alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

### SIP APPROVABILITY CHECKLIST--ENFORCEABILITY

- 

### PAGE 1

District: South CoastAirQuality Management 

### District Rule No.: 1610 Date Amended: April 11. 1997 Rule Title: Old-Vehicle Scrapping
APPLICABILITY a. What sources are being regulated? Stationary and indirect emission sources subiectto otherspecific rules and regulations, such as Regulations XI. XIII, and XX. See Sections (a). (c)(1). and (i) [Rule 1610 1. b. What exemptions are provided? See Section(s) N/A [Rule 1. c. What is the calculation procedure forexemptions? See Section(s) N/A [Rule 1. d. Is the averaging time used in the rule greaterthan that ofthe applicable federal ambient standard(s)? No. See Section(s) N/A [Rule 1. e. What are the units ofcompliance? Total pounds ofVOC. NOx, CO. or PM. See Section (h)(1) [Rule 1610 1. f. Is bubbling oraveraging ofanytype allowed? No. g. Ifthere is a redesignation ofthe AQCR to attainment, will this change the emissions limitation in the rule? N/ACALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

### SIP APPROVABILITY CHECKLIST--ENFORCEABILITY

- 

### PAGE 2

COMPLIANCE DATES a. What is compliance date? Rule 1610 is a voluntary rule and does not have compliance dates in itself, but does require that an MSERC Application, a Scrapping Plan, and a Compliance Plan (forcreditsto be used forcompliance with Regulation XI and Regulation XIII rules) be submitted within time constraints. The compliance dates ofthe applicable prerequisite Regulation Xl rulesforwhich credits are aenerated a~olvtothe submittal date ofa Scrapping Plan. See Sections (c)(3), (c)(4), (d). (e)(2). (e)(4), 

### (h)m, (k)(l). & 

### (l)(7) [Rule 1610 1. b. What is attainment date? Nitrogen dioxide 12/31/1995 Carbon monoxide 12/31/2000 Ozone 12/31/2010 TSP 12/31/2006 Sulfurdioxide Attained SPECIFICITYOF CONDUCT a. Whattest method is required? NotApplicable. b. What is the averaging time in the compliance test method? NotApplicable. c. Is a compliance calculation orevaluation required? Yes. A calculation methodology is given fordetermining the Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits perscrapped vehicle. See Section (h) [Rule 1610 1. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE a. What is District authorityfor rulemaking? See Board amendment Resolution. b. What methods/rules are incorporated in the rule? No new methods/ruleswere incorporated into this amendment.CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

### SIP APPROVABILITY CHECKLIST--ENFORCEABILITY

- 

### PAGE 3

RECORDKEEPING a. What records are required to determine compliance? See Sections (i). (k). and (I) [Rule 1610 1. b. Whatform or units mustthe records be kept? See Sections (c)(4). (h). (i)(3,4), & (fl(1) [Rule 1610 1. c. On whattime basis mustthe records be kept? See Sections (i)(1.2.6.7). (k)(t5). & (l)(8) [Rule 1610 1. d. Does the rule affirmatively require thatthe records be kept? Yes. See Sections (I) and (k) [Rule 1610 1. EXEMPTIONS a. Are any exemptions allowed? N/A b. What is the criteriaforapplication? N/A
7. MALFUNCTION PROVISIONS

N/A (ARBFORM

- 6/93)
# C_2015337EN.01003701.xml

| 12.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 337/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 337/37

---

Action brought on 11 August 2015 — Syriatel Mobile Telecom v Council

(Case T-471/15)

(2015/C 337/41)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Syriatel Mobile Telecom (Joint Stock Company) (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Declare the applicant’s action admissible and well founded; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare the applicant’s action admissible and well founded;

| — | Consequently, annul Decision (CFSP) 2015/837 of 28 May 2015 and the subsequent measures implementing it, in so far as they relate to the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Consequently, annul Decision (CFSP) 2015/837 of 28 May 2015 and the subsequent measures implementing it, in so far as they relate to the applicant;

| — | Order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant raises three pleas in law which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-432/11 in Makhlouf v Council
   (1).

Makhlouf

Council

1

---

(1)  OJ C 290, p. 13.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1142 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1142

  To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of certain 
                        hydroelectric projects.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 16, 2017

  Mr. Cassidy introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of certain 
                        hydroelectric projects.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``J. Bennett Johnston Waterway 
Hydropower Extension Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the time period specified in 
section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would 
otherwise apply to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project numbers 
12756, 12757, and 12758, the Commission may, at the request of the 
licensee for the applicable project, and after reasonable notice, in 
accordance with the good faith, due diligence, and public interest 
requirements of that section and the Commission's procedures under that 
section, extend the time period during which such licensee is required 
to commence the construction of its applicable project for up to 3 
consecutive 2-year periods from the date of the expiration of the 
extension originally issued by the Commission under that section for 
such project.
    (b) Obligation for Payment of Annual Charges.--Any obligation of a 
licensee for a project described in subsection (a) for the payment of 
annual charges under section 10(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 
803(e)) shall commence when the construction of the project commences.
    (c) Reinstatement of License; Effective Date for Extension.--
            (1) Reinstatement.--If the time period required for 
        commencement of construction of a project described in 
        subsection (a) has expired prior to the date of the enactment 
        of this Act, the Commission may reinstate the license for such 
        project, effective as of the date of the expiration of the 
        license.
            (2) Effective date for extension.--If the Commission 
        reinstates a license under paragraph (1) for a project, the 
        first extension authorized under subsection (a) with respect to 
        such project shall take effect on the effective date of such 
        reinstatement under paragraph (1).
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 31.2
 SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 I, Robert D. Burr., CERTIFY THAT:
 1.
    
    I have reviewed this 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 of Bayou City Exploration, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to
state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which
such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this
report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and
procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the small business issuer, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small
business issuers disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the
end of the period covered by this report based
on such evaluation;c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the small
business issuers internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the
small business issuers most recent fiscal
quarter (the small business issuers fourth
quarter in the case of an annual report) that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, the small business
issuers internal control over financial
reporting; and
 5.
    
    The small business issuers certifying officer(s) have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation
of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which
are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
small business issuers ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the small business
issuers internal controls over financial
reporting.
  /s/ Robert D. BurrRobert D. BurrActing Chief Financial Officer
Filed 1/15/14 City of Lake Forest v. Evergeen Holistic Collective CA4/3 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

CITY OF LA KE FOREST, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. EVERGREEN HOLISTIC COLLECTIVE, Defendant and Appellant. G043909

(Super. Ct . No. 30-2009-00298887)

O P I N I O N

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, David R. Chaffee, Judge. Affirmed. D|R Welch Attorneys at Law and David R. Welch fo r Defendant and Appellant. Best Best & Krieger, Jeffrey V. Dunn and Laura A. Dahl for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *2 Evergreen Holistic Collective contends local bans on medical marijuana dispensaries are preempted because the Legisl ature made clear its policy determination in Health and Safety Code section 11362.775 that the cultivation of marijuana for sick Californians by qualified cooperative or colle ctive associations is not a nuisance, and therefore, what the Legislature has authorized, the City of Lake Forest (the city) may not ban. We agreed in a published opinion, a nd because the trial court granted the city’s injunction request solely on the basis of th e city’s dispensary ban, we reversed the preliminary injunction and remanded the matt er for further proceedings. The Supreme Court granted the city’s petition fo r review and later concluded in City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Hea lth & Wellness Center, Inc. (2013) 56 Cal.4th 729 ( Inland Empire ) that local governments may ban medi cal marijuana dispensaries without triggering preemption by the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (Health & Saf. Code, § 11362.5) or California’s Medical Marijuana Program (Health & Saf. Code, § 11362.7 et seq.). The high court transferred this cas e back to us to c onsider in light of Inland Empire , and because that decision is controlling authority ( Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 455), we affirm the preliminary injunction. The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

ARONSON, J.

WE CONCUR:

RYLAARSDAM, ACTING P. J.

FYBEL, J.
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 65-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 1 of 7
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 65-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 2 of 7
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 65-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 3 of 7
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 65-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 4 of 7
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 65-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 5 of 7
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 65-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 6 of 7
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS Document 65-2 Filed 08/14/2009 Page 7 of 7
No. 66244.

#### Fanning Chemical Corporation et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/12573, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain of the merchandise consists of drums, containing wool grease, with more than 2 percent of free fatty acids, similar in all material respects to the wool grease the subject of Abstract 60387, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.1

                                 CERTIFICATION

           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES
                                     CODE)

     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Allianz Aktiengesellschaft, a German company (the
"Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the
"Report") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Date: July 15, 2004

                                          /s/ MICHAEL DIEKMANN
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Michael Diekmann
                                          Chief Executive Officer
# C_2016441EN.01000701.xml

| 28.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 441/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 441/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 5 October 2016 — European Commission v Republic of Poland

(Case C-23/16) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulil obligations - Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 - Common rules concerning the conditions to be complied with to pursue the occupation of road transport operator - Article 16(1) and (5) - National electronic register of road transport undertakings - Lack of interconnection with the electronic registers of other Member States))

(2016/C 441/09)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Hottiaux, acting as Agent)

Defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Declares that, by not creating a national electronic register of road transport undertakings and by not establishing the interconnection with the electronic registers of other Member States, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 16(1) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 21 October 2009, establishing common rules concerning the conditions to be complied with to pursue the occupation of road transport operator and repealing Council Directive 96/26/EC. |
| --- | --- |

1)

Declares that, by not creating a national electronic register of road transport undertakings and by not establishing the interconnection with the electronic registers of other Member States, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 16(1) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 21 October 2009, establishing common rules concerning the conditions to be complied with to pursue the occupation of road transport operator and repealing Council Directive 96/26/EC.

| 2) | Orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.

---
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1017 

To designate the Red River Valley Agricultural Research Center in Fargo, 

North Dakota, as the ‘‘Edward T. Schafer Agricultural Research Center’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 3, 2017 

Mr. HOEVEN (for himself and Ms. HEITKAMP) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To designate the Red River Valley Agricultural Research 

Center in Fargo, North Dakota, as the ‘‘Edward T. 

Schafer Agricultural Research Center’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EDWARD T. SCHAFER AGRICULTURAL RE4 SEARCH CENTER. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Red River Valley Agricul6 tural Research Center in Fargo, North Dakota, shall be 

7 known and designated as the ‘‘Edward T. Schafer Agricul8 tural Research Center’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1017 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in any law, map, 

2 regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the Edward T. Schafer 

5 Agricultural Research Center. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE COMPANY FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
JUNE 30, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE COMPANY'S
FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      124,475
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      2,469
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          24,309
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         1,050
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                   6,374
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 158,677
<COMMON>                                            49
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       18,424
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             45,822
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                  64,295
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            58,017
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                               1,100
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      962
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  34,303
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  158,677
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       55,723
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             4,605
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      39,932
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      44,537
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         11,186
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 131<F3>
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  11,317
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         3,911
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,406
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                    7,406
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         1,148
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        4,453<F1>
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          16,452
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.23<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.23<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Total interest on books represents interest expense related to long-term
debt outstanding under first mortgage bonds and long-term secured notes.
<F2>Represents basic and diluted earnings per share computed in accordance with
FASB 128.
<F3>Includes expense due to the net cumulative effect of accounting changes
of $349.
</FN>


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      I, Jonathan Judge, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of Crystal Decisions, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June
27, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in
such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Crystal Decisions, Inc.



                                      By:  /s/ Jonathan Judge
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Jonathan Judge
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer




      I, Eric Patel, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Crystal Decisions, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June
27, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in
such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Crystal Decisions, Inc.



                                      By:  /s/ Eric Patel
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Eric Patel
                                           Chief Financial Officer
H. Res. 719 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 30, 2018. 

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is 

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Mr. Curtis. 

Attest: 

Clerk.