alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2023227EN.01004001.xml

| 14.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 227/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 227/40

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 172/2020

of 23 October 2020

amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms [2023/1747]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (“the EEA Agreement”), and in particular Articles 86 and 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | It is appropriate to continue the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement in Union actions funded from the general budget of the Union regarding the free movement of workers, coordination of social security schemes and measures for migrants, including migrants from third countries. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

It is appropriate to continue the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement in Union actions funded from the general budget of the Union regarding the free movement of workers, coordination of social security schemes and measures for migrants, including migrants from third countries.

| (2) | Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for that extended cooperation to take place from 1 January 2020, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for that extended cooperation to take place from 1 January 2020,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In paragraphs 5 and 13 of Article 5 of Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, the words “and 2019” are replaced by the words “, 2019 and 2020”.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following the last notification under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement (*1).

It shall apply from 1 January 2020.

Article 3

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, 23 October 2020.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Sabine MONAUNI

---

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
5.404-1 Release procedures.

(a) The HCA is the designee.

Parent topic: SUBPART 5.4 – RELEASE OF INFORMATION
###### Editorial Note on Part 61

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 61 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015, and at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

#### § 61.4 Communications.

Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk; Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's Offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Electronic submissions must be made in a manner that enables the NRC to receive, read, authenticate, distribute, and archive the submission, and process and retrieve it a single page at a time. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html*; by e-mail to *MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov*; or by writing the Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The guidance discusses, among other topics, the formats the NRC can accept, the use of electronic signatures, and the treatment of nonpublic information.

[73 FR 5725, Jan. 31, 2008, as amended at 74 FR 62683, Dec. 1, 2009; 79 FR 75740, Dec. 19, 2014; 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015]
# EUR-Lex - 31975L0036 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31975L0036

**Council Directive 75/36/EEC of 17 December 1974 supplementing Directive No 71/307/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to textile names **

*
Official Journal L 014 , 20/01/1975 P. 0015 - 0015 Finnish special edition: Chapter 15 Volume 1 P. 0200 Greek special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 3 P. 0031 Swedish special edition: Chapter 15 Volume 1 P. 0200 Spanish special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 4 P. 0053 Portuguese special edition Chapter 13 Volume 4 P. 0053 *

COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 17 December 1974 supplementing Directive No 71/307/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to textile names (75/36/EEC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 100 thereof;

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission;

Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament (1);

Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2);

Whereas Article 5 (1) of Council Directive No 71/307/EEC (3) of 26 July 1971 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to textile names must be supplemented by the addition of the Danish equivalent of the terms in that paragraph,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

A sixth indent shall be added to Article 5 (1) of Directive No 71/307/EEC:

"- Friskklippet uld."

Article 2

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 December 1974.

For the Council

The President

M. DURAFOUR (1)OJ No C 93, 7.8.1974, p. 86. (2)OJ No C 125, 16.10.1974, p. 52. (3)OJ No L 185, 16.8.1971, p. 16.
About this capture
Alexa Crawls
Alexa Internet
Wayback Machine
Alexa Crawl EH
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 26, 2012 

y0319 

Order 

 

March 26, 2012 

143948 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143948 

 COA: 305667 

Muskegon CC: 00-045110-FC 

MARLON DEWAYNE WALKER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 6, 2011 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
2007-1734.

#### State v. Silverman.

Hamilton App. No. C-060515. Discretionary appeal accepted; cause held for the decision in 2007-0265, *State v. Fulmer,*Lake App. No. 2005-L-137, 2006-Ohio-7015; and briefing schedule stayed.
#### Craig FULLER *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CA CR 06-1272

261 S.W.3d 452

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered September 6, 2007

*Bill Luppen,*for appellant.

No response.

Per Curiam.

Appellant Craig Fuller, by and through his attorney, has filed a motion for rule on clerk. His attorney, Bill Luppen, states in the motion that he erroneously appealed the court’s denial of his motion to suppress rather than the appellant’s judgment of conviction, which he recognizes as error under Rule 24.3 of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure.

This court clarified its treatment of motions for rule on clerk and motions for belated appeals in *McDonald v. State,*356 Ark. 106, 146 S.W.3d 883 (2004). There we said that there are only two possible reasons for an appeal not being timely perfected: either the party or attorney filing the appeal is at fault, or, there is “good reason.” *McDonald v. State,*356 Ark. at 116, 146 S.W.3d at 891. We explained:

> Where an appeal is not timely perfected, either the party or attorney filing the appeal is at fault, or there is good reason that the appeal was not timely perfected. The party or attorney filing the appeal is therefore faced with two options. First, where the party or attorney filing the appeal is at fault, fault should be admitted by affidavit filed with the motion or in the motion itself. There is no advantage in declining to admit fault where fault exists. Second, where the party or attorney believes that there is good reason the appeal was not perfected, the case for good reason can be made in the motion, and this court will decide whether good reason is present.

*470
      *Id.,*146 S.W.3d at 891 (footnote omitted). While this court no longer requires an affidavit admitting fault before we will consider the motion, an attorney should candidly admit fault where he has erred and is responsible for the failure to perfect the appeal. *See id.*

In accordance with *McDonald v. State, supra,*Mr. Luppen has candidly admitted fault. The motion is, therefore, granted. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

Motion granted.
228 So.2d 485

#### John ISTRE v. DIAMOND M. DRILLING COMPANY et al.

No. 50182.

Dec. 15, 1969.

In re: John Istre applying for certiorari or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Iberia. 226 So.2d 779.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                        5
<CIK>                                   0000764763
<NAME>          ELECTRONIC BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1
<CURRENCY>                                     USD

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                           SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1
<CASH>                                     129,817
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                            1,029,390
<ALLOWANCES>                              (147,474)
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         1,057,910
<PP&E>                                   1,486,810
<DEPRECIATION>                            (945,970)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           3,911,178
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    3,331,745
<BONDS>                                    866,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                              2,057,173
<COMMON>                                    13,988
<OTHER-SE>                              (2,358,228)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             3,911,178
<SALES>                                  5,366,312
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         5,366,312
<CGS>                                    2,435,109
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            4,600,017
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (73,096)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         145,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (1,740,918)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (1,740,918)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                            (1,856,783)
<EPS-BASIC>                                 (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.13)


</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 61
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 61 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015, and at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 61.22 Updating of application. ( a ) The application must be as complete as possible in the light of information that is available at the time of submittal.
( b ) The applicant shall supplement its application in a timely manner, as necessary, to permit the Commission to review, prior to issuance of a license, any changes in the activities proposed to be carried out or new information regarding the proposed activities.
[49 FR 9405, Mar. 12, 1984]
Amended Schedule 2.1 of Deferred Compensation and Benefits Trust Agt



 Exhibit 10.24 
 Schedule 2.1 to the Deferred Compensation and Benefits Trust Agreement 
 Benefit Plans and Other Arrangements Subject to Trust 
 (1) Sunoco,
Inc. Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”); 
 (2) Sunoco, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan; 
 (3) Sunoco, Inc. Pension Restoration Plan; 
 (4) Sunoco, Inc. Savings Restoration Plan. 
 (5) Sunoco, Inc. Special Executive
Severance Plan; 
 (6) The funding of the Sunoco, Inc. Special Employee Severance Plan necessary to provide benefits in
accordance with the terms of such Plan to only those employees then in grades 11 through 13. 
 (7) The entire funding for all
the Indemnification Agreements with the executives set forth below shall be Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) in the aggregate: 
  

							
	(1)	  	Anne-Marie Ainsworth	  	(16)	  	Brian P. MacDonald
	(2)	  	Michael J. Colavita	  	(17)	  	Joel H. Maness b
	(3)	  	Robert N. Deitz	  	(18)	  	Christopher J. Minnich
	(4)	  	Terence P. Delaney i	  	(19)	  	Ann C. Mulé
	(5)	  	Michael H. R. Dingus a	  	(20)	  	Paul A. Mulholland f
	(6)	  	John G. Drosdick c	  	(21)	  	Rolf D. Naku g
	(7)	  	Lynn L. Elsenhans	  	(22)	  	Marie A. Natoli
	(8)	  	Bruce G. Fischer	  	(23)	  	Robert W. Owens
	(9)	  	Peter J. Gvazdauskas	  	(24)	  	Bruce D. Rubin
	(10)	  	Marilyn Heffley	  	(25)	  	Thomas J. Scargle
	(11)	  	Michael J. Hennigan h	  	(26)	  	Michael J. Thomson
	(12)	  	Thomas W. Hofmann e	  	(27)	  	Charles K. Valutas d
	(13)	  	Vincent J. Kelley	  	(28)	  	Charmian Uy
	(14)	  	Joseph P. Krott	  	(29)	  	Dennis Zeleny
	(15)	  	Michael S. Kuritzkes	  		  	

  
  
 NOTES: 
  

	a.	Mr. Dingus retired as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective June 1, 2008. 


	b.	Mr. Maness stepped down as an Executive Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective July 9, 2007. He continued on a part-time basis as Strategic Advisor on
refining and supply issues reporting directly to the Company’s President, until his retirement from the Company, effective January 1, 2008. 


	c.	Mr. Drosdick retired as Chief Executive Officer and President of Sunoco, Inc., effective August 8, 2008. 


	d.	Mr. Valutas retired as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective September 1, 2008. 


	e.	Mr. Hofmann retired as Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	f.	Mr. Mulholland retired as Treasurer of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	g.	Mr. Naku ceased being a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	h.	Mr. Hennigan stepped down as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective May 15, 2009, at which time he accepted an executive officer position with a
Sunoco, Inc. subsidiary. 


	i.	Mr. Delaney ceased being Interim Chief Financial Officer of Sunoco, Inc., effective August 31, 2009.
Editorial Note on Part 63
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 63 appear at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 63.322 Human intrusion scenario. For the purposes of the analysis of human intrusion, DOE must make the following assumptions: ( a ) There is a single human intrusion as a result of exploratory drilling for groundwater;
( b ) The intruders drill a borehole directly through a degraded waste package into the uppermost aquifer underlying the Yucca Mountain repository;
( c ) The drillers use the common techniques and practices that are currently employed in exploratory drilling for groundwater in the region surrounding Yucca Mountain;
( d ) Careful sealing of the borehole does not occur, instead natural degradation processes gradually modify the borehole;
( e ) No particulate waste material falls into the borehole;
( f ) The exposure scenario includes only those radionuclides transported to the saturated zone by water (e.g., water enters the waste package, releases radionuclides, and transports radionuclides by way of the borehole to the saturated zone); and
( g ) No releases are included which are caused by unlikely natural processes and events.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RALPH WILSON LINGO, )

)

 Petitioner, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06-CV-703-MHT

)

WILLIE R. COLLINS, et al., )

)

 Respondents. )

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of the motion to withdraw acceptance and waiver filed by

Assistant Attorney General Rosa H. Davis on December 7, 2006 (Court Doc. No. 26), and

for good cause, it is

ORDERED that this motion be and is hereby GRANTED. 

Done this 7th day of December, 2006.

 /s/ Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 27 Filed 12/07/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### § 1710.119 Non-waiver of rights.

An employee's involuntary payment of all or any part of a debt collected under these regulations will not be construed as a waiver of any rights that the employee may have under 5 U.S.C. 5514 or any other provision of contract or law, unless there are statutes or contracts to the contrary.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 995 

To direct the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior 

to amend regulations for racial appropriateness. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2017 

Mr. JEFFRIES (for himself and Mr. CHABOT) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary 

of the Interior to amend regulations for racial appropriateness. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘21st Century Respect 

5 Act’’. 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 995 IH

1 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO REGULATIONS REQUIRED. 

2 (a) SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE.—The Secretary 

3 of Agriculture shall amend section 1901.202 of title 7, 

4 Code of Federal Regulations, for purposes of— 

5 (1) replacing the reference to the term ‘‘Negro 

6 or Black’’ with ‘‘Black or African American’’; 

7 (2) replacing the reference to the term ‘‘Span8 ish Surname’’ with ‘‘Hispanic’’; and 

9 (3) replacing the reference to the term ‘‘Ori10 ental’’ with ‘‘Asian American or Pacific Islander’’. 

11 (b) SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR.—The Secretary 

12 of the Interior shall amend section 906.2 of title 36, Code 

13 of Federal Regulations, for purposes of— 

14 (1) replacing the references to the term 

15 ‘‘Negro’’ with ‘‘Black or African American’’; 

16 (2) replacing the definition of ‘‘Negro’’ with the 

17 definition of ‘‘Black or African American’’ as ‘‘a per18 son having origins in any of the Black racial groups 

19 of Africa’’; 

20 (3) replacing the references to the term ‘‘Ori21 ental’’ with ‘‘Asian American or Pacific Islander’’; 

22 (4) replacing the references to the terms ‘‘Es23 kimo’’ and ‘‘Aleut’’ to ‘‘Alaska Native’’; and 

24 (5) replacing the definition of ‘‘Eskimo’’ and 

25 ‘‘Aleut’’ to have the same meaning as the term ‘‘NaVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:27 Feb 17, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H995.IH H995

emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 995 IH

1 tive’’ has in section 3(b) of the Alaska Native Claims 

2 Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(b)). 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
§ 590.314 Presiding officials. ( a ) The Assistant Secretary may designate a presiding official to conduct any stage of the proceeding, including officiating at a conference, oral presentation, or trial-type hearing. The presiding official shall have the full authority of the Assistant Secretary during such proceedings.
( b ) A presiding official at a conference, oral presentation, or trial-type hearing shall have the authority to regulate the conduct of the proceeding including, but not limited to, determination of the issues to be raised during the course of the conference, oral presentation, or trial-type hearing, administering oaths or affirmations, directing discovery, ruling on objections to the presentation of testimony or exhibits, receiving relevant and material evidence, requiring the advance submission of written testimony and exhibits, ruling on motions, determining the format, directing that briefs be filed with respect to issues raised or to be raised during the course of the conference, oral presentation or trial-type hearing, questioning witnesses, taking reasonable measures to exclude duplicative material, and placing limitations on the number of witnesses to be called by a party.
Order entered September 6 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 01064
- CR LARRY LYNN ROBINSON, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F
- 1451103
- Y



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s September 2, 2016 motion requesting immediate release. Our opinion issued on January 27, 2016. The court of criminal appeals denied appellant’s petition for discretionary review on April 13, 2016 , and our mandate issued on May 17, 2016

. Appellant’s motion is DENIED

.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
PUBLIC LAW 109–413—DEC. 18, 2006 120 STAT. 2765

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 4050:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):

Dec. 6, considered and passed Senate.

Dec. 8, considered and passed House.

Æ

Public Law 109–413

109th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 103 East

Thompson Street in Thomaston, Georgia, as the ‘‘Sergeant First Class Robert

Lee ‘Bobby’ Hollar, Jr. Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SERGEANT FIRST CLASS ROBERT LEE ‘‘BOBBY’’ HOLLAR,

JR. POST OFFICE BUILDING.

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal

Service located at 103 East Thompson Street in Thomaston,

Georgia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sergeant First

Class Robert Lee ‘Bobby’ Hollar, Jr. Post Office Building’’.

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation,

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference

to the ‘‘Sergeant First Class Robert Lee ‘Bobby’ Hollar, Jr. Post

Office Building’’.

Approved December 18, 2006.

Dec. 18, 2006

[S. 4050]