alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014255EN.01000101.xml

| 6.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7306 — Triton / GEA Heat Exchanger Business)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 255/01

On 31 July 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7306. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7306. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2015433EN.01000201.xml

| 23.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

22 December 2015

(2015/C 433/02)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0952 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,42 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4615 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,73620 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2620 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0818 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,5430 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,028 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 313,97 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2377 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5192 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2280 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5109 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5242 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4913 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6036 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5379 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 283,30 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,5748 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,0933 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6560 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 963,04 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7093 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 51,789 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 77,8588 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,504 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,3619 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,7405 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,5474 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0952

JPY

Japanese yen

132,42

DKK

Danish krone

7,4615

GBP

Pound sterling

0,73620

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2620

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0818

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,5430

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,028

HUF

Hungarian forint

313,97

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2377

RON

Romanian leu

4,5192

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2280

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5109

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5242

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4913

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6036

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5379

KRW

South Korean won

1 283,30

ZAR

South African rand

16,5748

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,0933

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6560

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 963,04

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7093

PHP

Philippine peso

51,789

RUB

Russian rouble

77,8588

THB

Thai baht

39,504

BRL

Brazilian real

4,3619

MXN

Mexican peso

18,7405

INR

Indian rupee

72,5474

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
Exhibit 99.31

News
Release
August 21, 2000

Trading Symbols:TRBD (EASDAQ)

EASDAQ MAINTAINS TURBODYNE'S SUSPENSION

Carpinteria, CaliforniaAugust 21, 2000Turbodyne Technologies, Inc.
(EASDAQ:TRBD) reports that on August 2, 2000 EASDAQ suspended trading of the shares of Turbodyne Technologies, Inc., pending clarification of the facts underlying Turbodyne's press
release dated August 1, 2000.

On
August 17, 2000, the EASDAQ Market Authority reviewed the decision to suspend and decided to maintain the suspension pending further investigation. Such suspension will
remain in effect until October 3, 2000, unless otherwise determined by the Market Authority.

Turbodyne
Technologies, Inc., a California based high technology company, specializes in the development of charging technology for internal combustion engines plus the
development and manufacturing of high-tech assemblies for electrically assisted turbochargers and superchargers. Turbodyne Technologies, Inc.'s is located in Carpinteria, CA; the European
business location is Frankfurt, Germany.

Contacts:

Kenneth
Fitzpatrick, VP Group FinanceInvestor Relations: (805) 684-4551
Markus Kumbrink, Turbodyne Europe Investor Relations: +49-69-69-76-73-13

---

QuickLinks
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 1354** 

GENNADIY KARP; TAMILLA HUMBAT GIZI HASANOVA , Petitioners ,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General , Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : July 29, 2013 Decided: August 8, 2013

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed in part, and denied in part by un published per curiam opinion

.
Gennadiy Karp, Tamilla Humbat Gizi Hasanova, Petitioners Pro Se. Lindsay Corliss, Nicole N. Murley, William Charles Peachey, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this cir cuit.2 PER CURIAM: Gennadiy Karp, a native of Moldova and a citizen of Azerbaijan, and his wife, Tamilla Humbat Gizi Hasanova, a native and citizen of Azerbaijan, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying their motion to reconsider and reopen. We have reviewed the administrative record and Petitioners’ contentions, and conclude that we lack jurisdiction over the claims challenging prior Board orders from
which Petitioners failed to file a timely petition for rev iew.

See Stone v. INS , 514 U.S. 386, 405 (1995). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review in part with respect to those claims. Next, after reviewing Petitioners’ claims relative to
the instant order under review, we conclude that the Board did

n ot abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen and
reconsider. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2013). We therefore deny the petition for review in part for the reasons stated by the
Board. See In re: Karp , (B.I.A. Feb. 25, 2013 ). We dispense
with or al argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presente d in the materials before this C ourt and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DISMISSED IN PART , AND DENIED IN PART
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tac Asset Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony N. DeMint, President and Chief AccountingOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.    The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

2.    The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

/s/ Anthony N.DeMint                    

Anthony N. DeMint

President and

Chief AccountingOfficer

 

May 20, 2005
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-51109

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANDRES MENDOZA-LAZALDE,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:15-CR-1948-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Andres Mendoza-Lazalde, federal prisoner # 59855-380, was sentenced 

to 46 months of imprisonment for smuggling goods and facilitating the 

smuggling of goods from the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 554. He 

has filed a motion for the appointment of counsel and leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis (IFP) on appeal.

The district court entered the judgment of conviction on April 4, 2016. 

Mendoza-Lazalde filed a pro se notice of appeal at the earliest on August 30, 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 22, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-51109 Document: 00513769181 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/22/2016
No. 16-51109

2

2016, well beyond the time for appealing and for extending the appeal period. 

See FED. R.APP. P. 4(b)(1)(A), (b)(4). The appeal, which was filed far outside 

the time limit, is frivolous. See United States v. Leijano-Cruz, 473 F.3d 571, 

574 (5th Cir. 2006). Consequently, Mendoza-Lazalde’s appeal is DISMISSED, 

see 5TH CIR. R. 42.2, and his motion for the appointment of counsel and leave 

to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED.

 Case: 16-51109 Document: 00513769181 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/22/2016
Exhibit
      32.2








GVI
SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.


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 Annual Report of
GVI Security Solutions, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending
December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steven Walin, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, 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:





(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 result of operations of the
      Company.








March
      16, 2009
              /s/ Steven WalinSteven
      WalinChief
      Financial
Officer
Order filed, December 01, 2016.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00643-CV

____________

GULSHAN ENTERPRISES, INC., Appellant

V.

ZAFAR, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 80th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2013-75119

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due September 19, 2016. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 35.1. On September 30, 2016, Michelle Tucker filed a motion for 

extension of time to file the record which was granted until October 19, 2016. On 

November 07, 2016, a second motion for extension of time was filed and granted 

until November 18, 2016 with the notation that no further extensions will be 
granted absent exceptional circumstances. The court has not received a request to 

extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. 

Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following 

order.

We order Michelle Tucker, the official court reporter, to file the record in 

this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
**Exhibit 24.2**

 

**POWER OF ATTORNEY**

 

KNOW ALL MEN BYTHESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Robert E.Sulentic, Derek R. McClain, and J. Christopher Kirk and each of them, his trueand lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution andresubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, to sign on hisbehalf, as a director or officer, or both, as the case may be, of Trammell CrowCompany, a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), the Corporation’s AnnualReport on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, and to sign anyor all amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same, with all exhibitsthereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities andExchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, and each of themwith or without the others, full power and authority to do and perform each andevery act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about thepremises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do inperson, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of said attorneys-in-factor their substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done byvirtue hereof.

 

 
|   | /s/  ARLIN E. GAFFNER |
|--------|-----------------------|
|   | Arlin  E. Gaffner     |

 

----
1H-NMR

Sanitized
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

BRANDON STEEN FUHRMANN, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 17-0615 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. 2013-459682-001

The Honorable Daniel J. Kiley, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED AND RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Diane Meloche

Counsel for Respondent

Brandon Steen Fuhrmann, Florence

Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Randall M. Howe, Judge Kenton D. Jones, and Judge James 

B. Morse Jr. delivered the decision of the Court.

FILED 2-1-2018
STATE v. FUHRMANN

Decision of the Court

2

PER CURIAM: 

¶1 Petitioner Brandon Steen Fuhrmann seeks review of the 

superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed 

pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner’s 

first petition and it is untimely.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s burden to 

show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition 

for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 

2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of 

discretion. 

¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.
#### Eaton vs. Gillet.

Part payment of a note nothin six years before the commencement of an action upon it, takes the case out of the statute of limitations.

Where the complaint showed such payment, a demurrer to it, taken *before*the decision of this court upon the same point in *Cleodtmd m. Earrison,*15 Wis., 670, will not be treated as frivolous.

ERROR to the Circuit Court for *Fond du Lac*County.

The action in the circuit court was by *Gillet*against *Eaton,*on a promissory note. The complaint showed that the note was made more than six years before the action was commenced, but that a payment had been made upon it within six years. The defendant demurred, setting up the statute of limitations as a defense; and the court rendered judgment for the plaintiff, on the ground that the demurrer was frivolous; upon which *Eaton*sued out his writ of error.

*B. P.*Eaton, in person.

*J. M. Gillet,*in person.

*By the Court,*

DfXON, C. J.

The complaint states a good cause of action. Part payment within the period prescribed takes a case out of the statute of limitations. This was determined in *Cleveland vs. Harrison,*15 Wis., 670; but as this *436case arose before that was decided, and as we then listened to a lengthy and most elaborate argument of the question, we. cannot pronounce the demurrer to have been frivolous, though it might have been so had it been taken since that decision. The judgment must, therefore, be reversed, and cause remanded for further proceedings according to law.
# C_2016246EN.01000601.xml

| 7.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 246/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 246/6

---

NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION

(2016/C 246/07)

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:

| | EPSO/AST/138/16 — AUDIO-VISUAL AND CONFERENCE TECHNICIANS (AST 3) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AST/138/16 — AUDIO-VISUAL AND CONFERENCE TECHNICIANS (AST 3)

The competition notice is published in 24 languages in
  Official Journal of the European Union C 246 A of 7 July 2016.

Official Journal of the European Union

Further information can be found on the EPSO website: http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/eu-careers.info/

---
EXHIBIT 24.12

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Robert E. Sulentic, Derek R. McClain, Arlin E. Gaffner and J. Christopher
Kirk and each of them, his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, to sign on his
behalf, as a director or officer, or both, as the case may be, of Trammell Crow Company, a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), the Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2001, and to sign any or all amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, and each of them with or without the others, full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that each of said attorneys-in-fact or their substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

| |  | /s/H. PRYOR BLACKWELLH. Pryor Blackwell
| |  | ---------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
# CA2014099EN.01000501.xml

| 4.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 99/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 99/5

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OFFICIAL JOURNALS

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OFFICIAL JOURNALS

2014/C 099 A/02

Please find below the list of C A Official Journals published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, the Official Journals are published in all language versions.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 6 | |
| 11 | |
| 19 | |
| 21 | |
| 26 | |
| 27 | |
| 30 | (PL) |
| 35 | |
| 41 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 42 | |
| 43 | |
| 46 | |
| 47 | |
| 48 | |
| 55 | |
| 56 | |
| 60 | |
| 62 | |
| 65 | |
| 73 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 74 | |
| 81 | |
| 88 | |
| 92 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 97 | |
| 98 | |
| 99 | |

5

6

11

19

21

26

27

30

(PL)

35

41

(DE/EN/FR)

42

43

46

47

48

55

56

60

62

65

73

(DE/EN/FR)

74

81

88

92

(DE/EN/FR)

97

98

99

---
Exhibit 10.1


 





AMENDMENT
NUMBER 4 TO THE CONSULTING AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN COMMUNITY BANK OF THE CHESAPEAKE AND JAMES F. DI MISA


 


This amendment to the consulting
agreement by and between Community Bank of the Chesapeake (the “Bank”) and James F. Di Misa (the “Consultant”)
is entered into on September 30, 2021 (the “Amendment Number 4”).


 


WHEREAS, the Bank and the Consultant entered into
a consulting arrangement (“Consulting Agreement”) on April 1, 2019 and subsequently extended the term of the Consulting Agreement
through September 30, 2021; and


 


WHEREAS, the Bank
requires the Consultant’s services for an additional three months and thereby wishes to further extend the Consulting
Agreement through December 31, 2021; and


 


WHEREAS, the Consulting
Fee (as such term is defined in Section 2(a) of the Agreement) will be $17,500.00 effective October 1, 2021.


 


NOW, THEREFORE:


 


		1.	Effective September 30, 2021, Section 2(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the last
three sentences in Section 2(a) and replacing those sentences with the following new language:



 


“If this Agreement is extended beyond December
31, 2021, the Consultant will be compensated on an hourly basis for actual hours worked and billed to the Bank. The Consultant’s
hourly fee will be $150 per hour. Consultant will be paid within 30 days of the Bank’s receipt and approval of an invoice for hours
billed.”


 


		2.	Effective September 30, 2021, Section 1(a) shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following
new Section 1(a):



 


“The Consultant shall provide consulting services
through December 31, 2021, unless sooner terminated by the Parties or extended by the Bank. Any extension will be the “Consulting
Period” for purposes of Section 3 of this Agreement.”


 


		3.	All other provisions of the Agreement will remain in full force and effect



 


		4.	The term of the Agreement is extended through December 31, 2021, unless otherwise terminated sooner
or extended.



 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Bank has caused this Amendment Number 4 to be executed by its duly authorized representative and Consultant has
signed this Amendment Number 4 effective as of the date first above written.


 


 


COMMUNITY BANK OF THE CHESAPEAKE


 


 


	By:		 




 


 


CONSULTANT


 


 





	By:
S. 2794 

One Hundred Seventeenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty two 

An Act 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase automatic maximum coverage 

under the Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance program and the Veterans’ 

Group Life Insurance program, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Supporting Families of the 

Fallen Act’’. 

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN AUTOMATIC MAXIMUM COVERAGE UNDER 

SERVICEMEMBERS’ GROUP LIFE INSURANCE AND VETERANS’ GROUP LIFE INSURANCE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1967(a)(3)(A)(i) of title 38, United 

States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘$400,000’’ and inserting 

‘‘$500,000’’. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a) 

shall take effect on the later of— 

(1) the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment 

of this Act; or 

(2) the date on which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

determines that— 

(A) the amount for which a member will be insured 

pursuant to the amendment made by subsection (a) and 

the premiums for such amount are administratively and 

actuarially sound for the Servicemembers’ Group Life 

Insurance program under subchapter III of chapter 19 of 

title 38, United States Code, and the Veterans’ Group 

Life Insurance program under section 1977 of such title; 

and 
S. 2794—2 

(B) the increase in such amount carried out pursuant 

to the amendment will not result in such programs operating at a loss. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.