alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 1820.3 Consultations and referrals.

When OSC receives a FOIA request for a record in its possession, it may determine that another Federal agency or entity is better able to decide whether the record is exempt from disclosure under the FOIA. If so, OSC will either respond to the request for the record after consulting with the other Federal agency or entity or refer the responsibility for responding to the request to the other Federal agency or entity deemed better able to determine whether to release it. OSC will ordinarily respond promptly to consultations and referrals from other Federal agencies or entities.
# L_2015202EN.01009601.xml

| 30.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 202/96 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 202/96

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 208/2014

of 30 September 2014

amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement [2015/1276]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides (1), as corrected by OJ L 161, 29.6.2010, p. 11, is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides (1), as corrected by OJ L 161, 29.6.2010, p. 11, is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex XX to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex XX to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is inserted after point 1k (Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex XX to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘1l. | 32009 L 0128: Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides (OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 71), as corrected by OJ L 161, 29.6.2010, p. 11.
  The provisions of the Directive shall, for the purposes of this Agreement, be read with the following adaptation:
  With regard to Norway, the words “
  26 November 2012
  ” in Article 4(2) shall be replaced by the words “
  1 January 2016
  ”.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘1l.

The provisions of the Directive shall, for the purposes of this Agreement, be read with the following adaptation:

With regard to Norway, the words “
  26 November 2012
  ” in Article 4(2) shall be replaced by the words “
  1 January 2016
  ”.’

Article 2

The texts of Directive 2009/128/EC, in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 1 October 2014, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1), or on the day of the entry into force of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 203/2014 of 30 September 2014 (2), whichever is the later.

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 30 September 2014.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Kurt JÄGER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 71.

1

(*1)  Constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

(2)  See page 57 of this Official Journal.

2

---
### §6709. Information used in allocation formulas

(a) Population Data for Payment Period Beginning October 1, 1994.—For the payment period beginning October 1, 1994, the Secretary, in making allocations pursuant to sections 6704 through 6706 and 6708, shall use for the population of the States the population for 1992 as reported by the Bureau of the Census in the publication Current Population Reports, Series P–25, No. 1045 (July 1992) and for the population of units of general local government the Secretary shall use the population for 1990 as reported by the Bureau of the Census in the publication Summary Social, Economic, and Housing Characteristics.

(b) Data for Payment Periods Beginning After September 30, 1995.—For any payment period beginning after September 30, 1995, the Secretary, in making allocations pursuant to sections 6704 through 6706 and 6708, shall use information more recent than the information used for the payment period beginning October 1, 1994, provided the Secretary notifies the Committee on Government Operations of the House of Representatives at least 90 days prior to the beginning of the payment period that the Secretary has determined that the more recent information is more reliable than the information used for the payment period beginning October 1, 1994.

(Added Pub. L. 103–322, title III, §31001(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1873.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 6709, Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1018; Pub. L. 97–452, §1(25), Jan. 12, 1983, 96 Stat. 2478; Pub. L. 98–185, §9(d), Nov. 30, 1983, 97 Stat. 1312, related to other local government allocations, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–272, title XIV, §14001(a)(1), (e), Apr. 7, 1986, 100 Stat. 327, 329, eff. Oct. 18, 1986.

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

#### Change of Name

Committee on Government Operations of House of Representatives treated as referring to Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of House of Representatives by section 1(a) of Pub. L. 104–14, set out as a note preceding section 21 of Title 2, The Congress. Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Government Reform of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 5, One Hundred Sixth Congress, Jan. 6, 1999. Committee on Government Reform of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 6, One Hundred Tenth Congress, Jan. 5, 2007. Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Oversight and Reform of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 6, One Hundred Sixteenth Congress, Jan. 9, 2019. Committee on Oversight and Reform of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Oversight and Accountability of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 5, One Hundred Eighteenth Congress, Jan. 9, 2023.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1355

To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to clarify that a prohibition 

on contracting by the Secretary of Homeland Security with foreign incorporated entities applies to contracting with subsidiaries of such entities, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 19, 2003

Ms. DELAURO (for herself, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, and Mr. DOGGETT) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Government Reform, and in addition to the Select Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 

in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL

To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to clarify 

that a prohibition on contracting by the Secretary of 

Homeland Security with foreign incorporated entities applies to contracting with subsidiaries of such entities, 

and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Wellstone Memorial 

5 Stop Corporate Expatriates Act’’. 
2

•HR 1355 IH 

1 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING 

2 WITH INVERTED DOMESTIC CORPORATIONS. 

3 Section 835 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 

4 (Public Law 107–296; 6 U.S.C. 395) is amended—

5 (1) in subsection (a), by inserting before the pe6 riod ‘‘, or any subsidiary of such an entity’’; 

7 (2) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting ‘‘before, 

8 on, or’’ after the ‘‘completes’’; 

9 (3) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking ‘‘which 

10 is after the date of enactment of this Act and’’; and 

11 (4) in subsection (d), by striking all after ‘‘in 

12 the interest of’’ and inserting ‘‘national security.’’.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7236

LESLIE EDWARD GOODMAN, Petitioner - Appellant,
versus GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Walter D. Kelley, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-620) Submitted: December 22, 2005 Decided: January 3, 2006 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leslie Edward Goodman, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Leslie Edward Goodman, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) as untimely. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Goodman has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
DATE: 03/28/2016

MEMORANDUM

TO: Docket #EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0292

FROM: Steffan Johnson 

Group Leader – Measurement Technology Group

RE: Discussion with Stephen Norfleet at 40th Annual SSSAAP Conference – March 24th, 2016; Point Clear, 

Alabama

I listened to some concerns voiced by Stephen Norfleet, a consultant employed by RMB Consulting, Inc., 

in Raleigh, NC, for ten minutes on the afternoon of Thursday, March 24th. The conversation was ad-hoc, 

with Mr. Norfleet wishing to voice opinion on language changes to the Part 60.8 General Provisions that 

were proposed in MTG’s September, 2015 Test Method, Performance Specification and Rule 

Requirements Revisions package.

Specifically Mr. Norfleet expressed concern about the proposal language being both too vague (allencompassing and not well defined) and inclusive of some items that were, in his opinion, not necessary 

to report in every emissions test report. The focus of Mr. Norfleet’s comments were toward 

streamlining the number of items that may need to be individually reported as electronic data via EPA’s 

ERT or CEDRI online tool, versus included as data in a .pdf format file. The latter may be searched 

manually, in a traditional paper-report fashion, while the former would allow select data to be searched 

electronically.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Declaration of Disaster #3634] 

In accordance with a notice received from the Department of Homeland Security—Federal Emergency Management Agency—effective October 19, 2004, the above numbered declaration is hereby amended to include the Municipality of Gurabo as a disaster area due to damages caused by Tropical Storm Jeanne. All other municipalities contiguous to the above named primary municipality have previously been declared. 

In addition, Añasco, Ciales, Dorado, Fajardo, Florida, Guayanilla, Isabela, Juana Díaz, Juncos, Lares, Moca, Peñuelas, Ponce, Salinas, San Juan, San Lorenzo, San Sebastian, Vega Alta, Vega Baja, and Yauco Municipalities in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico are also eligible under Public Assistance and our disaster loan program is available for private non-profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature in those municipalities. 

                    All other information remains the same,                     *i.e.*, the deadline for filing applications for physical damage is November 22, 2004, and for economic injury the deadline is June 21, 2005.                 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 59008.) 

Dated: October 25, 2004. 

Herbert L. Mitchell, 

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 04-24279 Filed 10-29-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-4726
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL JAMES PATTERSON, Defendant - Appellant.
No. 00-4727
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL JAMES PATTERSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CR-99-43, CR-99-75) Submitted: May 28, 2002 Decided: July 8, 20022 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. D. Rodney Kight, Jr., KIGHT LAW OFFICE, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas Richard Ascik, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Patterson was notified by counsel of his right to file a supplemental brief raising issues he deemed significant and has elected not to do so. 3 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Michael James Patterson brings a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel during his plea and sentencing on one count of unlawful possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(1) (West 2000) and one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 (West 1999 & Supp. 2001). Patterson’s appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there are no meritorious issues for appeal but addressing whether Patterson’s counsel conclusively provided ineffective assistance of counsel at either Patterson’s plea hearings or sentencing hearing and whether any other meritorious claims exist. * We have thoroughly reviewed the record and find no evidence on the face of the record that Patterson’s attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel at either his plea hearing or at sentencing. We have examined the entire record in this case in accordance with the requirements of Anders and find no meritorious issues for appeal. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition4 be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. Finally, we dispense with oral argument, because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 05-025 February 8, 2005

NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE TO MEET

FEB. 23-25 IN ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste will hold a

public meeting Feb. 23-25, in Rockville, Md., where, among other items, members will meet with

Commissioner Jeffrey S. Merrifield to discuss items of mutual interest in the waste management arena.

The committee will also be briefed on the status of agreements between the NRC and the Department

of Energy related to the proposed Yucca Mountain high-level waste repository. 

The meeting on Wednesday will run from 10:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and the meeting on Thursday

will run from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The Friday session will run from 8:30 a.m. to noon. The meeting

will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s Two White Flint North Building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. 

A complete agenda will be available on the NRC’s Web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acnw/agenda/2004/ . For additional information,

contact Michael P. Lee at 301-415-6887.

###
§ 330.212 Agency flexibilities. An agency may provide the following flexibilities within its written RPL policies established under this subpart: ( a ) Allow RPL eligibles to register only for certain sub-areas of a local commuting area when the agency has components dispersed throughout a large commuting area. However, an agency cannot deny registration throughout the local commuting area if the RPL eligible requests it.
( b ) Suspend an RPL registration for all positions, permanent and time-limited, if the agency is unable, through documented written means, to contact the RPL registrant; however, the agency must reactivate an RPL registration when the registrant submits an updated application or otherwise requests reactivation in writing. Registration suspension and reactivation do not change the expiration date of the original registration period set in § 330.208.
( c ) ( 1 ) Modify the OPM or OPM-approved qualification standard used to determine if an RPL eligible is qualified for a position, provided the: ( i ) Exception is applied consistently and equitably in filling a position;
( ii ) RPL registrant meets any minimum educational requirements for the position; and
( iii ) RPL registrant has the capacity, adaptability, and special skills needed to satisfactorily perform the duties and responsibilities of the position, as determined by the agency.
( 2 ) Any modification to the qualification standard under paragraph (c)(1) of this section does not authorize a waiver of the selection order required under § 330.213.
( d ) Permit RPL eligibles to register for positions with work schedules different from the work schedule of the position from which they were, or will be, separated.
( e ) Permit RPL registrants to update their qualifications or conditions for accepting positions during the RPL registration period. If an agency provides this flexibility in its RPL policies, the agency must update the RPL registrant's registration information within 10 calendar days of receipt of the registrant's written request. The updated registration information would apply only to those vacancies becoming available after the agency updates the RPL registrant's registration.
var ForeSee = {    'version': '2.5.4',    'Date:': '2/03/2009',    'enabled': true,    'files': '/foresee/',    //'files': 'http://<hostname>/foresee/',    'id': 'V4olkdtg1xYZoRNJgJUFww==',    'sites': [{        path: 'af.mil',        cookie: 'session',        domain: 'af.mil'    }]};/************* DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! **************/function fsr$setAlive(){var A=new Date().getTime();document.cookie="foresee.alive="+A+";path=/;domain="+ForeSee.site.domain+";"}(function(){var C=ForeSee.sites;for(var B=0,A=C.length;B<A;B++){if(document.location.href.match(C[B].path)){ForeSee.siteid=B;ForeSee.site=ForeSee.sites[ForeSee.siteid];if(ForeSee.site.files){ForeSee.files=ForeSee.site.files}break}}if(!window["fsr$timer"]){fsr$setAlive();window["fsr$timer"]=setInterval(fsr$setAlive,1000)}})();
#### William D. Stratton, Respondent, v. Edmund K. Stallo, Appellant, Impleaded, etc.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to defendant to withdraw demurrer and to answer on payment of costs in this court and in the court below. Ho opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
### §4218. Authorization of appropriations

#### (a) Authorization of appropriations

#### (1) In general

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Commerce to carry out this subchapter $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2021 through 2024.

#### (2) Use of appropriated funds

Subject to paragraph (3), amounts made available under paragraph (1) shall be provided to the Foundation to match contributions (whether in currency, services, or property) made to the Foundation, or to a recipient of a grant provided by the Foundation, by private persons and State and local government agencies.

#### (3) Prohibition on use for administrative expenses

#### (A) In general

Except as provided in subparagraph (B), no Federal funds made available under paragraph (1) may be used by the Foundation for administrative expenses of the Foundation, including for salaries, travel and transportation expenses, and other overhead expenses.

#### (B) Exception

The Secretary may allow the use of Federal funds made available under paragraph (1) to pay for salaries during the 18-month period beginning on December 18, 2020.

#### (b) Additional authorization

#### (1) In general

In addition to the amounts made available under subsection (a), the Foundation may accept Federal funds from a Federal agency under any other Federal law for use by the Foundation to further the assessment, prevention, reduction, and removal of marine debris in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.

#### (2) Use of funds accepted from Federal agencies

Federal funds provided to the Foundation under paragraph (1) shall be used by the Foundation for matching, in whole or in part, contributions (whether in currency, services, or property) made to the Foundation by private persons and State and local government agencies.

#### (c) Prohibition on use of grant amounts for litigation and lobbying expenses

Amounts provided as a grant by the Foundation shall not be used for—

(1) any expense related to litigation consistent with Federal-wide cost principles; or

(2) any activity the purpose of which is to influence legislation pending before Congress consistent with Federal-wide cost principles.

(Pub. L. 116–224, title I, §118, Dec. 18, 2020, 134 Stat. 1080.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in subsecs. (a)(1) and (b)(1), was in the original "this title", meaning title I of Pub. L. 116–224, Dec. 18, 2020, 134 Stat. 1074, which is classified principally to this subchapter. For complete classification of title I to the Code, see Tables.