alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019336EN.01000101.xml

| 7.10.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 336/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.10.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 336/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

4 October 2019

(2019/C 336/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0979 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 117,23 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4666 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89045 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,8105 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0913 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 135,70 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,9915 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,741 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 332,76 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3245 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7480 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,2505 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6247 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4612 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,6099 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7350 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5139 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 312,32 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,6446 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,8497 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4215 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 531,39 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5953 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,811 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 71,1420 |
| THB | Thai baht | 33,437 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,4726 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,5087 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 77,8415 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0979

JPY

Japanese yen

117,23

DKK

Danish krone

7,4666

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89045

SEK

Swedish krona

10,8105

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0913

ISK

Iceland króna

135,70

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,9915

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,741

HUF

Hungarian forint

332,76

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3245

RON

Romanian leu

4,7480

TRY

Turkish lira

6,2505

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6247

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4612

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,6099

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7350

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5139

KRW

South Korean won

1 312,32

ZAR

South African rand

16,6446

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,8497

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4215

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 531,39

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5953

PHP

Philippine peso

56,811

RUB

Russian rouble

71,1420

THB

Thai baht

33,437

BRL

Brazilian real

4,4726

MXN

Mexican peso

21,5087

INR

Indian rupee

77,8415

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
Exhibit 23 - Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We  consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual  Report
(Form  10-K)  of Burr-Brown Corporation of our report dated  January
22,  1998,  (except  for  the note entitled  Accounting  Policies  -
Earnings  per  Share,  as to which the date is February  23,  1998),
included  in  the 1997 Annual Report to Stockholders of   Burr-Brown
Corporation.

Our  audits also include the financial statement schedule of   Burr-
Brown  Corporation  listed  in  Item 14(a).  This  schedule  is  the
responsibility  of the Company's management. Our responsibility   is
to  express  an  opinion based on our audits. In  our  opinion,  the
financial  statement schedule referred to above, when considered  in
relation  to  the  basic  financial statements  taken  as  a  whole,
presents  fairly in all material respects the information set  forth
therein.

We   also  consent  to  the  incorporation  by  reference   in   the
Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 33-65866) pertaining  to   the
Burr-Brown   Corporation   Stock  Incentive   Plan   and   in    the
Registration  Statement (Form S-8, No. 33-12185) pertaining  to  the
Burr-Brown  Corporation Future Investment Trust of our report  dated
January  22, 1998, (except for the note entitled Accounting Policies
-  Earnings  per Share, as to which the date is February 23,  1998),
with  respect  to the consolidated financial statements incorporated
herein  by  reference,  and  our report included  in  the  preceding
paragraph with respect to the financial statement schedule  included
in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Burr-Brown Corporation.

Ernst & Young LLP
Tucson, Arizona
March 24, 1997
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Carmine Franzese, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Kings County, rendered June 5, 1961, after trial upon a jury verdict, convicting him of criminal contempt of court, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed on the law and new trial ordered. We have considered the facts; we affirm the findings of fact implicit in the jury’s verdict; and we would affirm the conviction if we did not reverse on the law. The indictment charged that when the defendant appeared before the Grand Jury as a witness, he refused to answer a certain question on the ground that Ms answer might tend to incriminate him, and he persisted in such refusal notwithstanding the direction by the Grand Jury that he answer the question. It was established at the

*805trial that the Grand Jury, in connection with said direction to defendant, had offered him immunity and had given him a three-week interval to consult counsel. Defendant did not testify at the trial and produced no evidence in his defense. In our opinion, the prosecutor’s statements in his summation to the jury: (a) that the defendant told the Grand Jury that if he answered their questions his answers would be admissions that he had committed a crime, and (b) that “ the Grand Jury knows they are dealing with a man who is in crime, who is a criminal,” deprived defendant of a fair trial. We also believe that the trial court’s instruction to the jury that, as a matter of law, defendant “had no legal right whatsoever to refuse to answer that question,” was erroneous. Defendant was not required to answer the question unless, in connection with the grant of immunity, he was “fully and fairly informed as to the extent of the protection afforded by” section 2447 of the Penal Law *(People*v. *Brayer,*6 A D 2d 437, 440), and unless he had knowledge of the granting of immunity *(People*v. *Riela,*14 Misc 2d 213, 218-220, affd. 9 A D 2d 481, revd. on another ground 7 N Y 2d 571). Whether he was so informed and whether he had such knowledge were questions of fact for determination by the jury. Christ, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur; Beldoek, P. J., and Ughetta, J., dissent and vote to affirm the judgment, with the following memorandum: In our opinion, the charge when considered in its entirety was free from error. But even if it be assumed that there was some error in the charge or in the summation and that such error was not adequately corrected before the case was finally submitted to the jury, nevertheless, under all the circumstances here, we believe that such error did not affect any substantial right of the defendant and should be disregarded (Code Grim. Pro., § 542).
3424.170 Protection of human subjects. In this section, *research* means a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge. (34 CFR 97.102(d)) Research is considered to involve human subjects when a researcher obtains information about a living individual through intervention or interaction with the individual or obtains personally identifiable private information about an individual. Some categories of research are exempt in accordance with 34 CFR part 97. ( a ) The contracting officer must insert the provision in 3452.224-71 (Notice about research activities involving human subjects) in any solicitation where a resultant contract will include, or is likely to include, research activities involving human subjects covered under 34 CFR part 97.
( b ) The contracting officer must insert the clause at 3452.224-72 (Research activities involving human subjects) in any solicitation that includes the provision in 3452.224-71 (Notice about research activities involving human subjects) and in any resultant contract.
ATES L BUREAU OF STANDARDS

laneous Publication No. 155

Price 10 cents

sale by the Superintendent of >cuments, Washington, D. C.

.mission has ororthern portion

tveen the Eastern

nes so as to inlower peninsular

ire State of Ohio

e. This change

27, 1936.
)
Amendment, dated 10/21/09, to The CECONY, Inc. 2005 Executive Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.2.1 
 AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 
 TO THE 
 CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. 
 2005 EXECUTIVE INCENTIVE PLAN 
 DATED: October 21, 2009 
 Effective January 1, 2009 







 Pursuant to resolutions of the Board of Trustees of Consolidated Edison Company of New York,
Inc. (“CECONY”) adopted on May 18, 2009, the undersigned hereby approves the amendments to the Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. 2005 Executive Incentive Plan, as set forth below: 
 1. The PURPOSE is amended by adding the following at the end thereof: 
 Effective January 1, 2009, the Plan has been amended to include the position of Executive Vice President as an Executive Officer.

 2. ARTICLE I, DEFINITIONS, is amended as follows: 
 The definition of Executive Officer is amended by inserting the words “Executive Vice President” after “Chief Executive
Officer,” and before “Senior Vice President” in the second sentence to read as follows: 
 1.16    Executive Officer 
 shall mean an executive of the Company who holds the position of
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Executive Vice President, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, General Counsel, President and Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President—Business Shared Services, Senior Vice
President—Enterprise Shared Services, Senior Vice President—Public Affairs, or Vice President and General Auditor; an executive of Orange and Rockland Utilities Inc. who holds the title of President and Chief Executive Officer; or an
executive of CEI who holds the title of The Group President, Competitive Energy Businesses. 
  

 1 








 3. ARTICLE IV. DETERMINATION OF AWARDS, is amended as follows: 
 Subsection (b) of Section 4.05 Awards to Executive Officers, is amended by inserting the words “Executive Vice
President,” after the words “Chief Executive Officer,” and before “Senior Vice President” to read as follows: 
 (b) For the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Executive Vice President, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, and General Counsel. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this instrument this 21st day of October, 2009. 
  

	
	 /s/    Mary Adamo

	 Mary Adamo

	 Vice President—Human Resources and

	 Plan Director

	 The Consolidated Edison, Inc. Stock Purchase Plan



  

 2
Appendix Q Explanation of OPP Acceptability Criteria and Rejection Codes for ECOTOX Data Studies located and coded into ECOTOX must meet acceptability criteria, as established in the Interim Guidance of the Evaluation Criteria for Ecological Toxicity Data in the Open Literature, Phase I and II, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 16, 2004. Studies that do not meet these criteria are designated in the bibliography as “Accepted for ECOT OX but not OPP.” The intent of the acceptability criteria is to en sure data quality and verifiab ility. The criteria parallel criteria used in evaluating registrant-submitted studies. Specific criteria are listed below, along with the correspo nding rejection code.

· The paper does not report toxicology information for a chemical of concern to OPP; (Rej ection Code: NO COC) · The article is not published in E nglish language; (Rejection Code: NO FOREIGN) · The study is not presented as a fu ll article. Abstracts will not be considered; (Rejection Code: NO ABSTRACT) · The paper is not publicly availabl e document; (Rejection Code: NO NOT PUBLIC (typically not used, as any paper acquired from the ECOTOX holding or through the literature search is cons idered public) · The paper is not the primary sour ce of the data; (Rejection Code: NO REVIEW) · The paper does not report that treatment(s) were compared to an acceptable control; (Rejec tion Code: NO CONTROL) · The paper does not report an explic it duration of exposure; (Rejection Code: NO DURATION) · The paper does not report a conc urrent environmental chemical concentration/dose or applicati on rate; (Rejectio n Code: NO CONC) · The paper does not report the locatio n of the study (e.g., laboratory vs. field); (Rejection Code: NO LOCATION) · The paper does not report a biologica l effect on live, whole organisms; (Rejection Code: NO IN-VITRO) · The paper does not report the species that was tested; and this species can be verified in a reliable s ource; (Rejection Code: NO SPECIES) · The paper does not report effects a ssociated with exposure to a single chemical. (Rejection Code: NO MIXTURE) . It should be noted that all papers including data on pest icide mixtures are considered. Additionally, efficacy studies on target species are excluded and coded as NO TARGET.Data that originated from the OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database is coded as NO EFED. These data are already av ailable to the chemical team.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 28 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 28

 Designating January 27, 2017, as ``Earned Income Tax Credit Awareness 
                                 Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 30, 2017

Ms. Baldwin (for herself, Mr. Brown, Mr. Coons, Mr. Reed, Mrs. Shaheen, 
    Mr. Durbin, Ms. Warren, and Mr. Booker) submitted the following 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Designating January 27, 2017, as ``Earned Income Tax Credit Awareness 
                                 Day''.

Whereas the earned income tax credit is a refundable Federal tax credit 
        available to low- and moderate-income working families and individuals;
Whereas the earned income tax credit encourages and rewards work;
Whereas, in 2015, the earned income tax credit lifted approximately 6,500,000 
        people out of poverty, including approximately 3,300,000 children;
Whereas the earned income tax credit provides substantial economic benefit to 
        local economies; and
Whereas an estimated 20 percent of eligible workers do not claim the earned 
        income tax credit: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates Friday, January 27, 2017, as ``Earned Income 
        Tax Credit Awareness Day''; and
            (2) calls on Federal, State, and local agencies, community 
        organizations, nonprofit organizations, employers, and other 
        partners to help increase awareness about the earned income tax 
        credit and other refundable tax credits to ensure that all 
        eligible workers have access to the full benefits of the 
        credits.
                                 <all>
```
#### 352.270-11 Protection of Human Subjects—Research Involving Human Subjects Committee (RIHSC) Approval of Research Protocols Required.

As prescribed in HHSAR 370.304(c), the Contracting Officer shall insert the following clause:

# Protection of Human Subjects—Research Involving Human Subjects Committee (RIHSC) Approval of Research Protocols Required (DEC 2015)

(a) The Contractor agrees to protect the rights and welfare of human subjects involved in research under this contract by complying with 45 CFR part 46 and the clause at HHSAR 352.270-4b.

(b) Initial proof of compliance with 45 CFR part 46 shall consist of:

(1) A copy of a current Federal-wide Assurance on file with OHRP. The copy of a current Federal-wide Assurance shall be included with the Contractor's proposal;

(2) A letter from the Contractor's local IRB (the Institutional Review Board (IRB) specified in the Offeror's Assurance of Compliance) stating that it has reviewed and approved the proposed research protocol. The letter from the local IRB shall be submitted to the Contracting Office; and

(3) A copy of a letter from the RIHSC stating that it or its designee has reviewed and approved the proposed research protocol. This shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer within three business days of its issuance.

The Contractor shall not advertise for, recruit, or enroll human subjects, or otherwise commence any research involving human subjects under this contract, until RIHSC has reviewed and approved its research. The Contractor may commence other limited aspects of contract performance prior to receiving RIHSC or its designee approval of its proposed research protocol. Research involving human subjects may commence immediately upon the Contractor's receipt of RIHSC or its designee approval; however, the Contractor shall submit a copy of RIHSC's or its designee's letter of approval to the Contracting Officer within three business days of its receipt.

Failure to obtain RIHSC or its designee approval of proposed research protocols may result in the termination of this contract.

(c) The Contractor further agrees that:

(1) The Contractor will provide a letter from RIHSC, at least annually, stating that RIHSC or its designee has reviewed and approved the research protocols for research performed under this contract. This shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer for inclusion in the contract file.

(2) The Contractor will submit all proposed modifications and amendments to research protocols for research performed under this contract to RIHSC for review and approval. Modifications and amendments include, but are not limited, to changes to consent forms and advertising materials, and the addition or deletion of investigators. Changes may be instituted immediately after the Contractor has received both the local IRB and RIHSC or its designee approval (except when necessary to eliminate apparent immediate hazards to the subject); however the Contractor shall submit a copy of the letter evidencing RIHSC's or its designee's approval of the proposed changes to the Contracting Officer within three business days of its receipt.

(End of clause)
#### Flavin Benjamin, Administrator, *vs.*Patrick D. Smith.

April 11, 1890.

Beplevin — Omission to Claim Immediate Delivery. — The action of replevin is not changed into one for conversion by plaintiff omitting to claim .n immediate delivery under Gen. St. 1878, *c.*66, § 132.

Action brought in the district court for Eice county, the complaint alleging that since the decease of John Doyle, plaintiff’s intestate, the defendant, in Eice county, wrongfully and unlawfully took possession of certain described personal property, of the value of $600, owned by the decedent at the time of his death, and of which the plaintiff, as administrator, is entitled to immediate possession, and that the defendant now wrongfully detains the property at Le Sueur coun*147ty. The complaint properly alleges plaintiff’s appointment as administrator and a demand on defendant, and prays judgment for the immediate return and possession of the property, or for its value, with $25 damages for its detention. The plaintiff took no steps to obtain possession pending suit. Before answering the defendant demanded that the place of trial be changed to Le Sueur county, where he resided, and after answering moved the court to order such change, which motion was denied by *BucTcham,*J. The cause was thereafter tried before the same judge, with the following verdict: “We the jury find for the plaintiff, and assess his damages at the sum of $241.46.” The defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

*J. B. O'Malley*and *H. J. Peck,*for appellant.

*Thos. H. Quinn,*for respondent.

Gilfillan, C. J.

The action .for possession of personal property is commenced by the service of summons, as other actions are, and not, as was the former action of replevin, by writ requiring a seizure of the property. The statute (Gen. St. 1878, c. 66, § 132) leaves it optional with the plaintiff to claim an immediate delivery at the time of issuing the summons, or after that and before answer, or to waive that, and let the action proceed, the possession to be obtained upon execution after judgment. The character of the action is determined by the complaint, and not by the plaintiff claiming, or failing to claim, immediate delivery. If he waive his right to an immediate delivery, the action is not thereby changed to one for conversion merely. The action was therefore properly triable in the county of Bice, and the court correctly denied the motion for a change of venue. The evidence justified the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,408
<SECURITIES>                                     2,755
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,330
<ALLOWANCES>                                       825
<INVENTORY>                                     44,390
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               176,532
<PP&E>                                          58,357
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,287
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 257,342
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           66,905
<BONDS>                                         62,895
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,653
<OTHER-SE>                                     121,899
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   257,342
<SALES>                                        130,981
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               130,981
<CGS>                                           87,012
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   87,012
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                35,425<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,161
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,538
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,354
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,184
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,184
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .25
<FN>
<F1>OTHER EXPENSES- Includes $1,900 for the settlement of a lawsuit which
approximates $0.07 per share.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.9
 
 
 SECTION
1350 CERTIFICATION
 OF
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF CILCORP INC.
 (required
by Section 906 of the
 Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002)
 
 
 In
connection with the report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March
31, 2005 of CILCORP Inc. (the “Company”) as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I, Gary L. Rainwater,
chief executive officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:
 
 (1)
    The
      Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
      and
 
 (2)
    The
      information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 Dated:
May 10, 2005
 ****By:
    /s/ Gary L.
    RainwaterGary
      L. RainwaterChairman, President andChief
      Executive Officer(Principal Executive
Officer)