alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 3121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00715]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XA731]


Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's (MAFMC's) 
Tilefish Monitoring Committee (MC) will hold a public meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 16, 2021, from 10 
a.m. to 11:30 a.m. For agenda details, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via webinar, which can be accessed 
at: http://mafmc.adobeconnect.com/tf2021mc/. Meeting audio can also be 
accessed via telephone by dialing 1-800-832-0736 and entering room 
number 5068609.
    Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N. 
State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674-2331; 
www.mafmc.org.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive 
Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 
526-5255.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of this meeting is for the 
Tilefish MC to set blueline tilefish specifications for 2022-24. The MC 
will review annual catch limits, trip limits, discard estimates, and 
other management measures for the blueline tilefish fishery.

Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to M. Jan Saunders at the Mid-Atlantic Council 
Office, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: January 11, 2021.
Rey Israel Marquez,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National 
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-00715 Filed 1-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
# The Attorney Gene.ral of Texas
March 19, 1981 MARKWHITE AttorneyGeneral

,220 ONI” ha.. SUIN202 No!man.Tx.m 71-

42CSN.lath, SuIta B Mcubn. TX. 73301 51-7

200 MaIn Plu4. sun9 u-m SanAMlo. TX.7szM s12/2s4101 Honorable James Warren Smith, Jr. Prio County Attorney P.0. BoxV Pearsall, Texas 78061 Dear Mr.Smith: Opinion No. k!+S99 Re: Grievance procedure under article 391214V.T.C.S.

You ask two questions concerning the grievance procedure provided in article 391214V.T.C.S. Youfirst ask:

Once a grievance committee has met and taken formal action, but less than an unanimous concurrence wasreached as to raising the aggrieved parties salaries, then may those elected officials continue to file repeated written requests for the reconvening of said committee to reconsider their grievances or must said officials wait until the next budgetary hearing to file their written grievances at which time their salaries would be re-set for the ~followhig budgetary year? Article 391214 V.T.C.S., authorizes the ,commissioners court to’~sat the salaries and expenses of county officers and employees. A grievance committee is established pursuant to section 2of article 3912k. An elected county or precinct officer “who is aggrieved by the setting of hi salary, expenses, or other allowance by the commissioners court may request a

committee: hearing before the It Sec. 2(d)(emphasis added). The statute IS phrased inthe singular. Webelieve a single grievance.entitles the official to a single appeal through the grievance procedure. The elected officials may not, have the committee reconvened repeatedly in order to consider their salary setting. Your second question arises from the fact that the public members of the grievance committee are drawn from persons whoserved on’grand juries during the preceding calendar year. Yourquestion isasfollows:

Are grand jurors, whoare selected inaccordance with this article, entitled to a fee for their services onthe grievance committee as they would be if they were actually serving on agrand jury?

p. 985Honorable James Warren Smith, Jr. - Pege Two

Article 2122,V.T.C.S., provides for the payment of each grand juror for each day or fraction of a day that he serves as ajuror. Webelieve that service onthe grievance committee does not constitute service as ajuror. Service as apublic member of the grievance committee is voltmtary and does not carry compensation under article 2122. SUMMARY An elected county or precinct officer who is aggrieved by the setting of his salary under article 391214V.T.C.S., isentitled to one appeal through the grievance procedure per salary setting. The public members of the grievance committee who are &awn from grand jury lists are not entitled to payment under article 2122,V.T.C.S., as grand jurors for service on the grievance committee.

JOHN W.FAINTER, JR. First Assistant Attorney General RICHARD E.GRAYIII Exeoutive AssIstant Attorney General Prepared by Susan L. Garrison Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Susan L.Garrison, Chairman Jon Bible Walter Davis Rich Gilpin Bruce Youngblood

p. 986
### §5608. Foreign trade missions

#### (a) Tribal representation on trade missions

#### (1) In general

The Secretary, in consultation with the Tribal Advisory Committee established under subsection (b)(2) of section 6921 of this title (referred to in this section as the "Advisory Committee"), shall seek—

(A) to support the greater inclusion of Tribal agricultural and food products in Federal trade-related activities; and

(B) to increase the collaboration between Federal trade promotion efforts and other Federal trade-related activities in support of the greater inclusion sought under subparagraph (A).

#### (2) Interdepartmental coordination

In carrying out activities to increase the collaboration described in paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary shall coordinate with—

(A) the Secretary of Commerce;

(B) the Secretary of State;

(C) the Secretary of the Interior; and

(D) the heads of any other relevant Federal agencies.

#### (b) Report; goals

#### (1) Report

Not later than 2 years after December 20, 2018, the Secretary shall submit a report describing the efforts of the Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies under this section to—

(A) the Advisory Committee;

(B) the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives;

(C) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives;

(D) the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate;

(E) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate; and

(F) the Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate.

#### (2) Goals

Not later than 90 days after December 20, 2018, the Secretary shall establish goals for measuring, in an objective and quantifiable format, the extent to which Indian Tribes and Tribal agricultural and food products are included in the trade-related activities of the Department of Agriculture.

(Pub. L. 115–334, title III, §3312, Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4623.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, and not as part of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 which comprises this chapter.

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

#### Definition of "Secretary"

"Secretary" as meaning the Secretary of Agriculture, see section 2 of Pub. L. 115–334, set out as a note under section 9001 of this title.
### §4912. Requirement of referendum

(a) The Secretary shall conduct a referendum among producers, handlers, and importers not exempt under sections 4902(5) and 4907(b) of this title who, during a representative period determined by the Secretary, have been engaged in the production, handling, or importing of watermelons, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the issuance of a plan is approved or favored by producers, handlers, and importers. The ballots and other information or reports that reveal or tend to reveal the vote of any producer, handler, or importer or the person's volume of watermelons produced, handled, or imported shall be held strictly confidential and shall not be disclosed. Any officer or employee of the Department of Agriculture violating the provisions hereof shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 4908(c) of this title.

(b) A plan issued under this chapter shall not take effect unless the Secretary determines that the issuance of the plan is approved or favored by a majority of the producers and handlers (and importers who are subject to the plan) voting in the referendum.

(Pub. L. 99–198, title XVI, §1653, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1629; Pub. L. 103–189, §§2, 8(i), Dec. 14, 1993, 107 Stat. 2259, 2262.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1993—Pub. L. 103–189 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), added subsec. (b), and in subsec. (a) substituted ", handlers, and importers" for "and handlers" in two places and ", handling, or importing" for "or handling" in first sentence, substituted ", handler, or importer" for "or handler" and ", handled, or imported" for "or handled" in sentence beginning with "The ballots", and struck out after first sentence "The referendum shall be conducted at the county extension offices. No plan issued under this chapter shall be effective unless the Secretary determines that the issuance of the plan is approved or favored by not less than two-thirds of the producers and handlers voting in such referendum, or by the producers and handlers of not less than two-thirds of the watermelons produced and handled during the representative period by producers and handlers voting in such referendum, and by not less than a majority of the producers and a majority of the handlers voting in the referendum."
### SUBCHAPTER IV—SUPPLEMENTAL AGRICULTURAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
1503.1003 Requirements. ( a ) A contractor's system of management controls should provide for: ( 1 ) A written code of business ethics and conduct and an ethics training program for all employees;
( 2 ) Periodic reviews of company business practices, procedures, policies and internal controls for compliance with standards of conduct and the special requirements of Government contracting;
( 3 ) A mechanism, such as a hotline, by which employees may report suspected instances of improper conduct, and instructions that encourage employees to make such reports;
( 4 ) Internal and/or external audits, as appropriate;
( 5 ) Disciplinary action for improper conduct;
( 6 ) Timely reporting to appropriate Government officials of any suspected or possible violation of law in connection with Government contracts or any other irregularities in connection with such contracts; and
( 7 ) Full cooperation with any Government agencies responsible for either investigation or corrective actions.
( b ) Contractors who are awarded an EPA contract of $1 million or more must display EPA Office of Inspector General Hotline Posters unless the contractor has established an internal reporting mechanism and program as described in paragraph (a) of this section.
### §§229 to 231. Repealed. June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title IV, §403(a)(17), (23), (27), 66 Stat. 279, eff. Dec. 24, 1952

Section 229, acts May 19, 1921, ch. 8, 42 Stat. 5; May 26, 1924, ch. 190, §30, 43 Stat. 169, related to imposition and enforcement of penalties under act May 19, 1921.

Section 230, Joint Res. Oct. 16, 1918, ch. 190, 40 Stat. 1014, related to alien residents conscripted or volunteering for service during World War I.

Section 231, act May 26, 1926, ch. 400, 44 Stat. 657, related to admission into Puerto Rico of certain resident Spanish subjects.
Exhibit 10.6


                                        [ Comerica Logo ]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Comerica Bank                           One Detroit Center
                                        P.O. Box 75000
                                        Detroit, MI 48275-3265
                                        (313) 222-5431

October 23, 1996                        Deborah S. Albrecht
                                        Account Officer
                                        U. S. Banking
                                        Automotive


W. T. ZurSchmiede, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Federal Screw Works
2400 Buhl Building
Detroit, Michigan 48226


Dear Mr. ZurSchmiede,

Per your request dated September 11, 1996, and pursuant to Section 2.13 of
the Revolving Credit and Term Loan Agreement between Federal Screw Works
and Comerica Bank, the Bank has approved the one year extension for the
Revolving Credit Facility and Term Loan option. The new maturity dates for
the facilities are October 31, 1999 and October 31, 2001 respectively.

Please contact me if you have any additional questions.


Sincerely,

/s/ Deborah S. Albrecht



cc: Wade Plaskey
§ 635.14 Release of law enforcement information furnished by foreign governments or international organizations. ( a ) Information furnished by foreign governments or international organizations is subject to disclosure, unless exempted by 32 CFR part 518 and 32 CFR part 505, federal statutes or executive orders.
( b ) Release of U.S. information (classified military information or controlled unclassified information) to foreign governments is accomplished per AR 380-10 (available at *http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r380_10.pdf*).
### §5104. Regulations

The Secretary and the Farm Credit Administration shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out this chapter. The regulations prescribed by the Secretary shall require qualifying States to adequately train mediators to address all of the issues covered by the mediation program of the State.

(Pub. L. 100–233, title V, §504, Jan. 6, 1988, 101 Stat. 1664; Pub. L. 103–354, title II, §282(c), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3235.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–354 in first sentence substituted "The" for "Within 150 days after January 6, 1988, the" and inserted at end "The regulations prescribed by the Secretary shall require qualifying States to adequately train mediators to address all of the issues covered by the mediation program of the State."
#### 1322.406-8 Investigations.

The designee authorized to process a contracting officer's report on labor standards investigations is set forth in CAM 1301.70.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.0




                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



To the Board of Directors 
Intelect Communications Systems Limited

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement on Form
S-3 (Nos. 333-15243, 333-14287, 333-10103 and 333-09049) and on Form S-8 (Nos.
33-03246, 33-96908, and 33-05918) of Intelect Communications Systems Limited of
our report dated April 9, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Intelect Communications Systems Limited and subsidiaries as of December 31,
1996 and 1995, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
shareholders equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 1996, the
two months ended December 31, 1995 and the years ended October 31, 1995 and
1994, and the related schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 1996
annual report on Form 10-K of Intelect Communications Systems Limited.

Our report dated April 9, 1997, contains an explanatory paragraph that states
that the Company has suffered recurring losses from continuing operations and
is dependent upon the successful development and commercialization of its
products and its ability to secure adequate sources of capital until the
Company is operating profitably.  These matters raise substantial doubt about
the Companys ability to continue as a going concern.  Managements plans with
regard to these matters are described in note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements.  The consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of
this uncertainty.


/S/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK


Chartered Accountants
Hamilton, Bermuda
April 9, 1997
#### § 855.3 Applicability.

This part applies to all regular United States Air Force (USAF), Air National Guard (ANG), and United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR) installations with airfields. This part also applies to civil aircraft use of Air Force ramps at civil airports hosting USAF, ANG, and USAFR units.
#### In the Matter of Patrick D. and Others, Infants. Monroe County Department of Human Services, Respondent; Mary D., Appellant.

[833 NYS2d 421]

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Monroe County (Marilyn L. O’Connor, J.), entered June 20, 2005 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10. The order, among other things, adjudged that the children are neglected children and placed respondent under the supervision of petitioner for a period of 12 months.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs. Present—Scudder, EJ., Smith, Fahey, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices 

# Order

October 26, 2010

139096

ALISHA ANN RECKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 139096 COA: 284676 Grand Traverse CC: CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDING, 07-025927-NI COMPANY, L.L.C., and MICHAEL ALAN WARNES, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

By order of October 26, 2009, the appli cation for leave to appeal the May 12, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals was he ld in abeyance pending the decision in
McCormick v Carrier (Docket No. 136738). On order of the Court, the case having been decided on July 31, 20 10, 487 Mich ___ (2010), the appli cation is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of gr anting leave to appeal, we VACATE the judgments of the Court of Appeals and th e Grand Traverse Circuit Court, and we

REMAND this case to the trial court for reconsideration in light of McCormick

.

C ORRIGAN , J. ( concurring ).

I concur in the order remanding for reconsideration under McCormick v Carrier, 487 Mich ___ (2010), because the majority opinion in McCormick altered the criteria for determining whether an injured plaintiff meet s the serious impairment threshold in MCL 500.3135(7). But I reiterate my disagreement with the McCormick majority’s analysis for the reasons expressed in Justice M ARKMAN ’s dissent in that case, which I joined. I

continue to conclude that the McCormick majority misinterpreted MCL 500.3135(7), thus encouraging litigation that is expressly prohibited by the mo tor vehicle no-fault insurance act and upsetting the Legislature’ s clear intent to provide Mi chigan citizens with timely, automatic benefits for injuries sustained in auto accidents while avoiding costly, unnecessary litigation.I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 26, 2010

d1018 2

Y OUNG , J. ( concurring ).

Although I recognize that this Court’s decision in McCormick v Carrier , 487 Mich ___ (2010), now controls when a person may recover in tort for non-economic loss under the no-fault act, I continue to adhere to the position stated in Justice M ARKMAN ’s dissenting opinion in that case, which I joined.
### §8104. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–334, title IX, §9004, Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4885

Section, Pub. L. 107–171, title IX, §9004, as added Pub. L. 110–234, title IX, §9001(a), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1313, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title IX, §9001(a), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2075; amended Pub. L. 112–240, title VII, §701(f)(3), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2365; Pub. L. 113–79, title IX, §9004, Feb. 7, 2014, 128 Stat. 930, related to repowering assistance program.

A prior section 8104, Pub. L. 107–171, title IX, §9004, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 480, related to a biodiesel fuel education program, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 110–246. See section 8106 of this title.
#### Robert E. Fillet, Appellant, v. Bernard F. Curry, Jr., Doing Business as Curry Motor Company, Respondent.

In an action to rescind the purchase of a new motor vehicle, based upon defendant’s breach of an implied warranty of merchantability, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, dated May 10, 1959, dismissing his complaint at the close of the entire case, after a jury trial. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff purchased a motor vehicle from defendant, an authorized dealer. Plaintiff was given a parts warranty under which defendant guaranteed the parts for 90 days or 4,000 miles, whichever occurred first. The day following the delivery of the vehicle and every day thereafter (with few exceptions) plaintiff had difficulty starting the automobile. Within a period of about three weeks following delivery defendant replaced the battery, the voltage regulator and the generator; but the difficulties persisted. About five weeks after delivery plaintiff brought the automobile to defendant for a 1,000-mile inspection. At that time the speedometer registered 1,356 miles. Being dissatisfied with the attempted adjustment, plaintiff demanded of defendant the return of the purchase price, and upon defendant’s refusal brought this action for rescission. After trial before a jury the court *520dismissed the complaint on the ground that there was no implied warranty of merchantability. We do not agree with the learned trial court that there is no implied warranty of merchantability. In our opinion such a warranty accompanied the sale of the automobile (Personal Property Law, § 96, subd. 2; *Bencoe Exporting & Importing Co.*v. *McGraw Tire & Rubber Co.,*212 App. Div. 136; *Ryan*v. *Progressive Grocery Stores,*255 N. Y. 388; *Kelvinator Sales Corp.*v. *Quabbin Improvement Co.,*234 App. Div. 96; *Marino*v. *Maytag Atlantic Co.,*141 N. Y. S. 2d 432). We are of the opinion, however, that the evidence adduced fails as a matter of law to establish a breach of the warranty of merchantability (cf. *Adams*v. *Peter Tramontin Motor Sales,*42 N. J. Super. 313). Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur; Kleinfeld, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment and to grant a new trial, with the following memorandum: There was sufficient evidence, offered by the plaintiff, to warrant a finding by the jury that, when the automobile was delivered, it could not be started without a push, or a charging of the battery. Even when plaintiff, at defendant’s suggestion, refrained from using the lights, radio, and electric hand signal, the ear could not be started. Plaintiff gave defendant a reasonable opportunity to put the car into good working condition. After all of defendant’s efforts had failed to remove the difficulty, plaintiff tendered the return of the car, and demanded a refund of the purchase price. Under all the circumstances, whether there was a breach of the warranty of merchantability, is an issue of fact which should have been submitted to the jury.