alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 200 (Monday, October 18, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61436-61437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23226]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Veterans' Advisory Committee on Rehabilitation (VACOR); Notice of 
Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public 
Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that a meeting of the 
Veterans' Advisory Committee on Rehabilitation (VACOR) will be held on 
November 8-10, 2004, at the Department of Veterans Affairs Washington 
Regional Office, 1722 I Street NW., Washington, DC, 20421. The meeting 
sessions will be held in the third floor training room and will begin 
at 1 p.m. on November 8 and 8:30 a.m. on November 9 and 10. The meeting 
sessions will end at 4:30 p.m. on November 8 and 9 and at noon on 
November 10. The meeting is open to the public.
    The purpose of the Committee is to provide recommendations to the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs on the rehabilitation needs of veterans 
with disabilities and on the administration of VA's rehabilitation 
programs.
    During the meeting, committee members will be briefed on various VA 
rehabilitation related initiatives. They will also receive updates on 
the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Task Force report and 
recommendations, the Spinal Cord Injury Research Project and Research 
Model, and other disability and rehabilitation issues related to 
veterans. Additionally, the Committee will receive a briefing from the 
Advisory Committee on Prosthetics and Special Disabilities. The 
Committee will also discuss recommendations for the 2004 report.
    No time will be allocated at this meeting for oral presentations 
from the public. Any member of the public wishing to attend the meeting 
is requested to contact Ms. Carolyn Davis, Designated Federal Officer, 
at (202) 273-7433. The Committee will accept written comments. Comments 
can be addressed to Ms. Davis at the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
Veterans Benefits Administration (28), 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20420, or sent electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#27717562646366716e6771656609716609606871"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="65333720262124332c253327244b33244b222a33">[email protected]</span></a>. In

[[Page 61437]]

communication with the Committee, writers must identify themselves and 
state the organizations, associations, or person(s) they represent.

    Dated: October 6, 2004.

    By Direction of the Secretary.
E. Philip Riggin,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-23226 Filed 10-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 190.192 Certification for compliance program. ( a ) *General.* A party may be certified as a participant in the drawback compliance program after meeting the core requirements established under the program, or after negotiating an alternative drawback compliance program suited to the needs of both the party and CBP. Certification requirements will take into account the size and nature of the party's drawback program, the type of drawback claims filed, and the volume of claims filed. Whether the party is a drawback claimant, a broker, or one that provides data and documentation on which a drawback claim is based, will also be considered.
( b ) *Core requirements of program.* In order to be certified as a participant in the drawback compliance program or negotiated alternative drawback compliance program, the party must demonstrate that it: ( 1 ) Understands the legal requirements for filing claims, including the nature of the records that are required to be maintained and produced and the time periods involved;
( 2 ) Has in place procedures that explain the CBP requirements to those employees involved in the preparation of claims, and the maintenance and production of required records;
( 3 ) Has in place procedures regarding the preparation of claims and maintenance of required records, and the production of such records to CBP;
( 4 ) Has designated a dependable individual or individuals who will be responsible for compliance under the program, and maintenance and production of required records;
( 5 ) Has in place a record maintenance program approved by CBP regarding original records, or if approved by CBP, alternative records or recordkeeping formats for other than the original records; and
( 6 ) Has procedures for notifying CBP of variances in, or violations of, the drawback compliance program or other alternative negotiated drawback compliance program, and for taking corrective action when notified by CBP of violations and problems regarding such program.
( c ) *Broker certification.* A customs broker may be certified as a participant in the drawback compliance program only on behalf of a given claimant (*see* § 190.194(b)). To do so, a customs broker who assists a claimant in filing for drawback must be able to demonstrate, for and on behalf of such claimant, conformity with the core requirements of the drawback compliance program as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section. The broker must ensure that the claimant has the necessary documentation and records to support the drawback compliance program established on its behalf, and that claims to be filed under the program are reviewed by the broker for accuracy and completeness.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 96-165 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, November 22, 1996)

NRC BEGINS FIRST OF A SERIES OF DESIGN INSPECTIONS AT NUCLEAR

POWER PLANTS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has begun a series of

special design inspections to verify that selected nuclear power

plants are operating under the terms and conditions of their

licenses and NRC regulations.

A six-member team began the first of the series this week

at the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant in Florida. The second will

begin shortly at Three Mile Island Unit 1 in Pennsylvania, and

the third at Washington Nuclear Project-2 in the State of

Washington. Similar inspections will be performed periodically

over the next two years at other plants.

Inspections will focus on reviews of the plants' original

design and configuration, and conformance with the licensees'

safety analysis report. Each inspection team will be made up of

engineers from NRC and design specialists from either Stone &

Webster or Sargent & Lundy, architect/engineering firms with

which NRC has contracted.

NRC has planned these inspections as a result of recent

findings that licensees at the Millstone plant in Connecticut and

at other facilities routinely performed full-core offloads during

refueling outages without performing the necessary safety

evaluation. It also was discovered that other facilities' actual

as-built configuration or operations were inconsistent with the

design basis information described in their licenses.

Plants have been selected for inspection based upon several

factors, including: Systematic Analysis of Licensee Performance

ratings for the engineering area, placement on the NRC "watch

list" of plants requiring increased attention, design review

programs, and previous NRC design inspections. Special care will

be taken to avoid having inspections performed by representatives

of the architectural/engineering firm which originally designed a

power plant.

The design inspections will last eight weeks each. A

written report will be available approximately 45 days after each

inspection is completed.
#
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 1 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 2 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 3 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 4 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 5 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 6 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 7 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 8 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 9 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 10 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 11 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 12 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 13 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 14 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 15 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 16 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 17 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 18 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 19 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 20 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 21 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 22 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 23 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 24 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 25 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 26 of

27
Case 1:20-cv-23276-DPG Document 159-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2021 Page 27 of

27
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Jerome Templeton, Respondent, against Verna L. T. Lynn, Appellant, and Morton M. Z. Lynn, as General Guardian of Clarence A. Templeton, an Infant, Intervener, Appellant.

Third Department,

September 19, 1951.

*6
      *Joseph J. Casey*for appellants.

*Harold J. Shannon*for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

A decree of divorce had earlier been granted in the State of Tennessee in favor of the mother. The decree in that case decided that the children of the marriage, who were then residing with the mother in the State of New York,, should continue in her custody. Subsequently this decree was modified, in a proceeding purporting to be for contempt, so as to give the custody of the children to the father for two months in each year. It is argued by the appellants here that the court in Tennessee lacked jurisdiction to make the modification in question. The Special Term held that it was bound by the modified decree entered in Tennessee.

It should be noted that the order appealed from was granted on the 2d day of August, 1950. It is alleged before us, and not denied, that since the date of the order the relator-respondent’s conduct has been such as to make it highly questionable whether he is a fit person to have custody of the child in question. These allegations would indicate that he has not only violated the order of the court in Tennessee, but also the order appealed from. In addition, he apparently violated the conditions of an order obtained from a Justice of this court which vacated a stay. We think, therefore, that further proceedings should be had before the Special Term to determine whether there has been such a change in conditions and circumstances since the *7entry of the Tennessee decree which would render it necessary for the child’s best interests to have its custody retained by the mother in the State of New York. *(Finlay*v. *Finlay,*240 N. Y. 429.) The primary concern of the courts should be for the welfare of the child.

Accordingly, we suspend further consideration of the appeal herein pending a remission of the matter to the Special Term for such action as the parties may be advised.

Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ., concur.

Further consideration of the appeal herein is suspended pending a remission of the matter to the Special Term for such action as the parties may be advised.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-cv-22952-BLOOM/Louis

ANTHONY BURGOS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DESIGNER FRAGRANCES & 

COSMETICS COMPANY d/b/a 

KIEHL’S and L’OREAL USA, INC. 

d/b/a KIEHL’S,

Defendants.

______________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the parties’ Stipulation for Dismissal with 

Prejudice, ECF No. [14] (“Stipulation”), filed on October 22, 2020. The Court has carefully 

reviewed the Stipulation and the record, and is otherwise fully advised. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Stipulation, ECF No. [14] is APPROVED;

2. The above-styled case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

3. Each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs;

4. To the extent not otherwise disposed of, all pending motions are DENIED AS

MOOT and all deadlines are TERMINATED;

5. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

Case 1:20-cv-22952-BB Document 15 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/22/2020 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 20-cv-22952-BLOOM/Louis

2

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on October 22, 2020.

_________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to:

Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-22952-BB Document 15 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/22/2020 Page 2 of 2
Editorial Note on Part 151
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 151 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93021, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 151.71 Laboratory testing for clean yield. ( a ) *Test and report by Customs laboratory.* The clean yield of all general samples taken in accordance with § 151.70 shall be determined by test in a Customs laboratory, unless it is found that it is not feasible to test such a sample and obtain a proper finding of percentage clean yield. A report of the percentage clean yield of each general sample as established by the test, or a statement of the reason for not testing a general sample, shall be forwarded to the Center director.
( b ) *Notification to importer.* Where samples of wool or hair have been tested in a Customs laboratory and the Center director has received a copy of the Laboratory Report, Customs Form 6415, the Center director shall promptly provide notice of the test results by mailing a copy of that report to the importer.
( c ) *Importer's request for retest.* If the importer is dissatisfied with the port director's or Center director's finding of clean yield, made before January 19, 2017, or the Center director's finding of clean yield made on or after January 19, 2017, he may file with CBP, either at the port of entry or electronically, a written request in duplicate for another laboratory test for percentage clean yield. Such request shall be filed within 14 calendar days after the date of mailing of the notice of the port director's or Center director's finding of clean yield. The request shall be granted if it appears to the Center director to be made in good faith and if a second general sample as provided for in § 151.70 is available for testing, or if all packages or, in the opinion of the Commissioner of Customs, an adequate number of the packages represented by the general sample are available and in their original imported condition.
( d ) *Retest procedures.* The second test shall be made upon the second general sample, if such a sample is available. If the second general sample is not available, the packages shall be reweighed, resampled, and tested in accordance with the provisions of this section. All costs and expenses of such operations, exclusive of the compensation of Customs officers, shall be borne by the importer, who may be present during such resampling and testing.
( e ) *Request for commercial test.* If the importer is dissatisfied with the results of the second laboratory test, or if a second laboratory test is not feasible, the wool or hair may be retested by a commercial laboratory in accordance with § 151.73.
[T.D. 73-175, 38 FR 17470, July 2, 1973, as amended by T.D. 75-121, 40 FR 23458, May 30, 1975; T.D. 93-52, 58 FR 37854, July 14, 1993; CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93021, Dec. 20, 2016]
§ 7.941 Complaints. ( a ) Any person, individually or as a member of a class or on behalf of others, may file a complaint with FEMA, alleging discrimination prohibited by the Act or these regulations occurring after the date of final adoption of this rule. A complainant shall file a complaint within 180 days from the date the complainant first had knowledge of the alleged act of discrimination. However, for good cause showing, FEMA may extend this time limit.
( b ) FEMA will consider the date a complaint is filed to be the date upon which the complaint is sufficient to be processed. A complaint is deemed “sufficient” when it contains particulars (e.g., names, addresses, and telephone numbers of parties involved; date(s) of alleged discrimination; kind(s) of alleged discrimination) upon which to begin an investigation.
( c ) FEMA will attempt to facilitate the filing of complaints wherever possible, including taking the following measures: ( 1 ) Accepting as a sufficient complaint any written statement which identifies the parties involved and the date the complainant first had knowledge of the alleged violation, describes generally the action or practice complained of, and is signed by the complainant.
( 2 ) Freely permitting a complainant to add information to the complaint to meet the requirements of a sufficient complaint.
( 3 ) Notifying the complainant and the recipient of their rights and obligations under the complaint procedure, including the right to have a representative at all stages of the complaint procedure.
( 4 ) Notifying the complainant and the recipient (or their representatives) of their right to contact FEMA for information and assistance regarding the complaint resolution process.
( d ) FEMA will return to the complainant any complaint outside the jurisdiction of this regulation, and will state the reason(s) why it is outside the jurisdiction of this regulation.
#### § 147.31 Articles to be kept separate.

Articles for exhibit at a fair shall be segregated from domestic articles and from imported articles entered under the provisions of the general Customs laws and released from Customs custody.
#### § 108.1640 SBA access to records of the CRA, Brokers, Dealers and Pool or Trust assemblers.

The CRA and any broker, dealer and Pool or Trust assembler operating under the regulations in this part shall make all books, records and related materials associated with Debentures and TCs available to SBA for review and copying purposes. Such access shall be at such party's primary place of business during normal business hours.
#### Ragland Momand, as Director and Vice-President and General Manager of the Pressure Lighting Company, Respondent, v. George M. Landers and Another, Appellants, Impleaded with Another.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to defendants to withdraw demurrer and to answer on payment of costs in this court and in the court below. No opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
§ 122.174 Operational procedures. ( a ) *Participating carriers.* Participating carriers are required to develop and adhere to procedures whereby they will: ( 1 ) Provide security personnel for every international arrival participating in the ACSPP to conduct the following procedures: ( i ) Perform a thorough internal and external search of the arriving aircraft;
( ii ) Maintain total control of all passengers and cargo being discharged from the aircraft to either the Customs passenger hall or to the carrier's cargo facility;
( iii ) Verify that all cargo on aircraft is properly manifested, marked and weighed and that piece counts are properly performed; and
( iv ) Maintain physical security of the aircraft and ramp access to the aircraft while it is being offloaded.
( 2 ) Provide security personnel at the foreign point of departure for every international departure which is participating in ACSPP to conduct the following procedures: ( i ) Perform a thorough internal and external search of the departing aircraft;
( ii ) Maintain total control of all passengers and cargo being loaded on the aircraft from either the passenger terminal or the carrier's cargo facility;
( iii ) Verify that all cargo placed on the aircraft is properly manifested, marked and weighed and that piece counts are properly performed;
( iv ) Maintain physical security of the aircraft and ramp access to the aircraft while it is being loaded; and
( v ) Maintain similar positive security measures at all foreign intermediate airports prior to the arrival of the aircraft at an ACSPP designated airport.
( b ) *U.S. Customs.* U.S. Customs will: ( 1 ) Retain all current options available regarding the search and inspection of any and all passengers, cargo and conveyances; and
( 2 ) Provide training to carrier personnel to assist the development of proper operational procedures.
### §6619. Advance payments for computer programing services

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate, subject to the approval of the Committee on Rules and Administration, is on and after July 6, 1981, authorized to enter into contracts which provide for the making of advance payments for computer programing services.

(Pub. L. 97–20, July 6, 1981, 95 Stat. 104.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 123c–1 of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.