alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1.000
<CASH>                                          15,198
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    112,134
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          36,612
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            35,499
<LOANS>                                        244,213
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,057
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 418,775
<DEPOSITS>                                     299,473
<SHORT-TERM>                                     4,700
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,609
<LONG-TERM>                                     79,395
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,935
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,663
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 418,775
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 19,661
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                9,491
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   237
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                29,389
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              10,519
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,898
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           14,491
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      370
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  88
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 11,382
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,570
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,082
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,082
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.39
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.58
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,444
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,076
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 1,014
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    508
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,909
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      264
<RECOVERIES>                                        42
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,057
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,949
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,108



</TABLE>
PUBLIC LAW 114–320—DEC. 16, 2016 130 STAT. 1621 

Public Law 114–320 

114th Congress 

An Act 

To provide for the approval of the Agreement for Cooperation Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Kingdom 

of Norway Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN 

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF 

AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM 

OF NORWAY CONCERNING PEACEFUL USES OF 

NUCLEAR ENERGY. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding the provisions for congressional consideration of a proposed agreement for cooperation in 

subsection d. of section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 

(42 U.S.C. 2153), the Agreement for Cooperation Between the 

Government of the United States of America and the Government 

of the Kingdom of Norway Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear 

Energy, done at Washington June 11, 2016, may be brought into 

effect on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, as if 

all the requirements in such section for consideration of such agreement had been satisfied, subject to subsection (b). 

(b) APPLICABILITY OF ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954 AND OTHER

PROVISIONS OF LAW.—Upon entering into effect, the agreement 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be subject to the provisions 

of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) and 

any other applicable United States law as if such agreement had 

Effective date. 

Dec. 16, 2016 

[S. 8] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS
130 STAT. 1622 PUBLIC LAW 114–320—DEC. 16, 2016 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 8: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 162 (2016): 

Dec. 9, considered and passed Senate. 

Dec. 13, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

come into effect in accordance with the requirements of section 

123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2153). 

Approved December 16, 2016. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS
Case File...

h More

er links between crimes not

nected, firearms examiners

tained “open case files” of

ce. Now, advanced tech

he possibility of an open

any thousands of exhibits,

nutes instead of the lifetimes

required for an entirely

examiners or technicians

 casing evidence into the

stic Identification System

hen the new images are

nst earlier entries. It is

h against evidence from the

s, neighboring jurisdictions,

ictions across the country.

lert firearms examiners to

.

iners then compare the

e to confirm a “hit.” This

 helps investigators connect

nnect a crime to a recovered

ators can take this lead and

r case information to help

How You Can HelpIf your agency has its own NIBINequipment, you can contribute to its

success by:

☛ Picking up projectiles and cartridge

casings at ALL crime scenes and submitting them for imaging. Consistentevidence entry helps your agency gethits by giving you the maximum crimegun evidence for comparison.

☛ Ensuring that ALL weapons recovered in

your cases are testfired and imaged intoNIBIN.

☛ Following up on the investigative leads

that NIBIN discovers.

But if your agency doesn’t have itsown NIBIN equipment, you can stillbenefit!NIBIN is deployed nationwide; most StateBureaus of Investigation (or equivalent) areconnected to NIBIN, as are many othercounty and city laboratories. If you needassistance in finding a NIBIN site in yourarea, you may contact the NIBIN Coordinator in your ATF field division, or call theATF NIBIN Branch at 202-927-5660.

ATF’s Partnershipwith State and LocalLaw EnforcementThrough ATF’s NIBIN Program, State andlocal agencies receive technology that theycould likely not afford on their own, as well asthe capability to exchange investigativeinformation with other jurisdictions.The NIBIN program is currently in the finalstages of deployment nationwide. Therewill be 235 sites nationwide. NIBIN will beavailable in every State and in most majormetropolitan areas.In addition to its support of the NIBIN program,ATF provides comprehensive support to Stateand local NIBIN partners. They have access toa variety of resources such as the expertise inATF Laboratory Services, assistance with firearms tracing and crime gun analysis, andindustry resources.

Side-bysideimagesallow initialcomparisononscreen

Firearms examiners confirm “hits” by comparingoriginal evidence

Even damaged bullets can be entered into IBISsuccessfully.
For more information

about the NIBIN Program,

contact your agency’s forensic laboratory.

You may also:

Contact the NIBIN Coordinator in

your ATF Field Division,

call 202-927-5660,

or visit www.nibin.gov

ATF P 3315.2Revised February 2005

NIBI N

National Integrated Ballistic Information Network

HOW ATF’S NIBINPROGRAM CANHELP YOUR AGENCYSOLVE VIOLENTFIREARMS CRIMES

U.S. Department of JusticeBureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Bullets, Casings,and You
#### § 285.821 Will BSEE conduct scheduled and unscheduled inspections?

BSEE may conduct both scheduled and unscheduled inspections.

[89 FR 42721, May 15, 2024]
(No. 86-CC-0048

#### Maurice Moore, Claimant, *v.*The State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed June 22, 1987.*

Maurice Moore, *pro se,*for Claimant.

Neil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (John R. Buckley, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.

*181Patchett, J.

This is a claim brought by Maurice Moore for personal injuries sustained by him while a resident of the Centraba Correctional Center. On April 27, 1985, Claimant was playing cards in the day room of the institution. While sitting in a plastic swivel chair bolted to a table unit, the chair gave way and threw him to the floor. He injured his back, and in trying not to hit his head on the floor, caused his left index finger to be sprained. Examination of the chair revealed that one or more of the screws needed to hold the chair to the unit were missing.

Applying this Court’s holding in *Ware v. State,*25 Ill. Ct. Cl. 181, Claimant made an unrebutted *prima facie*case of negligence on the part of the Respondent. In *Ware,*the Claimant was injured when the chair in which she was sitting in a State office collapsed.

> “This Court is of the opinion that the doctrine of *res ipsa loquitur*is applicable to a public authority in Illinois. (See *Roberts v. City of Sterling,*22 Ill. App. 2d 337; *Kenney v. State,*22 Ill. Ct. Cl. 247; and *Finch v. State,*22 Ill. Ct. Cl. 376.) The testimony clearly shows that the chair in question was under the control and management of the Unemployment Compensation Division of the Department of Labor of the State of Illinois, and that the occurrence was such as in the ordinary course of events would not have happened if due care had been exercised by Respondent. Claimant has established a *prima facie*case of negligence on the part of the Respondent, thereby shifting the burden of proof to Respondent. Respondent produced no evidence on the question of negligence and has failed to rebut the presumption raised by Claimant’s testimony. There is testimony in the record by Claimant that after the fall she noticed there was an old place in the chair where the chair had cracked, and that there was a crack on the back part of the chair where the seat goes into the leg. Under the doctrine of *res ipsa loquitur*it becomes the obligation of Respondent to show by affirmative proof that Respondent was not guilty of negligence in the incident in question, namely, the collapsing of the chair on which the Claimant sat. Respondent has failed to do so, and the Court finds that Respondent was guilty of negligence in the maintenance of the chair, and that said negligence caused the injury to Claimant.” *Ware v. State,*25 Ill. Ct. Cl. 181, 185.

*182Claimant’s medical history pertaining to the accident is contained in the departmental report attached to the transcript of this case. We are of the opinion that the Claimant suffered temporary pain and discomfort. It appears that he was unable to work in the correctional center kitchen for two weeks, and lost $6.00 in pay.

Therefore, we award the Claimant five hundred dollars ($500.00) for pain and suffering.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      33,422,370
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,418,696
<ALLOWANCES>                                   338,020
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               306,280
<PP&E>                                       8,893,172
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,965,741
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              96,143,379
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,191,040
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    78,297,211      
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,116,905
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                96,143,379
<SALES>                                     60,977,700
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            60,977,700
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            52,192,527
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               251,313
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (59,354)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,593,214
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,488,093
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,105,121
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,105,121
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Lucian Booker, Appellant.

Motion granted to prosecute appeal on original papers, typewritten briefs, and Gary Orenstein, Esq., of Syracuse, assigned as counsel.
### §48107. Civil aviation security research and development

After the review under section 44912(b) of this title is completed, necessary amounts may be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation out of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund established under section 9502 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9502) to make grants under section 44912(a)(4)(A).

(Pub. L. 103–272, §1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1297.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 48107 | 49 App.:1357(d)(9). | Aug. 23, 1958, Pub. L. 85–726, 72 Stat. 731, §316(d)(9); added Nov. 16, 1990, Pub. L. 101–604, §107, 104 Stat. 3077. |

Section

The words "to the Secretary of Transportation" are added for clarity and consistency in this chapter.
#### In the Matter of Charles A. Glick, an Attorney, Respondent. Joint Bar Association Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District, Petitioner.

Second Department,

March 5, 1979

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Donald. E. Humphrey*for petitioner.

*Charles A. Glick,*respondent *pro se.*

OPINION OF THE COURT

*Per Curiam.*

The respondent was admitted to practice by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department, on November 26, 1945. In this proceeding to discipline him for professional misconduct, the petitioner, moves to confirm the *488report of the Justice of the Supreme Court to whom the issues were referred for hearing and report. The respondent cross-moves to confirm said report, but asks that the measure of discipline be limited to a censure.

In this proceeding the respondent was charged with failing to abide by the terms of an escrow agreement; converting $25,000 of his clients’ money; commingling personal and escrow funds; misrepresenting the status of an escrow account; failing to obey the order of a Justice of the Supreme Court to turn over funds; failing to hold $5,750 in escrow; converting to his own use said $5,750; failing to deliver $5,750 pursuant to the instructions of his client; delivering his checks to his client, or on her behalf, which checks were dishonored because of insufficient funds; and converting to his own use $16,649.20 entrusted to him by his client. The Referee found the respondent guilty of all of the allegations of misconduct, but pointed out in mitigation that the complainants herein were repaid all of the funds entrusted to the respondent within two months of the date they became due.

After reviewing all of the evidence we are in agreement with the Referee that the respondent was guilty of the charges of professional misconduct. The petitioner’s motion to confirm the Referee’s report is granted and the respondent’s cross motion is denied.

In determining an appropriate measure of discipline we have taken into consideration the fact that the respondent has repaid the moneys which were converted. Accordingly, the respondent is suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years, commencing April 1, 1979, and until the further order of this court.

Mollen, P. J., Titone, Suozzi, O’Connor and Lazer, JJ., concur.
### §14709. Tariff reconciliation rules for motor carriers of property

Subject to review and approval by the Board, motor carriers subject to jurisdiction under subchapter I of chapter 135 (other than motor carriers providing transportation of household goods) and shippers may resolve, by mutual consent, overcharge and under-charge claims resulting from incorrect tariff provisions or billing errors arising from the inadvertent failure to properly and timely file and maintain agreed upon rates, rules, or classifications in compliance with section 13702 or, with respect to transportation provided before January 1, 1996, sections 10761 and 10762, as in effect on December 31, 1995. Resolution of such claims among the parties shall not subject any party to the penalties for departing from a tariff.

(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, §103, Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 912; amended Pub. L. 104–287, §5(39), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3392.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

#### Pub. L. 104–287

This amends 49:14709 by setting out the effective date of 49:14709 and for clarity and consistency.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Sections 10761 and 10762, referred to in text, were omitted in the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, title I, §102(a), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 804, effective Jan. 1, 1996.

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 11712 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, §102(a).

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–287 substituted "January 1, 1996" for "the effective date of this section" and "December 31, 1995" for "the day before the effective date of this section".

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.
#### § 57.14203 Application of belt dressing.

Belt dressings shall not be applied manually while belts are in motion unless a pressurized-type applicator is used that allows the dressing to be applied from outside the guards.
#### § 57.11003 Construction and maintenance of ladders.

Ladders shall be of substantial construction and maintained in good condition.
#### § 556.806 What is the effective date of an assignment of operating rights?

An assignment is effective at 12:01 a.m. on the first day of the month following the date on which BOEM approves your request, unless you request an earlier effective date and BOEM approves that earlier date. Such an earlier effective date, if prior to the date of BOEM's approval, does not relieve you of obligations accrued between that earlier effective date and the date of approval.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                        560,393
<SECURITIES>                  536,216                   <F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                 105,825
<ALLOWANCES>                  0
<INVENTORY>                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              0
<PP&E>                        12,154,114                <F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                3,019,418 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                10,631,614
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         0
<BONDS>                       6,309,557                 <F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      3,309,728                 <F4>
<OTHER-SE>                    0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  10,631,614  
<SALES>                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              1,497,370                 <F5>
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 833,092                   <F6>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              53,346                    <F7>
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0           
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            560,423 
<INCOME-PRETAX>               0
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           0
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0       
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  50,509
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                 0
<FN>
<F1>   "SECURITIES" REPRESENTS INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE
<F2>   "PP&E" REPRESENTS INVESTMENT IN REAL ESTATE [LAND AND
BUILDING]
<F3>   "BONDS" REPRESENTS MORTGAGES PAYABLE
<F4>   "COMMON" REPRESENTS TOTAL PARTNERS CAPITAL
<F5>   "TOTAL REVENUES" REPRESENTS RENTAL, INTEREST, AND OTHER
INCOME
<F6>   "TOTAL COSTS" REPRESENTS TOTAL EXPENSES
<F7>   "OTHER EXPENSES" REPRESENTS INTEREST IN JOINT VENTURES' NET
INCOME/LOSS
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
§ 585.225 What happens if BOEM accepts a bid? ( a ) BOEM will identify and notify the lease area's provisional winner of the amount due on each winning bid, which equals the cash component of the provisional winner's bid less its bid deposit retained by BOEM under § 585.501. BOEM will provide an unsigned copy of the lease to the provisional winner.
( b ) Within 10 business days after receipt of the unsigned copy, or as otherwise specified by BOEM under paragraph (d) of this section, the provisional winner must: ( 1 ) Execute the lease and return it to BOEM;
( 2 ) File financial assurance as required by §§ 585.516 through 585.529; and
( 3 ) Pay the amount due.
( c ) When the bid deposit exceeds the amount due, BOEM will refund the overage without interest.
( d ) A provisional winner may request in writing an extension of the 10-day time limit in paragraph (b) of this section. BOEM, in its discretion, may grant such a request.
( e ) BOEM will execute the lease by signing the lease on behalf of the United States only after the provisional winner completes the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section and any appeals timely filed under § 585.118(c)(1) have been resolved. After BOEM executes the lease, the provisional winner becomes the winning bidder, and BOEM will send the winning bidder an electronic version of the fully executed copy of the lease. The lease takes effect as set forth in § 585.237.
( f ) The winning bidder must pay the first 12 months' rent under § 585.503(a) within 45 calendar days after receiving a copy of the executed lease from BOEM.
( g ) In the event that a lessee does not meet the commitments it made to obtain any bidding credits, the lessee will be required to repay the value of the bidding credits that it received adjusted for inflation.