alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017090EN.01000601.xml

| 23.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 90/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 90/6

---

State aid — Decision to raise no objections

(2017/C 90/07)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 15 December 2016 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case No | : | 79781 |
| Decision No | : | 234/16/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Title | : | Enova’s Demo scheme 2017-2022 |
| Legal basis | : | Parliamentary Decision of 5 April 2001 on the basis of a proposition by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy of 21 December 2000. The Parliamentary Decision amends the Energy Act of 29 June 1990 No 50 |
| Type of measure | : | Scheme |
| Objective | : | Environmental |
| Form of aid | : | Grants, convertible loans |
| Budget | : | NOK 1,5 billion annually |
| Intensity | : | For demonstration projects: 40 % for large enterprises, 50 % for medium-sized and small enterprises.
  For feasibility studies: 50 % for all undertakings. |
| Duration | : | 1.1.2017-31.12.2022 |
| Economic sectors | : | No sector limitations under the scheme. |
| Name and address of the granting authority | : | Enova SF |
| Professor Brochs Gate 2 |
| PO Box 5700 Sluppen |
| N-7437 Trondheim |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

Date of adoption of the decision

:

15 December 2016

Case No

Case No

:

79781

Decision No

Decision No

:

234/16/COL

EFTA State

EFTA State

:

Norway

Title

Title

:

Enova’s Demo scheme 2017-2022

Legal basis

Legal basis

:

Parliamentary Decision of 5 April 2001 on the basis of a proposition by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy of 21 December 2000. The Parliamentary Decision amends the Energy Act of 29 June 1990 No 50

Type of measure

Type of measure

:

Scheme

Objective

Objective

:

Environmental

Form of aid

Form of aid

:

Grants, convertible loans

Budget

Budget

:

NOK 1,5 billion annually

Intensity

Intensity

:

For demonstration projects: 40 % for large enterprises, 50 % for medium-sized and small enterprises.

For feasibility studies: 50 % for all undertakings.

Duration

Duration

:

1.1.2017-31.12.2022

Economic sectors

Economic sectors

:

No sector limitations under the scheme.

Name and address of the granting authority

Name and address of the granting authority

:

Enova SF

Professor Brochs Gate 2

PO Box 5700 Sluppen

N-7437 Trondheim

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 97-50056

_____________________

KELLY S. RODGERS;

RUTH C. WHITEHURST,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

FRANKLIN FEDERAL BANCORP, FSB,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas

(A-96-CV-82)

_________________________________________________________________

September 11, 1997

Before WISDOM, JOLLY, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After a review of the record, a study of the briefs, and

consideration of the oral arguments of counsel, we agree with the

district court that the plaintiffs failed to prove, with respect to

each of them, that the defendant engaged in either gender

discrimination or unlawful retaliation under Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act. Consequently, judgment is
2

A F F I R M E D.
# C_2022385EN.01002301.xml

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/23

---

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

(2022/C 385/05)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | 23 June 2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Case No | 88760 |
| Decision No | 154/22/COL |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Region | Helgeland |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Investment aid to Avinor AS for the construction of a new airport in Mo i Rana |
| Legal basis | The revised national budget proposition for 2021, adopted by the Parliament on 11 June 2021 (Innst. 648 S– 2020–2021)
  A letter of assignment from the Ministry of Transport of 25 August 2021
  Decision of Rana Municipality of 12 May 2020, case 36/20
  Three-part agreement between Avinor AS, Polarsirkelen Lufthavnutvikling AS, and Rana Municipality |
| Type of measure | Ad hoc aid |
| Objective | Airport infrastructure or equipment |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Up to NOK 2 888 989 000 (discounted) |
| Intensity | 95 % |
| Duration | From 2022 to 2026 |
| Economic sectors | Passenger air transport |
| Name and address of the granting authority | The Ministry of Transport |
| PO Box 8010 Dep, N-0030 Oslo |
| NORWAY |
| Rana Municipality |
| P.O. Box 173, 8601 Mo i Rana |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

23 June 2022

Case No

88760

Decision No

154/22/COL

EFTA State

Norway

Region

Helgeland

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Investment aid to Avinor AS for the construction of a new airport in Mo i Rana

Legal basis

The revised national budget proposition for 2021, adopted by the Parliament on 11 June 2021 (Innst. 648 S– 2020–2021)

A letter of assignment from the Ministry of Transport of 25 August 2021

Decision of Rana Municipality of 12 May 2020, case 36/20

Three-part agreement between Avinor AS, Polarsirkelen Lufthavnutvikling AS, and Rana Municipality

Type of measure

Ad hoc aid

Objective

Airport infrastructure or equipment

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Up to NOK 2 888 989 000 (discounted)

Intensity

95 %

Duration

From 2022 to 2026

Economic sectors

Passenger air transport

Name and address of the granting authority

The Ministry of Transport

PO Box 8010 Dep, N-0030 Oslo

NORWAY

Rana Municipality

P.O. Box 173, 8601 Mo i Rana

NORWAY

Other information

—

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/

---
§ 324.45 Recognition of credit risk mitigants for securitization exposures. ( a ) *General.* ( 1 ) An originating FDIC-supervised institution that has obtained a credit risk mitigant to hedge its exposure to a synthetic or traditional securitization that satisfies the operational criteria provided in § 324.41 may recognize the credit risk mitigant under §§ 324.36 or 324.37, but only as provided in this section.
( 2 ) An investing FDIC-supervised institution that has obtained a credit risk mitigant to hedge a securitization exposure may recognize the credit risk mitigant under §§ 324.36 or 324.37, but only as provided in this section.
( b ) *Mismatches.* An FDIC-supervised institution must make any applicable adjustment to the protection amount of an eligible guarantee or credit derivative as required in § 324.36(d), (e), and (f) for any hedged securitization exposure. In the context of a synthetic securitization, when an eligible guarantee or eligible credit derivative covers multiple hedged exposures that have different residual maturities, the FDIC-supervised institution must use the longest residual maturity of any of the hedged exposures as the residual maturity of all hedged exposures.
§ 19.9 Ex parte communications. ( a ) *Definition* — ( 1 ) *Ex parte communication. Ex parte communication* means any material oral or written communication relevant to the merits of an adjudicatory proceeding that was neither on the record nor on reasonable prior notice to all parties that takes place between: ( i ) An interested person outside the OCC (including such person's counsel); and
( ii ) The ALJ handling that proceeding, the Comptroller, or a decisional employee.
( 2 ) *Exception.* A request for status of the proceeding does not constitute an *ex parte* communication.
( b ) *Prohibition of ex parte communications.* From the time the notice is issued by the Comptroller until the date that the Comptroller issues a final decision pursuant to § 19.40(c): ( 1 ) An interested person outside the OCC must not make or knowingly cause to be made an *ex parte* communication to the Comptroller, the ALJ, or a decisional employee; and
( 2 ) The Comptroller, ALJ, or decisional employee may not make or knowingly cause to be made to any interested person outside the OCC any *ex parte* communication.
( c ) *Procedure upon occurrence of ex parte communication.* If an *ex parte* communication is received by the ALJ, the Comptroller, or any other person identified in paragraph (a) of this section, that person will cause all such written communications (or, if the communication is oral, a memorandum stating the substance of the communication) to be placed on the record of the proceeding and served on all parties. All other parties to the proceeding may, within ten days of service of the *ex parte* communication, file responses thereto and to recommend any sanctions that they believe to be appropriate under the circumstances. The ALJ or the Comptroller then determines whether any action should be taken concerning the *ex parte* communication in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section.
( d ) *Sanctions.* Any party or counsel to a party who makes a prohibited *ex parte* communication, or who encourages or solicits another to make any such communication, may be subject to any appropriate sanction or sanctions imposed by the Comptroller or the ALJ including, but not limited to, exclusion from the proceedings and an adverse ruling on the issue which is the subject of the prohibited communication.
( e ) *Separation of functions* — ( 1 ) *In general.* Except to the extent required for the disposition of *ex parte* matters as authorized by law, the ALJ may not: ( i ) Consult a person or party on a fact in issue unless on notice and opportunity for all parties to participate; or
( ii ) Be responsible to or subject to the supervision or direction of an employee or agent engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecuting functions for the OCC.
( 2 ) *Decision process.* An employee or agent engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecuting functions for the OCC in a case may not, in that or a factually related case, participate or advise in the decision, recommended decision, or agency review of the recommended decision under § 19.40, except as witness or counsel in administrative or judicial proceedings.
§ 28.10 Authority, purpose, and scope. ( a ) *Authority.* This subpart is issued pursuant to the authority in the International Banking Act of 1978 (IBA), 12 U.S.C. 3101 *et seq.,* and 12 U.S.C. 93a.
( b ) *Purpose—Purpose and scope.* This subpart implements the IBA pertaining to the licensing, supervision, and operations of Federal branches and agencies in the United States. For corporate procedures pertaining to Federal branches and agencies, refer to 12 CFR part 5.
( c ) *Scope.* This subpart applies to all Federal branches and agencies of foreign banks. Nothing in the OCC's rules relieves a Federal branch or agency from complying with requirements that are imposed by the FRB under Regulation K (12 CFR part 211) or otherwise imposed in accordance with applicable law.
[61 FR 19532, May 2, 1996, as amended at 61 FR 60387, Nov. 27, 1996; 68 FR 70699, Dec. 19, 2003]
§ 261a.10 Appeal of adverse determination of request for access or amendment. ( a ) *Appeal.* You may appeal a denial of a request made pursuant to § 261a.5 or § 261a.8 of this part within 10 business days after we notify you that we denied your request. Your appeal must— ( 1 ) Be made in writing with the words “PRIVACY ACT APPEAL” written prominently on the first page and addressed to the Secretary of the Board, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20551;
( 2 ) Specify the background of the request; and
( 3 ) Provide reasons why you believe the initial denial is in error.
( b ) *Determination.* We will make a determination on your appeal within 30 business days from the date we receive it, unless we extend the time for good cause. ( 1 ) If we grant your appeal regarding a request for amendment, we will take the necessary steps to amend your record and, when appropriate and possible, notify prior recipients of the record of our action.
( 2 ) If we deny your appeal, we will inform you of such determination, tell you our reasons for the denial, and tell you about your rights to file a statement of disagreement and to have a court review our decision.
( c ) *Statement of disagreement.* ( 1 ) If we deny your appeal regarding a request for amendment, you may file a concise statement of disagreement with the denial. We will maintain your statement with the record you sought to amend and any disclosure of the record will include a copy of your statement of disagreement.
( 2 ) When practicable and appropriate, we will provide a copy of the statement of disagreement to any prior recipients of the record.
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2912

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 2, 2004

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

AN ACT

To reaffirm the inherent sovereign rights of the Osage Tribe 

to determine its membership and form of government.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 2912 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. REAFFIRMATION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS OF THE 

2 OSAGE TRIBE. 

3 (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds as follows: 

4 (1) The Osage Tribe is a federally recognized 

5 tribe based in Pawhuska, Oklahoma. 

6 (2) The Osage Allotment Act of June 28, 1906 

7 (34 Stat. 539), states that the ‘‘legal membership’’ 

8 of the Osage Tribe includes the persons on the Jan9 uary 1, 1906 roll and their children, and that each 

10 ‘‘member’’ on that roll is entitled to a headright 

11 share in the distribution of funds from the Osage 

12 mineral estate and an allotment of the surface lands 

13 of the Osage Reservation. 

14 (3) Today only Osage Indians who have a 

15 headright share in the mineral estate are ‘‘mem16 bers’’ of the Osage Tribe. 

17 (4) Adult Osage Indians without a headright in18 terest cannot vote in Osage government elections 

19 and are not eligible to seek elective office in the 

20 Osage Tribe as a matter of Federal law. 

21 (5) A principal goal of Federal Indian policy is 

22 to promote tribal self-sufficiency and strong tribal 

23 government. 

24 (b) REAFFIRMATION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS OF THE

25 OSAGE TRIBE.—
3

HR 2912 RFS 

1 (1) MEMBERSHIP.—Congress hereby clarifies 

2 that the term ‘‘legal membership’’ in section 1 of the 

3 Act entitled, ‘‘An Act For the division of lands and 

4 funds of the Osage Indians in Oklahoma Territory, 

5 and for other purposes’’, approved June 28, 1906 

6 (34 Stat. 539), means the persons eligible for allot7 ments of Osage Reservation lands and a pro rata 

8 share of the Osage mineral estate as provided in 

9 that Act, not membership in the Osage Tribe for all 

10 purposes. Congress hereby reaffirms the inherent 

11 sovereign right of the Osage Tribe to determine its 

12 own membership, provided that the rights of any 

13 person to Osage mineral estate shares are not dimin14 ished thereby. 

15 (2) GOVERNMENT.—Notwithstanding section 9 

16 of the Act entitled, ‘‘An Act For the division of 

17 lands and funds of the Osage Indians in Oklahoma 

18 Territory, and for other purposes’’, approved June 

19 28, 1906 (34 Stat. 539), Congress hereby reaffirms 

20 the inherent sovereign right of the Osage Tribe to 

21 determine its own form of government. 

22 (3) ELECTIONS AND REFERENDA.—At the re23 quest of the Osage Tribe, the Secretary of the Inte-
4

HR 2912 RFS 

1 rior shall assist the Osage Tribe with conducting 

2 elections and referenda to implement this section.

Passed the House of Representatives June 1, 2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
850 922 6387 P. 02 DEC-15-2004 15:43 10ENUIRONMENT PROTECTION 

## Department 

# of 

# Environmental 

# Protection

Twln Towers Ofice Building Jeb Bush 2600 Blair Stane Road

, Colleen CasUlle Governor Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400 Secretary
December 14,2004 Andrew Bartlett Water Management Division U.S. 

### E.P.A.

# - Region 

### IV (WMDISMTB) Atlanta Federal Center Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960 Re: 

### Numeric Nutrient Criteria Development Plan for Florida 

### Dear Mr. Bartlett, 

### This letter documentsrevisions 

### to Florida's nuhient criteria development schedule. 

### FDEP submittedthe state's Nutrient Criterion Development Plan rThe Plan") to 

### EPA onDecember 3 1, 2003. EPA subsequently agreed to the Plan on July 7,2004. As described in the 

### Plan, 

### DEP has mdertaken 

### a Teobnical Advisory Committee (TAC) 

### process. 

### The Plan, developed based on 

### the best available information

### at the 

### time, projected completion 

### ofthe Technical

### Advisory Committee process by September2004 and subsequent submission of nutrient 

### criterionrule to our Environmental Regulation Commissionby October 2005. 

### Pursuant to the schedule outlined 

### in the Plan, we have held ten nutrient 

### TAC meetings sinceJanuary 2003, including 

### sixmeetings during the 2004 calendaryear. Through this TAC process and staff evaluations of available data, 

### it has become clearthat there are numerous remaining technical complexities and 

### limitations associated with the 

### verification, analysis, and interpretation ofthe currently availhle data. 

### Givcn these complexities,

### wc have deoided to extend the 

### TAC process through April 2006. 

### Consequently, other milestones identified

### in the Plan will need 

### to be rescheduled. We 

### still Bnticipate that the rulemaking process will require one 

### year following completion

### ofthe 

### TAC process. Submission of

### the nuhient criterion rule language to the Environmental

### Regulation Commissionforpossible 

### adoption is 

### now projected for April 2007. 

### We intendto 

### review 

### the Plan in early 2005 and may revise 

### it to reflect knowledge 

### gained over the last 

### year. Please feet freeto contact me if you have 

### any questionsconcerning our nutrient criteria development efforts. Sincerely, I



## - Deputy Director Division ofWater Resource Management

cc. Ed 

### Decker, 

### EPADEC-15-2004 15:43 10ENUIRONMENT PROTECTION

. + 

### Frank Nearhoof, 

### FDEP Greg 

### Knecht, 

### FDEP Ken Weaver, 

### FDEP

"More Protection, Less Process" Printed on recycled paper.
## IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL A PPE ALS OF TEXAS

NO. P D-1156-15 STE VEN LOWEL L MORTON, Appellan t

v. THE S TATE O FTEXAS ON AP P ELL ANT’S P ETIT ION F OR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

F ROM THE TE NTH COURT OF A P P EALS

JOHNSON COUNTY P E R C U R I A M . K

E A S L E R and H E R V E Y , JJ., dissent.

ORDER The pe tition for discretionar y revie w violates Rule of Appe llate Proce dure 68.4( j), beca use it does not contain a c omplete copy of the opinion of the c ourt of appe als. The pe tition i s struck. See Rule of Appellate Proc edure68.6. The pe titioner may

redraw the pe tition. The redra wn petition and copies must be f iled in the Court of Criminal Appea ls within thirty day s after

the date of

this order. Filed: Nove mber 18, 2015 Do Not Publish
# C_2016434EN.01000401.xml

| 24.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 434/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 434/4

---

State aid — Decision to raise no objections

(2016/C 434/04)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following State aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 6 July 2016 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case No | : | 79160 |
| Decision No | : | 150/16/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Title | : | Amendment to the Norwegian Tax Act concerning changes in the depreciation rules for wind power plants |
| Legal basis | : | Act 19.6.2015 no. 52 on amendment of act 26.3.1999 no. 14 (the Taxation Act) paragraph 14-51. |
| Type of measure | : | Scheme |
| Objective | : | Environmental protection |
| Form of aid | : | Tax advantage |
| Budget | : | NOK 115 million |
| Intensity | : | 3,7 % |
| Duration | : | 19.6.2015-31.12.2021 |
| Economic sectors | : | Energy |
| Name and address of the granting authority | : | Ministry of Finance |
| P.O. Box 8008 Dep. |
| NO-0030 Oslo |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

Date of adoption of the decision

:

6 July 2016

Case No

Case No

:

79160

Decision No

Decision No

:

150/16/COL

EFTA State

EFTA State

:

Norway

Title

Title

:

Amendment to the Norwegian Tax Act concerning changes in the depreciation rules for wind power plants

Legal basis

Legal basis

:

Act 19.6.2015 no. 52 on amendment of act 26.3.1999 no. 14 (the Taxation Act) paragraph 14-51.

Type of measure

Type of measure

:

Scheme

Objective

Objective

:

Environmental protection

Form of aid

Form of aid

:

Tax advantage

Budget

Budget

:

NOK 115 million

Intensity

Intensity

:

3,7 %

Duration

Duration

:

19.6.2015-31.12.2021

Economic sectors

Economic sectors

:

Energy

Name and address of the granting authority

Name and address of the granting authority

:

Ministry of Finance

P.O. Box 8008 Dep.

NO-0030 Oslo

NORWAY

Other information

Other information

:

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---