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

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-34,244 Riddle, Oregon; TA-W-34,244A Coos Bay, Oregon]

                    In accordance with section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on February 25, 1998, applicable to workers of Glenbrook Nickel Company, Riddle, Oregon. The notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on March 23, 1998 (63 FR 13879). The certification was amended March 20, 1998 to include another manufacturing facility of the subject firm. The notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on March 31, 1998 (63 FR 15441).                

At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged in the production of ferronickel. New information received from the company shows that Cominco Ltd and Cominco American are the owners of the Glenbrook properties. In 1998, Glenbrook Nickel Company became known as Cominco Ltd., Cominco American,—Glenbrook Operations. Information also shows that workers separated from employment at Glenbrook Nickel Company had their wages reported under a separate unemployment insurance (UI) tax account for Cominco Ltd., Cominco American,—Glenbrook Operations.

Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to properly reflect this matter.

The amended notice applicable to TA-W-34,244 and TA-W-344,244A are hereby issued as follows:

All workers of Cominco Ltd., Cominco American,—Glenbrook Operations (Formerly Glenbrook Nickel Company), Riddle, Oregon and Coos Bay, Oregon who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after January 30, 1997 through February 25, 2000 are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed at Washington, DC this 12th day of May, 2000.

Grant D. Beale,

Program Manager, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00-12772 Filed 5-19-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
§ 15.101 Who may file an administrative claim under the FTCA against the Department? ( a ) A claim for the injury to or loss of property may be presented by the owner of the property, his or her duly authorized agent, or his or her legal representative.
( b ) A claim for personal injury may be presented by the injured person, his or her duly authorized agent, or his or her legal representative.
( c ) A claim for death may be presented by the executor or administrator of the decedent's estate or by any other person legally entitled to assert such a claim in accordance with applicable State law.
( d ) A claim presented by an agent or legal representative shall be presented in the name of the claimant, be signed by the agent or representative, show the title or legal capacity of the person signing and be accompanied by evidence of his or her authority to present a claim on behalf of the claimant as agent, executor, administrator, parent, guardian, or legal representative.
( e ) Only claims involving alleged acts or omissions of Department employees (including Job Corps students) should be presented to the Department.
#### § 18.1005 Public records.

The contents of an official record, or of a document authorized to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed, including data compilations in any form, if otherwise admissible, may be proved by copy, certified as correct in accordance with § 18.902 or testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If a copy which complies with the foregoing cannot be obtained by the exercise of reasonable diligence, then other evidence of the contents may be given.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4910 

To adjust the regulation of certain grants awarded by the Secretary of 

Veterans Affairs during a covered public health emergency to serve 

homeless veterans, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 18, 2020 

Mr. TESTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To adjust the regulation of certain grants awarded by the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs during a covered public 

health emergency to serve homeless veterans, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Grant Regulation Ad5 justment during the Coronavirus Emergency for Homeless 

6 Veterans Act of 2020’’ or the ‘‘GRACE for Homeless Vet7 erans Act of 2020’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4910 IS

1 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF FUNDING LIMITATIONS FOR 

2 CERTAIN GRANTS AWARDED BY THE SEC3 RETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS DURING A 

4 COVERED PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY TO 

5 SERVE HOMELESS VETERANS. 

6 Subsection (c)(2) of section 2011 of title 38, United 

7 States Code, shall not apply to any grant awarded during 

8 a covered public health emergency under such section for 

9 a project described in subsection (b)(1) of such section. 

10 SEC. 3. DISPOSITION DURING A COVERED PUBLIC HEALTH 

11 EMERGENCY OF PROPERTY RELATING TO 

12 CERTAIN GRANTS AWARDED BY THE SEC13 RETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS TO SERVE 

14 HOMELESS VETERANS. 

15 During a covered public health emergency, if the re16 cipient of a grant awarded before or during such emer17 gency under section 2011 of title 38, United States Code, 

18 for a project described in subsection (b)(1) of such section 

19 is no longer providing services in accordance with the 

20 terms of the grant, the recipient shall not be subject dur21 ing such emergency to any property disposition require22 ments relating to the grant under subsection (c) or (f) of 

23 section 61.67 of title 38, Code of Federal Regulations, sec24 tion 200.311(c) of title 2, Code of Federal Regulations, 

25 or successor regulations. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4910 IS

1 SEC. 4. COVERED PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY DEFINED. 

2 In this Act, the term ‘‘covered public health emer3 gency’’ means an emergency with respect to Coronavirus 

4 Disease 2019 (COVID–19) declared by a Federal, State, 

5 or local authority. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP00-281-000]

Take notice that on May 11, 2000, Trailblazer, Pipeline Company (Trailblazer) tendered for filing to be a part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to the filing, to be effective June 1, 2000.

Trailblazer states that these tariff sheets are being filed in compliance with the Commission's Order No. 587-G issued April 16, 1998 in Docket No. RM96-1-008, which order relates to interstate pipelines' business transactions using Internet communication as well as to various issues relating to the standardization of these business communications using the Internet.

Trailblazer requested any waivers which may be required for the tendered tariff sheets to become effective June 1, 2000, consistent with Order Nos. 587-G and 587-I.

Trailblazer states that copies of the filing have been mailed to its customers, interested state commissions and all parties set out on the Commission's official service list in Docket No. RM96-1.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-12722  Filed 5-19-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### § 22.44 Right to administrative offset.

The amount of any penalty or assessment which has become final, or for which a judgment has been entered under § 22.42 or § 22.43, or any amount agreed upon in a compromise or settlement under § 22.46, may be collected by administrative offset under 31 U.S.C. 3716, except that an administrative offset may not be made under this subsection against a refund of an overpayment of Federal taxes, then or later owing by the United States to the defendant.
Editorial Note on Part 1926
Editorial Notes: 1. At 44 FR 8577, Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at 44 FR 20940, Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of 29 CFR part 1926 together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in 29 CFR part 1910, which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at 84 FR 21597, May 14, 2019.

§ 1926.1406 Assembly/Disassembly—employer procedures—general requirements. ( a ) When using employer procedures instead of manufacturer procedures for assembly/disassembly, the employer must ensure that the procedures: ( 1 ) Prevent unintended dangerous movement, and prevent collapse, of any part of the equipment.
( 2 ) Provide adequate support and stability of all parts of the equipment.
( 3 ) Position employees involved in the assembly/disassembly operation so that their exposure to unintended movement or collapse of part or all of the equipment is minimized.
( b ) *Qualified person.* Employer procedures must be developed by a qualified person.
#### Antonio LEAL, Appellant, v. Dr. George J. BETO, Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Appellee.

No. 23670.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

May 25, 1967.

*9Clyde W. Woody, Houston, Tex., for appellant.

Gilbert J. Pena, Asst. Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., Waggoner Carr, Atty. Gen. of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Asst. Atty. Gen., T. B. Wright, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., Howard M. Fender, Asst. Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., for appellee.

Before WISDOM, COLEMAN and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court denying Antonio Leal’s petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Leal was convicted in Texas state court in 1958 for unlawful possession of marijuana. On appeal the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed. Leal v. State, 169 Tex.Cr. 222, 332 S.W.2d .729 (Ct.Crim.App., 1959).

The search of Leal which disclosed marijuana in his possession was made after an arrest without warrant. Mapp v. Ohio, 376 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081 (1960), requiring exclusion by state courts of evidence obtained in violation of Fourth Amendment standards, is not retroactive, hence has no application to this case. Linkletter v. Walker, 381 U.S. 618, 85 S.Ct. 1731, 14 L.Ed. 2d 601 (1965). Appellant argues, however, that because Texas since 1925 has required by statute the exclusion of evidence obtained “in violation of any provisions of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of this State”,1 the federal courts may determine whether the seizure of the marijuana was in violation of the Constitution of the United States and, if it is found so seized, order the writ of habeas corpus issued. But this Court recently has ruled that petitioners held in Texas custody pursuant to preMapp convictions resting on evidence seized under circumstances federal courts would regard as violations of the United States Constitution are not held “in custody in violation of the Constitution * * * of the United States” within the meaning of the habeas corpus statute 2 and therefore cannot avail themselves of the habeas corpus remedy. *10Flores v. Beto, 374 F.2d 225 (5th Cir., 1967).

Thus, even if we should conclude that the evidence introduced at appellant’s 1958 trial was seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment, appellant would not be entitled to release. Nevertheless, we have examined the record and fully considered the contentions of the parties, and we hold that the search in. this case in fact did comply with federal standards.

The introduction of a prior conviction on the issue of enhancement of punishment constitutes no ground for relief. Spencer v. State of Texas, 385 U.S. 554, 87 S.Ct. 648, 17 L.Ed.2d 606 (1967).

Affirmed.

1

. (. Art. 727a, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., now Art. 38.23, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, 1966.

2

. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241.
# Publicatieblad C 184A/17 j

| | ISSN 1725-2474 |
| --- | --- |
| Publicatieblad
  van de Europese Unie | C 184A |
| | |
| Uitgave in de Nederlandse taal | Mededelingen en bekendmakingen | 47e jaargang17 juli 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2474

Publicatieblad

van de Europese Unie

C 184A

Uitgave in de Nederlandse taal

Mededelingen en bekendmakingen

47e jaargang17 juli 2004

---

| Nummer | Inhoud | Bladzijde |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Bekendmakingen |
| | Raad |
| 2004/C 184A/1 | | 1 |

Nummer

Inhoud

Bladzijde

III   Bekendmakingen

Raad

2004/C 184A/1

1

| NL | |
| --- | --- |

NL

---

III Bekendmakingen

Raad

| 17.7.2004 | NL | Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie | CA 184/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2004

NL

Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie

CA 184/1

---

KENNISGEVING VAN EEN VACATURE

(Ref. A/014)

DIRECTEUR-GENERAAL

(2004/C 184 A/01)

Het secretariaat-generaal van de Raad van de Europese Unie heeft een vacature voor de functie van directeur-generaal voor het directoraat-generaal H „Justitie en binnenlandse zaken”.

Meer informatie (in het Engels en het Frans) en de sollicitatieformulieren kunnen worden verkregen bij de dienst Selectie en aanwerving, op het e-mailadres: service.recrutement@consilium.eu.int of via de website: http://ue.eu.int/concours.

Uiterste termijn: 3 september 2004 (poststempel geldt als bewijs).

---
A-AA+Skip to content

                  - Home
                  - Compendium Statistics
                  - Event
                  - Archives
                  - Glossary
                  - Help
                  - Contact
                  - Research on Disability

Annual Disability Statistics Compendium

              - Home /
              - Compendium Statistics /
              - Federal Government Spending and Employment /
              - 13.1  Federal Government Spending and Employment—Federal Expenditures on Income Maintenance Programs

## Table 13.1: Federal Government Spending and Employment—Federal Expenditures on Income Maintenance Programs

----

----

 

----

#### 2012 Disability Compendium

                        - Home
                        - Compendium Statistics                           - Population and Prevelance
                          - Employment
                          - Time Trend Population Statistics
                          - Poverty
                          - Earnings
                          - Veterans
                          - Health Insurance Coverage
                          - Health
                          - Social Security Administration Programs
                          - Medicaid and Medicare
                          - Special Education
                          - Vocational Rehabilitation
                          - Federal Government Spending and Employment
                          - International Disability Statistics
                          - Population Statistics: Disability Type
                        - Event
                        - Archives                           - 2012 Compendium Statistics
                        - Glossary
                        - Help
                        - Contact
                        - Research on Disability

#### Funding for this project is made possible by:

 The Research and Training Center on Disability Statistics and Demographics (StatsRRTC), which is funded by the U.S. Department of Education, National Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research, under cooperative agreements H133B080012.

#### Stay Connected

**Institute on Disability**10 West Edge Drive, Suite 101Durham, NH 03824603.862.4320 | relay: 711 | [email protected]www.iod.unh.edu

© 2013. Institute on Disability.University of New Hampshire.
#### § 2509.75-6 Interpretive bulletin relating to section 408(c)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

The Department of Labor today announced guidelines for determining when a party in interest with respect to an employee benefit plan may receive an advance for expenses to be incurred on behalf of the plan without engaging in a transaction prohibited by section 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. That section prohibits, among other things, any lending of money from a plan to a party in interest, or transfer to, or use by or for the benefit of, a party in interest of any assets of the plan, as well as any act whereby a fiduciary deals with the assets of a plan in his own interest or for his own account.

However, section 408(c)(2) of the Act provides that nothing in section 406 of the Act shall be construed to prohibit the reimbursement by a plan of expenses properly and actually incurred by a fiduciary in the performance of his duties with the plan. Questions have arisen under section 408(c)(2) of the Act as to whether a plan may reimburse a party in interest in the performance of his duties with the plan and as to whether a plan might make an advance to a fiduciary or other party in interest for expenses to be incurred in the future.

The Department of Labor views the relevant provisions of section 408(c)(2) as clarifying the scope of section 406 so as to permit reimbursement of fiduciaries for expenses incurred in the performance of their duties with a plan. Similarly, consistent with section 408(c)(2), section 406 is construed to permit the reimbursement by the plan of expenses properly and actually incurred by a party in interest in the performance of his duties with the plan.

If a plan makes an advance to a fiduciary or other party in interest to cover expenses to be properly and actually incurred by such person in the performance of his duties with the plan, a prohibited transaction within the meaning of section 406 shall not occur when the plan makes the advance if—

(a) The amount of such advance is reasonable with respect to the amount of the expense which is likely to be properly and actually incurred in the immediate future (such as during the next month), and

(b) The party in interest accounts to the plan at the end of the period covered by the advance for the expenses actually incurred (whether computed on the basis of actual expenses incurred or on the basis of actual transportation costs plus a reasonable per diem allowance, where appropriate).

It should be noted, however, that despite the reasonableness of the amount of the advance and of the expenses underlying it, the question of whether incurring such expenses was prudent, and thus whether the advance was for reasonable expenses, is to be judged pursuant to section 404 of the Act (relating to fiduciary responsibilities).

[40 FR 31755, July 29, 1975. Redesignated at 41 FR 1906, Jan. 13, 1976]
[Civ. No. 2425.

Second Appellate District.

December 10, 1917.]

#### PATRICK FITZWILLIAM, Respondent, v. THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES (a Municipal Corporation), et al., Appellants.

Street Assessment — Opening of Street Under Act of 1903 — Proceedings of City Council—When Conclusive.—Judgment reversed on authority of *Nutting*v. *City of Los Angeles et al., ante,*p. 519.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Lewis R. Works, Judge.

*808The facts are the same as those stated in the opinion in *Nutting*v. *City of Los Angeles et al., cunte,*p.. 519.

Albert Lee Stephens, City Attorney, Charles S. Burnell, Assistant City Attorney, and Arthur M. Ellis, for Appellants.

Stephens & Stephens, for Respondent.

THE COURT.

This action was tried together with No. 2391, *Nutting*v. *City of Los Angeles et al., ante,*p. 519, [170 Pac. 680], in which the decision of this court was filed to-day; the two cases being tried upon the same evidence. The opinion written in the Nutting ease covers all of the -questions which we find it necessary to determine in this case. Upon the authority of that decision, the judgment appealed from herein is reversed.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on February 7, 1918.
EXHIBIT 16.1



[MOORE STEPHENS POTTER LLP LETTERHEAD ]




April 6, 2004


Mr. Lee Sisney
Lincoln International Corporation
2300 Greene Way, Ste 201
Louisville, KY   40220

Dear Mr. Sisney:

We concur with the statement made by the registrant in the Form 10-k report that
the relationship  between Moore Stpehens Potter,  LLP (f.k.a.  Potter & Company,
LLP) and Lincoln International Corporation was terminated on July 28, 2003.


Sincerely,


MOORE STEPHENS POTTER, LLP


/s/ JOE ACKERMAN

Joe Ackerman, CPA
Partner