alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 238 (Monday, December 13, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 72201]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27187]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Mine Safety and Health Research Advisory Committee (MSHRAC): 
Notice of Charter Renewal

    This gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 
92-463) of October 6, 1972, that the Mine Safety and Health Research 
Advisory Committee, National Institute for Occupational Safety and 
Health (NIOSH), of the Department of Health and Human Services, has 
been renewed for a 2-year period extending through November 30, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffery L. Kohler, Ph.D., Executive 
Secretary, Mine Safety and Health Research Advisory Committee, Centers 
for Disease Control and Prevention, of the Department Of Health Human 
Services, NIOSH, 626 Cochran Mill Road, M/S P-05, Pittsburgh, 
Pennsylvania 15236. Telephone 412-386-5301, fax 412-386-5300, e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9ad0d1d5d2d6dfc8daf9fef9b4fdf5ec"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d892939790949d8a98bbbcbbf6bfb7ae">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services office has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to 
announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, 
for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Dated: December 6, 2004.
Alvin Hall,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 04-27187 Filed 12-10-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-19-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### § 249b.200 Form CA-1,[1]
 form for registration or for exemption from registration as a clearing agency and for amendment to registration as a clearing agency pursuant to section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

This form shall be used for application for registration or for exemption from registration as a clearing agency and for amendment to registration as a clearing agency pursuant to section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

[40 FR 52359, Nov. 10, 1975, as amended at 51 FR 12134, Apr. 9, 1986; 73 FR 32228, June 5, 2008]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting Form CA-1, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*

###### Footnotes -
  249b.200

[1] Copies of the form may be obtained from the Publication Section, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549 and from each of the Commission's regional offices.
AFS-10-291-E June 10, 2010 Exemption No. 8396D Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2003-15373

Mr. John W. Hazlet, Jr. Vice President-Safety and Standards Ameriflight, LLC 4700 Empire Avenue Burbank, CA 91505

Dear Mr. Hazlet:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8396, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated May 24, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Adm inistration (FAA) on behalf of Ameriflight, LLC (Ameriflight), for an extension of Exemption No. 8396, as amended. That exemption from § 135.85 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows Ameriflight and its pilots to transport FAA-certificated airmen who are employed as flight crewmembers by another part 121 or part 135 certificate holder without complying with certain part 135 passenger-carrying requirements.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Ameriflight.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determ ined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8396, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the term ination date of Exemption No. 8396, as amended, to September 30, 2012, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 8396, as amended, remain the same. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 8396.

Sincerely,

/s/ Raymond Towles Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has d etermined that this opinion should not be published and is not

precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50111

Summary Calendar

RHETT VAUGHN POSEY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-96-CA-1066

September 25, 1998

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. terminated Rhett Vaughn Posey’s employment for cause on June 14,

1996. Posey brought a timely action in the United States District Court for the Western District of

Texas alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

et. seq. (“Title VII”); 42 U.S.C. § 1981 ; and t he Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29

U.S.C. § 1001 et. seq. (“ERISA”).

On December 29, 1997, the district court issued an order granting summary judgment in favor

of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. First, the district court found that Posey could not prove a p rima facie case

of discrimination. Next, the district court noted that even if Posey had established a p rima facie case,

he failed to sh o w t hat Wal-Mart’s reasons for terminating him were a pretext for intentional2

discrimination. Finally, the district court granted summary judgment on Posey’s ERISA claim after

finding that Posey had neither a reasonable expectation o f reinstatement nor a colorable claim to

benefits under the plan.

W e review the district court’s grant of summary judgment d e novo

. G uillory v. Domtar

Industries, I nc. , 95 F.3d 1320, 1326 (5th Cir. 1996). This review requires the same analysis

employed by the district court. I d

. (citing Turnage v. General Elec. Co. 953 F.2d 206, 212 (5th Cir.

1992). Summary judgment is appropriate when “the pleadings, depositions, a nswers to

interrogatories, and admissions on file along with the affidavits filed in support of the motion, if any,

indicate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving p arty is entitled to

judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56.; s ee also

, Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

, 477 U.S. 317,

322 (1986). The essence of our review rests on “whether the evidence presents a sufficient

disagree ment t o require submission to the jury or whether it is so one-sided that one party must

prevail as a matter of law.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S. 242, 251-52 (1986).

We have reviewed the law, briefs, and the record and conclude that the district court did not

err in granting Wal-Mart’s motion for summary judgment. We agree with the district court and affirm

based on its reasoning.

AFFIRMED.
#### C. L. Sanger v. Leonard Magee.

Decided May 14, 1902.

1. —Distraint—Judgment—Trial of Right of Property.

On the trial of right of property between a distraining landlord and a claimant who bought it from the tenant, the judgment recovered by the landlord against the tenant is conclusive as to the amount of the latter’s indebtedness for rents and advances, unless attacked for fraud or collusion.

*2.*—Landlord’s Lien—Waiver.

A landlord did not waive his lien on cotton raised on the rented premises by permitting the tenant to sell other cotton so raised to other purchasers, where the purchase, by the claimant, of the cotton against which the lien was sought to be enforced was not influenced by the fact that such other sales had been permitted.

Appeal from the County Court of McLennan. Tried below before Hon. G. B. Gerald.

*Boynton & Boynton,*for appellant.

*Z. I. Harlan,*for appellee.

KEY, Associate Justice.

Appellee had a tenant named E. G. Cotton, who sold to appellant six bales of cotton upon which appellee had a landlord’s lien for rent. Appellee caused a distress warrant to be *398issued and the cotton seized thereunder, and appellant filed a claimant’s affidavit and bond for the trial of the right of property. The latter proceeding was regularly docketed and came on for trial, resulting in a judgment in favor of appellee Magee, from which judgment Sanger has appealed.

We have considered all the points presented in the briefs, and find no error. The judgment rendered in the original suit of Magee v. Cotton, the tenant, not being attacked in this case on account of fraud or collusion, was conclusive as to the amount of Cotton’s indebtedness to Magee for rents and advances. Livingston v. Wright, 68 Texas, 706; Ross v. Lewyn, 5 Texas Civ. App., 600; Lehman v. Stone, 4 Willson’s Civ. Cas., 122; Cornwell v. Hartzell, 4 Willson’s Civ. Cas., 73.

It was not shown that in purchasing the cotton here involved, appellant was influenced by the fact that appellee had permitted the tenant to make other sales of cotton in another market and to other purchasers. Hence we hold that appellee had not waived his lien and was not estopped from asserting it.

The judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
Amendment No. 4 to Administrative and Investment Services Agreement



 Exhibit 10.7.5 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 4 
 TO ADMINISTRATIVE AND INVESTMENT 
 SERVICES AGREEMENT 
 between 
 State Street Bank and Trust Company 
 and the 
 ABA Retirement Funds (f/k/a “American Bar Retirement Association”)

  
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16.07 of the Administrative
and Investment Services Agreement, amended and restated as of November 18, 2002 (the “AISA Agreement”) between State Street Bank and Trust Company (“State Street”) and the American Bar Retirement Association, now called
“ABA Retirement Funds” (“ARF”), the AISA Agreement may be amended by written instrument and executed by State Street and ARF. 
  
 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, pursuant to the power of amendment contained in Section 16.07 of the AISA Agreement, the AISA Agreement hereby
is amended, effective as of the date hereof, as follows: 
  

	 	1.	The name “ABA Retirement Funds” is substituted for the name “American Bar Retirement Association” in each place where the latter name appears, and the term
“ARF” is substituted for the term “ABRA” in each place where the latter name appears. 

  

	 	2.	Section 2.02(b) of the AISA Agreement hereby is amended by deleting the period at the end of said section, inserting a semi-colon in lieu thereof and adding the following
immediately after said semi-colon: 

  
 provided,
however, that State Street shall not have any authority to, and shall not, appoint an Investment Advisor that is an Affiliate or is controlled by or under common control with CitiStreet unless directed to in writing by ARF, in which event Sections
2.04, 2.05 and 2.06 shall not apply and the responsibility for monitoring and removing such Investment Advisor shall exclusively be that of ARF. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ARF and State Street hereby cause this instrument to be executed by duly authorized officers this 24th day of January, 2006.

  

							
	ABA RETIREMENT FUNDS	 	STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY
				
	By:	 	 /s/ Donald Schiller

	 	By:	 	 /s/ Beth M. Halberstadt


	Its:	 	President	 	Its:	 	Vice President
#### § 1414.4 Duration of prohibition.

Unless otherwise provided by specific order of the Board entered in the proceeding, the prohibition of § 1414.2 shall be applicable in any Board proceeding subject to 5 U.S.C. 557(a) beginning at the time of which the proceeding is noticed for hearing, unless the person responsible for the communication has knowledge that it will be noticed, in which case the prohibitions shall apply beginning at the time of such person's acquisition of such knowledge.
October 20, 2016 

The Honorable Edward J. Markey 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

Dear Senator Markey: 

I am responding to your letter of September 21, 2016, in which you urge the Commission 

to reject a request from Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. for an extension of time to comply with 

NRC order EA-13-109 for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station. EA-13-109 relates to the 

installation of reliable hardened containment vents. 

The Commission also recently received a request from Pilgrim Watch, on behalf of itself 

and a number of other groups, asking that the Commission hold a hearing on Entergy’s 

extension request. The agency has not yet resolved Entergy’s extension request or Pilgrim 

Watch’s request to hold a hearing. For these reasons, we cannot fully respond to your letter at 

this time. We will keep you apprised of any significant agency actions on these matters. 

Please feel free to contact me or Eugene Dacus, Director of the Office of Congressional 

Affairs, at (301) 415-1776, if you have any questions. 

 Sincerely, 

 /RA/ 

 Stephen G. Burns 

 
Identical letter sent to: 

The Honorable Edward J. Markey 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

The Honorable Elizabeth Warren 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

The Honorable William R. Keating 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Niki Tsongas 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable James P. McGovern 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Michael E. Capuano 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Stephen F. Lynch 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Joseph P. Kennedy, III 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Richard E. Neal 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Katherine Clark 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Seth Moulton 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515
#### § 1002.6 Records of other Departments and Agencies.

Requests for records that have been originated by or are primarily the concern of another U.S. Department or Agency will be forwarded to the particular Department of Agency involved, and the petitioner notified. In response to requests for records or publications published by the Government Printing Office or other Government printing activity, the Foundation will refer the petitioner to the appropriate sales office and refund any fee payments therefor which accompany the request.
§ 23.611 Delegation of authority to the Director of the Division of Clearing and Risk to establish an alternative compliance schedule to comply with clearing member acceptance for clearing. ( a ) The Commission hereby delegates to the Director of the Division of Clearing and Risk or such other employee or employees as the Director may designate from time to time, the authority to establish an alternative compliance schedule for requirements of § 23.610 for swaps that are found to be technologically or economically impracticable for an affected swap dealer or major swap participant that seeks, in good faith, to comply with the requirements of § 23.610 within a reasonable time period beyond the date on which compliance by such swap dealer or major swap participant is otherwise required.
( b ) A request for an alternative compliance schedule under this section shall be acted upon by the Director of the Division of Clearing and Risk within 30 days from the time such a request is received, or it shall be deemed approved.
( c ) An exception granted under this section shall not cause a registrant to be out of compliance or deemed in violation of any registration requirements.
( d ) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, in any case in which a Commission employee delegated authority under this section believes it appropriate, he or she may submit to the Commission for its consideration the question of whether an alternative compliance schedule should be established. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit the Commission, at its election, from exercising the authority delegated in this section.
[77 FR 21308, Apr. 9, 2012]
§ 286.2 Periodic reports. ( a ) Within 45 days after the end of each of its fiscal quarters, the Bank shall file with the Commission the following information: ( 1 ) Information as to any purchases or sales by the Bank of its primary obligations during such quarter.
( 2 ) Copies of the Bank's regular quarterly financial statement.
( 3 ) Copies of any material modifications or amendments during such quarter of any exhibits (other than ( i ) constituent documents defining the rights of holders of securities of other issuers guaranteed by the Bank, and
( ii ) loans and guaranty agreements to which the Bank is a party) previously filed with the Commission under any statute.
( b ) Copies of each annual report of the Bank to its Board of Governors shall be filed with the Commission within 10 days after the submission of such report to the Board of Governors.
132 STAT. 5082 PUBLIC LAW 115–359—DEC. 21, 2018 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5791: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018): 

Sept. 28, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 12, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 115–359 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 9609 South 

University Boulevard in Highlands Ranch, Colorado, as the ‘‘Deputy Sheriff 

Zackari Spurlock Parrish, III, Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. DEPUTY SHERIFF ZACKARI SPURLOCK PARRISH, III, POST 

OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 9609 South University Boulevard in Highlands 

Ranch, Colorado, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Deputy 

Sheriff Zackari Spurlock Parrish, 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 ‘‘Deputy Sheriff Zackari Spurlock Parrish, III, Post Office 

Building’’. 

Approved December 21, 2018. 

Dec. 21, 2018 

[H.R. 5791] 


ralbany on LAP520R082 with PUB LAWS PDF
### §§16654, 16655. Repealed or Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 16654, Pub. L. 109–155, title III, §304, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2918; Pub. L. 111–314, §4(e), Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3443, which related to assessment of science mission extensions, was repealed in part and omitted in part. Introductory provisions of subsec. (a) were repealed and reenacted as subsec. (a) of section 30504 of Title 51, National and Commercial Space Programs, by Pub. L. 111–314, §§3, 6, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3328, 3444, which Act enacted Title 51. Subsec. (a)(1), requiring Administrator to carry out assessment for certain missions not later than 60 days after Dec. 30, 2005, was amended and redesignated subsec. (a) by Pub. L. 111–314, §4(e)(1), Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3443, and was omitted from the Code following the enactment of Title 51. Subsec. (a)(2) was repealed and reeenacted as subsec. (b) of section 30504 of Title 51. Subsec. (b), requiring Administrator to submit report on assessment to congressional committees not later than 30 days after completion of assessment, was amended by Pub. L. 111–314, §4(e)(2), Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3443, and was omitted from the Code following the enactment of Title 51.

Section 16655, Pub. L. 109–155, title III, §305, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2918, which related to microgravity research, was repealed in part and omitted in part. Par. (1), which required Administrator to submit report to congressional committees not later than 90 days after Dec. 30, 2005, as required by former section 16766 of this title, was omitted from the Code following the enactment of Title 51. Pars. (2) and (3) were repealed and reenacted as section 40904 of Title 51 by Pub. L. 111–314, §§3, 6, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3328, 3444, which Act enacted Title 51.
§ 1605.5 Subpoenas. ( a ) The Commission may issue to any person, sole proprietorship, partnership, or corporation a subpoena requiring the production of documentary evidence (subpoena duces tecum) and/or the attendance and testimony of witnesses (subpoena ad testificandum) relating to any matter under investigation. The Commission hereby delegates to the Associate Executive Director for Compliance and Enforcement, the Director of the Enforcement Division, the Solicitor, or the General Counsel, depending upon which officer is involved with the subpoena, the power to negotiate and approve the terms of satisfactory compliance with such subpoena.
( b ) The person, sole proprietorship, partnership, or corporation upon whom a subpoena is served may file a motion to limit or quash the subpoena. Any such motion shall set forth the reasons why the subpoena should be quashed or limited and may be accompanied by memoranda, affidavits, or other documents submitted in support of the motion. Unless a different period of time for filing a motion is specified in the subpoena, the motion must be received in the Office of the Secretary of the Commission within ten calendar days after the subpoena is mailed or delivered to such person, sole proprietorship, partnership, or corporation unless the Commission, upon a showing of good cause, grants an extension of time within which to file a motion to limit or quash a subpoena.
( c ) Upon receipt of any such motion, the Office of the Secretary shall immediately notify and transmit a copy of the motion to the Associate Executive Director for Compliance and Enforcement or the General Counsel, as appropriate. Unless a different period of time is specified in the subpoena, the Associate Executive Director for Compliance and Enforcement or the General Counsel shall file an answer with the Office of the Secretary within ten calendar days after receipt of a copy of the motion. A copy of the answer shall be served upon the moving party or the counsel of the moving party. No reply to the answer will be permitted.
( d ) All motions to limit or quash a subpoena shall be ruled upon by the Commission. The Office of the Secretary shall serve the decision on the motion to limit or quash the subpoena upon the moving party or the counsel of the moving party and shall furnish a copy of the decision to the Associate Executive Director for Compliance and Enforcement or the General Counsel, as appropriate. The decision on the motion to limit or quash shall be the final decision on the matter. Motions for reconsideration will not be received.
#### § 1008.635 Drug-free workplace.

*Drug-free workplace* means a site for the performance of work done in connection with a specific award at which employees of the recipient are prohibited from engaging in the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance.