alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT(this "Amendment") is made and entered into effective
August 28, 2001 by and between Caremark Rx, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Caremark") and E. Mac Crawford ("Executive"). Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein
shall have the meanings ascribed to them in that certain Employment Agreement by and between Caremark and Executive dated March 18, 1998, as amended August 6, 1998, December 1,
1998, and March 8, 2000 (the "Employment Agreement").

WHEREAS,Caremark and Executive entered into the Employment Agreement on March 18, 1998 for a five-year term ending on
March 18, 2003, subject to extension as provided therein; and

WHEREAS,effective August 28, 2001 the Company agreed to extend the stated term of the Employment Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE,in consideration of the foregoing recitals and of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in the Employment
Agreement and this Amendment, the parties agree as follows:

1.Amendment of Section 2.Section 2 is hereby deleted in its entirety, and the following substituted
therefore:

The
term of employment provided for in this Agreement shall commence on March 18, 1998 (the "Commencement Date"), and shall remain in full force and effect until
September 1, 2006. Such term shall be automatically extended for an additional year on each anniversary of the Commencement Date, unless written notice of non-extension is provided by Caremark
to Executive at least 30 days prior to such anniversary.

2.No Other Amendment.Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, all other terms and conditions
of the Employment Agreement shall not be modified or amended and shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.

Caremark Rx, Inc.

|/s/KIRK MCCONNELLKirk McConnell
Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer |  | /s/HARRIS DIAMONDHarris Diamond
Director and Compensation Committee Chairman
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/E. MAC CRAWFORDE. Mac Crawford                                                         |  |                                                                             

---

QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 174 (Monday, September 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 50879]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19677]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1061-103]


Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Waiver Period for 
Water Quality Certification Application

    On August 26, 2021, Pacific Gas and Electric Company submitted to 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) a copy of their 
application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality 
certification filed with the California State Water Resources Control 
Board (California Water Board), in conjunction with the above captioned 
project. Pursuant to 40 CFR 121.6, we hereby notify the California 
Water Board of the following:
    Date of Receipt of the Certification Request: August 26, 2021.
    Reasonable Period of Time to Act on the Certification Request: One 
year.
    Date Waiver Occurs for Failure to Act: August 26, 2022.
    If the California Water Board fails or refuses to act on the water 
quality certification request by the above waiver date, then the 
agency's certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 
401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).

    Dated: September 7, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-19677 Filed 9-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
# L_2010049EN.01003001.xml

| 26.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/30

---

COUNCIL DECISION 2010/121/CFSP

of 25 February 2010

amending the Annex to Common Position 2004/161/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Zimbabwe

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 19 February 2004, the Council adopted Common Position 2004/161/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Zimbabwe (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 19 February 2004, the Council adopted Common Position 2004/161/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Zimbabwe (1).

| (2) | Council Decision 2010/92/CFSP (2), adopted on 15 February 2010, extended the restrictive measures provided for in Common Position 2004/161/CFSP until 20 February 2011. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Council Decision 2010/92/CFSP (2), adopted on 15 February 2010, extended the restrictive measures provided for in Common Position 2004/161/CFSP until 20 February 2011.

| (3) | The Council considers that one person should be added to the list of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Common Position 2004/161/CFSP. The list set out in the Annex to Common Position 2004/161/CFSP should be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Council considers that one person should be added to the list of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Common Position 2004/161/CFSP. The list set out in the Annex to Common Position 2004/161/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The person mentioned in the Annex to this Decision shall be included in the list set out in the Annex to Common Position 2004/161/CFSP.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Article 3

This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 25 February 2010.

For the Council

The President

M. Á. MORATINOS

---

(1)  
  OJ L 50, 20.2.2004, p. 66.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 41, 16.2.2010, p. 6.

2

---

ANNEX

The person referred to in Article 1

| no 57 | Jangara (a.k.a. Changara), Thomsen |
| --- | --- |

no 57

---
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 20

- 00374

- CR

Felecia Rae Suetos v. The State of Texas

On Appeal from the 36th District Court of San Patricio County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. S

- 19

- 3111CR

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having conside red this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed as modified by
this Court . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Ju ne 10 , 2021
# L_2018054DE.01001801.xml

| 24.2.2018 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 54/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2018

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 54/18

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 987/2009 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 16. September 2009 zur Festlegung der Modalitäten für die Durchführung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 883/2004 über die Koordinierung der Systeme der sozialen Sicherheit

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 284 vom 30. Oktober 2009
  )

Seite 25, Artikel 75 Absatz 1 erster Gedankenstrich:

Anstatt:

| „— | ‚Forderung‘ alle Forderungen im Zusammenhang mit nicht geschuldet geleisteten Beiträgen oder gezahlten Leistungen, ...“ |
| --- | --- |

„—

‚Forderung‘ alle Forderungen im Zusammenhang mit nicht geschuldet geleisteten Beiträgen oder gezahlten Leistungen, ...“

muss es heißen:

| „— | ‚Forderungen‘ alle Forderungen im Zusammenhang mit Beiträgen oder zu Unrecht gezahlten oder erbrachten Leistungen, ...“ |
| --- | --- |

„—

‚Forderungen‘ alle Forderungen im Zusammenhang mit Beiträgen oder zu Unrecht gezahlten oder erbrachten Leistungen, ...“

---
## F I F T H 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
Case No. 5D 2 3

- 401 LT Case No. 2020

- CF

- 7601

_____________________________
L ONNIE P RINCE , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Mark Borello , Judge

. Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Betty Wyatt, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kristie Regan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

September 12, 2023

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
W ALLIS , J AY , and M AC I VER , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________
WHITE RIVER NEAR WATSON, UTLatitude: 39.967Longitude: -109.167Elevation: 5221

WHITE RIVER NEAR WATSON, UT

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Bison Lake Site Page...



Bison Lake

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Burro Mountain Site Page...



Burro Mountain

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Ripple Creek Site Page...



Ripple Creek

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Trapper Lake Site Page...



Trapper Lake
Basin Hydrology, Operations 

2017 Hydrograph 

Glen Canyon Technical Work Gro

June 14, 2016 
May was wet 

• Slowed snow• Some additio

accumulation 

• Widespread 

throughout th

http://www.cbrfc.noaa.gov/product/mapsum/mapsum.php?area=cbrfc 

2 
3 

Snowpack peaked at ~94% on 

April 2th 

As of 

Almos

basin 

me
4 
Lake Powell 2016 Operating Tie

Upper Elevation Balancing 

• Tier was set in August 2015• April Adjustment to 

Balancing 

• Goal: balance contents of Lake 

Powell and Lake Mead by end of water year 

– release 8.23 maf - 9.0 maf – Currently projecting 9.0 maf release 

5 
6 
7 
WY 2016 release projections 

Most: 9.0 maf release 

Max: 9.0 maf release 

Min: 9.0 maf release 

8 

End of CY 2016 Projection: 

3,605.17 feet 

(Range 3,576 to 3,627 feet) 

End of CY 2017 

3610.26 

(Range 3,567 t
DOI-DOE Hydrograph 

Development 

for Water Year 2017 

9 
Lake Powell 2017 Operating Tie

Scenarios Based on April and June 2016 modeling 

Inflow 

Scenario 

Operating Tier 

Release Volume 

Minimum 

Probable 

Upper Elevation Balancing 

8.23 maf 

Most 

Probable 

Upper Elevation Balancing 

9.0 maf 

Maximum 

Probable 

Upper Elevation Balancing 

11.91 maf 

10 
2017 Hydrograph 

Current Proposal

Annual Release 

Volume June August Se

less than 9.0 maf 600 kaf 

-

650 kaf 800 kaf 6

9.0 maf – 

less than 9.5 maf 800 kaf 900 kaf 7

9.5 maf – 

less than 10 maf 900 kaf 900 kaf 7

10 maf and greater 900 kaf or more 900 kaf or more 8

o

11 
2017 Proposed Hydrogra

8.23 maf release 

12 
2017 Proposed Hydrogra

9.0 maf release 

13 
2017 Proposed Hydrogra

11.9 maf release 

• Lots of water to move: limited flexibility, minimal difference

14 
2017 Hydrograph Next Ste

• Continue to coordinate with TWG and AM

member agencies 

• TWG present to AMWG August 24-5 with 

for approval to recommend to Secretary 

15 
Questions?

Paul Davidson

801-524-3642

pdavidson@usbr.gov

Hydraulic Engineer, Glen Canyon

Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region

Resource Management Division

Water Resources Group

16 
2017 Hydrograph Concep

• Objective – enhance resources in the can

while maintaining hydropower objectives same annual release volume 

17 
Dave Trueman 

dtrueman@usbr.gov 

(801) 524-3759 

Manager 

Resource Management Division 

Upper Colorado Region 

Salt Lake City, UT 

Objective: better preserve August 

and September sand inputs for 

potential HFE in November. 

Typical 

greatest 

18 
19 

Typical months of higher 

release volumes: 

July and August 

(also Dec, Jan) 
Decreasing releases in the 

1,000kaf to 800kaf range can 

significantly decrease sand 

transport. Less difference seen at 

lower flow volumes. 

20 
2015 Hydrograph 

Monthly Release Objectives

Annual Release 

Volume June August Se

less than 9.0 maf 600 kaf 

-

650 kaf 6

9.0 maf – 

less than 9.5 maf 800 kaf 

800 kaf 

7

9.5 maf – 

less than 10 maf 900 kaf 7

10 maf and greater more than 900 kaf 8

o
2016 Possible Hydrograp

9.0 maf release – initial consideratio

presented at Feb AMWG meeting 
Screening Tool Analysis 

Typical MLFF Proposed 2016 Hyd
Update on the Bug 

Flows Experiment

Jeff Muehlbauer, 

Ted Kennedy 

15 October 2020

Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center

Southwest Biological Science Center

U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Department of the Interior
Theory Behind Bug Flows

 Daily hydropower flows create “tides”

 Insects lay eggs at water line at dusk

 When tide drops, eggs dry, die

Want to 

avoid 

this

Kennedy et al. 

2016 BioScience

2
Goals of Bug flows

 Improve egg-laying conditions for bugs!

 Thus:

• Increase abundance of midges

• Increase abundance/diversity of EPT

• (mayflies, stoneflies, caddisflies)

• Improve fish condition Yum

3
Design of Bug Flows

 Give bugs the “weekends off”

 Stable, low flows on weekends, May-August

 Eggs laid on weekends won’t dry/die

“Bug Flows” tested at Glen Canyon Dam 

May-August of 2018, 2019, 2020
In the past we’ve shown you:

 Midge spatial pattern

 Midge, caddisfly abundance

 Midge, caddisfly phenology

 Lees Ferry midges monthly

5

These are based on:

 Citizen science light traps (~1000 yearly)

 Lees Ferry sticky traps (~60 monthly)
With COVID-19 in 2020:

 Midge spatial pattern

 Midge, caddisfly abundance

 Midge, caddisfly phenology

 Lees Ferry midges monthly

These are based on:

~450 (~250 done)

6

 Citizen science light traps (~1000 yearly)

 Lees Ferry sticky traps (~60 monthly)
Lees Ferry monthly patterns

 2018 and 2019: 

Extreme May 

emergence

 2020: Normal?

 But May 2020 

hydrograph was 

unusual

Unpublished data, 

subject to change, do not cite.

7
2020 as a rubber match?

2018

 Dry/warm early, 

normal later

 High-normal bugs, 

and early

 Bug sine wave 

breaks?

2019

 Wet/cold early, 

dry/warm later

 Normal-high bugs, 

but late

 Bug sine wave 

returns?

8

Due to COVID-19,

2020 will NOT fully settle this!

Consider continuing in 2021...
Why not do Bug Flows in 2021?

Known outcomes

1. Better fishing

2. High wknd emerg.

3. High May emerg.

 Wet wknd eggs

 High wknd algae

 Hydropower cost

Less certain outcomes

A. Spatial sine wave

B. Midge increase

C. Caddisfly increase

Unpublished data, 

subject to change, do not cite.

9

1 2 3

A B

C
What about the FLAHG flow?

 Complementary? Yes

• Bug Flows: Egg stage

• FLAHG flow: Larval stage

 Complicating? Yes

• Will make data analysis harder

 Confounding? No

• Effects can be disentangled

Bug Flows

 Sine wave pattern

 Grand Canyon focus

FLAHG flow

 Insect, NZ mudsnail count

 Lees Ferry focus

No (scientific) issues with 

FLAHG flow + Bug Flows in 2021 10
#### In the Matter of Daniel Smith, Petitioner, v Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Kingston, Respondent.

— Kane, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Ulster County) to review a determination of respondent which terminated petitioner’s employment.

On or about February 13, 1985, petitioner was charged with misconduct in the performance of his duties as head custodian for the Kingston School District. The charges provided, *inter alia,*that: "on Saturday, February 9, at approximately 4:15 in the afternoon you were found by officers of the Kingston Police Department to be asleep in room 008 at Kingston High School.” The hearing officer found petitioner guilty of this charge and, as punishment for this misconduct, the hearing officer recommended a reduction of grade and title. In due course, respondent adopted the hearing officer’s findings of fact; however, respondent found that petitioner should be discharged. Petitioner then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding which was transferred to this court.

A review of the record provides substantial evidence to support respondent’s finding that petitioner was guilty of sleeping while on duty *(see, Matter of Di Maria v Ross,*52 NY2d 771). Petitioner was one of two head custodians at Kingston High School and testified that he normally worked from 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. On Saturday, February 9, 1985, due to special events being scheduled to take place at the school, petitioner was supposed to work at 8:00 a.m. and fellow head custodian Gilbert Williams was to begin work at 3:00 *814p.m. However, according to the testimony of Williams, at petitioner’s request, the two switched their work shifts on that date. Further, two police officers testified that at approximately 4:41 p.m., when they entered room 008 of the high school to investigate the setting off of the school’s burglar alarm system, they discovered petitioner lying down on a shop table. The police officers stated that petitioner appeared to be sleeping and they proceeded to wake petitioner up. The above provides substantial evidence to support respondent’s findings.

Finally, we fail to find the penalty of dismissal shockingly disproportionate to the offense *(see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222, 233-235). The determination should therefore be confirmed.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.
734 A.2d 1271

#### In the Matter of Valerie J. GLOVER. Petition for Reinstatement.

No. 845 Disciplinary Docket No. 2.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

July 23, 1999.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 1999, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board *489dated May 21, 1999, the Petition for Review and response thereto, the Petition for Reinstatement is denied. Pursuant to Rule 218(e), Pa.R.D.E., petitioner is directed to pay the expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Juan Enriquez v. Ahmed A. Morsy

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 8

- 00 877

- CV

Trial court case number: 1 8

- CV

- 0884

Trial court: 1 0 th District Court of Galveston County

Proceeding pro se, a ppellant

, Juan Enriquez

, has requested access to the appellate

record in this proceeding

. Accordingly, t he trial court clerk is directed , no later than 10 days from the date of this order, to send a copy of the one

- volume clerk’s record

, filed in

this Court on October 29 , 201 8

, and the one

- volume supplemental clerk’s record filed in
this Court on March 12, 2019

, to appellant at the address provided in his request :
Juan Enriquez

TDC# 227122

TDCJ

- Terrell

1 300 FM 655

Rosharon , Texas 7 7583.

And, t he court reporter is directed , no later than 10 days from the date of this order, to send a copy of the reporter’s record filed in this appeal on March 7, 2019, to appellant at
th e above address

. We further direct the district court clerk and the court reporter, no later than 15 days from the date of this order, to notify the Clerk of this Court the date on which delivery to appellant was made.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Julie Countiss

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ May 30, 2019

____
#### Municipal Testing Laboratory, Inc., Respondent, v Aleksandr Brom et al., Appellants.

Submitted April 30, 2007;

decided June 7, 2007

Motion to dismiss the appeal herein granted and appeal dismissed, with $400 costs and $100 costs of motion, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
1 – ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

LINH THI MINH TRAN, No. 3:16-cv-00707-AC

Plaintiff, ORDER

v. 

 

OFFICER DARRYN J. KUEHL, 

OFFICER BENJAMIN J. TOOPS, and

OFFICER RYAN KERSEY,

 Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge John Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation [164] on January 

14, 2020, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss 

Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

Case 3:16-cv-00707-AC Document 175 Filed 11/16/20 Page 1 of 2
2 – ORDER

Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. 

Pl. Obj., ECF 169. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & 

Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the 

Magistrate Judge’s report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th 

Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s objections and concludes that there is no 

basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent 

portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & 

Recommendation. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta’s Findings and Recommendation [164].

Therefore, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss [145] [146] are GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Third 

Amended Complaint [139] is dismissed without leave to amend. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _______________________.

 ___________________________

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ

United States District Judge

November 15, 2020

Case 3:16-cv-00707-AC Document 175 Filed 11/16/20 Page 2 of 2
# L_2010252EN.01019501.xml

| 25.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 252/195 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 252/195

---

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

of 5 May 2010

on the closure of the accounts of the Euratom Supply Agency for the financial year 2008

(2010/541/EU)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

having regard to the final annual accounts of the Euratom Supply Agency for the financial year 2008,

having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Euratom Supply Agency for the financial year 2008, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 16 February 2010 (5827/2010 — C7-0061/2010),

having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

having regard to Council Decision 2008/114/EC, Euratom of 12 February 2008 establishing Statutes for the Euratom Supply Agency (3) and in particular Article 8 thereof,

having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0076/2010),

| 1. | Approves the closure of the accounts of the Euratom Supply Agency for the financial year 2008; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Director-General of the Euratom Supply Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series). |
| --- | --- |

2.

The President

Jerzy BUZEK

The Secretary-General

Klaus WELLE

---

(1)  
  OJ C 304, 15.12.2009, p. 6.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 41, 15.2.2008, p. 15.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

4

---