alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1128.615 General criteria for determining allowability as cost sharing or matching. ( a ) *OMB guidance.* The OMB guidance in 2 CFR 200.306(b) lists the basic criteria for the allowability of cost sharing or matching under grants and cooperative agreements.
( b ) *Award terms and conditions* — ( 1 ) *General.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must include the wording appendix F to this part provides as Section B of FMS Article VI to specify the allowability of cash or third-party in-kind contributions as cost sharing or matching.
( 2 ) *Exception.* A DoD Component may reserve paragraph B.4 of Section B of FMS Article VI in its general terms and conditions, or replace it with appropriate alternative wording, if the DoD Component has statutory authority to accept costs reimbursed by other Federal awards as cost sharing or matching under the awards using its general terms and conditions.
# EUR-Lex - 31987D0425 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31987D0425

**87/425/EEC: Commission Decision of 15 July 1987 amending Decision 86/473/EEC as regards the list of establishments in Uruguay approved for the purpose of importing meat products into the Community **

*
Official Journal L 228 , 15/08/1987 P. 0045 - 0045 *

*****

COMMISSION DECISION

of 15 July 1987

amending Decision 86/473/EEC as regards the list of establishments in Uruguay approved for the purpose of importing meat products into the Community

(87/425/EEC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 77/99/EEC of 21 December 1976 on health problems affecting intra-Community trade in meat products (1), as last amended by Directive 86/469/EEC (2), and in particular Article 17 (1) thereof,

Whereas a list of establishments in Uruguay, approved for the purpose of importing meat products into the Community, was drawn up initially by Commission Decision 86/473/EEC (3);

Whereas a Community on-the-spot visit to meat product establishments in Uruguay has revealed that the level of hygiene in one establishment has altered since the last inspection; whereas the list of establishments should be amended accordingly;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex to Decision 86/473/EEC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 July 1987.

For the Commission

Frans ANDRIESSEN

Vice-President

(1) OJ No L 26, 31. 12. 1977, p. 85.

(2) OJ No L 275, 26. 9. 1986, p. 36.

(3) OJ No L 279, 30. 9. 1986, p. 53.

ANNEX

LIST OF ESTABLISHMENTS

1.2.3 // // // // Approval No // Establishment // Address // // // // 2 // Frigorífico Colonia // Tarariras, Colonia // 8 // Frigorífico Canelones // Canelones, Canelones // 35 // Delta Brands Uruguay // Pando, Canelones // // //
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 698 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 698

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that all Americans 
 should participate in a moment of silence to reflect upon the service 
and sacrifice of members of the United States Armed Forces both at home 
                              and abroad.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 28, 2006

Mr. Knollenberg submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that all Americans 
 should participate in a moment of silence to reflect upon the service 
and sacrifice of members of the United States Armed Forces both at home 
                              and abroad.

Whereas it was through the brave and noble efforts of the Nation's forefathers 
        that the United States first gained freedom and became a sovereign 
        nation;
Whereas there are more than 1,300,000 active component and more than 1,100,000 
        reserve component members of the Armed Forces serving the Nation in 
        support and defense of the values and freedom that all Americans 
        cherish;
Whereas the members of the Armed Forces deserve the utmost respect and 
        admiration of their fellow Americans for putting their lives in danger 
        for the sake of the freedoms enjoyed by all Americans;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces are defending freedom and democracy around 
        the globe and are playing a vital role in protecting the safety and 
        security of all Americans;
Whereas the nation officially celebrates and honors the accomplishments and 
        sacrifices of veterans, patriots, and leaders who fought for freedom, 
        but does not yet officially pay tribute to those who currently serve in 
        the Armed Forces;
Whereas all Americans should participate in a moment of silence to support the 
        troops; and
Whereas March 26th, 2006, is designated as ``National Support the Troops Day'': 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
all Americans should participate in a moment of silence to reflect upon 
the service and sacrifice of members of the United States Armed Forces 
both at home and abroad.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Onorina Minozzi, Petitioner, v Blanche Bernstein, as Commissioner of the Department of Social Services of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent State commissioner, dated August 29, 1978 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency reducing petitioner’s grant of public assistance. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The State commissioner’s determination as to petitioner’s willful withholding of information is supported by substantial evidence (see *300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176). Damiani, J. P., Laser, Mangano and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
H. Res. 788

In the House of Representatives, U.S., 

May 16, 2006.

Whereas the well-being of all people of the United States is 

preserved and enhanced as a direct result of the vigilance 

and dedication of law enforcement personnel; 

Whereas more than 870,000 law enforcement personnel in 

the United States serve their fellow citizens as guardians 

of peace; 

Whereas peace officers are on the front line in preserving the 

right of the children of the United States to receive an 

education in a crime-free environment, a right that is all 

too often threatened by the insidious fear caused by violence in schools; 

Whereas 155 peace officers across the Nation were killed in 

the line of duty during 2005, well below the decade-long 

average of 164 deaths annually, and a major drop from 

2001 when 237 officers were killed, including 72 officers 

in the September 11th terrorist attacks; 

Whereas a law enforcement officer is killed in the United 

States every 53 hours, and there are 56,000 assaults 

against our law enforcement officers each year, resulting 

in 16,000 injuries; 

Whereas section 136 of title 36, United States Code, requests 

that the President issue an annual proclamation desig-
2

•HRES 788 EH 

nating May 15 as Peace Officers Memorial Day in honor 

of Federal, State, and local officers killed or disabled in 

the line of duty; and 

Whereas on May 15, 2006, more than 20,000 peace officers 

are expected to gather in Washington, D.C. to join with 

the families of their recently fallen comrades to honor 

those comrades and all others who have fallen before 

them: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) supports the goals and ideals of Peace Officers 

Memorial Day to honor Federal, State, and local peace 

officers killed or disabled in the line of duty; and 

(2) calls upon the people of the United States to observe such a day with appropriate ceremonies and respect.

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lance Daniel Jenkins, Appellant.

[814 NYS2d 415]

Mercure, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Cortland County (Campbell, J.), rendered June 9, 2005, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

*1178Defendant pleaded guilty to attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree in satisfaction of a three-count indictment. Although the negotiated plea agreement provided that defendant would be sentenced to a 21/2-year prison term with two years of postrelease supervision, County Court advised defendant that if he was arrested prior to sentencing, he would be subject to an enhanced sentence. Defendant was thereafter arrested on two separate occasions prior to the date of his sentencing and, as a result, County Court sentenced him to 4V2 years in prison with two years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals, asserting that County Court erred in failing to inquire about the arrests prior to sentencing him. We agree.

“ ‘When an issue is raised concerning the validity of [a] postplea charge or there is a denial of any involvement in the underlying crime, the court must conduct an inquiry at which the defendant has an opportunity to show that the arrest is without foundation’ ” *(People v Curtis,*278 AD2d 664, 665 [2000], quoting *People v Outley,*80 NY2d 702, 713 [1993], *cert denied sub nom. Maietta v Artuz,*519 US 964 [1996]; *see People v Valencia,*3 NY3d 714, 715 [2004]; *People v Naranjo,*89 NY2d 1047, 1049 [1997]). While the nature and extent of the inquiry is discretionary, it “must be of sufficient depth ... so that the court can be satisfied—not of defendant’s guilt of the new criminal charge but of the existence of a legitimate basis for the arrest on that charge” *(People v Outley, supra*at 713). Here, when given the opportunity to comment on the arrests, defendant offered exculpatory explanations, claiming that one arrest was malicious and that he was not present at the time and location of the alleged offense underlying the second arrest. Despite these contentions by defendant, which served as a challenge to the validity of the arrests, County Court sentenced him to an enhanced prison term without further inquiry. Accordingly, inasmuch as County Court failed to ascertain whether there was a legitimate basis for the postplea arrests, we must remit this matter for a new sentencing hearing in accordance with this decision *(see People v McClemore,*276 AD2d 32, 35-37 [2000]; *cf. People v Douglas, 2*AD3d 1050, 1050-1051 [2003], *lv denied 2*NY3d 761 [2004]).

The People’s remaining argument has been reviewed and found to be lacking in merit.

Cardona, *P.J.,*Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating the sentence imposed; matter remitted to the County Court of Cortland County for resentencing; and, as so modified, affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
ART. 5 FOR 3-MOS 10-Q
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000813040
<NAME> GREYHOUND LINES INC
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          11,052
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   52,042
<ALLOWANCES>                                       398
<INVENTORY>                                      8,325
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                95,707
<PP&E>                                         608,204
<DEPRECIATION>                                 191,892
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 672,990
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          233,952
<BONDS>                                        170,877
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            5,214
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           587
<OTHER-SE>                                     230,992
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   672,990
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               291,275
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  262,016
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,590
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,669
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,243
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,419
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,419
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                       TO
                          SPECIAL TERMINATION AGREEMENT

     THIS AMENDMENT No. 1, dated as of July 1, 1997, to that certain Special
Termination Agreement (the "Agreement") that was amended and restated as of the
31st day of January, 1997 by and among Abington Bancorp, Inc., a Massachusetts
corporation, Abington Savings Bank, a Massachusetts savings bank, and Edward J.
Merritt, an individual currently o employed by the Company and the Bank in the
capacity of Executive Vice President.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to the Agreement hereby agree to amend the
Agreement as follows:

     1. The first clause of Paragraph 3(a) is hereby amended to remove all
references to the office of chief financial officer, so that such clause as
amended shall read as follows'

          "(a) termination by either of the Employers of the employment of the
          Executive as Executive Vice President of the Bank or the Company for
          any reason other than (i) death, (ii) deliberate dishonesty of the
          Executive with respect to the Company or the Bank or any subsidiary or
          affiliate thereof, or (iii) conviction of the Executive of a crime
          involving moral turpitude, or"

     2. Paragraph 4 of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the last
sentence thereof.

     3. As amended by this Amendment, the Agreement shall continue in full force
and effect in accordance with its terms.

     4. This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of
which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument, and any of
the parties hereto may execute this Amendment by signing any such counterpart.

     5. This Amendment shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in
accordance with, the substantive laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
without regard to its principles of conflicts of laws.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the day
and year first above written.



ABINGTON SAVINGS BANK                   ABINGTON BANCORP, INC.

By: /s/ James P. McDonough              By: /s/ James P. McDonough
    ---------------------------             ---------------------------------
    Its President                           Its President & CEO


                                        /s/ Edward J. Merritt
                                        ------------------------------------- 
                                        Edward J. Merritt
#### § 1400.526 Who at DOI Places Exclusions Information into SAM?

The Office of Acquisition and Property Management (PAM) Debarment Program personnel enter information about persons suspended or debarred by DOI into the GSA Web-based System for Award Management (SAM) within 3 working days of the effective date of the action.
# L_2023240EN.01009201.xml

| 28.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 240/92 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 240/92

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 221/2020

of 11 December 2020

amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement [2023/2023]

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) | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/473 of 20 January 2020 supplementing Directive (EU) 2017/2397 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the standards for databases for the Union certificates of qualification, service record books and logbooks (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/473 of 20 January 2020 supplementing Directive (EU) 2017/2397 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the standards for databases for the Union certificates of qualification, service record books and logbooks (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

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

(2)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following point is inserted after point 46d (Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2020/12) of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘46e. | 32020 R 0473: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/473 of 20 January 2020 supplementing Directive (EU) 2017/2397 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the standards for databases for the Union certificates of qualification, service record books and logbooks (OJ L 100, 1.4.2020, p. 1).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘46e.

32020 R 0473: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/473 of 20 January 2020 supplementing Directive (EU) 2017/2397 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the standards for databases for the Union certificates of qualification, service record books and logbooks (OJ L 100, 1.4.2020, p. 1).’

Article 2

The text of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/473 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 100, 1.4.2020, p. 1.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
§ 820.7 Questions of policy or law. ( a ) *Certification.* There shall be no interlocutory appeal from any ruling order, or action decision of a DOE Official except as permitted by this section. A Presiding Officer in an enforcement adjudication may certify, in his discretion, a question to the Secretary, when the order or ruling involves an important question of law or policy concerning which there is substantial grounds for difference of opinion, and either an immediate decision will materially advance the ultimate termination of the proceeding, or subsequent review will be inadequate or ineffective.
( b ) *Decision.* The certified question shall be decided as soon as practicable. If the Secretary determines that the question was improvidently certified, or if he takes no action within thirty days of the certification, the certification is dismissed. The Secretary may decide the question on the basis of the submission made by the Presiding Officer or may request further information from any person.
#### KRATKA v. BOSTON & M. R. R.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

May 21, 1914.)

Action by Paul Kratka against the Boston & Maine Railroad.

No opinion. Motion denied. See, also, 147 N. Y. Supp. 751.
#### Dorothy Brand, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent.

Motion for permission to proceed as a poor person denied, without costs, and without prejudice to its renewal on notice to all interested parties (!CPLR 1101, subd. [c]) and on a proper showing of sufficient facts to enable the court to ascertain the merit of appellant’s contentions (CPLR 1101, subd. [a]). Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur.
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed June 6, 2013
. 

# S

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 11
- 00680
- CR
JACOB WHEELER , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F10
- 57968
- H
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, O’ Neill, and Murphy Opinion by Justice O'Neill Appellant Jacob Wheeler appeals his conviction for manslaughter. Aft er finding appellant guilty, the jury assessed punishment, enhanced by a prior felony conviction, at life confinement. In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court erred in overruling his objection
to extraneous offense evidence admitted at punis hment. In the punishment phase, the State presented evidence that appellant confessed to several
extraneous offense s . Appellant asserts the trial court erred in admitting the extraneous offense evidence because the State failed to present sufficient pro of appellant committed the offense s
. See T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 37.07, § 3(a)(1) (West Supp. 2012 ). In particular, he asserts the State failed to prove the “corpus delicti” of the extraneous offense s
. The corpus delicti doctrine requires that evid ence independent of a defendant’ s extrajudicial confession show that the “essential nature” of the charged crime was committed by someone. Bible v. State,– 2

– 162 S.W.3d 234, 246 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). The cor pus delicti doctrine is concerned with

prev enting a conviction from being based solely upon a false confession. Id. at 247. When the offense at issue is extraneous, offered at the punishment stage, no concern about the defendant’ s conviction arises. Id. The refore, the corpus delicti doctrine does not apply to extraneous offenses offered at the punishment phase

. Cf. id.; s ee also Padron v. State , 988 S.W.2d 344, 346 (Tex.App.

— Hous ton [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.). We resolve the sole issue against appellant. We affirm appellant’s convi ction.

Do Not Publish T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47
110680F.U05 /Michael J. O'Neill/ MICHAEL J. O'NEILL JUSTICE– 3

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
JACOB WHEELER, Appellant

No. 05

- 11

- 00680

- CR V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F10

- 57968

- H. Opinion delivered by Justice O’Neill. Justices Bridges and Murphy participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgm ent of the trial court is AFFIRMED

.
Judgment entered this 6 th day of June, 2013.

/Michael J. O'Neill/ MICHAEL J. O'NEILL JUSTICE