alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2023240EN.01011301.xml

| 28.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 240/113 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 240/113

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 235/2020

of 11 December 2020

amending Annex XXII (Company law) to the EEA Agreement [2023/2037]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

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

Whereas:

| (1) | Directive (EU) 2017/828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 amending Directive 2007/36/EC as regards the encouragement of long-term shareholder engagement (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Directive (EU) 2017/828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 amending Directive 2007/36/EC as regards the encouragement of long-term shareholder engagement (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is added in point 10g (Directive 2007/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32017 L 0828: Directive (EU) 2017/828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 (OJ L 132, 20.5.2017, p. 1).
  The provisions of the Directive shall, for the purposes of this Agreement, be read with the following adaptation:
  In Article 3a(7), as regards the EFTA States, the words "By 10 June 2019
  ” shall read “Within one year of the date of the entry into force of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 235/2020 of 11 December 2020
  ”.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32017 L 0828: Directive (EU) 2017/828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 (OJ L 132, 20.5.2017, p. 1).

The provisions of the Directive shall, for the purposes of this Agreement, be read with the following adaptation:

In Article 3a(7), as regards the EFTA States, the words "By 10 June 2019
  ” shall read “Within one year of the date of the entry into force of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 235/2020 of 11 December 2020
  ”.’

Article 2

The text of Directive (EU) 2017/828 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 12 December 2020, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 11 December 2020.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Sabine MONAUNI

---

(1)  
  OJ L 132, 20.5.2017, p. 1.

1

(*1)  Constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7607

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MATTHEW EUGENE BARRENTINE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(4:09-cr-00953-RBH-1; 4:15-cv-03953-RBH; 4:12-cv-00797-RBH)

Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 1, 2016

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Matthew Eugene Barrentine, Appellant Pro Se. Carrie Fisher 

Sherard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Matthew Eugene Barrentine seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as 

unauthorized and successive. The order is not appealable unless 

a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate 

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Barrentine has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
PGI 219.2 -POLICIES    **Parent topic:** PGI Part 219 - SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMSPGI 219.201 General policy.       (c)(10)(*1*)             Agencies are not precluded from requiring that actions over the micro-purchase threshold, but under the             simplified acquisition threshold, that are totally set aside for small business be             reviewed by the small business specialist. One example of when an agency may choose to             require this review is when the agency determines that such a review is necessary to             assist contracting officers in identifying opportunities for other small business             set-aside programs (e.g., HUBZone, service-disabled veteran-owned, small disadvantaged             business, women-owned small business) in order to meet small business goals.          (*2*) Modifications that increase the scope of the contract, or the order under a Federal Supply Schedule contract, should be reviewed by the small business specialist. At a minimum, these actions might impact the small business subcontracting plan. However, funding modifications or modifications that do not increase the scope of the contract generally should not be reviewed, because the value that a small business specialist review would add in these instances would be minimal compared to the resources that would be expended.          (d) Small business specialists are appointed and perform functions in accordance with DoD Instruction (DoDI) 4205.01, DoD Small Business Programs. In the DoDI, small business specialists are called “small business professionals.”
#### § 603.835 Program income requirements.

A TIA must apply the standards of 10 CFR 600.314 for program income that may be generated. The TIA must also specify if the recipient is to have any obligation to the Federal Government with respect to program income generated after the end of the project period (i.e., the period, as established in the award document, during which Federal support is provided).
PGI 242.1203 Processing agreements.

(1) For contracts awarded by the military departments, provide notices to the following addressees

instead of individual contracting or contract administration offices:

Army usarmy.pentagon.hqda-asa-alt.list.saal-ps-staff@army.mil

Navy usn.pentagon.asstsecnavrdadc.mbx.pabt@us.navy.mil

Air Force AFMC.PK.Workflow-02@us.af.mil

National Aeronautics and Space

Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

ATTN: Office of Procurement, Program Operations Division

300 E Street, SW

Washington, DC 20546-0001

(2) Lists of affected contracts accompanying a notice of successor in interest should include the

information at FAR 42.1204(e)(2).

(3) Lists of affected contracts accompanying a notice of a name change should include the

information at FAR 42.1205(a)(3).

(4) On notices sent to the addressees in paragraph (1) of this section, include a consolidated list for

all subordinate contracting offices of the addressee.

(5) Before making any substantial alterations or additions to the novation agreement format at FAR

42.1204(i), coordinate with the addressees in paragraph (1) of this section that have contracts with

the contractor. Resolve any objections before executing the agreement.

(6) If the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) wants a separate agreement with

the contractor, continue to process the agreement only for DoD.

(7) In addition to the requirements of FAR 42.1203(g) and PGI 204.201 , make distribution to—

(i) The physical address or a copy to the email addresses in paragraph (1) of this section; and

(ii) The appropriate Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command area command for

agreements affecting contracts and basic agreements for storage and related services for personal

property of military and civilian personnel — two copies:
Commander

Eastern Area

Military Surface Deployment

and Distribution Command

ATTN: MTE-LO

Bayonne, NJ 07002

Commander

Western Area

Military Surface Deployment

and Distribution Command

Oakland Army Base

ATTN: MTW-LO

Oakland, CA 94626

(8) In addition to the distribution requirements of FAR 42.1203(h)(4) and PGI 204.201 –

(i) Send two copies to the physical address or a copy to the email addresses in paragraph (1) of this

section. The list of contracts may be confined to those issued by that department.

(ii) Do not send copies to NASA or the commands in paragraph (7)(ii) of this section. They will issue

their own modifications.

(9) Report the novation agreement or name change modification for each of the affected contracts to

FPDS (see PGI 204.606 (4)(iv) and (v)).

(10) The contracting officer responsible for execution of a change-of-name agreement (see FAR

Subpart 42.12) must submit the agreement to DLIS-SBB. If there are no current contracts, each

contracting and contract administration office receiving notification of changes from the commercial

entity must forward a copy of the change notice annotated with the CAGE code to DLIS-SBB unless

the change notice indicates that DLIS-SBB already has been notified.

Parent topic: PGI 242.12 -NOVATION AND CHANGE-OF-NAME AGREEMENTS
§ 52.177 Application for renewal. ( a ) Not less than 12 months, nor more than 5 years before the expiration of the manufacturing license, or any later renewal period, the holder of the manufacturing license may apply for a renewal of the license. An application for renewal must contain all information necessary to bring up to date the information and data contained in the previous application.
( b ) The filing of an application for a renewed license must be in accordance with subpart A of 10 CFR part 2 and 10 CFR 52.3 and 50.30.
( c ) A manufacturing license, either original or renewed, for which a timely application for renewal has been filed, remains in effect until the Commission has made a final determination on the renewal application, *provided, however,* that in accordance with § 52.173, the holder of a manufacturing license may not begin manufacture of a reactor less than 3 years before the expiration of the license.
( d ) Any person whose interest may be affected by renewal of the license may request a hearing on the application for renewal. The request for a hearing must comply with 10 CFR 2.309. If a hearing is granted, notice of the hearing will be published in accordance with 10 CFR 2.104.
( e ) The Commission shall refer a copy of the application for renewal to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS). The ACRS shall report on those portions of the application which concern safety and shall apply the criteria set forth in § 52.159.
[72 FR 49517, Aug. 28, 2007, as amended at 89 FR 57721, July 16, 2024]
222 So.2d 69

#### William Gerald MILES v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 49853.

May 19, 1969.

In re: William Gerald Miles applying for writ of habeas corpus.

Writs denied. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.
§ 39.41 Design and performance criteria for sources. ( a ) A licensee may use a sealed source for use in well logging applications if— ( 1 ) The sealed source is doubly encapsulated;
( 2 ) The sealed source contains licensed material whose chemical and physical forms are as insoluble and nondispersible as practical; and
( 3 ) Meets the requirements of paragraph (b), (c), or (d) of this section.
( b ) For a sealed source manufactured on or before July 14, 1989, a licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging applications if it meets the requirements of USASI N5.10-1968, “Classification of Sealed Radioactive Sources,” or the requirements in paragraph (c) or (d) of this section.
( c ) For a sealed source manufactured after July 14, 1989, a licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging applications if it meets the oil-well logging requirements of ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997, “Sealed Radioactive Sources—Classification.”
( d ) For a sealed source manufactured after July 14, 1989, a licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging applications, if— ( 1 ) The sealed source's prototype has been tested and found to maintain its integrity after each of the following tests: ( i ) *Temperature.* The test source must be held at −40 °C for 20 minutes, 600 °C for 1 hour, and then be subject to a thermal shock test with a temperature drop from 600 °C to 20 °C within 15 seconds.
( ii ) *Impact test.* A 5 kg steel hammer, 2.5 cm in diameter, must be dropped from a height of 1 m onto the test source.
( iii ) *Vibration test.* The test source must be subject to a vibration from 25 Hz to 500 Hz at 5 g amplitude for 30 minutes.
( iv ) *Puncture test.* A 1 gram hammer and pin, 0.3 cm pin diameter, must be dropped from a height of 1 m onto the test source.
( v ) *Pressure test.* The test source must be subject to an external pressure of 1.695 × 107 pascals [24,600 pounds per square inch absolute].
( e ) The requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this section do not apply to sealed sources that contain licensed material in gaseous form.
( f ) The requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this section do not apply to energy compensation sources (ECS). ECSs must be registered with the Commission under § 32.210 of this chapter or with an Agreement State.
[65 FR 20345, Apr. 17, 2000]
§ 60.143 Monitoring and testing waste packages. ( a ) A program shall be established at the geologic repository operations area for monitoring the condition of the waste packages. Waste packages chosen for the program shall be representative of those to be emplaced in the underground facility.
( b ) Consistent with safe operation at the geologic repository operations area, the environment of the waste packages selected for the waste package monitoring program shall be representative of the environment in which the wastes are to be emplaced.
( c ) The waste package monitoring program shall include laboratory experiments which focus on the internal condition of the waste packages. To the extent practical, the environment experienced by the emplaced waste packages within the underground facility during the waste package monitoring program shall be duplicated in the laboratory experiments.
( d ) The waste package monitoring program shall continue as long as practical up to the time of permanent closure.
Subpart 1207.3—Contractor Versus

Government Performance

Parent topic: PART 1207—ACQUISITION PLANNING

1207.305 Solicitation provisions and contract clause.

The contracting officer may insert clause 1252.237–73, Key Personnel, in solicitations and contracts

when the acquisition is conducted pursuant to OMB Circular A–76 and meets the clause prescription

requirements at 1237.110–70(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 31 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 31

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a portrait of 
 Dilip Singh Saund should be displayed in an appropriate place in the 
          United States Capitol or in a House Office Building.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2005

Mr. Wilson of South Carolina submitted the following resolution; which 
         was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a portrait of 
 Dilip Singh Saund should be displayed in an appropriate place in the 
          United States Capitol or in a House Office Building.

Whereas Dilip Singh Saund was born in 1899, in Chhajulwadi, Punjab Province, 
        India;
Whereas Dilip Singh Saund was inspired to immigrate to the United States by the 
        writings of Presidents Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, and Theodore 
        Roosevelt;
Whereas Dilip Singh Saund received his Ph.D. in mathematics from the University 
        of California, Berkeley, in 1924 and served as the national president of 
        the Hindustan Association of America while he was a student there;
Whereas Dilip Singh Saund was a successful farmer for nearly 30 years in 
        Imperial Valley, California;
Whereas in 1946, Dilip Singh Saund was instrumental in ending restrictions which 
        prohibited the naturalization of immigrants from India;
Whereas in 1952, Dilip Singh Saund was elected justice of the peace in 
        Westmorland, California, becoming one of the first Asian Americans ever 
        elected to public office;
Whereas Dilip Singh Saund was elected to serve in the House of Representatives 
        in 1956, becoming the first Asian American and first native of India 
        ever elected to Congress;
Whereas in 1957, the people of India recognized Dilip Singh Saund's historic 
        election by giving him a hero's welcome when he visited India as a 
        member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee;
Whereas Dilip Singh Saund overcame many obstacles to become a United States 
        citizen and a Member of Congress; and
Whereas Dilip Singh Saund continues to serve as a role model and inspiration for 
        the Indian American community: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
a portrait of Dilip Singh Saund should be displayed in an appropriate 
place in the United States Capitol or in a House Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
Case 2:06-cv-00746-WHA Document 11 Filed 11/15/2006 Page 1 of 1
Subpart 2416.3 - Cost-Reimbursement Contracts    **Parent topic:** PART 2416 - TYPES OF CONTRACTS2416.307 Contract clauses.       (a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 2452.216-79, Estimated Cost (No Fee), in all cost-reimbursement (no fee) type solicitations and contracts.          (b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 2452.216-80, Estimated Cost and Fixed-Fee, in all cost-plus-fixed fee type solicitations and contracts.
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 2.1503 Authority of presiding officer.

If the Commission appoints a presiding officer to conduct the legislative hearing, the presiding officer shall be responsible for expeditious development of a sufficient record on the Commission-identified issues, consistent with the direction provided by the Commission under § 2.1502(c). The presiding officer has the authority otherwise accorded to it under §§ 2.319(a), (c), (e), (g), (h), and (i), 2.324, and 2.333 to control the course of the proceeding, and may exercise any other authority granted to it by the Commission in accordance with § 2.1502(c)(6).
#### Brian ROBINSON *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 07-887

262 S.W.3d 140

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered September 13, 2007

*Grant*C. *DeProw,*for appellant.

No response.

Per Curiam.

Appellant Brian Robinson, by and through his attorney Grant C. DeProw, has filed a motion for rule on clerk, which we will treat as a motion for belated appeal. While the circuit court granted a motion to extend time, the order on that motion makes no indication that all parties had the opportunity to be heard on the motion pursuant to Ark. R. App. P.-Civ. 5(b)(1)(C). The clerk refused to docket the record because the order granting an extension made no reference to an opportunity to be heard. DeProw now offers in lieu of that requirement an affidavit from the deputy prosecuting attorney stating that the State has no opposition to extending time for filing the record, and that had there been a formal hearing on the motion, the State would have had no objection to the extension. This court has made it very clear that strict compliance with Rule 5(b) is required. The granting of an extension is not a mere formality. The mle requires that the order indicate that all parties have had the opportunity to be heard on the motion. Here, the order does not comply with Rule 5(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, we remand this matter to the circuit court for compliance with Rule 5(b)(1)(C). *See Jones v. State,*367 Ark. 324, 239 S.W.3d 483 (2006).
1 

 2015-06-24

Re: Questions to incompleteness letter – 26 May 2015

To: Chenise Farquharson

farquharson.chenise@epa.gov

We are very thankful for your willingness to list us under SNAP, and providing us with guidance to reach the 

requirements needed. I have tried to the best of my knowledge, to understand and answer the questions raised in 

our application. I will discuss these questions to makes sure I understand the incompleteness before resubmitting, 

I hope this can 

In the first section of the R-1270 Incompleteness Letter_26 May 2015 the following can be read.. 

 “EPA also requires additional information on topics including, but not limited to, occupational and 

environmental exposure, local air quality impacts, and servicing and recovery practices, based on your 

responses to the preliminary questions presented in this letter”

Question: I have attached our normal service and maintenance manual for the machine that will cover these 

points. Basically the machine is an air-cooled chiller and does not pollute the air with any substances. Please 

comment if this is enough to move forward or if further explanation will be needed.

Responses/questions to the specific points raised in letter R-1270 Incompleteness Letter_26 May 2015 

1) I have filled in the document “Enclosure_Table of SNAP RefAC EndUses and Applications” with the 

appropriate EndUses. Please provide comment if further information is needed to move forward with 

resubmitting the application.

2) I have made a qualified assumption based on my knowledge and feel for the market and indicated based on 

the sales of R-1270 chiller within the segment of R-1270 chiller within the respective EndUse catagories. I 

hope this is the correct approach, please confirm, before I move forward with re-submitting the application.

3) We confirm we do not intend to claim any information back from the earlier submitted information.

Please communicate back to me via e-mail; bjorn.skattberg@frigadon.se

Kind regards

/Björn Skattberg, 

Managing Director, Frigadon AB