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

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, June 7, 1995 (75), Para 75.15 H. Res. 156--Unfinished Business]
[Page 828]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.75.15  h. res. 156--unfinished business

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. LaHOOD, pursuant to clause 5, rule I, 
announced the unfinished business to be the question on agreeing to the 
resolution (H. Res. 156) providing for the further consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 1561) to consolidate the foreign affairs agencies of the 
United States; to authorize apporpriations for the Department of State 
and related agencies for fiscal years 1996 and 1997; to responsibly 
reduce the authorizations of appropriations for United States foreign 
assistance programs for fiscal years 1996 and 1997, and for other 
purposes.
  The question being put,
  Will the House agree to the resolution?
  The vote was taken by electronic device.

It was decided in the

Yeas

252

affirmative

Nays

168
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2354 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2354

 To provide for the continuance of oil and gas operations pursuant to 
         certain existing leases in the Wayne National Forest.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 19, 1995

 Mr. Cremeans introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for the continuance of oil and gas operations pursuant to 
         certain existing leases in the Wayne National Forest.

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

SECTION 1. ELECTION TO CONTINUE OIL AND GAS OPERATIONS UNDER CERTAIN 
              EXISTING LEASES.

    In the case of the Wayne National Forest, an election under section 
17(b)(3) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226(b)(3)), including an 
election made before the date of enactment of this Act, shall be deemed 
to be an election to continue operations pursuant to the existing lease 
instead of an election to continue the lease as a noncompetitive lease 
under section 17(c)(1) of that Act, and in the case of any such 
election, the provisions of subparagraphs (C) and (D) of such section 
17(b)(3) shall not apply. The preceding sentence shall not apply to any 
lands subject to an election made by a leaseholder under such section 
17(b)(3) before the date of enactment of this Act if the lease holder 
notifies the Secretary of the Interior (within 6 months after the date 
of enactment of this Act) that the leaseholder intends such election to 
remain an election to continue the lease as a noncompetitive lease 
under section 17(c)(1) of that Act.
                                 <all>
```
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.                  

###### National Transportation Safety Board

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vicky D'Onofrio, (202) 314-6410.

Dated: September 7, 2007.

Vicky D'Onofrio,

Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 07-4470 Filed 9-7-07; 1:22 pm]

BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
§ 31.7 Complaint. ( a ) On or after the date the Department of Justice approves the issuance of a complaint in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3803(b)(1), the reviewing official may serve a complaint on the defendant, as provided in § 31.8.
( b ) The complaint shall state— ( 1 ) The allegations of liability against the defendant, including the statutory basis for liability, an identification of the claims or statements that are the basis for the alleged liability, and the reasons why liability allegedly arises from such claims or statements;
( 2 ) The maximum amount of penalties and assessments for which the defendant may be held liable;
( 3 ) Instructions for filing an answer to request a hearing, including a specific statement of the defendant's right to request a hearing by filing an answer and to be represented by a representative; and
( 4 ) That failure to file an answer within 30 days of service of the complaint will result in the imposition of the maximum amount of penalties and assessments without right to appeal, as provided in § 31.10.
( c ) At the same time the reviewing official serves the complaint, he or she shall serve the defendant with a copy of these regulations.
```

[109th Congress Public Law 93]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ093.109]

[[Page 119 STAT. 2104]]

Public Law 109-93
109th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To adjust the boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park in the State of 
              Colorado. <<NOTE: Oct. 26, 2005 -  [S. 55]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress <<NOTE: Rocky Mountain National 
Park Boundary Adjustment Act of 2005. 16 USC 191 note.>> assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Rocky Mountain National Park Boundary 
Adjustment Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
            (1) Federal parcel.--The term ``Federal parcel'' means the 
        parcel of approximately 70 acres of Federal land near MacGregor 
        Ranch, Larimer County, Colorado, as depicted on the map.
            (2) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map numbered 121/
        80,154, dated June 2004.
            (3) Non-federal parcels.--The term ``non-Federal parcels'' 
        means the 3 parcels of non-Federal land comprising approximately 
        5.9 acres that are located near MacGregor Ranch, Larimer County, 
        Colorado, as depicted on the map.
            (4) Park.--The term ``Park'' means Rocky Mountain National 
        Park in the State of Colorado.

SEC. 3. ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.

    (a) Exchange of Land.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary shall accept an offer to 
        convey all right, title, and interest in and to the non-Federal 
        parcels to the United States in exchange for the Federal parcel.
            (2) <<NOTE: Deadline.>> Conveyance.--Not later than 60 days 
        after the date on which the Secretary receives an offer under 
        paragraph (1), the Secretary shall convey the Federal parcel in 
        exchange for the non-Federal parcels.
            (3) Conservation easement.--As a condition of the exchange 
        of land under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall reserve a 
        perpetual easement to the Federal parcel for the purposes of 
        protecting, preserving, and enhancing the conservation values of 
        the Federal parcel.

    (b) Boundary Adjustment; Management of Land.--On acquisition of the 
non-Federal parcels under subsection (a)(2), the Secretary shall--
            (1) adjust the boundary of the Park to reflect the 
        acquisition of the non-Federal parcels; and

[[Page 119 STAT. 2105]]

            (2) manage the non-Federal parcels as part of the Park, in 
        accordance with any laws (including regulations) applicable to 
        the Park.

    Approved October 26, 2005.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 55 (H.R. 774):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 109-108 accompanying H.R. 774 (Comm. on Resources).
SENATE REPORTS: No. 109-19 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 151 (2005):
            July 26, considered and passed Senate.
            Oct. 18, considered and passed House.

                                  <all>
```
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsExperimental fault characterization of a neural networkThe effects of a variety of faults on a neural network is quantified via simulation. The neural network consists of a single-layered clustering network and a three-layered classification network. The percentage of vectors mistagged by the clustering network, the percentage of vectors misclassified by the classification network, the time taken for the network to stabilize, and the output values are all measured. The results show that both transient and permanent faults have a significant impact on the performance of the measured network. The corresponding mistag and misclassification percentages are typically within 5 to 10 percent of each other. The average mistag percentage and the average misclassification percentage are both about 25 percent. After relearning, the percentage of misclassifications is reduced to 9 percent. In addition, transient faults are found to cause the network to be increasingly unstable as the duration of a transient is increased. The impact of link faults is relatively insignificant in comparison with node faults (1 versus 19 percent misclassified after relearning). There is a linear increase in the mistag and misclassification percentages with decreasing hardware redundancy. In addition, the mistag and misclassification percentages linearly decrease with increasing network size.Document ID19900019057Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsTan, Chang-Huong*(Illinois Univ. Urbana-Champaign, IL, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateAugust 1, 1990Subject CategoryComputer SystemsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:186885CRHC-90-1UILU-ENG-90-2229NASA-CR-186885Accession Number90N28373Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG1-613Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900019057.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 29.506 What standards apply to a Tribe's financial management systems when carrying out a compact and funding agreement? The following standards apply to a Tribe's financial management systems when carrying out a compact and funding agreement: ( a ) The system must expend and account for funds included in a funding agreement in accordance with: ( 1 ) The compact and funding agreement;
( 2 ) All statutory requirements applicable to the funding source; and
( 3 ) Applicable provisions of 2 CFR part 200.
( b ) The fiscal control and accounting procedures of a Tribe's financial management system must be sufficient to: ( 1 ) Permit the preparation of reports required by applicable Federal law, the compact, funding agreement, and this part; and
( 2 ) Permit the tracing of program or project funds to a level of expenditure adequate to establish that the funds have not been used in violation of any restrictions or prohibitions contained in any statute or provision of 2 CFR part 200 that applies to the funds included in the compact and funding agreement.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, October 17, 1995 (129), Para 129.8 Employee Benefit Plans]
[Page 1529]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.129.8  employee benefit plans

  Mr. GOODLING, by unanimous consent, submitted the following concurrent 
resolution (H. Con. Res. 108):

       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That, in the enrollment of the bill (H.R. 1594) 
     to place restrictions on the promotion by the Department of 
     Labor and other Federal agencies and instrumentalities of 
     economically targeted investments in connection with employee 
     benefit plans, the Clerk of the House of Representatives 
     shall, in section 5 of the bill, strike ``Nothing'' and all 
     that follows through the end of such section and insert the 
     following: ``Nothing in this Act is intended to affect the 
     ability of the Department of Labor to issue advisory 
     opinions, information letters, technical releases, prohibited 
     transaction exemptions, or other pronouncements interpreting 
     and applying the fiduciary responsibility rules of the 
     Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 in relation 
     to particular factual situations, or exempting specific 
     transactions from the prohibited transaction provisions of 
     such Act (pursuant to sections 406 and 408 of such Act (29 
     U.S.C. 1106, 1108)).''.

  When said concurrent resolution was considered and agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider the vote whereby said concurrent resolution was 
agreed to was, by unanimous consent, laid on the table.
  Ordered, That the Clerk request the concurrence of the Senate in said 
concurrent resolution.
```
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 7/18/15 8:51 PM

Received: July 17, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8k15-dan6

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related 

Proposed Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-2515

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: robert berendes

General Comment

I can plan my own retirement without the governments intervention. Fix Social Security before 

you think you can fix my personal retirement plan. Stay away from my 401k
Boston University

School of Law

765 Commonwealth Avenue
Boston, Massachusetts 02215
617-353-3773

Fax: 617-353-2444

E-mail: tfrankel@bu.edu

Tamar Frankel
Professor of Law

Office of Regulations and Interpretations July 21, 2015

Employee Benefits Administration
U.S. Department of Labor

200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20120

Attention: Conflict of Interest Rule - Room N-5655

Re: Proposed Rule Regarding the Definition of the Term “Fiduciary”: Conflict of Interest
Rule - Retirement Investment Advice
RIN 1210-AB32

Dear Sir or Madam:

“. [write :with respect to the Proposed Rule referenced above which was published in the
Federal Register on April 20, 2015, Volume 80, at 21928 (such publication, in its entirety, the
“Rélease”). The Proposed Rule defines “fiduciary” in the context of persons providing
investment advice to employee benefit plans (“Retirement Plans”), thereby providing essential
protections under ERISA to Retirement Plans and participants in Retirement Plans
(“Participants”). I support the Department-of Labor’s enhanced definition of “fiduciary”. that
protects Retirement Plans and Participants from conflicts of interest and biased advice.

Paragraph (b)(3) of the Proposed Rule contains a broad carve-out from fiduciary status for
platform providers that merely market and make available investment alternatives to Retirement
Plans (“Platform Provider Carve-Out’). I am concerned that the Proposed Rule does not
adequately protect Retirement Plans and Participants from the conflicts of interest that are
prevalent among platform providers.

As one of the amici in Tussey v. ABB, Inc., No. 12-2056, 12-2060, 12-3794, 12-3875, in
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, I believe I am fully qualified to evaluate and
comment on the Platform Provider Carve-Out. For the reasons set forth in the comment letter
filed by Perkins Coie, LLP, I support the suggestions for reform to the Platform Provider Carve-
Out that are advocated in that comment letter. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the
Proposéd Rules: =». Serra : . wo

sr
#### § 238.117 Protection against personal injury.

On or after November 8, 1999, all moving parts, high voltage equipment, electrical conductors and switches, and pipes carrying hot fluids or gases on all passenger equipment shall be appropriately equipped with interlocks or guards to minimize the risk of personal injury. This section does not apply to the interior of a private car.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000020639
<NAME>                        AmBase Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         2,646
<SECURITIES>                                   43,260
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 47,678
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       455
<OTHER-SE>                                     (29,879)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   47,678
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (6,640)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,280)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   235
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,515)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,515)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.10)



</TABLE>
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, October 6, 1995 (124), Para 124.12 Adjournment]
[Page 1495]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.124.12  adjournment

  On motion of Mr. DAVIS, pursuant to the special order agreed to on 
September 29, 1995, at 10 o'clock and 8 minutes a.m., the House 
adjourned until 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 10, 1995.
```
§ 220.37 Testing radio and wireless communication equipment. ( a ) Each radio, and all primary and redundant wireless communication equipment used under §§ 220.9 and 220.11, shall be tested as soon as practicable to ensure that the equipment functions as intended prior to the commencement of the work assignment.
( b ) The test of a radio shall consist of an exchange of voice transmissions with another radio. The employee receiving the transmission shall advise the employee conducting the test of the clarity of the transmission.
-----Original Message----- 

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

Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 7:38 PM 

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, 

Monique Stockett 

9612 E.32 St. 

Tucson, AZ 85748
Summary of ON Semiconductor Corporation



 Exhibit 10.1 
 Summary of ON Semiconductor Corporation Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements 
 (as
approved by the Board of Directors on March 23, 2006) 
 Retainers and Meeting Fees 
  

						
	 Annual Retainers for Board of Directors (Cash)
	  			  	
	 Chairman of the Board
	  	$	100,000	  	($25,000/quarter)
	 All other non-employee Directors
	  	$	45,000	  	($11,250/quarter)
	 Annual Retainers for Board Committees (Cash)
	  			  	
	 Audit Committee Chair
	  	$	20,000	  	($5,000/quarter)
	 Audit Committee Members
	  	$	15,000	  	($3,750/quarter)
	 Compensation Committee Chair
	  	$	15,000	  	($3,750/quarter)
	 Compensation Committee Members
	  	$	10,000	  	($2,500/quarter)
			
	 Meeting Fees (Cash)
	  			  	
	 Board of Directors Meetings*
	  	 	$1,500 in person, $500 via telephone
	 (*for each attended meeting over 6 during calendar year)
	  			  	
	 Committee Meetings**
	  	 	$1,500 in person, $500 via telephone
	 (**for each attended meeting over 8 during calendar year)
	  			  	

 Retainer fees are paid in cash in arrears in four quarterly pro rata installments. All changes to retainers and
meeting fees are effective April 1, 2006. 
 Equity Compensation 
 Subject to ON Semiconductor’s 2000 Stock Incentive Plan (“Stock Incentive Plan”), the Board has the discretion to determine the terms (including the amount of compensation) and form of all equity-based
awards to Directors. 
 Initial Directorship – Consistent with past practice, when an individual initially becomes a member of the Board he/she will be
granted a stock option (or other comparable equity-based compensation) to purchase a certain number of shares of ON Semiconductor’s common stock with equal pro rata vesting over a three year period beginning on the first anniversary of the
grant date, at an exercise price equal to the fair market value of the stock on the grant date, and subject to the Stock Incentive Plan and a relevant stock option grant agreement. Recently, these grants have been for approximately 20,000 shares of
common stock. 
 Annual Director’s Award - Each year, non-employee Directors will be awarded restricted stock units (“RSUs”) (or other
comparable equity-based compensation) providing for automatic conversion to shares of ON Semiconductor’s common stock upon vesting, with vesting to occur over a three-year period beginning on the first anniversary of the award date, and subject
to the Stock Incentive Plan and a relevant award agreement. 
 Other Information 
 Non-employee Directors are reimbursed for reasonable expenses to attend Board and Committee meetings and to perform other relevant Board duties. 
 TPG related Board members waive their retainers and meeting fees until such time as they request that the Board rescind the waiver and reinstate their fees. TPG related Board members will receive the equity-based
compensation (summarized above).