alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2005057EN.01003901.xml

| 5.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 57/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/39

---

Action brought on 4 January 2005 by Guido Strack against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-4/05)

(2005/C 57/65)

Language of the case: German

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 4 January 2005 by Guido Strack, residing in Wasserliesch (Germany), represented by R. Schmitt, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul both the decision of 5 February 2004 to close the OLAF investigation OF/2002/0356 and the final case report on which that decision was based (NT/sr D(2003)-AC-19723-01687 of 5 February 2004); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul both the decision of 5 February 2004 to close the OLAF investigation OF/2002/0356 and the final case report on which that decision was based (NT/sr D(2003)-AC-19723-01687 of 5 February 2004);

| — | order the Commission to reopen the investigation, draw up a new final case report and pay all the costs of the judicial proceedings and all other expenses. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to reopen the investigation, draw up a new final case report and pay all the costs of the judicial proceedings and all other expenses.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, who is a Commission official, informed the Director General of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) that, while performing his duties at the Official Publications Office, he had become of aware of facts indicating the existence of serious irregularities. The investigation opened by OLAF on the basis of that information was closed by the contested decision.

The applicant submits, first of all, that his action is admissible because the contested decision has binding legal effect on him in that it deprives him of the status of ‘whistleblower’.

In support of his action, he submits that OLAF failed to investigate fully the facts of which it had been informed and adopted an arbitrary decision.

---
### -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

34 36 38 40 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 06/08 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 08 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ● 

## ★ ● ● ● ●
# C_2004239EN.01002805.xml

| 25.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/28

---

Removal from the Register of Case T-325/03 (1)

1

(2004/C 239/64)

(Language of the case: German)

(Language of the case: German)

By order of 6 May 2004, the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-325/03, E-Sim Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  OJ C 289, 29.11.2003.

1

---
# C_2005115EN.01001703.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/17

---

Action brought on 6 April 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-160/05)

(2005/C 115/32)

Language of the case: French

An action against the French Republic was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 6 April 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by D. Maidani, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission of the European Communities claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions which are necessary in order to comply with Directive 2002/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2002 on financial collateral arrangements (1)and, in any event, by failing to inform the Commission of them, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions which are necessary in order to comply with Directive 2002/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2002 on financial collateral arrangements (1)and, in any event, by failing to inform the Commission of them, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| 2. | order the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposing the directive into national law expired on 27 December 2003.

---

(1)  OJ L 168 of 27.06.2002, p. 43.

1

---
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7697** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. LANCE D. YOUNG , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Wheeling
. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr. , Senior District Judge. ( 5:05

- cr - 00063

- FPS

- 1; 5:09

- cv 00116

- FPS

- JSK )

Submitted : April 23, 2015 Decided: April 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Lance D. Young, Appellant Pro Se. Randolph John Bernard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
La nce D. Young seeks to appeal the district court’s order s accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion , and denying reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the de nial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently review ed the record and conclude that Young has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense wi th oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
ARTHUR D. LITTLE, INC.GovernmentSuite 1000Regulatory Impact2111 Wilson BoulevardModelArlington, Virginia January 12, 200122201-3001USDOE Central Air Conditioner RulemakingBecause software is inherently complex and may notbe completely free of errors, you are advised to verifyyour work.In no event will Arthur D. Little be liablefor direct, indirect, special, incidental, orconsequential damages arising out of the use ofor inability to use the software or documentation,even if advised of the possibility of such damages.InstructionsBegin at theMajor Assumptionssheet: Adjust any of the parameters in beige cells and select options from the menus.Proceed to the other sheets, also adjusting any parameters in beige.Check to make sure the word "Ready" appears in the lower left corner of the Excel window. If the word "Calculate" appears, press F9.Change to theSummary Reportand Graphs to view the results of your modifications.All sheets areprotectedto prevent usersfrom inadvertently altering formulae incells. To release protection, useTools>Protection>Unprotect Sheet.Some intermediate worksheets and cellsare hidden to make the workbook easierto navigate. To reveal sheets, useFormat>Sheet>Unhide. To reveal cells,select the rows or columns you wish toreveal and useFormat>Rows/Columns>Unhide.
Exhibit
        32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
        OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT
        TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
 AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
        connection with the Annual Report of ATSI Communications, Inc. on Form 10-KSB/A
        for the period ending July 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
        Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur L. Smith, President and Chief Executive
        Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C, ss. 1350, as adopted
        pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,
 
 1)
              the
                  Report complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                  of the
                  Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 2)
              the
                  information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
                  the
                  financial condition and result of operations of the
                  Company.
 
 By
/s/
        Arthur L. Smith
 Arthur
        L.
        Smith
 President
        and
 Chief
        Executive Officer
 November
        2, 2005
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. February 2024 nrcs.usda.gov

 

Agricultural Land 

Easements

Agricultural Land Easements help private 

and tribal landowners, land trusts, and 

other entities such as state and local 

governments protect working farms and 

ranches by limiting nonagricultural uses of 

the land through conservation easements.

Who is Eligible?

Eligible partners include American Indian 

tribes, state and local governments, and 

nongovernmental organizations that have 

farmland, rangeland, or grassland 

protection programs.

Eligible landowners include owners of 

privately held land including land that is 

held by tribes and tribal members.

All landowners, including members of 

landowner-legal entities, must meet 

adjusted gross income (AGI) limitations 

and must be compliant with the Highly 

Erodible Land/Wetland Compliance 

(HEL/WC) provisions of the Food Security 

Act of 1985.

What Land is Eligible?

Land eligible for agricultural easements 

includes private or Tribal agricultural land, 

cropland, rangeland, grassland, 

pastureland, and nonindustrial private 

forest land. NRCS prioritizes applications 

that protect agricultural uses and keeps a 

farm or a ranch in production agriculture.

How Does it Work?

NRCS provides financial assistance to 

eligible partners to purchase Agricultural 

Land Easements that protect the 

agricultural uses. Partners, in turn, work 

with interested landowners to enroll their 

land in an Agricultural Land Easement.

How do I Find a Partner 

to Hold my Easement?

Visit the following websites to learn how to 

find an eligible partner to hold 

conservation easements.

Farmland Protection Directory

Land Trust Alliance

Find Your Local NRCS 

Office

Service Center Locator

Benefits

The Agricultural Land 

Easements component of 

the USDA Natural 

Resources Conservation 

Service’s Agricultural 

Conservation Easement 

Program protects the longterm viability of the nation’s 

food supply by preventing 

conversion of productive 

working lands, including 

grasslands and related 

conservation values, to 

nonagricultural uses.

Land protected by 

agricultural land easements 

provides additional public 

benefits, including 

environmental quality, 

historic preservation, 

wildlife habitat, and 

protection of open space.

Agricultural Land 

Easements also leverage 

local partnerships to match 

NRCS funding.

Local partners are 

responsible for the longterm stewardship of the 

easement.

For More 

Information 

To learn more about 

Agricultural Land 

Easements, contact your 

local NRCS office. 

You can also read more 

about the Agricultural 

Conservation Easement 

Program on the NRCS 

website at 

www.nrcs.usda.gov.

How to Find a Partner to 

Hold an Agricultural Land 

Easement
# C_2005069EN.01001701.xml

| 19.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/17

---

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 10 November 2004

in Case T-303/04 R, European Dynamics SA v Commission of the European Communities

(Public service contracts - Community tender procedure - Interim measures - Application for suspension of operation - Urgency - None)

(2005/C 69/33)

Language of the case: English

In Case T-303/04 R, European Dynamics SA, established in Athens (Greece), represented by S. Pappas, lawyer, against Commission of the European Communities (Agents: L. Parpala and E. Manhaeve, and J. Stuyck, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — application for suspension of operation of, first, the Commission's decision of 4 June 2004 (DIGIT/R2/CTR/mas D(2004) 324) to rank only in second place the offer submitted by the consortium of which the applicant is a member following a call for tenders for the provision of informatics services and, second, the Commission's decision of 14 July 2004 (DG DIGIT/R2/CTR/mas D(2004) 811) rejecting the applicant's complaints of 21 June, 1, 5 and 8 July 2004 against the award of the contract to another consortium — the President of the Court of First Instance has made an order on 10 November 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

European Dynamics SA,

Commission of the European Communities

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | Costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Costs are reserved.

---
# C_2005143EN.01001201.xml

| 11.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/12

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 14 April 2005

in Case C-22/04 Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 - Fishing vessels - Establishment of a satellite-based position monitoring system - Failure to transpose within the prescribed periods)

(2005/C 143/14)

Language of the case: Greek

In Case C-22/04 Commission of the European Communities (Agents: M Condou-Durande and T. van Rijn) v Hellenic Republic (Agents: A. Samoni-Rantou and S. Chala) — action under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 26 January 2004 — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of R. Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber, J. Makarczyk and P. Kūris (Rapporteur), Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 14 April 2005, in which it:

Commission of the European Communities

Hellenic Republic

| 1. | Declares that by failing to ensure that fishing vessels which fly its flag and must be equipped with satellite-tracking devices were in fact equipped with such devices, according to the type of vessel concerned, on 30 June 1998 or 1 January 2000, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 686/97 of 14 April 1997; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that by failing to ensure that fishing vessels which fly its flag and must be equipped with satellite-tracking devices were in fact equipped with such devices, according to the type of vessel concerned, on 30 June 1998 or 1 January 2000, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 686/97 of 14 April 1997;

| 2. | Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 85 of 3.4.2004.

1

---
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Mechanical Behavior of Ballooned and Ruptured Cladding (NUREG-2119)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-2119 (PDF - 7.04 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**February 2012**Date Published:**February 2012

**Prepared by:** Michelle Flanagan

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report presents and discusses the results of the NRC’s integral loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) research program. In this program, the residual bending moment and failure energy were measured using the four point bend tests for as-received and irradiated samples following exposure to LOCA conditions to determine the resistance to fracturing of ballooned cladding. The findings of this research program have been used to develop a recommendation for how to treat the ballooned region in LOCA analysis. To support the recommendation, this document will begin with a review of the regulatory history of the balloon region, present a discussion of available test methods for measuring post-LOCA cladding behavior, present the results of bend tests on as-fabricated and irradiated cladding material following exposure to LOCA conditions, and conclude with recommendations for using this information to inform regulatory decisions. The purpose of this document is to serve as the technical basis for the treatment of the ballooned and ruptured regions of a fuel rod in LOCA analysis.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
EXHIBIT 10(M)




March 24, 1998
Mr. Scott Gast
Heller Financial, Inc.
500 West Monroe Street
Chicago, Illinois  60661


Dear Scott:

We have determined during the course of our year-end audit that currently we do
not comply with certain of the covenants in our Loan and Security Agreement as
follows:

1. Section 6.4 - the Company's Annualized Net Attrition rate exceeded the
   allowed percentage.
2. Section 6.5(a) - the Company's Debt Service Coverage for the period fell
   below the permissible ratio.
3. Section 7.4 - the Company extended a loan, in the amount of $12,000, to a
   dealer with whom the Company conducts business.

We respectfully request that you waive the compliance requirements for the above
stated Sections by signing the acknowledgment below and returning it to me.

Sincerely,


/s/DARIUS G. NEVIN
Darius G. Nevin
Chief Financial Officer


                                       Signature: /s/SCOTT E. GAST
                                                        Scott E. Gast


                                       Title:   Assistant Vice President

                                       Date:   March 16, 199
# C_2005069EN.01002701.xml

| 19.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/27

---

Removal from the Register of Case T-189/04 (1)

1

(2005/C 69/47)

(Language of the case: French)

By order of 16 December 2004, the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-189/04, Christian van der Haegen v European Economic and Social Committee.

---

(1)  OJ C 217 of 28.8.2004.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.b



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of BCTC IV Assignor Corp. (the "registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc N. Teal, Principal Financial Officer of the registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                  
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                        
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.



|                  |  |                            
|----------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Date:             |  |                            
|November 16, 2009 |  | /s/ Marc N. Teal           
|                  |  |                            
|                  |  | Marc N. Teal               
|                  |  | Principal Financial Officer
|                  |  |                            
|                  |  |                            
|                  |  |                            

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other

document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2005106EN.01000802.xml

| 30.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/8

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 3 March 2005

in Case C-90/04: Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Austria (1)

1

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Article 7(1) of Directive 1999/32/EC - Failure to supply the report relating to the sulphur content of liquid fuels used on its national territory)

(2005/C 106/15)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-90/04: Action for failure to fulfil obligations under Article 226 EC, brought on 23 February 2004 — Commission of the European Communities (Agents: J. Schieferer and G. Valero Jordana) v Republic of Austria (Agent: E. Riedl) –the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of R. Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber, J. Makarczyk (Rapporteur) and P. Kūris, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 3 March 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to supply to the Commission of the European Communities, before 30 June 2002, the report for 2001, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(1) of Council Directive 1999/32/EC of 26 April 1999 relating to a reduction in the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels and amending Directive 93/12/EEC; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to supply to the Commission of the European Communities, before 30 June 2002, the report for 2001, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(1) of Council Directive 1999/32/EC of 26 April 1999 relating to a reduction in the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels and amending Directive 93/12/EEC;

| 2. | Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 94 of 17.04.2004.

1

---