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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2305

To designate the United States Courthouse for the Eastern District of Virginia in Alexandria, Virginia, as the ‘‘Albert V. Bryan United States

Courthouse’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 12, 1995

Mr. MORAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To designate the United States Courthouse for the Eastern

District of Virginia in Alexandria, Virginia, as the ‘‘Albert V. Bryan United States Courthouse’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF ALBERT V. BRYAN UNITED

4 STATES COURTHOUSE.

5 (a) NEW COURTHOUSE.—

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Federal building located

7 at Courthouse Square South and Jamieson Avenue

8 in Alexandria, Virginia, shall be known and des-
2

•HR 2305 IH

1 ignated as the ‘‘Albert V. Bryan United States

2 Courthouse’’.

3 (2) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law,

4 map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of

5 the United States to the Federal building referred to

6 in paragraph (1) shall be deemed to be a reference

7 to the ‘‘Albert V. Bryan United States Courthouse’’.

8 (b) OLD COURTHOUSE.—

9 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Federal building located

10 at 200 South Washington Street in Alexandria, Vir11 ginia, shall not be known and designated as the

12 ‘‘Albert V. Bryan United States Courthouse’’.

13 (2) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law,

14 map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of

15 the United States to the Federal building known and

16 designated prior to the effective date of this section

17 as the ‘‘Albert V. Bryan United States Courthouse’’

18 shall be deemed to be a reference to the Federal

19 building referred to in paragraph (1).

20 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall become ef21 fective on the date of the completion of the construction

22 of the Federal building referred to in subsection (a)(1).

Æ
-----Original Message----- 

From: turtleactivist@hotmail.com [mailto:turtleactivist@hotmail.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 1:01 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 28, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone and 

Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (RIN 

1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from charging 

higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket expenses for mental 

health treatment than they would for other physical health care. Thank you 

for ensuring that mental health care and physical health care coverage are 

included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Brad Nahill 

7227 SW Linette Way 

Beaverton, OR 97007
#### State Of Delaware v. William Paul Napier and Herbert Lee Napier.

*(February*25, 1950.)

Carey, J., sitting

*Daniel J. Layton, Jr.,*Deputy Attorney - General, for the State.

*Jack White*for defendants.

Court of General Sessions for Sussex County,

Indictment for larceny, No. 46,

February Term, 1950.

*264Carey, Judge.

The motion must be denied. 5200 Revised Code of Delaware 1935, as amended by 43 Laws of Delaware, Ch. 235, expressly makes checks of the value of $25 or more the subject of grand larceny. Paragraph (f) of this section reads in part as follows: “In all prosecutions under this section the value of promissory notes, bank notes, bills of exchange, cheques, bonds, and other evidence of debt shall be deemed the sum of money due thereon or secured thereby and remaining unsatisfied * * *”. Statutes containing words almost identical with this have uniformly been construed as laying down a rule of evidence, under which the face value is deemed to be its actual value, subject to rebuttal. *State*v. O’Connell, 144 *Mo.*387, 46 S. *W.*175; *Whalen*v. *Commonwealth,*90 *Va.*544, 19 S. *E.*182, 192; *State*v. *Harrison,*347 *Mo.*1230, 152 S. *W.*2d 161; *State*v. *Cassill,*71 *Mont.*274, 229 *P.*716. I express no opinion concerning the application of this statute where the check presented has something on its face indicating that it has been paid or is worthless; conceivably, the quoted part of the statute might have no application in such event.
-----Original Message----- 

From: angel.butts@gmail.com [mailto:angel.butts@gmail.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 11:09 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Angela Butts 

80 Belmont Place 

Staten Island, NY 10301
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, July 25, 1995 (101), Para 101.25 Providing for the Consideration of H.R. 2076]
[Pages 1192-1193]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.101.25  providing for the consideration of h.r. 2076

  Mr. GOSS, by direction of the Committee on Rules, called up the 
following resolution (H. Res. 198):

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for

[[Page 1193]]

     consideration of the bill (H.R. 2076) making appropriations 
     for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
     Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1996, and for other purposes. The first reading 
     of the bill shall be dispensed with. General debate shall be 
     confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
     divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general 
     debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 
     five-minute rule. The bill shall be considered by title 
     rather than by paragraph. Each title shall be considered as 
     read. Points of order against provisions in the bill for 
     failure to comply with clause 2 or 6 of rule XXI are waived. 
     During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman 
     of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in 
     recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an 
     amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
     Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 6 
     of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as 
     read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
     amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the 
     House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill 
     and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.

  When said resolution was considered.
  After debate,
  On motion of Mr. GOSS, the previous question was ordered on the 
resolution to its adoption or rejection and under the operation thereof, 
the resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider the vote whereby said resolution was agreed to 
was, by unanimous consent, laid on the table.
```
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

54 

KA 10-02010 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND GORSKI, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DAVID QUINONES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES ECKERT OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

MICHAEL C. GREEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY GILLIGAN OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Frank

P. Geraci, Jr., A.J.), entered August 10, 2010. The order determined

that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender

Registration Act. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that Supreme

Court erred in determining that he is a level three risk pursuant to

the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.).

Defendant failed to request a downward departure to a level two risk,

and thus he failed to preserve for our review his contention that the

court erred in failing to afford him that downward departure from his

presumptive level three risk (see People v Ratcliff, 53 AD3d 1110, lv

denied 11 NY3d 708). In any event, we conclude that “defendant failed

to present clear and convincing evidence of special circumstances

justifying a downward departure” (People v McDaniel, 27 AD3d 1158,

1159, lv denied 7 NY3d 703; see People v Cummings, 81 AD3d 1261, lv

denied 16 NY3d 711).

Insofar as defendant contends that the court erred in treating

his prior youthful offender adjudication as a conviction pursuant to

risk factor nine in the criminal history section of the risk

assessment instrument (RAI), that contention is without merit. “As

used [in the criminal history section of the RAI], the term ‘crime’

includes criminal convictions, youthful offender adjudications and

juvenile delinquency findings. The Board [of Examiners of Sex

Offenders] concluded that these determinations are reliable indicators

of wrongdoing and, therefore, should be considered in assessing an

offender’s likelihood of reoffense and danger to public safety” (Sex

Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary,
-2- 54 

KA 10-02010 

at 6 [2006]; see People v Wilkins, 77 AD3d 588, lv denied 16 NY3d 703;

People v Irving, 45 AD3d 1389, 1389-1390, lv denied 10 NY3d 703). 

Entered: January 31, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
#### William Owens, *Respondent, v.*Joshua T. Cromwell, *Appellant.*

— Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Pratt, J.
<PAGE>

                               BROOKSTONE, INC.

                           Subsidiary of Registrant

                                April 20, 2001


   Name                                         Organized under laws of
   Brookstone, Company, Inc.                    New Hampshire
   Brookstone Stores, Inc.                      New Hampshire
   Brookstone Purchasing, Inc.                  New Hampshire
   Brookstone Properties, Inc.                  New Hampshire
   Brookstone By Mail, Inc.                     New Hampshire
   Brookstone Holdings, Inc.                    New Hampshire
   Fork Distribution Corporation                New Hampshire
   Gardeners Eden By Mail, Inc.                 New Hampshire
   Brookstone Retail Puerto Rico, Inc.          Puerto Rico
   Brookstone O'Hare, LLC                       Delaware
§ 218.105 Additional operational requirements for hand-operated main track switches. ( a ) Each railroad shall adopt and comply with an operating rule which complies with the requirements of this section. When any person including, but not limited to, each railroad, railroad officer, supervisor, and employee violates any requirement of an operating rule which complies with the requirements of this section, that person shall be considered to have violated the requirements of this section.
( b ) *Designating switch position.* The normal position of a hand-operated main track switch shall be designated by the railroad in writing and the switch shall be lined and locked in that position when not in use except when: ( 1 ) The train dispatcher directs otherwise with respect to the position of a hand-operated main track switch and the necessary protection is provided; or
( 2 ) The hand-operated switch is left in the charge of a crewmember of another train, a switchtender, or a roadway worker in charge.
( c ) *Additional job briefing requirements for hand-operated main track switches.* ( 1 ) Before a train or a train crew leaves the location where any hand-operated main track switch was operated, all crewmembers shall have verbal communication to confirm the position of the switch.
( 2 ) In the case of exclusive track occupancy authority established under § 214.321, foul time under § 214.323, or train coordination under § 214.325, when a roadway worker qualified to operate hand-operated main track switches is granted permission by the roadway worker in charge to occupy or otherwise use the limits of the exclusive track occupancy, such employee receiving permission to occupy the working limits shall report the position of any such switches operated upon expiration of the authority limits to the roadway worker in charge or to a designated intermediary employee who shall convey the switch position to the roadway worker in charge.
( d ) *Releasing authority limits.* In non-signaled territory, before an employee releases the limits of a main track authority and a hand-operated switch is used to clear the main track, and, prior to departing the switch's location, the following conditions are required: ( 1 ) The employee releasing the limits, after conducting a job briefing in accordance with this subpart, shall report to the train dispatcher that the hand-operated main track switch has been restored to its normal position and locked, unless the train dispatcher directs that the hand-operated main track switch be left lined and locked in the reverse position and the necessary protection is provided;
( 2 ) If the report of the switch position is correct, the train dispatcher shall repeat the reported switch position information to the employee releasing the limits and ask whether that is correct; and
( 3 ) The employee releasing the limits shall then confirm to the train dispatcher that this information is correct.
-----Original Message----- 

From: dchaves@msn.com [mailto:dchaves@msn.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 8:36 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 24, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone and 

Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (RIN 

1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from charging 

higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket expenses for mental 

health treatment than they would for other physical health care. Thank you 

for ensuring that mental health care and physical health care coverage are 

included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Dorothy Chaves 

108 Liberty Ave. #2 

Somerville, MA 02144
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49301-49302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4224]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO-200-0777-XZ-241A]


Notice of Meeting, Front Range Resource Advisory Council 
(Colorado)

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
(FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. 
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Front Range 
Resource Advisory Council (RAC), will meet as indicated below.

DATE: The meeting will be held September 26, 2007 from 9:15 a.m. to 4 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: Holy Cross Abbey Community Center, 2951 E. Highway 50, Canon 
City, Colorado 81212.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Smith, (719) 269-8500.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15 member Council advises the Secretary 
of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, on a variety of 
planning and management issues associated with public land management 
in the Royal Gorge Field Office and San Luis Valley, Colorado. Planned 
agenda topics include: Manager updates on current land management 
issues including; a summary of current Environmental Analysis in the 
Royal Gorge Field Office, Travel Management Planning in the San Luis 
Valley and a tour, for RAC members, of the Wild Horse and Burro 
facility in Canon City. All meetings are open to the public. The

[[Page 49302]]

public is encouraged to make oral comments to the Council at 9:30 a.m. 
or written statements may be submitted for the Councils consideration. 
Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment and time 
available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. 
Summary minutes for the Council Meeting will be maintained in the Royal 
Gorge Field Office and will be available for public inspection and 
reproduction during regular business hours within thirty (30) days 
following the meeting. Meeting Minutes and agenda (10 days prior to 
each meeting) are also available at: http://www.blm.gov/rac/co/frrac/
co--fr.htm.

    Dated: August 20, 2007.
Roy L. Masinton,
Royal Gorge Field Manager.
[FR Doc. 07-4224 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JB-M
§ 243.105 Optional model program development. ( a ) Any organization, business, or association may develop and submit one or more model training programs to FRA for review and approval so that the model program(s) may be used by multiple employers. ( 1 ) Any such model program should be submitted with a unique identifier associated with the program, or FRA will assign a unique identifier.
( 2 ) The program associated with the organization's unique identifier shall include all information required by § 243.103.
( 3 ) Each model training program submitted to FRA before May 1, 2019, is considered approved and may be implemented 180 days after the date of submission unless the Associate Administrator advises the organization, business, or association that developed and submitted the program that all or part of the program does not conform.
( b ) An employer that chooses to use a model program approved by FRA is not required to submit the entire program to FRA. Instead, the employer must submit only the unique identifier, and all other information that is specific to that employer or deviates from the model program.
[79 FR 66501, Nov. 7, 2014, as amended at 82 FR 20552, May 3, 2017; 83 FR 18458, Apr. 27, 2018]
#### § 236.511 Cab signals controlled in accordance with block conditions stopping distance in advance.

The automatic cab signal system shall be arranged so that cab signals will be continuously controlled in accordance with conditions described in § 236.205 that obtain at least stopping distance in advance.
#### § 24.3 No duplication of payments.

No person shall receive any payment under this part if that person receives a payment under Federal, State, local law, or insurance proceeds which is determined by the agency to have the same purpose and effect as such payment under this part. (*See* appendix A to this part, section 24.3.)
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Firearms commerce in the UnitedStates. Annual statistical update.**
 
2012| 2013| 2014| 2015 | 2016 | 2017| 2018| 2019
2020| 2021
 
SuDoc Number:J 38.19/2:
Item Number:0718-H-10 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000889933
 
February 10, 2020
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2376

To develop a program regarding career opportunities by making such information available on publicly accessible networks and other electronic media.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 21, 1995

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

Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities

A BILL

To develop a program regarding career opportunities by making such information available on publicly accessible networks and other electronic media.

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 ‘‘Career Awareness

5 Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. CAREER INFORMATION AVAILABILITY.

7 (a) PROGRAM.—The Secretary of Education, in con8 sultation with the Secretary of Labor, shall develop an age

9 specific program for students from kindergarten through
2

HR 2376

1 12th grade regarding career opportunities and the skills

2 necessary to pursue such careers.

3 (b) DEADLINE.—Not later than one year after the

4 date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall de5 velop and make available the program described in sub6 section (a).

7 SEC. 3. INFORMATION NETWORK.

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Education shall,

9 to the maximum extent practicable, coordinate with other

10 Federal agencies and specifically with local educational

11 agencies to make available the program developed pursu12 ant to section 2 on publicly accessible networks and other

13 electronic media.

14 (b) CURRENT INFORMATION AND DISSEMINATION.—

15 The Secretary of Education shall—

16 (1) regularly update the age specific programs

17 regarding career opportunities;

18 (2) use reasonable means to notify other Fed19 eral agencies and local educational agencies regard20 ing the availability of such information; and

21 (3) create and ensure currency in the dissemi22 nation of the career information.

Æ