alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 585.216 How are bidding credits awarded and used? ( a ) BOEM will determine the highest bid, taking into account the combined value of the monetary (cash) component and the non-monetary component(s), represented by bidding credits. The PSN and FSN will explain the following details, if bidding credit(s) are available for that auction: ( 1 ) Eligibility and application requirements;
( 2 ) The value of each available bidding credit, which will be either a sum certain or a percentage of the bid; and
( 3 ) Procedures for applying each available bidding credit to bids submitted during the auction.
( b ) Eligibility for bidding credits must be established in advance of any lease auction, in accordance with the specifications of the FSN. Such eligibility may be based on actions that the bidder has already undertaken or actions that it has committed to undertake in the future, provided that BOEM has agreed to the terms by which such a commitment will be made. BOEM may offer bidding credits for any of the following: ( 1 ) Power purchase agreements;
( 2 ) Eligibility for, or applicability of, renewable energy credits or subsidies;
( 3 ) Development agreements by a potential lessee that facilitate shared transmission solutions and grid interconnection;
( 4 ) Technical merit, timeliness, or financing and economic considerations;
( 5 ) Environmental considerations, public benefits, or compatibility with State and local needs;
( 6 ) Agreements or commitments by the developer that would facilitate OCS renewable energy development or other OCSLA goals; or
( 7 ) Any other factor or criteria to further development of offshore renewable energy, as identified by BOEM in the PSN and FSN.
( c ) Before the auction, bidders seeking to use bidding credits must establish that they meet the eligibility criteria for each bidding credit according to the FSN provisions.
( d ) Before the auction, BOEM will determine each bidder's eligibility for bidding credits, and the value of those bidding credits, and will inform each eligible bidder of the value of the bidding credits to which it may be entitled.
( e ) A provisional winner who is awarded bidding credits must pay an amount equal to the cash component of its winning bid less any bid deposit retained by BOEM under § 585.501.
§ 556.202 How does BOEM start the Five Year program preparation process? To begin preparation of the Five Year program, BOEM invites and considers nominations for any areas to be included or excluded from leasing, by doing the following: ( a ) BOEM prepares and makes public official protraction diagrams and leasing maps of OCS areas. In any area properly included in the official Five Year diagrams and maps, any area not already leased for oil and gas may be offered for lease.
( b ) BOEM invites and considers suggestions and relevant information from governors of States, local governments, industry, Federal agencies, and other interested parties, through a publication of a request for information in the Federal Register. Any local government must first submit its comments on the request for information to its State governor before sending the comments to BOEM.
( c ) BOEM sends a letter to the governor of each affected State asking the governor to identify specific laws, goals, and policies that should be considered. Each State governor, as well as the Department of Commerce, is requested to identify the relationship between any oil and gas activity and the State under sections 305 and 306 of the CZMA, 16 U.S.C. 1454 and 1455.
( d ) BOEM asks the Department of Energy for information on regional and national energy markets and transportation networks.
## Subtitle I—General
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,821

EX PARTE JEFFERY DALE CHAMBERLAIN, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. F0916778-A IN THE 420th DISTRICT COURT

FROM NACOGDOCHES COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of one count of

possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and one count of possession of a certain

chemical with intent to manufacture a controlled substance. He was sentenced to twenty years’

imprisonment in each count. 

Applicant contends that he was deprived of his meaningful right to a direct appeal because

his counsel, through no fault of his own, failed to timely file a notice of appeal. 

The trial court has determined that counsel, through no fault of his own, failed to timely file
2

a notice of appeal. We find that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time appeal

of the judgment of conviction in Cause No. F0916778-A from the 420th District Court of

Nacogdoches County. Applicant is ordered returned to that time at which he may give a written

notice of appeal so that he may then, with the aid of counsel, obtain a meaningful appeal. Within

ten days of the issuance of this opinion, the trial court shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. 

If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall immediately

appoint an attorney to represent Applicant on direct appeal. All time limits shall be calculated as if

the sentence had been imposed on the date on which the mandate of this Court issues. We hold that,

should Applicant desire to prosecute an appeal, he must take affirmative steps to file a written notice

of appeal in the trial court within 30 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division. 

Delivered: June 20, 2012

Do not publish
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2023218EN.01001001.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 21.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 218/10 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.11137 – EMIL FREY FRANCE / SACAPUCE / JAM PROD / GROUPE KERTRUCKS FINANCE)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 218/07)

1.

On 9 June 2023, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2023218EN.01001001-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Emil Frey France (‘Emil Frey’, Switzerland), belonging to the Emil Frey Group, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Sacapuce (France), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Jam Prod (France), and |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Groupe Kertrucks Finance (‘GKF’, France). |

Emil Frey, Sacapuce and Jam Prod will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of GKF.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Emil Frey is active in France in the retail sale of new and second-hand motor vehicles, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Sacapuce is a financial holding company, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Jam Prod is a financial holding company, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | GKF is the management holding company of Groupe Kertrucks. Groupe Kertrucks is active in the sale and leasing of industrial vehicles, and the provision of associated services. |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2023218EN.01001001-E0002), it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.11137 – EMIL FREY FRANCE / SACAPUCE / JAM PROD / GROUPE KERTRUCKS FINANCE

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Postal address:

| |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2023218EN.01001001-E0001)  [OJ L 24 of 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2023218EN.01001001-E0002)  [OJ C 366 of 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
Exhibit 23

                       Consent of Independent Accountants

Board of Directors
Greene County Bancshares, Inc.


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  registration  statement of
Greene County  Bancshares,  Inc. on Form S-8 (File No.  333-08609) of our report
dated January 28, 2000, on our audits of the consolidated  financial  statements
of Greene County Bancshares, Inc. as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and for each
of the years in the three year period ended  December 31, 1999,  which report is
included in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP


Knoxville, Tennessee
March 24, 2000
§ 725.22 Financial management. ( a ) The agency shall account for grant funds in accordance with the requirements of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102. An agency shall use generally accepted accounting principles and practices, consistently applied. Accounting for grant funds must be accurate and current.
( b ) The agency shall adequately safeguard all funds, property, and other assets and shall assure that they are used solely for authorized purposes.
( c ) The agency shall provide a comparison of actual amounts spent with budgeted amounts for each grant.
( d ) When advances are made by a letter-of-credit method, the agency shall make drawdowns from the U.S. Treasury through its commercial bank as closely as possible to the time of making the disbursements.
( e ) The agency shall support accounting records by source documentation.
( f ) The agency shall design a systematic method to assure timely and appropriate resolution of audit findings and recommendations.
#### § 921.816 Performance standards—surface mining activities.

Part 816 of this chapter, *Permanent Program Performance Standards—Surface Mining Activities,* shall apply to any person who conducts surface coal mining and reclamation operations.
Exhibit 31

Certifications



I, Andrew V. Ippolito, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Discovery Oil, LTD.



2.

Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly  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 quarterly report.



4.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:



a.

designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

b.

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the Evaluation Date); and

c.

presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



5.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operations of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b.

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and



6.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date:  August 14, 2003



/s/Andrew V. Ippolito

Andrew V. Ipploito

President, Director and Chief Financial Officer
### §3308a. Provision of certain information to Government Accountability Office by National Reconnaissance Office

#### (a) In general

The Director of the National Reconnaissance Office shall provide to the Comptroller General of the United States, in a timely manner, access to the cost, schedule, and performance information the Comptroller General requires to conduct assessments, as required by any of the appropriate congressional committees, of programs of the National Reconnaissance Office.

#### (b) Appropriate congressional committees defined

In this section, the term "appropriate congressional committees" means—

(1) the congressional defense committees; and

(2) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

(Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1620, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2596.)

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

#### "Congressional Defense Committees" Defined

Congressional defense committees means the Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives, see section 3 of Pub. L. 114–328, 130 Stat. 2025. See note under section 101 of Title 10, Armed Forces.
###### Editorial Note on Part 779

#### Editorial Note:

At 82 FR 54948, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 779 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93327, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 779.2 Objectives.

The objectives of this part are to ensure that each application provides to the regulatory authority a complete and accurate description of the environmental resources that may be impacted or affected by proposed surface mining activities.

[44 FR 15354, Mar. 13, 1979, as amended at 81 FR 93327, Dec. 20, 2016; 82 FR 54948, Nov. 17, 2017]
Appeal No. 77-26.

#### Raymond Rodriques *v.*Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation.

*Lovett & Linder, Ltd., Raul L. Lovett,*for petitioner.

*Quinn, Cuzzone & Ceremia, Bruce Q. Morin,*for respondent.

The petition to enforce the decree of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission is denied, without prejudice.
§ 77.602 Permanent splicing of trailing cables. When permanent splices in trailing cables are made, they shall be: ( a ) Mechanically strong with adequate electrical conductivity;
( b ) Effectively insulated and sealed so as to exclude moisture; and,
( c ) Vulcanized or otherwise made with suitable materials to provide good bonding to the outer jacket.
#### DE ZAVALA v. ROYALINER.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

November 18, 1903.)

1. Brokers—Commissions—Sale—Procuring Cause.

A broker was not entitled to commissions for the sale of a leasehold where he merely brought the parties together, but did not cause them to agree upon terms, which was not done until some time later, and through the intervention of another broker, who effected an agreement upon a basis other than that which was submitted by the first broker.

¶ 1. See Brokers, vol. 8, Cent. Dig. § 82.

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Tenth District.

Action by Henry De Zavala against Maurice Royaliner. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.

Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and BISCHOFF and BLANCHARD, JJ.

Morris S. Hart, for appellant.

Mulqueen & Mulqueen, for respondent.

BLANCHARD, J.

We do not think it can be said that under the evidence produced the plaintiff was entitled to recover. The action is brought to recover upon an assigned claim for broker’s commission. The testimony of the plaintiff is to the effect that he secured the defendant’s leasehold for sale, and offered it, at the price named by the defendant, to the party who subsequently became the purchaser. The evidence, however, fails to show that plaintiff’s assignor was the procuring cause of the sale.

It appears that although the parties were originally brought together by the plaintiff’s assignor, still, at that time, the parties had not agreed upon'terms. Subsequently, and some weeks later, the *970matter was taken up by another broker, who finally consummated the sale by bringing the parties to terms upon a basis other than that which was submitted originally to the plaintiff by the defendant, and by the plaintiff submitted to the purchaser. The efforts of the plaintiff’s assignor were not crowned with success, and it was left to another broker to bring the transaction to a successful termination. As was said by Justice Finch in Sibbald v. B. J. Co., 83 N. Y. 378-383, 38 Am. Rep. 441, *“A*broker is never entitled to commissions for unsuccessful efforts.” The learned justice further says, “It matters not that, after his failure and the termination of his agency, what he had done proves of use and benefit to the principal.” And so, in the present case, we are of the opinion that the plaintiff has failed to establish his right to the commission.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event. All concur.
# C_2023344EN.01011901.xml

| 29.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 344/119 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 344/119

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.11267 – SMRP / DR SCHNEIDER GROUP)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 344/08)

On 22 September 2023, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M11267. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M11267. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  
  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
MEMORANDUM

Subject: Estimates of the number of retail stations offering E85

From: David Korotney , U.S. EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality

To: EPA Air Docket EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 201 5

- 0111

One of the elements of an analysis of the volume of E85 that can be consumed is the number of retail stations that are expected to offer E85. To this end, we have evaluated two

sources of information on E85 stations:

• DOE's Alternative Fuels Data Center ( www.afdc.energy.gov/locator/stations/ )

• E85prices.com

Historical data from the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) was provided by the Clean Cities Technical Response Service, and included E85 station counts by state and month for the period June 2007 through April 2 0 14

. 1 Historical data from E85prices.c om was derived through a web archival service ( http://archive.org/web/ ). The nationwide E85 station counts

from both sources are shown below for the period January 2009

- April 2014

.

T he disparity between the two sets of E85 station counts can be traced to differences in the purposes of the two databases :

1 The nationwide E85 station count was also available through August 2014 from the AFDC website, but this data did not include station counts by state.• E85prices.com is a decentralized forum for users to record E85 and gasoline prices at specific retail stations. There does not appear to be any ongoing management of the

database by a single person or group to verify that a retail station offering E85 shou ld remain in the database long after the last price data for that station is recorded.

• The AFDC database is a centralized database that includes periodic reviews to ensure

that the information i t contains is accurate. It is clear from the data provided on E85 station counts by month and state that the E85 stations included in the AFDC database fluctuated up and down over time , presumably reflecting deletions as well as

additions to the database.

The E85prices.com database is likely to include all stations that have ever offered E85 rather than those stations that currently offer E85. As a result, the data from AFDC is likely to more

accurate ly reflect the number of stations current ly offering E85 . To evaluate this assumption, we adjusted the data from E85prices.com to include those occasions wherein the number of E85 stations in a given state declined from one month to the next according to the AFDC data . The

result was that the E 85prices.com data converge s with the AFDC data

.

Based on this analysis, the AFDC database appears to provide a more accurate estimate of the number of retail stations that actually offer E85.