alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §2246. Advisory committees

The Chairman of the Board, subject to the approval of the Board, may establish one or more advisory committees in accordance with chapter 10 of title 5 and may appoint to such committee or committees individuals who are members of the Federal Farm Credit Board when such Board is terminated by the Farm Credit Amendments Act of 1985.

(Pub. L. 92–181, title V, §5.12, Dec. 10, 1971, 85 Stat. 620; Pub. L. 99–205, title II, §201(1), Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1690; Pub. L. 100–233, title IV, §431(d), Jan. 6, 1988, 101 Stat. 1660; Pub. L. 117–286, §4(a)(56), Dec. 27, 2022, 136 Stat. 4311.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Farm Credit Amendments Act of 1985, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 99–205, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1678. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title of 1985 Amendment note set out under section 2001 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

2022—Pub. L. 117–286 substituted "chapter 10 of title 5" for "the Federal Advisory Committee Act".

1988—Pub. L. 100–233 inserted ", subject to the approval of the Board," after "Chairman of the Board".

1985—Pub. L. 99–205 substituted provisions respecting advisory committees for provisions respecting compliance by the Governor with orders of the Federal Farm Credit Board.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1985 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–205 effective thirty days after Dec. 23, 1985, see section 401 of Pub. L. 99–205, set out as a note under section 2001 of this title.

#### Interim Implementation of 1985 Amendment

For provisions authorizing interim implementation by Governor of Farm Credit Administration of amendments to this section by Pub. L. 99–205, see section 402 of Pub. L. 99–205, set out as a note under section 2241 of this title.
{"agency":"PRC","generated":"2020-10-23 13:17:19","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"},{"label":"2014","value":"2014"},{"label":"2015","value":"2015"},{"label":"2016","value":"2016"},{"label":"2017","value":"2017"},{"label":"2018","value":"2018"},{"label":"2019","value":"2019"},{"label":"2020","value":"2020"}],"value":"2020"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Reporting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q4"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":null}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":null}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["PRC"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["8"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["8"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":["1"]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2020","quarter":"Q4"}
```

[110th Congress Public Law 11]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ011.110]

[[Page 121 STAT. 66]]

Public Law 110-11
110th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  3903 South Congress Avenue in Austin, Texas, as the ``Sergeant Henry 
Ybarra III Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: Mar. 7, 2007 -  [H.R. 577]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SERGEANT HENRY YBARRA III POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 3903 South Congress Avenue in Austin, Texas, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Sergeant Henry Ybarra III Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant 
Henry Ybarra III Post Office Building''.

    Approved March 7, 2007.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 577:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007):
            Feb. 5, considered and passed House.
            Feb. 17, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Alston, Ch afin and Senior Judge Haley

KARIN LANDRY MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 1189-15-1 PER CURIAM JANUARY 19, 2016 ATLANTIC PROTECTI VE SERVICES AND TRAVELERS INDE MNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Ralph Rabinowitz, on briefs), for appellant. (Chanda W. Stepney; Law Offices of Mark J. Beachy, on brief), for appellees.
Karin Landry (claimant) appeals the decisi on of the Workers’ Compensation Commission (Commission) finding that claimant was not entitled to an award of temp orary total disability benefits. On appeal, claimant argues that the Commission erred (1) when it ignored Deputy Commissioner Jenkins’ Septembe r 10, 2013 decision crediting Dr. Holzer’s opinion, which was not appealed and became the law of the case for the May 16, 2014 hearing; (2) when it failed to give great weight to Dr. Holze r’s opinions because he treated clamant for years and his opinion was supported by medical evidence; (3) in finding that Dr. Holzer ’s conclusions were primarily premised on subjective complaints from claimant, that his conclusions were shaded in doubt, and that he assumed the role of medical advocate for claimant; (4) by not adopting a view of the medical evidence consistent with the dissenti ng opinion of Commissione r Marshall; (5) by not crediting Dr. Holzer’s opinion above Dr. Ross’ opinion; (6) in finding that Dr. Gold concluded

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designated for publication.UNPUBLISHED- 2 - claimant was able to return to all pre-injury work when Dr. Gold imposed work restrictions of no lifting of more than fifteen pounds a nd no prolonged standing and walking 1 ; and (7) in holding that claimant sustained no disability from work. We have reviewed the record and the Comm ission’s opinion and find th at this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the Commission in its opinion. See Landry v. Atl. Protective Servs., JCN VA00000424316 (July 6, 2015). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because th e facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid th e decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. Affirmed.

1 D. Wade McClenny, the president of Atlantic Protective Services, testified claimant’s job did not require prolo nged standing and walking and it did not require her to lift more than fifteen pounds.
### §954. Voluntary extension; probation

The Secretary concerned may provide for persons who were subject to his authority at the time of commission of their offenses a system for retention of selected offenders beyond expiration of normal service obligation in order to voluntarily serve a period of probation with a view to honorable restoration to duty.

(Added Pub. L. 90–377, §1, July 5, 1968, 82 Stat. 288; amended Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, §1073(a)(12), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1900.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1997—Pub. L. 105–85 substituted "his authority" for "this authority".
-  Home 
-  Technical Resources 

# In This Section

                      -  HazMat Technical Resources 
                      -  Technical Reports 

## Related Documents

                  -                                          Forensic Evaluation of Pressure Relief Devices P.E. Project No. 502023 Final Report PDF                   

# Forensic Evaluation and Documentation of Pressure Relief Devices (PRDs) of Argon Cryogenic Portable Tank

**May 2, 2011**

This research project is a part of Failure Investigation relating to an argon portable tank incident in Port Everglades, Florida.  The final report provides comprehensive testing and analysis of the pressure relieve devices (PRDs) used on the cryogenic argon portable tank.  The report includes forensic evaluation as well as performance of each PRD at designated pressure setting.   The knowledge gained from this effort will then be used to assess rout-cause of the argon portable tank incident which released a large amount of argon gas on board of a cargo vessel in Port Everglades.  This research project has been initiated and managed by DOT/Hazardous Materials Technology. For technical question, contact Mr. Mark Toughiry, 202-366-4545.
# C_2006326EN.01006702.xml

| 30.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/67

---

Action brought on 17 November 2006 — Whirlpool Europe v Council

(Case T-314/06)

(2006/C 326/141)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Whirlpool Europe Srl (Comerio, Italy) (represented by: M. Bronckers and F. Louis, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare the definitive regulation annulled insofar as the definition of the product concerned/like product does not include all large-volume refrigerator-freezer units with at least two external doors placed side-by-side; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare the definitive regulation annulled insofar as the definition of the product concerned/like product does not include all large-volume refrigerator-freezer units with at least two external doors placed side-by-side;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, who is a domestic appliance producer in Europe of among others refrigerators, seeks the partial annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1289/2006 of 25 August 2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain side-by-side refrigerators originating in the Republic of Korea (1).

1

In support of its application, the applicant submits that the Community institutions violated Article 253 EC by providing inadequate and insufficient reasoning on the exclusion of three-door side-by-side refrigerators from the issue of product scope, especially in light of the circumstances of the case.

The applicant further submits that the Community institutions violated the applicant's right to be heard with regard to the last-minute exclusion of three-door side-by-side refrigerators from the scope of the product concerned.

Moreover, the applicant alleges that the Community institutions violated Article 15(2) of the Basic Regulation (2) by failing to consult the Advisory Committee on time on the exclusion of three-door side-by-side refrigerators from the scope of the product concerned.

2

Finally, the applicant claims that the Community institutions violated the Basic Regulation in their approach to defining the product scope on the basis of physical characteristics without regard to consumer perception.

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 236, p. 11.

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1).

2

---
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1038

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt small issue bonds

for agriculture from the State volume cap.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 13, 1999

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Mr. KERREY, Mr. CONRAD, and Mr. DASCHLE)

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the

Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt

small issue bonds for agriculture from the State volume

cap.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Agricultural Bond En5 hancement Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF AGRICULTURAL BONDS FROM

7 STATE VOLUME CAP.

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 146(g) of the Internal

9 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exception for certain
2

•S 1038 IS

1 bonds) is amended by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para2 graph (3), by striking the period at the end of paragraph

3 (4) and inserting ‘‘, and’’, and by inserting after para4 graph (4) the following:

5 ‘‘(5) any qualified small issue bond described in

6 section 144(a)(12)(B)(ii).’’.

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

8 this section shall apply to bonds issued after the date of

9 enactment of this Act.

Æ
# C_2007095EN.01002101.xml

| 28.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/21

---

Action brought on 15 February 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-84/07)

(2007/C 95/37)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Zavvos and H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that, by the acts specified hereunder, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3, 4(1)(b) and 12 of Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by the acts specified hereunder, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3, 4(1)(b) and 12 of Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (1);

1

| — | order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

According to the Commission, the Hellenic Republic refuses to consider and to recognise certain optical diplomas issued by an Italian educational establishment on the basis of a franchise agreement concluded with a Greek educational establishment.

The Commission states that the basic issue that the Greek authorities can determine is whether or not the diploma gives access to the profession concerned and that the question whether or not the diploma in question has been issued on the basis of a franchise agreement is not relevant for the purposes of its recognition by the Greek authorities. Directive 92/51 makes no such distinction. The Commission also states that the present dispute does not concern Articles 149 and 150 EC, or Article 16 of the Greek Constitution, in that the diplomas have been lawfully issued by Italian educational establishments, not by Greek establishments with which the former have concluded franchise agreements for the award of qualifications.

On those grounds, the refusal of the Greek authorities to consider and to recognise those Italian diplomas constitutes an infringement of Articles 3 and 12 of Directive 92/51. Furthermore, in the Commission's submission, and as is clear from substantiated complaints, the Greek authorities required the complainants who applied for recognition of the optical diploma obtained in Italy to undergo a conversion course. The Commission maintains that such a course infringes Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 92/51, pursuant to which the Greek authorities must allow foreign applicants to choose between the conversion course and an aptitude test.

---

(1)  OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 25.

1

---
### §3346. Establishment of State appraiser certifying and licensing agencies

To assure the availability of State certified and licensed appraisers for the performance in a State of appraisals in federally related transactions and to assure effective supervision of the activities of certified and licensed appraisers, a State may establish a State appraiser certifying and licensing agency. The duties of such agency may additionally include the registration and supervision of appraisal management companies and the addition of information about the appraisal management company to the national registry.

(Pub. L. 101–73, title XI, §1117, Aug. 9, 1989, 103 Stat. 515; Pub. L. 111–203, title XIV, §1473(f)(3), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2193.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2010—Pub. L. 111–203 inserted at end "The duties of such agency may additionally include the registration and supervision of appraisal management companies and the addition of information about the appraisal management company to the national registry."

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the date on which final regulations implementing that amendment take effect, or on the date that is 18 months after the designated transfer date if such regulations have not been issued by that date, see section 1400(c) of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 1601 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.
### §1831aa. Enforcement of agreements

#### (a) In general

Notwithstanding clause (i) or (ii) of section 1818(b)(6)(A) of this title or section 1831o(e)(2)(E)(i) of this title, the appropriate Federal banking agency for a depository institution may enforce, under section 1818 of this title, the terms of—

(1) any condition imposed in writing by the agency on the depository institution or an institution-affiliated party in connection with any action on any application, notice, or other request concerning the depository institution; or

(2) any written agreement entered into between the agency and the depository institution or an institution-affiliated party.

#### (b) Receiverships and conservatorships

After the appointment of the Corporation as the receiver or conservator for a depository institution, the Corporation may enforce any condition or agreement described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a) imposed on or entered into with such institution or institution-affiliated party through an action brought in an appropriate United States district court.

(Sept. 21, 1950, ch. 967, §2[50], as added Pub. L. 109–351, title VII, §702(a), Oct. 13, 2006, 120 Stat. 1985.)
Copy Right ed Material. This file is not available on Regulations.gov . It is only publically

available at EPA, Region IX in San Francisco

. To view this material, c ontact Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947

- 4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov to schedule an appointme nt during normal busine ss hours.
### §2144. Consolidation of functions

Subject to section 2143 of this title, to the greatest extent practicable, the functions of the consolidated bank shall be consolidated in the central office of the bank.

(Pub. L. 92–181, title III, §3.23, as added Pub. L. 100–233, title IV, §415(2), Jan. 6, 1988, 101 Stat. 1644.)
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 11775]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4710]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-2924-000]


Denver Energy, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based 
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Denver Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with 
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is March 15, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with 
any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9fd9dacddcd0f1f3f6f1facceaefeff0edebdff9faedfcb1f8f0e9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e9afacbbaaa6878580878cba9c9999869b9da98f8c9b8ac78e869f">[email protected]</span></a> or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: February 23, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-4710 Filed 3-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>