alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3120

To provide for the dissemination of information on irradiated foods used 

in the school lunch programs and to ensure that school districts, parents, 

and students retain the option of traditional, non-irradiated foods 

through such programs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 17, 2003

Ms. LEE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL

To provide for the dissemination of information on irradiated 

foods used in the school lunch programs and to ensure 

that school districts, parents, and students retain the 

option of traditional, non-irradiated foods through such 

programs.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Right to Know School 

5 Nutrition Act’’. 
2

•HR 3120 IH 

1 SEC. 2. IRRADIATED FOODS IN THE SCHOOL LUNCH PRO2 GRAMS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Agriculture 

4 shall, by rule, require any institutions that serve irradiated 

5 foods as part of the school lunch program under the Rich6 ard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 

7 1751 et seq.) or the school breakfast program established 

8 under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 

9 U.S.C. 1773) to—

10 (1) provide to the students served by such pro11 grams, and to the parents or guardians of such stu12 dents, prior to serving irradiated foods, balanced in13 formation regarding irradiated foods, including—

14 (A) the purpose of radiation used on foods; 

15 (B) the effects of radiation on the nutri16 tional value of foods; and 

17 (C) any potential adverse health con18 sequences of irradiated foods; 

19 (2) provide students served by such programs 

20 (and their parents or guardians with respect to such 

21 students) the option of traditional, non-irradiated 

22 foods at every meal provided under such programs; 

23 (3) ensure that menu items containing irradi24 ated foods are clearly labeled with the phrase ‘‘treat25 ed with irradiation’’, or ‘‘treated by irradiation’’; 
3

•HR 3120 IH 

1 (4) ensure that irradiated and non-irradiated 

2 foods are not commingled; and 

3 (5) ensure the prominent display of signs in 

4 school cafeterias indicating that irradiated food is 

5 being served. 

6 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

7 are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary such 

8 sums as may be necessary for carrying out this Act.

Æ
§ 303.24 Application for deposit insurance for an interim institution. ( a ) *Application required.* Subject to § 303.62(b)(2), a deposit insurance application is required for a state-chartered interim institution if the related merger transaction is subject to approval by a federal banking agency other than the FDIC. A separate application for deposit insurance for an interim institution is not required in connection with any merger requiring FDIC approval pursuant to subpart D of this part.
( b ) *Content of separate application.* A letter application for deposit insurance for an interim institution, accompanied by a copy of the related merger application, shall be filed with the appropriate FDIC office. The letter application shall briefly describe the transaction and contain a statement that deposit insurance is being requested for an interim institution that does not operate independently but exists solely as a vehicle to accomplish a merger transaction which will be reviewed by a federal banking agency other than the FDIC.
( c ) *Processing.* An application for deposit insurance for an interim depository institution will be acknowledged in writing by the FDIC. Final action will be taken within 21 days after receipt of a substantially complete application, unless the applicant is notified in writing that additional review is warranted. If the FDIC does not act within the expedited processing period, it does not constitute an automatic or default approval.
Deborah Ottinger 

----- Original Message -----

From: Deborah Ottinger 

Sent: 10/26/2010 PM EDT 

To: Suzanne Kocchi 

Cc: Kirsten Cappel 

Subject: Draft F-GHG MRR for OMB Clearance; Comparison Between Versions 

Submitted to OMB in August and Today 

Suzie, 

Attached please find (1) the draft final F-GHG MRR for OMS clearance and (2) a "track changes" version 

of the rule that compares today's version to that submitted to OMS on August 10. Please give me a call if 

you have any questions. Thanks. 

Debbie 

Comparison F-GHG 

between August MRR 10 

and October 26 10 

submissions.docclean.doc 

Deborah Ottinger Schaefer 

Inventory Analyst for High-GWP Emissions 

Climate Change Division 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

e-mail: ottinger.deborah@epa.gov 

phone: 202-343-9149
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3122 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3122

To amend the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act 
 of 1990 to direct the Secretary of the department in which the Coast 
 Guard is operating to issue a regulation prohibiting a vessel with a 
ballast water tank from entering the Great Lakes if more than 5 percent 
          of the capacity of the tank contains ballast water.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 17, 2003

   Mrs. Miller of Michigan introduced the following bill; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act 
 of 1990 to direct the Secretary of the department in which the Coast 
 Guard is operating to issue a regulation prohibiting a vessel with a 
ballast water tank from entering the Great Lakes if more than 5 percent 
          of the capacity of the tank contains ballast water.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Great Lakes Water Protection Act of 
2003''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO NONINDIGENOUS AQUATIC NUISANCE PREVENTION AND 
              CONTROL ACT.

    (a) Prohibition on Entry of Certain Vessels Into the Great Lakes.--
Section 1101(b) of the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and 
Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4711(b)) is amended by adding at the end 
the following:
            ``(5) Prohibition on entry of certain vessels into the 
        great lakes.--In addition to promulgating regulations under 
        paragraph (1) and (3), the Secretary shall issue, not later 
        than 30 days after the date of enactment of this paragraph, a 
        regulation that prohibits any vessel with a ballast water tank 
        from entering the Great Lakes if more than 5 percent of the 
        capacity of the tank contains ballast water.''.
    (b) Certification.--Paragraph (2)(E) of such section is amended by 
inserting before the semicolon at the end ``and the regulation issued 
under paragraph (5)''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2023040EN.01000201.xml

| 2.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 40/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 40/2

---

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

(2023/C 40/02)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | 30 September 2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Case No | 89236 |
| Decision No | 185/22/COL |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Prolongation of the rail freight support scheme |
| Legal basis | Guidelines of the Norwegian Railway Directorate |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | Coordination of transport |
| Form of aid | Direct grants |
| Budget | NOK 93,5 million (annual) |
| Intensity | 50 % |
| Duration | 2 years |
| Economic sectors | Freight rail transport |
| Name and address of the granting authority | The Norwegian Railway Directorate |
| DFØ Trondheim |
| Postboks 4746 |
| 7468 Trondheim |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

30 September 2022

Case No

89236

Decision No

185/22/COL

EFTA State

Norway

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Prolongation of the rail freight support scheme

Legal basis

Guidelines of the Norwegian Railway Directorate

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Coordination of transport

Form of aid

Direct grants

Budget

NOK 93,5 million (annual)

Intensity

50 %

Duration

2 years

Economic sectors

Freight rail transport

Name and address of the granting authority

The Norwegian Railway Directorate

DFØ Trondheim

Postboks 4746

7468 Trondheim

NORWAY

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/

---
# C_2007038EN.01001101.xml

| 22.2.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/11

---

Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1 f of Annex XV of the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises)

(2007/C 38/08)

| Aid No | Aid to small and medium-sized undertakings 2/06 |
| --- | --- |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Region | Hordaland County |
| Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid | Hardanger Industripark AS |
| Legal basis | Hordaland County council, decision made 26 January 2006, issue 18/06, ‘Hardanger Industripark — Flaskevatnproduksjon i Ullensvang — Søknad om tilskot’ |
| Overall amount of individual aid granted to the company | EUR 0,075 million |
| Maximum aid intensity | In conformity with Articles 4(2)-(6) and 5 of the Regulation |
| Date of implementation | 28.2.2006 |
| Duration of scheme or individual aid award | 1.4.2006 |
| Objective of aid | Aid to small and medium-sized enterprises |
| Economic sectors concerned | All manufacturing
  Other services |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Hordaland fylkeskommune |
| Box 7900, N-5020 Bergen |
| Large individual aid grants | In conformity with Article 6 of the Regulation |

Aid No

Aid to small and medium-sized undertakings 2/06

EFTA State

Norway

Region

Hordaland County

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid

Hardanger Industripark AS

Legal basis

Hordaland County council, decision made 26 January 2006, issue 18/06, ‘Hardanger Industripark — Flaskevatnproduksjon i Ullensvang — Søknad om tilskot’

Hardanger Industripark

Flaskevatnproduksjon i Ullensvang

Søknad om tilskot

Overall amount of individual aid granted to the company

EUR 0,075 million

Maximum aid intensity

In conformity with Articles 4(2)-(6) and 5 of the Regulation

Date of implementation

28.2.2006

Duration of scheme or individual aid award

1.4.2006

Objective of aid

Aid to small and medium-sized enterprises

Economic sectors concerned

All manufacturing

Other services

Name and address of the granting authority

Hordaland fylkeskommune

Box 7900, N-5020 Bergen

Large individual aid grants

In conformity with Article 6 of the Regulation

---
#### *Matthew Gill and others, executors of J. Kille, at the suit of John R. Drummond.

Suit for

of assetts. (a)

auditorfand exceptions thereto.

THIS was an action for a legacy. The defendant that they had not assetts for the payment of all the debts and legacies; whereupon auditors were appointed under the statute, *Pat.*37, to examine, settle, and report on the accounts of said executors. Upon the .——.----- *335coming in of tlieir report, several exceptions were filed, and among others, the following, *viz.*That the auditors, - in their report, have varied from the accounts of the executors, settled and decreed by the Orphans’ Court of the county of *Gloucester*on the 15th of *March*1802; and struck out and omitted a number of credits contained in those accounts, &c. The items struck out, wore specially set forth in the reason.

*Kinsey*and *R. Stockton*for exceptants. *White*and *Ewing*for the plaintiff.

(a)

*Lloyd vs. Rowe, Spen. 685.*

Opinion of the Court.

Kirkpatrick 0. J.

This was an action of debt for a legacy, and upon the plea of want of assetts, in pursuance of the statute in that case, made and provided, it was referred to auditors to examine the accounts of the said executors, and to report, &c.

Upon the coming in of the report of the auditors, sundry exceptions were taken thereto, and particularly it was excepted thereto, that the said auditors, in making-up the account of the said defendants, had refused to give them credit for sundry sums of money, alleged by them to have been paid and disbursed, *for which they had obtained, a credit in the settlement of their accounts in the Orphans’ Court of the county of Gloucester,*which settlement still remains there of record in its full force, *(a)*

This exception appearing to be true in fact, and the decree of the Orphans’ Court, in these cases, being by the express provisions of the. statute, conclusive upon all persons interested, except for assetts or monies which may come to hand after such decree, and except for fraud or mistake, to be proved to the satisfaction *of the said Orpha/ns’ Court upon a resettlement;*and the state of facts, in other respects, not sufficiently appearing to the *court to enable them to amend and correct said report in all respects.

*336I am of opinion that the said report of the auditors be set aside, and that the said plaintiff have leave to apply for the appointment of other auditors thereupon, if he shall see fit.

Report of auditors set aside.

(a)

*Meeker vs. Vanderveer, 3 Gr. 392.*See *Richards vs. Drinker, 1 Hal. 307. Harker vs. Hough, 2 Hal. 428. Bell vs. Price, 1 Zah. 32.*Affirmed in error, *2 Zab. 578. Hoagland vs. Veghte, 3 Zab. 92. Smith vs. Minor, Coxe 16. Ruckman vs. Ransom, 6 Vr. 565. Veghte vs. Hoagland, 2 Stock. 45, Richardson*vs. *Lanning, 2 Dutch. 132. Cross vs. Cross, 2 C. E. Gr. 288.*
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2992 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2992

To modify the calculation of back pay for persons who were approved for 
  promotion as members of the Navy and Marine Corps while interned as 
 prisoners of war during World War II to take into account changes in 
                       the Consumer Price Index.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 3, 2003

Ms. Hooley of Oregon introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To modify the calculation of back pay for persons who were approved for 
  promotion as members of the Navy and Marine Corps while interned as 
 prisoners of war during World War II to take into account changes in 
                       the Consumer Price Index.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF AMOUNT OF BACK PAY FOR MEMBERS OF NAVY AND 
              MARINE CORPS SELECTED FOR PROMOTION WHILE INTERNED AS 
              PRISONERS OF WAR DURING WORLD WAR II TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT 
              CHANGES IN CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

    (a) Modification.--Section 667(c) of the Floyd D. Spence National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law by 
Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-170) is amended by adding at the 
end the following new paragraph:
    ``(3) The amount determined for a person under paragraph (1) shall 
be increased to reflect increases in cost of living since the basic pay 
referred to in paragraph (1)(B) was paid to or for that person, 
calculated on the basis of the Consumer Price Index (all items--United 
States city average) published monthly by the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics.''.
    (b) Recalculation of Previous Payments.--In the case of any payment 
of back pay made to or for a person under section 667 of the Floyd D. 
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 before 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy 
shall--
            (1) recalculate the amount of back pay to which the person 
        is entitled by reason of the amendment made by subsection (a); 
        and
            (2) if the amount of back pay, as so recalculated, exceeds 
        the amount of back pay so paid, pay the person, or the 
        surviving spouse of the person, an amount equal to the excess.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 21.1**

 

List of Subsidiaries 

 

Supreme International, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company formerly known as SupremeInternational, Inc. 

 

Jantzen, LLC, a Delaware limited liability companyformerly known as Jantzen, Inc. 

 

Perry Ellis Menswear, LLC, a Delaware limitedliability company formerly known as Perry Ellis Menswear, Inc. 

 

FarahManufacturing (U.K.) Limited, a private limited company incorporated in England and Wales 

 

Salant Holding, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company formerly known as Salant Holding Corporation 

 

PEI Licensing, Inc., a Delaware corporation 

 

Jantzen Apparel, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company formerly known as Jantzen Apparel Corp. 

 

Supreme Real Estate I, LLC, a Florida limited liability company 

 

Supreme Real Estate II, LLC, a Florida limited liability company 

 

Supreme Realty, LLC, a Florida limited liability company 

 

Supreme Munsingwear Canada Inc., a Canada corporation 

 

Supreme International Canada Co. Limited, a Canada corporation 

 

Perry Ellis Shared Services Corporation, a Delaware corporation 

 

Winnsboro DC, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

Tampa DC, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Limited, a private company incorporated under the laws of Ireland 

 

Perry Ellis International Europe Limited, a private company incorporated under the laws ofIreland 

 

Perry Ellis Real Estate, LLC, a Delaware limited liability companyformerly known as Perry Ellis Real Estate Corporation 

 

Grand Team HoldingsLimited, a private company incorporated under the laws of Hong Kong
#### § 303.160 Scope.

This subpart sets forth the notice requirements and procedures for the conversion of an insured mutual state-chartered savings bank to the stock form of ownership. The substantive requirements governing such conversions are contained in § 333.4 of this chapter.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 195 (Friday, October 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 52212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24560]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Tuesday, October 27, 2009.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Rule Enforcement Review Meeting.

Contact Person for More Information: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-24560 Filed 10-7-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2930

To authorize the disinterment from the American Ardennes Cemetery at 

Neuville-en-Condroz, Belgium of the remains of Sergeant Roaul R. 

Prieto, who died in combat in April 1945, and to authorize the transfer 

of his remains to his next of kin. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 25, 2003

Mrs. BONO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL

To authorize the disinterment from the American Ardennes 

Cemetery at Neuville-en-Condroz, Belgium of the remains of Sergeant Roaul R. Prieto, who died in combat 

in April 1945, and to authorize the transfer of his remains to his next of kin.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 2930 IH 

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF DISINTERMENT AND 

2 TRANSFER OF CUSTODY OF REMAINS OF A 

3 SPECIFIED AMERICAN WORLD WAR II FATAL4 ITY INTERRED IN THE AMERICAN ARDENNES 

5 CEMETERY, BELGIUM. 

6 (a) DISINTERMENT.—The Secretary of the Army and 

7 the American Battle Monuments Commission shall take 

8 such steps as are necessary to authorize the next of kin 

9 of Sergeant Roaul R. Prieto, United States Army, who 

10 died on April 6, 1945, as a result of a mid-air collision 

11 during a bombing mission over Leipzig, Germany, to dis12 inter his remains from the American Ardennes Cemetery, 

13 Neuville-en-Condroz, Belgium (such remains being in14 terred in Plot A, Row 41, Grave 46). 

15 (b) TRANSFER.—The Secretary of the Army and the 

16 American Battle Monuments Commission shall take such 

17 steps as are necessary to authorize the transfer of the re18 mains of Roaul R. Prieto to the custody of his next of 

19 kin. 

20 (c) NO EXPENDITURE OF FEDERAL FUNDS.—No 

21 Federal funds may be expended for the disinterment and 

22 transfer of custody authorized by this section.

Æ
#### Mathis *v.*The State.

*Arson.*

(Decided November 26, 1913.

63 South. 737.)

*Appeal arid Error; Review; Quashing Venire.*— The overruling of defendant’s motion to quash the venire served on him, based on grounds dehors the record proper must be presented by bill of exceptions, and unless so presented cannot be reviewed.

Appeal from Lee Law and Equity Court.

Heard before Hon. Lum Duke.

Taylor Mathis was convicted of arson and he appeals.

Affirmed.

J. E. Henry, for appellant. No brief reached the Reporter.

R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

The matters made the basis for quashing the venire are de hors the record, and can be presented only by bill of exceptions. There is no bill of exceptions in the record.

WALKER, P. J. —

As there is no hill of exceptions in this case, the action of the court in overruling a *48motion, which is set out in the record, made by the defendant, to quash the venire of jurors served upon him on grounds dehors the record proper is not presented for review on this *appeal.*— Kimbell *v. State,*165 Ala. 118, 51 South. 16; *Harris v. State,*4 Ala. App. 51, 58 South. 759.

No error is found in the record.

Affirmed.