alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2004228EN.01001202.xml

| 11.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/12

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 15 July 2004

in Case C-139/03: Commission of the European Communities against Federal Republic of Germany (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to transpose Directive 2000/38/EC)

(2004/C 228/23)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-139/03: Commission of the European Communities (Agents: J.C. Schieferer and H. Støvlbæk) against Federal Republic of Germany (Agent: A. Tiemann) — application for a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2000/38/EC of 5 June 2000 amending Chapter Va (Pharmacovigilance) of Council Directive 75/319/EEC on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to medicinal products (OJ 2000 L 139, p. 28), or by failing to inform the Commission thereof, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive — the Court (First Chamber), composed of: P. Jann (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, K. Lenaerts, E. Juhász and M. Ilešič, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 15 July 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | By failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the provisions of Commission Directive 2000/38/EC of 5 June 2000 amending Chapter Va (Pharmacovigilance) of Council Directive 75/319/EEC on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to medicinal products, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive. |
| --- | --- |

1.

By failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the provisions of Commission Directive 2000/38/EC of 5 June 2000 amending Chapter Va (Pharmacovigilance) of Council Directive 75/319/EEC on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to medicinal products, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.

| 2. | The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 146 of 21.6.2003.

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461*et seq.*) (HOLA), Regulation LL (12 CFR part 238), and Regulation MM (12 CFR part 239), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a savings and loan holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a savings association and nonbanking companies owned by the savings and loan holding company, including the companies listed below.                

The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(e)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 10(c)(4)(B) of the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(4)(B)). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than March 6, 2015.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia (William Lang, Senior Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105-1521:

                    1.                     *Kearny MHC, and Kearny Financial Corp.,*                     to merge with Kearny Financial Corp., (a newly formed holding company), and thereby directly acquire Kearny Federal Savings Bank, both in Kearny, New Jersey.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 4, 2015.

Michael J. Lewandowski,

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2015-02597 Filed 2-9-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICE EFFECTS - NETWORK DIAGRAM August 2023

Freshly shaped and graded land surface resulting from 

removal of unwanted obstructions. 

Obstruction Removal (500) 

I.2. (+) Land 

Values

Initial Settings: On any land where existing obstructions interfere 

with planned land use development, public safety or 

infrastructure. This standard is not intended for the removal of 

obstructions from aquatic environments.

Start

D.7 (+) Cost of 

implementation

I.3 (+) 

Health 

and 

safety of 

adjacent 

land.

I.6. (+) Regional 

Haze (temporary) 

C.2 (+/-) Income and income stability (individual and community)

D.1 (+) Available land area for 

desired use and operation 

efficiency. 

D.5 (+) Potential of exposing 

toxic or polluted materials 

(i.e., treated wood)

D.6 (-) Human 

health and safety 

during demolition

D.11 (+) Emissions (if debris is 

burned; particulates, CO2, CO, 

volatile organic compounds, 

nitrogen oxides, ammonia, methane. 

D.2 (+) 

Erosion 

during 

demolition 

process 

D.3 (+) Soil 

compaction 

(equipment 

operation). 

D.4 (-) 

Runoff, 

flooding and 

ponding 

D.12 (-) 

Human 

health and 

safety

D.13 (-) 

Visibility

C.4 (-) Air quality within the 

air-shed.(temporary)

C.3 (+/-) Recreational 

Opportunities

I.5. (+/-) Biodiversity 

D.8 (+) Upland habitat 

fragmentation possible if 

vegetation is removed or 

manipulated. 

D.9 (+/-) Early 

successional 

and edge 

habitat.

D.10 (-) Habitat features for 

reptiles, amphibians, small 

mammals, and invertebrates, 

including pollinators. 

Notes:

Effects are qualified with a plus 

(+) or minus (-). These symbols 

indicate only an increase (+) or a 

decrease (-) in the effect upon 

the resource, not whether the 

effect is beneficial or adverse.

Critical Area Planting (342)

Conservation Cover (327)

Access Road (560)

Dust Control on Unpaved 

Roads and Surfaces (373)

Woody Residue Treatment 

(384)

C.1 (+) Quality of receiving 

waters 

I.1 (+) Water 

Quality of runoff: 

(-) Sediment, (-) 

Nutrients (-) 

organics, and (-) 

pathogens

I.4. (+/-) Net Return

LEGEND

D. Direct effect

#. Created by practice

I. Indirect effect

C. Cumulative effect

Mitigating practice

Associated practice

Pathway
No. 90-6013.

#### Tiller *v.*Klincar et al.

Sup. Ct. Ill. Cer-tiorari denied.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Probabilistic Safety Analysis Procedures Guide (NUREG/CR-2815, BNL-NUREG-51559)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-2815 (PDF - 8.52 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**September 1983**Date Published:**January 1984

**Prepared by:** I.A. Papazoglou, R.A. Bari, A.J. Buslik, R.E. Hall, D. Ilberg, P.K. Samanta, T. Teichmann, and R.W. Youngblood, Brookhaven National Laboratory A. El-Bassioni, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission J. Fragola and E. Lofgren, Science Applications, Inc. W. Vesely, Battelle Columbus Laboratories

Department of Nuclear Energy  Brookhaven National Laboratory  Upton, NY 11973

**Prepared for:** Division of Safety Technology Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC FIN A-3382

Availability Notice

## Abstract

A procedures guide for the performance of probabilistic safety assessment has been prepared for interim use in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission programs. It will be revised as comments are received, and as experience is gained from its use. The probabilistic safety assessment studies performed are intended to produce probabilistic predictive models that can be used and extended by the utilities and by NRC to sharpen the focus of inquiries into a range of issues affecting reactor safety. This guide addresses the determination of the probability (per year) of core damage resulting from accident initiators internal to the plant and from loss of offsite electric power. The scope includes analyses of problem-solving (cognitive) human errors, a determination of importance of the various core damage accident sequences, and an explicit treatment and display of uncertainties for the key accident sequences. Ultimately, the guide will be augmented to include the plant-specific analysis of in-plant processes (i.e., containment performance) and the risk associated with external accident initiators, as consensus is developed regarding suitable methodologies in these areas. This guide provides the structure of a probabilistic safety study to be performed, and indicates what products of the study are essential for regulatory decision making. Methodology is treated in the guide only to the extent necessary to indicate the range of methods which is acceptable; ample reference is given to alternative methodologies which may be utilized in the performance of the study.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,091
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,957
<ALLOWANCES>                                       209
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,683
<PP&E>                                          14,233
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,418
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  24,251
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,370
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            46
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,041
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    24,251
<SALES>                                         34,520
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                34,520
<CGS>                                           22,287
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   37,986
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (84)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,573
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4,955)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       139
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5,094)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5,094)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.12)
        

</TABLE>
#### Stewart, Respondent, vs. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Mari-nette county dated January 4, 1927 : W. B. Quinlan, Judge.

Automobile collision. Judgment for plaintiff, from which defendant appeals.

For the appellant: *North, Parker, Bie & Welsh,*attorneys, and *Samuel D. Hastings,*of counsel, all of Green Bay.

For the respondent: *E. H. Herbert*of Coleman and *Arold F. Murphy*of Marinette.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
# C_2004251EN.01002602.xml

| 9.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 251/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/26

---

Action brought on 19 July 2004 by Caremar SpA against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-292/04)

(2004/C 251/48)

Language of the case: Italian

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 19 July 2004 by Caremar SpA and others, represented by Gian Michele Roberti, Alessandra Franchi and Guido Bellitti, lawyers.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul that part of the challenged decision in which the subsidies for public service obligations paid to Caremar, Toremar, Siremar and Saremar are regarded as State aid; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul that part of the challenged decision in which the subsidies for public service obligations paid to Caremar, Toremar, Siremar and Saremar are regarded as State aid;

| — | in the alternative, annul that part of the challenged decision in which the subsidies for public service obligations paid to Caremar, Toremar, Siremar and Saremar are classified as new aid, and not as existing aid; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul that part of the challenged decision in which the subsidies for public service obligations paid to Caremar, Toremar, Siremar and Saremar are classified as new aid, and not as existing aid;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-265/04 Adriatica di Navigazione and Others v Commission (1).

1

---

(1)  Not yet published in the Official Journal.

1

---
NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICE EFFECTS - NETWORK DIAGRAM September 2020

Terrace (600)

D.2 (+) Redirected water 

flow

1. Channel across the 

slope

I.14 (+) Infiltration D.3 (+) Maintenance 

requirement—removing 

sediment, reshaping

C.3 (+/-) Income and

income stability 

(individuals and

community) 

C.4 (+) Preservation 

of infrastructure; 

reduced community 

maintenance costs 

I.3 (-) Sediments 

and sedimentborne 

contaminants to 

receiving waters

I.4 (-) 

Ephemeral 

gullies

C.1 (+) Fishable and swimmable 

waters; reduced health and safety 

issues for humans and domestic and 

wild animals

I.8 (+) Soil quality

Initial setting: Cropland, nonirrigated, 

subject to water erosion and/or runoff

I.5 (-) Runoff 

velocity

I.10 (-) Maintenance 

of drainage ditches 

and other structures

I.9 (+) Crop 

production

I.11 (+/-) Net 

return to farmer

Underground Outlet 

(620)

Grassed Waterway (412)

Stable

outlets

I.6 (-) Sheet 

and rill 

erosion

I.1 (-) Runoff 

amount

I.2 (-) Onfarm flooding

I.13 (+) Saline 

seeps

C.2 (+) Quality of 

receiving waters 

D.1 (-) Slope length

I.7 (+) Reduced 

waterborne 

contaminants to 

receiving waters

I.12 (+) Plant 

available moisture

Start

Note: 

Effects are qualified with a 

plus (+) or minus (-). These 

symbols indicate only an 

increase (+) or a decrease (-) 

in the effect upon the 

resource, not whether the 

effect is beneficial or adverse.

LEGEND

#. Created by practice

D. Direct effect

I. Indirect effect

C. Cumulative effect

Pathway

Mitigating practice

Associated practice
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2258 

To require that certain standards for commercial driver’s licenses applicable 

to former members of the armed services or reserves also apply to 

current members of the armed services or reserves. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 1, 2017 

Mr. AGUILAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To require that certain standards for commercial driver’s 

licenses applicable to former members of the armed services or reserves also apply to current members of the 

armed services or reserves. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Active Duty Voluntary 

5 Acquisition of Necessary Credentials for Employment 

6 Act’’ or the ‘‘ADVANCE Act’’. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2258 IH

1 SEC. 2. COMMERCIAL DRIVER’S LICENSE STANDARDS FOR 

2 SERVICE MEMBERS AND VETERANS. 

3 Section 31305(d) of title 49, United States Code, is 

4 amended— 

5 (1) in the subsection heading, by striking ‘‘VET6 ERAN OPERATORS’’ and inserting ‘‘SERVICE MEM7 BERS, RESERVISTS, AND VETERANS’’; and 

8 (2) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting ‘‘current 

9 or’’ before ‘‘former’’ each place the term appears. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 219 

To correct the Swan Lake hydroelectric project survey boundary and to 

provide for the conveyance of the remaining tract of land within the 

corrected survey boundary to the State of Alaska. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2017 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To correct the Swan Lake hydroelectric project survey 

boundary and to provide for the conveyance of the remaining tract of land within the corrected survey boundary to the State of Alaska. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Swan Lake Hydro5 electric Project Boundary Correction Act’’. 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 219 IH

1 SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF FEDERAL LAND WITHIN THE 

2 SWAN LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 

3 BOUNDARY. 

4 Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment 

5 of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, after consulta6 tion with the Secretary of Agriculture, shall— 

7 (1) survey the exterior boundaries of the tract 

8 of Federal land within the project boundary of the 

9 Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2911) 

10 as generally depicted and labeled ‘‘Lost Creek’’ on 

11 the map entitled ‘‘Swan Lake Project Boundary— 

12 Lot 2’’ and dated February 1, 2016; and 

13 (2) issue a patent to the State of Alaska for the 

14 tract described in paragraph (1) in accordance 

15 with— 

16 (A) the survey authorized under paragraph 

17 (1); 

18 (B) section 6(a) of the Act of July 7, 1958 

19 (commonly known as the ‘‘Alaska Statehood 

20 Act’’) (48 U.S.C. note prec. 21; Public Law 85– 

21 508); and 

22 (C) section 24 of the Federal Power Act 

23 (16 U.S.C. 818). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                      14,327,570
<SECURITIES>                                21,307,956
<RECEIVABLES>                              148,970,826
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,087,525
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,393,750
<PP&E>                                       4,411,715
<DEPRECIATION>                                 198,003
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             261,444,752
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      216,070,736
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       800,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  44,104,809
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               261,444,752
<SALES>                                      3,177,912
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,371,535
<CGS>                                        1,520,731
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,850,804
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,415,155
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             2,850,804
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,720,361
<INCOME-TAX>                                   586,888
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,133,473
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.40
        

</TABLE>
*January 11, 1938.*

#### Szumiel, Respondent, vs. Zimowicz, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Casimir Gonski*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Skogmo <& Gill*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Order affirmed.
# C_2005019EN.01001003.xml

| 22.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/10

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sicilia by decision of that court of 20 July 2004 in the case of Agip Petroli SpA against Capitaneria di Porto di Siracusa, Capitaneria di Porto di Siracusa, Sezione Staccata di Santa Panagia, Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, interested party (for the applicant): Arbix Diamone Shipping

(Case C-456/04)

(2005/C 19/21)

Language of the case: Italian

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sicilia (Sicily Regional Administrative Court) (Italy) of 20 July 2004 received at the Court Registry on 29 October 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Agip Petroli SpA against Capitaneria di Porto di Siracusa, Capitaneria di Porto di Siracusa, Sezione Staccata di Santa Panagia, Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, interested party (for the applicant): Arbix Diamone Shipping on the following question:

For the purposes of Article 3(3) of Regulation No 3577/92 (1), does the term ‘voyage which follows or precedes the cabotage voyage’ apply only to a voyage which is ‘functionally and commercially autonomous, that is with cargo on board, the final/starting point of which is a foreign port’, as referred to in the contested measure in the present case, or does it also apply to a voyage without cargo on board (that is, a ‘voyage in ballast’)?

1

---

(1)  OJ L 364 of 12.12.1992, p. 7.

1

---