( 3 ) The swap dealer discloses in writing that it is acting in its capacity as a counterparty and is not undertaking to assess the suitability of the swap or trading strategy involving a swap for the counterparty; and
( 4 ) In the case of a counterparty that is a Special Entity, the swap dealer complies with § 23.440 where the recommendation would cause the swap dealer to act as an advisor to a Special Entity within the meaning of § 23.440(a).
( c ) A swap dealer will satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this section if it receives written representations, as provided in § 23.402(d), that: ( 1 ) In the case of a counterparty that is not a Special Entity, the counterparty has complied in good faith with written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that the persons responsible for evaluating the recommendation and making trading decisions on behalf of the counterparty are capable of doing so; or
( 2 ) In the case of a counterparty that is a Special Entity, satisfy the terms of the safe harbor in § 23.450(d).
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No . FAA - 2013 - 0352 Directorate ID : 2012 - SW - 063 - AD Helicopter Model: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Model S - 92A Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 24 Helicopters in the US Reg istry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to ensure the No. 1 engine forward firewall center fire extinguisher discharge tube would allow for complete coverage of an extinguishing agent in the No. 1 engine compartment area , ensure that a fire woul d be extinguished and prevent the loss of helicopter control. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 0 Labor per Helicopter ( 2 work- hour x $ 8 5 /workhour for the modification) Labor per Helicopter (1 work- hour x $85/work hour for the inspection) $ 170 $8 5 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 255 Total US Fleet Cost $ 6,120 Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Michael Schwetz
#### Hettie C. Barrows v. Fidelity and Casualty Company.

Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals granted. Order to be settled on notice. Present—Clarke, P. J., Scott, Smith, Page and Davis, JJ.
4.2305 Waivers.

(a) An executive agency required to comply with a FASCSA order may submit a request that the

order or some of its provisions not apply to—

(1) The agency;

(2) Specific actions of the agency or a specific class of acquisitions;

(3) Actions of the agency for a period of time before compliance with the order is practicable; or

(4) Other activities, as appropriate, that the requesting agency identifies.

(b) A request for waiver shall be submitted by the executive agency in writing to the official that

issued the order, unless other instructions for submission are provided by the applicable FASCSA

order.

(c) The request for waiver shall provide the following information for the issuing official to review

and evaluate the request, including—

(1) Identification of the applicable FASCSA order;

(2) A description of the exception sought, including, if limited to only a portion of the order, a

description of the order provisions from which an exception is sought;

(3) The name or a description sufficient to identify the covered article or the product or service

provided by a source that is subject to the order from which an exception is sought;

(4) Compelling justification for why an exception should be granted, such as the impact of the order

on the agency's ability to fulfill its mission-critical functions, or considerations related to the national

interest, including national security reviews, national security investigations, or national security

agreements;

(5) Any alternative mitigations to be undertaken to reduce the risks addressed by the FASCSA order;

and

(6) Any other information requested by the issuing official.

(d) The contracting officer, in accordance with agency procedures and working with the program

office or requiring activity, shall decide whether to pursue a waiver or to make award to an offeror

that does not require a waiver in accordance with the procedures at 4.2304(f). If a waiver is being

pursued, then the contracting officer may not make an award until written approval is obtained that

the waiver has been granted.

Parent topic: Subpart 4.23 Federal Acquisition Security Council.
### §16781. Repealed. Pub. L. 111–314, §6, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3444

Section, Pub. L. 109–155, title VI, §601, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2931, related to decreasing the risks associated with orbital debris. See section 31501 of Title 51, National and Commercial Space Programs.
###### Editorial Note on Part 240

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 240 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 240.12f-6 [Reserved]
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Kachurin Drug Company, Petitioner, and Surn Singh Lachhman Singh, Respondent. In the Matter of Eva Kachurin et al., as Executors of Philip Kachurin, Deceased, for an Order to Confirm an Award by Arbitrators, Respondents. Kuldip Singh et al., Copartners Trading under the Name of Surn Singh Lachhman Singh, at Amritsar, India, Appellants.

No opinion. Settle order on notice. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 6506

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
MANNY LIZARDO , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Anthony John Trenga , Senior District Judge. ( 1:18

- cr - 00426

- AJT

- 2 )

Submitted : October 14, 2021 Decided: October 18, 2021

Before DIAZ and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Manny Lizardo, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Manny Lizardo appeals the dis trict court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) (i) , as amended by the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. Having reviewed the record and finding no reversible err or, we affirm the decision of the district court

. See
United States v. Lizardo , No. 1:18

- cr - 00426

- AJT

- 2 ( E.D. Va. Mar. 22, 2021 ). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Pauline Baker and Alvin Kay, Appellants, et al., Defendants.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Shientag, JJ.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsFlow Quality Survey of the 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel (2015 Test) Prior to the 9- by 15-Foot Acoustic Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Acoustic Improvement ModificationsPrior to the NASA Glenn Research Center 9- by 15-Foot Low-Speed Wind Tunnel (9x15 LSWT) undergoing significant structural and acoustic modifications beginning in 2017, a flow quality survey (FQS) was conducted to characterize the flow quality of the 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel (8x6 SWT) test section and facility air dryer. The data from this FQS will be compared to data collected during a FQS following the completion of the 9x15 LSWT Acoustic Improvement Modifications. This document contains only the FQS data collected in November 2015 using the 16-inch-diameter cone cylinder and a set of twenty air dryer bed wind anemometers. The ability to reach the extents of the 8x6 SWT operating envelope with a large blockage model was verified through the 16-inch-diameter cone cylinder tests. The flow uniformity and angularity at the entrance of the facility air dryer was assessed and quantified using the air dryer bed wind anemometers.Document ID20180007180Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsJohnson, Aaron M.*(Jacobs Technology, Inc. Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredOctober 30, 2018Publication DateOctober 1, 2018Subject CategoryAeronautics (General)Research And Support Facilities (Air)Report/Patent NumberGRC-E-DAA-TN54197NASA/CR-2018- 219880E-19503Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 147016.03.03.04.01CONTRACT_GRANT: NNC15BA02BDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.KeywordsFlow Quality SurveyAvailable DownloadsNameType20180007180.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 94-41085

Summary Calendar

__________________

MACIEJ RYBICKI,

BOGNA RYBICKI,

KATARZYNA RYBICKI,

AGATA RYBICKI,

 Petitioners,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION

SERVICE,

 Respondent.

- - - - - - - - - -

Petition for Review of an Order of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals

A28-990-182/183/184/185

- - - - - - - - - -

December 20, 1995

Before KING, SMITH, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Rybickis petitioned this court to review the decision of

the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing an appeal of

the Immigration Judge's decision denying their applications for

asylum and withholding of deportation. They argue that there was

not substantial evidence to support the BIA's conclusion that 
No. 94-41085

-2-

reasonable persons in their circumstances would not fear

persecution in Poland and that there was little likelihood of

present or future persecution that would warrant asylum or

withholding of deportation. We have reviewed the record and the

BIA's decision and find that the evidence does not compel

reversal of the BIA's determination. Chun v. INS, 40 F.3d 76, 78

(5th Cir. 1994).

 PETITION DENIED.
RESPONSE SHEET
TO: Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary
FROM: Commissioner Ostendorff

SUBJECT: SECY-16-0070: INTEGRATED STRATEGY TO
MODERNIZE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION’S DIGITAL INSTRUMENTATION AND
CONTROL REGULATORY INFRASTRUCTURE

Approved XX_Disapproved Abstain Not Participating
COMMENTS: Below XX_ Attached None

| approve implementation of the digital |&C Action Plan to modernize the NRC’s digital 1&C
regulatory infrastructure. | fully support the staff's plan to engage the industry in demonstration
activities and table top exercises to ensure that the desired objectives are accomplished. The
staff should continue to encourage industry to support these efforts to test planned processes
and guidance before they are finalized for implementation. The staff has committed to consult
with the Commission if any potential policy issues are identified. | encourage the staff to bring
any such policy issues to the Commission early in the process. Lastly, the paper states that
shortfalls in the FY 2016 and FY 2017 budgets will be addressed through the add/shed process.
These activities have been prioritized as high and should continue to receive high priority in
future budgeting decisions.

Entered in STARS Lttteedf,
Yes X Signature , 7
fie hit

Date
Exhibit 99.3



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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Coca-Cola Company (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 (the "Report"), I, Douglas N.
Daft, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

  (1)  to my knowledge, 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.



                                        /s/ DOUGLAS N. DAFT
                                        -------------------
                                        Douglas N. Daft
                                        Chairman of the Board of Directors and
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        August 12, 2002
#### § 301.3 English language requirements.

All information required under the act and rules and regulations to appear on labels, invoices, and in advertising, shall be set out in the English language. If labels, invoices or advertising matter contain any of the required information in a language other than English, all of the required information shall appear also in the English language. The provisions of this section shall not apply to advertisements in foreign language newspapers or periodicals, but such advertising shall in all other respects comply with the act and regulations.