alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 14, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 74566]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27340]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 34622]


The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company--Trackage 
Rights Exemption--Union Pacific Railroad Company

    Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP), pursuant to a written trackage 
rights agreement entered into between UP and The Burlington Northern 
and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF), has agreed to grant overhead 
reciprocal trackage rights to BNSF over UP's rail line between UP's 
milepost 609.6 at a station known as Tower 60 (North Fort Worth) and 
UP's milepost 612.4 at a station known as Dalwor Junction, including a 
station known as Purina Junction (milepost 611.9), and continuing on to 
a station known as North Tower 55 (milepost 612.9) on UP's Duncan 
Subdivision and between BNSF's milepost 2.52 and BNSF's milepost 0.86 
adjacent to and connecting to BNSF owned Tail Track on BNSF's Fort 
Worth Subdivision and between UP's milepost F250.9 at a station known 
as Tower 55 and UP's milepost F250.8 at a station known as Tower 55 
(connecting with BNSF's Cleburne Subdivision) on UP's Fort Worth 
Subdivision, a total distance of approximately 5.0 miles. BNSF will 
operate its own trains with its own crews over the UP line under the 
trackage rights.
    BNSF indicates that it expected to consummate the transaction on 
December 1, 2004.
    The purpose of the overhead trackage rights is to facilitate 
directional running in the Fort Worth, TX area and to enhance the 
efficiency of UP and BNSF operations through Fort Worth.
    As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the 
trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in Norfolk 
and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as 
modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 360 I.C.C. 
653 (1980).
    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If the notice 
contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab 
initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may 
be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not 
automatically stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 34622, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, a 
copy of each pleading must be served on Sarah W. Bailiff, The 
Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company, P.O. Box 961039, Fort 
Worth, TX 76161-0039.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov.

    Decided: December 7, 2004.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-27340 Filed 12-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
### §300j–17. Estrogenic substances screening program

In addition to the substances referred to in section 346a(p)(3)(B) of title 21 the Administrator may provide for testing under the screening program authorized by section 346a(p) of title 21, in accordance with the provisions of section 346a(p) of title 21, of any other substance that may be found in sources of drinking water if the Administrator determines that a substantial population may be exposed to such substance.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XIV, §1457, as added Pub. L. 104–182, title I, §136, Aug. 6, 1996, 110 Stat. 1680.)
§ 1005.160 Communications. ( a ) The agency shall take appropriate steps to ensure effective communication with applicants, participants, personnel of other Federal entities, and members of the public. ( 1 ) The agency shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids where necessary to afford a handicapped person an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a program or activity conducted by the agency. ( i ) In determining what type of auxiliary aid is necessary, the agency shall give primary consideration to the requests of the handicapped person.
( ii ) The agency need not provide individually prescribed devices, readers for personal use or study, or other devices of a personal nature.
( 2 ) Where the agency communicates with applicants and beneficiaries by telephone, telecommunication devices for deaf person (TDD's) or equally effective telecommunication systems shall be used.
( b ) The agency shall ensure that interested persons, including persons with impaired vision or hearing, can obtain information as to the existence and location of accessible services, activities, and facilities.
( c ) The agency shall provide signage at a primary entrance to each of its inaccessible facilities, directing users to a location at which they can obtain information about accessible facilities. The international symbol for accessibility shall be used at each primary entrance of an accessible facility.
( d ) This section does not require the agency to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program or activity or in undue financial and adminstrative burdens. In those circumstances where agency personnel believe that the proposed action would fundamentally alter the program or activity or would result in undue financial and administrative burdens, the agency has the burden of proving that compliance with § 1005.160 would result in such alteration or burdens. The decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must be made by the agency head or his or her designee after considering all agency resources available for use in the funding and operation of the conducted program or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. If an action required to comply with this section would result in such an alteration or such burdens, the agency shall take any other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, handicapped persons receive the benefits and services of the program or activity.
{9 Avoidance Areas 0 10 20 40 60 80 100

Miles

Map 2-32

Utility/Transportation Systems
Avoidance Areas

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM Alternative 3
#### Florence R. Colasuonno et al., Appellants, v. Municipal Housing Authority of Schenectady, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of a Special Term, Supreme Court, Albany County. Plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant public housing authority has been dismissed at Special Term because of a failure to file a notice of claim within 90 days pursuant to section 50 -e of the General Municipal Law, which superseded “ inconsistent provisions of any general, special or local law * * * and shall be controlling.” (L. 1945, ch. 694, § 13.) It has been held that this shorter period, rather than the six-month period allowed by section 157 of the Public Housing Law is controlling. (Robin*son*v. *New York City Housing Auth.,*7 N Y 2d 908; cf. Public Housing Law, § 3.) Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs.
#### In the Matter of Jennie Sorrentino, Doing Business as Victory Bar & Restaurant, Petitioner, against John F. O’Connell, et al., Individually and Constituting the State Liquor Authority, Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority canceling a restaurant liquor license, transferred to this court pursuant to section 1296 of said Act. Petitioner also prays for an order directing respondents to renew said license for the period March 1, 1955, to February 29, 1956. The license was cancelled on findings that (1) the premises had ceased to be operated as a bona fide restaurant; (2) adequate books and records were not maintained, and (3) the licensee knowingly employed a disqualified person, a convicted felon. Determination annulled, without costs, and matter remitted to respondents for reconsideration and action not inconsistent herewith. We are of the opinion that above finding (1) is proper; that finding (2) is supported by some proof, and that finding (3) is improper because it is not supported by sufficient evidence. The matter is remitted to respondents to consider in the first instance whether there is a substantial basis for refusal to permit the continuance of the licensed premises. *(Matter of Norton*v. *O’Connell,*282 App. Div. 744, appeal dismissed 306 N. Y. 843.) Nolan, P. J., MacCrate, Schmidt, Murphy and Ughetta, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       5,036,986
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,985,945
<ALLOWANCES>                                   230,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,348,306
<PP&E>                                       7,383,354
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,861,288
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              70,726,114
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       86,040,908
<BONDS>                                        259,146
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,617
<OTHER-SE>                                 (16,540,446)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                70,726,114
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,010,578
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               26,821,960
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            13,236,926
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,633,899
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (8,780,726)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (8,780,726)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 182,296
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             (1,365,229)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (9,963,659)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.71)


</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Office of the Secretary 

In order to comply with the mandate of section 999(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the Department of the Treasury is publishing a current list of countries which may require participation in, or cooperation with, an international boycott (within the meaning of section 999(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986). 

On the basis of the best information currently available to the Department of the Treasury, the following countries may require participation in, or cooperation with, an international boycott (within the meaning of section 999(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986): Bahrain, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen, Republic of. 

Dated: December 13, 2004. 

Barbara Angus, 

International Tax Counsel (Tax Policy). 

[FR Doc. 04-27631 Filed 12-16-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810-25-M
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

RAMONA MARY MESTAS, * No. 14

- 800 V

*

Petitioner, * Special Master Moran

*

v. * Filed: September 29 , 2015

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Stipulation; influenza vaccine;

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Guillain

- Barré Syndrome (“GBS”)

. *

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Stephen I. Leshner , P

. C

. , Phoenix, AZ

, for Petitioner;

Camille Collett

, U nited States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC

, for R espondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION 1

On September 4 , 2015 , respondent filed a joint stipulation concerning the

petition for compensation filed by Ramona Mary Mestas on September 2 , 2014

. In

her petition, Ms. Mestas alleged that the influenza vaccine , which is contained in

the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42 C.F.R. §100.3(a), and which s he

received on August 31, 2011

, caused her to develop Guillain

- Barré syndrome

(“GBS”). Petitioner further alleges that s he experienced the residual effect s of this

condition for more than six months. Petitioner represents that t here has been no

prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of her condition.

Respondent denies that the influenza immunization is the cause of

petitioner’s alleged GBS or any other injury or condition.

1 T he E

- Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107

- 347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17,

2002), requires that the Court post this decision on its website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b),

the party has 14 days to file a motion proposing redaction of medical inform ation or other

information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 12(d)(4). Any redactions ordered by the special

master will appear in the document posted on the website.2

Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as

“Appendix A.” The undersigned finds said stipulation to be re asonable and adopts

it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

Damages awarded in that stipulation include:

A lump sum of $ 25 ,000 .00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner

, Ramona Mary Mestas

. This amount represents compensation for all

damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(a).

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC, Appendix B,

the clerk is directed to enter judgment in case 14

- 800V according to this decision

and the attached stipulation. 2

Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Dan Hoffman , at (202) 357

-

63 60

.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each

party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal

Claims judge.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4080 

To direct the Architect of the Capitol to acquire a statue of ‘‘The Unknown 

Slave’’ for permanent display in Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor 

Center, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 17, 2012 

Mr. ACKERMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To direct the Architect of the Capitol to acquire a statue 

of ‘‘The Unknown Slave’’ for permanent display in 

Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center, 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. STATUE OF ‘‘THE UNKNOWN SLAVE’’. 

4 Not later than 180 days after the date of the enact5 ment of this Act, the Architect of the Capitol (hereafter 

6 in this Act referred to as the ‘‘Architect’’) shall solicit bids 

7 and enter into an agreement for the creation of a statue 

8 of ‘‘The Unknown Slave’’. The Architect shall acquire and 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4080 IH

1 permanently display that statue in Emancipation Hall in 

2 the Capitol Visitor Center. 

3 SEC. 2. CONSULTATION WITH CONGRESSIONAL BLACK 

4 CAUCUS. 

5 The Architect shall carry out this Act in consultation 

6 with the Congressional Black Caucus. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
### §300dd–41. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXIV, §2441, as added Nov. 4, 1988, Pub. L. 100–607, title II, §211, 102 Stat. 3092, which related to demonstration projects for individuals with positive AIDS test results, was renumbered section 520B of act July 1, 1944, by Pub. L. 102–321, title I, §118(a), July 10, 1992, 106 Stat. 348, and was transferred to section 290bb–33 of this title, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 106–310, div. B, title XXXII, §3201(b)(2), Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1190.
Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 1 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 2 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 3 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 4 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 5 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 6 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 7 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 8 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 9 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 10 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 11 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 12 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 13 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 14 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 15 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 16 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 17 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 18 of 19Case 3:08-cv-03630-BZ Document 137 Filed 04/26/10 Page 19 of 19
#### § 1429.5 Matters not previously presented; official notice.

The Board will not consider evidence offered by a party, or any issue, which was not presented in the proceedings before the Regional Director, Hearing Officer, Administrative Law Judge, or Grievance Board. The Board may, however, take official notice of such matters as would be proper.
§ 1305.1 Purpose and scope. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 301, the head of an executive department or military department may prescribe regulations for the government of his/her department, the conduct of its employees, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use, and preservation of its records, papers, and property. Section 301 does not authorize withholding information from the public or limiting the availability of records to the public. This part contains the regulations of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) concerning procedures to be followed when a request, subpoena, order or other demand (hereinafter in this part referred to as a “demand”) of a court or other authorities in any state or federal proceeding is issued for the production or disclosure of: ( a ) Any material contained in the files of MCC;
( b ) Any information relating to materials contained in the files of MCC; or
( c ) Any information or material acquired by an employee of MCC during the performance of the employee's official duties or because of the employee's official status.
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13A-14(A) AND 15D-14(A),
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principals;c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.
  a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date: July 31, 2009
    By:
    /s/ TIMOTHY T. YATESTimothy T. YatesExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NANCY LANGSTON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

NORTH AMERICAN ASSET

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION GROUP

DISABILITY PLAN,

Defendant. /

No. C 08-02560 SI

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO

SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD

On January 20, 2010, this Court awarded plaintiff attorneys fees and costs, as the prevailing

party in this matter. In making the award, the Court rejected plaintiff’s requested hourly rate based in

part on defendant’s objection to same as excessive. Thereafter, plaintiff sought reconsideration of the

fee order, and this Court scheduled an evidentiary hearing for April 7, 2010, to evaluate the factual

predicate for the fee award. 

The April 7, 2010 hearing thus arises in the wake of defendant’s successful objection to

plaintiff’s fee petition based in part on the contention that plaintiff’s requested hourly rates were

excessive. However, defendant has submitted no factual information on which to evaluate the question.

Therefore, in preparation for the hearing, the Court directs defendant to supplement the record by filing

electronically no later than April 7, 2010 at 12:00 p.m. a declaration stating the rate defense counsel

charged in 2009 to defend ERISA cases like this one.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 6, 2010 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02560-SI Document 102 Filed 04/06/10 Page 1 of 1