alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2005143EN.01001202.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

(Sixth Chamber)

of 14 April 2005

in Case C-146/04: Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the Netherlands (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directives 2000/69/EC and 2001/81/EC - Atmospheric pollutants - Failure to transpose)

(2005/C 143/15)

Language of the case: Dutch

In Case C-146/04, action for failure to fulfil obligations brought on 19 March 2004 under Article 226 EC, Commission of the European Communities (Agents: M. van Beel and G. Valero Jordana) against Kingdom of the Netherlands (agents: H.G. Sevenster and J. van Bakel), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of A. Borg Barthet (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, S. von Bahr and J. Malenkovský, Judges, Advocate General: P. Léger, Registrar: R. Grass, has given a judgment on 14 April 2005 in which it:

Commission of the European Communities

Kingdom of the Netherlands

| 1. | Declares that by failing to adopt the necessary laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 2000/69/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000 relating to limit values for benzene and carbon monoxide in ambient air and Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that by failing to adopt the necessary laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 2000/69/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000 relating to limit values for benzene and carbon monoxide in ambient air and Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives;

| 2. | Orders Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 106 of 30.4.2004.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 7466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02869]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notice

February 6, 2015.

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, February 19, 2015.

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street 
entrance).

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Commission will hear oral argument in the 
matter Big Ridge, Inc. v. Secretary of Labor, Docket Nos. LAKE 2011-
699-R, et al. (Issues include whether the Administrative Law Judge 
erred in upholding certain orders issued pursuant to sections 103(j) 
and 103(k) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977.)
    Any person attending this oral argument who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. 
Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and Sec.  2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-
9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

Sarah L. Stewart,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2015-02869 Filed 2-6-15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         300,000                       0
<SECURITIES>                                 7,715,000                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,200,000                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                    66,000                       0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,149,000                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,503,000                       0
<PP&E>                                       3,169,000                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,212,000                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,944,000                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,866,000                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        62,000                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,967,000                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,944,000                       0
<SALES>                                      2,805,000               5,320,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,805,000               5,320,000
<CGS>                                        1,594,000               2,864,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,594,000               2,864,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,093,000               2,239,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (78,000)               (158,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                196,000                 375,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    73,000                 139,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   123,000                 236,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02                     .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02                     .04
        

</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 99.5
 (KPMG LOGO)KPMG LLPChartered Accountants
    
    Telephone
    
    (403) 691-80002700-205 5th Avenue SW
    
    Fax
    
    (403) 691-8008Calgary AB T2P 4B9
    
    Internet
    
    www.kpmg.ca
 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
  
    
    our auditors report dated March 20, 2008 on the consolidated balance sheets of Precision
Drilling Trust (the Trust) as at December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the consolidated statements
of earnings and retained earnings (deficit) and cash flow for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2007; and
    
    our Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated March 20, 2008 on the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007
Exhibit 12(a)


                               906 Certification

                                                                  June 30, 2003

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities and
Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code. This certification is not to
be deemed filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and does not
constitute a part of the Annual Report on Form 20-F (the "Report") accompanying
this letter.

     Richard H.P. Chang, the Chief Executive Officer and Richard C. Wei, the
Chief Financial Officer of ASE Test Limited, each certifies that, to the best
of his knowledge:

     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 ASE Test Limited.

                                        /s/ Richard H.P. Chang
                                        ------------------------------------
                                        Name:    Richard H.P. Chang
                                        Title:   Chief Executive Officer



                                        /s/ Richard C. Wei
                                        ------------------------------------
                                        Name:    Richard C. Wei
                                        Title:   Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures
that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Advanced Semiconductor
Engineering , Inc. and will be retained by Advanced Semiconductor Engineering,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.


                                      E-2
June 25, 2015

Mr. Chris Shuttlesworth

8383 Clairmont Drive South Semmes, AL 36575

Dear Mr. Shuttlesworth:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) . It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your June 12, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-2252), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
October 2020

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Conservation Practice Overview

Water Well (Code 642) 

A hole drilled, dug, driven, bored, jetted, or otherwise

constructed into an aquifer for agricultural water supply. 

Practice Information 

This practice is used to provide— 

• Adequate livestock water quality and quantity. 

• Water for terrestrial wildlife. 

• Irrigation water. 

This practice requires appropriate design and installation to function properly. If practicable, locate

wells on higher ground and up-gradient from potentail surface and subsurface contamination or

pollution and areas subject to flooding. Evaluate the potential for adverse interference with existing

nearby production wells during planning. Other concerns that should be considered in planning

include the potential for ground water overdraft; the long-term safe yield of the aquifer and potential

effects of installation; operation of the well on cultural, historical, archaeological, or scientific resources

at or near the site; and setback zones and prohibitions. Wells must be drilled and installed by a

licensed water well driller, according to State and local laws. 

Operation and maintenance of a water well includes recordkeeping of identified problems, corrective

actions taken, date, and specific capacity (yield per unit drawdown) of the water well before and after

corrective actions were taken.The owner must remedy unacceptable conditions in a timely manner. 

Common Associated Practices 

Once a well has been installed, a distribution system, watering system, and/or irrigation system is

usually needed. 

NRCS Conservation Practice Standard Water Well (Code 642) is commonly applied with other

conservation practices such as NRCS CPSs Pumping Plant (Code 533), Livestock Pipeline (Code

516), Watering Facility (Code 614), and Irrigation Pipeline (Code 430). 

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101934 

7 March 1967 

This file of material should be kept together in event that 

the JRC/NRO problem ever reappears - and it will! 

Quiggins 

~ --1 q p Sl=Cf<Z'T / B YEMA1v I 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101934 

... 
.. 

; J) 

',' 

... 

RECONNAISSANCE UNDER JCS MANAGEMENT 

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 14000239450 

A. Purpose 

1. This document defines the role of reconnaissance under 

Joint Chiefs of Staff management in consonance with the 

objectives of the "Agreement for Reorganization of the 

National Reconnaissance Program" dated 11 August 1965. 

B. General 

1. Reconnaissance under JCS management will be responsive 

both to national intelligence collection requirements and 

to the requirements of military operations. The validation of national targeting requirements, establishment of 

priorities and desired frequency of coverage are the responsibility of USIB; execution of operations to satisfy those ~ 

requirements is ' subject to approval by the 303 Committee. 

C. The Joint Chiefs of Staff will: 

1. Manage and direct military reconnaissance programs 

and operations assigned by the Secretary of Defense to 

support approved national intelligence collection requirements; 

2. In response to OSD direction and in coordination 

with the Department of State as appropriate, provi~e 

necessary guidance and constraints for reconnaissance 

activities in support of military operations; 

ViORt(lNG PAPER T~Dt"T' HANDL.E VIA ~YEMAN " 

I ur ' \)C~ CONTROL SYSTEM ONL.Y 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101934 

I , .... illili!!l 

), 

I 

t 

10= 

f 

f 

i 

i 

! 

I 

f 

r 

i " I 
-

,,- .' 

i 

, 

WUHKINIl PftP~R T[~ HANblE viA BiEMAN 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/~1 C051019341YSTE:M ONLY 

3. Submit, through the Secretary of Defense, proposed 

reconnaissance operations of national interest or of 

particular sensitivity to the 303 Committee for approval; 

4. Maintain close liaison and coordination with the CIA 

and NRO to minimize undesirable duplication and to prevent 

:i operational conflicts which might generate excessive hostile 

reaction; and 

5. Provide and coordinate military support for CIA 

-. . and NRO reconnaissance operations which involve assigned or 

attached resources of uammanders of unified or specified 

. commands. 

. ! 

• , • < ,< ~ .• '" 

.- ' 

, ' 

'. 

_ l , 

,i 

i 

; .~ , 

\ ,~. : . . 

; .\ 

. , , < 

. \VORKING PAPER ~(\Dr1 HANDLE VIA BYEMAN 

I U r Di::trArW CONTROL SYSTEM N" Y 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101934 

i 

ft 

ti 

I

'I 

.~ 

• 

r 

If 

r-I 

r 

!'
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.4


                      [LETTERHEAD OF SUNCOM APPEARS HERE]


VIA FACSIMILE AND OVERNIGHT MAIL
--------------------------------

October 13, 2000

Tom Hunt
SBA Towers, Inc.
One Town Center Road
Boca Raton, FL 33486

        Re: Purchase Agreement dated September 15, 2000 by and among TeleCorp
            Realty, LLC, TeleCorp Puerto Rico Realty, Inc., TeleCorp
            Communications, Inc., SBA Towers, Inc. and SBA Telecommunications,
            Inc. (the "Agreement")

Dear Tom:

        As contemplated in Section 3(a) of the Agreement, the Credit Agreement
has now been amended to permit additional Sites to be transferred to SBA.
Accordingly, I propose that with your acknowledgement, this letter serves to
amend the Agreement to increase the number of Sites up to and including Two
Hundred and Seventy-Five (275) completed Sites and increase the aggregate
purchase price to Ninety Million Sixty Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars
($90,062,500.00).  All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect.

        If acceptable to you please return your executed acknowledgement to me
by facsimile at (703) 236-1376.

                                        Sincerely,

                                        /s/ Ronald W. Keefe, Jr.

                                        Ronald W. Keefe, Jr.

                                   Acknowledged and Agreed to by:
                                   TeleCorp Realty, LLC
Acknowledged and Agreed to by:     By:
SBA Towers, Inc.                      ---------------------------
SBA Telecommunications, Inc.       It's:
                                        -------------------------
By: /s/ John Marino                TeleCorp Puerto Rico Realty, Inc.
   ---------------------------     By:
It's: Chief Financial Officer         ---------------------------
                                   It's:
                                        -------------------------
                                   TeleCorp Communications, Inc.
                                   By:
                                      ---------------------------
                                   It's:
                                        -------------------------
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-40274

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

NORBERTO MONTALVO, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-95-CV-257 (M-92-CR-71-2)

- - - - - - - - - -

June 17, 1997

Before SMITH, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Norberto Montalvo, Jr., # 40684-079, appeals the district

court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. He argues that

the forfeiture of his real property pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 

§ 881(a)(7), in addition to his convictions and sentences for

conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute cocaine,

constituted double punishment in violation of the Double Jeopardy

Clause. His argument is without merit. See United States v.

Ursery, 116 S. Ct. 2135, 2149 (1996).
No.

- 2 -

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2278 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2278

   To extend the authorization of the Uranium Mill Tailing Radiation 
   Control Act of 1978 relating to the disposal site in Mesa County, 
                               Colorado.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 1, 2017

  Mr. Tipton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the authorization of the Uranium Mill Tailing Radiation 
   Control Act of 1978 relating to the disposal site in Mesa County, 
                               Colorado.

    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 ``Responsible Disposal Reauthorization 
Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION.

    Section 112(a)(1)(B) of the Uranium Mill Tailing Radiation Control 
Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 7922(a)(1)(B)) is amended by striking 
``September 30, 2023'' and inserting ``September 30, 2048''.
                                 <all>
```
AD Economic Evaluation



### Docket No . FAA

- 20 15

- 6033 Directorate ID : 2015

- SW

- 019

- AD

Helicopter Model:

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 15 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason : This proposed AD is prompted by th e determination that placards had not been installed

according to specifications on newly manufactured helicopters. The proposed actions are

intended to provide exit procedures during an emergency.

Costs :

Parts per Helicopter $ 70

Labor per Helicopter

( 4 work hours X $85 for

inspection ) $ 340

Other

(Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter

$410

Total US Fleet Cost $6,150

Executive Order 12866 :

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  )

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures :

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  )

Regulatory Flexibility Act :

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No (  )

Project Engineer : David Hatfield