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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1157 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1157

   To require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to 
   consider Brunswick County, North Carolina to be part of the same 
      metropolitan statistical area as Wilmington, North Carolina.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 30, 2015

 Mr. Burr (for himself and Mr. Tillis) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to 
   consider Brunswick County, North Carolina to be part of the same 
      metropolitan statistical area as Wilmington, North Carolina.

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

SECTION 1. BRUNSWICK COUNTY.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for 
the purpose of the delineation of metropolitan statistical areas, the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall consider 
Brunswick County, North Carolina to be part of the same metropolitan 
statistical area that contains Wilmington, North Carolina.
    (b) Sunset.--Subsection (a) shall cease to be effective on January 
1, 2021.
                                 <all>
```
4 

1 z - 

IEW_7757757=5Fia 

..Z _PAGES 

49.4 -c,1r:efiEF NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

9NmAmber2OtIt Handle via BYEllAt 

Control System 

Col Duncan/vdw/6 Apr iS 4 

6 April 1966 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE DiRECTORANYNRO STAFF 

SUBJECT: Responsibilities of the Staff 

Per instructions in Punta* i.c.(2), 9 March 64 raernonindum, 

subject as above. inclosed, for your approval, are lists of duty subjects 

and action items o peractmael assigned duty in SAFSS-4. 

11111111111111111111 

Deputy for Satellite Operations 

10)-NRO Staff 

9 Inds. 

1. BYE 22678-64 

2. BYE 22679-64 

3. BYE 22680-64 

4. BYE 22717-64 

S. BYE 22718-64 

6. BYE 22719-64 

7. BYE 22720-66 

S. BYE 22721-64 

9. STE 22722-64 

DISTRIBUTION: 

1 ADDRESSEE 

2 SS-4 

3 SS-4 

4 RF #1 

5 R13. #2 

i - 

I 

 LADING; DOD DIII 5200.10 

DOES NOT Ar2LY.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                        5
<LEGEND>
         This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from
         TimeOne,  Inc. June 30, 1999  financial  statements and is qualified in
         its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                      0000350133
<NAME>                     TimeOne, Inc.


<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                      JUN-30-1999

<CASH>                                         1,070,599
<SECURITIES>                                   1,255,003
<RECEIVABLES>                                  389
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,325,991
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,403,945
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          9,660
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       826
<OTHER-SE>                                     2,393,459
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,403,945
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               704,124
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  129,509
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             7,427
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                574,615
<INCOME-TAX>                                   15
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            574,600
<DISCONTINUED>                                 21,375
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   595,975
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .07



</TABLE>
NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICE EFFECTS - NETWORK DIAGRAM October 2017

Woody Residue Treatment 

(384) 

D.6 (-) Fire 

D.1 (+) Surface erosion, hazard onsite

runoff and sediment 

production

Critical Area Planting 

(342)

D.9 (-) Surface erosion, runoff, 

and sediment production

D.7 (-) Physical obstructions 

to human management, 

wildlife/livestock movement

C.2 (+) Woodforest business 

and support 

infrastructure

C.6 (+) Income stability (individuals 

and community)

Firebreak (394)

I.5 (+) Forage/

browse 

utilization

I.6 (+) 

Livestock 

grazing

C.3 (+) Wildlife 

and recreation 

business 

opportunities

C.4 (+) Livestock 

business and 

support 

infrastructure

I.2 (+/-) Quality of 

receiving waters

Initial setting: Lands with quantities of woody slash and 

debris that are treated during forestry, agroforestry, and 

horticultural activities. Sites are or can be browsed 

and/or grazed by wildlife and livestock.

D.3 (+) Cost 

of operation 

3. Water energy 

controlled

1. Exposed bare 

ground

2. Vegetation

reduced and woody 

material treated or 

removed

I.4 (-) 

Landowner 

liability and risk; 

damage to 

structures and 

resources; 

outlay of repair 

and restoration 

of structures

Prescribed 

Grazing (528)

Prescribed 

Burning (338)

D.8 (-) Fire hazard offsite - in 

adjacent areas and airshed

I.8 (-) 

Greenhouse 

gases

I.7 (-) Emissions: embers, 

particulate matter, 

CO/CO2, volatile organics, 

nitrogen oxide within the 

airshed

C.5 (+) Air 

quality of 

the airshed

I.9 (+) 

Air 

quality 

(long 

term) 

C.7 (+) Health and safety for 

humans and domestic animals; 

(+/-) health and safety for wild 

animals

D.2 (-) Organic 

matter (if removed 

from site or burned)

I.1 (-) Site level 

nutrients and 

associated macro/

micro-organisms

C.1 (-) Site 

productivity and 

biodiversity

D.5 (-) Pests 

hazard (e.g., 

Ips beetle)

Access Control (472)

Sediment Basin

(350)

Structure for Water 

Control (587) I.3 (+/-) 

Net return

D.4 (+) 

Landowner 

income; 

contractor 

income 

Start
-TOP-SECRET-

-lei-NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. D.C. Magtlallai

THE NRO STAFF. November 14, 1973

MEMORANDUM FOR LT GENERAL STEWART, ASD, AFSC

SUBJECT: Assistance to the National Reconnaissance

Program

I would like to ask for your help in effecting a solution

to a problem we have been working. The provisions of Executive

Order 11246 when translated into the ASPRs and other directives

require a contracting office to verify a contractor's status of

compliance with the Equal Employment Opportunity provisions of

the Executive Order. This must occur prior to consummating any

contractual action over one million dollars. The procedure

requires contact to be made with the field office of the agency

(one of fourteen Government agencies) having EEO cognizance

over the particular contractor. Verification of the contractor's

compliance status is made with confirmation messages following

later.

This procedure impacts the National Reconnaissance Program.

with respect to our covert contractors (listed in Attachment)

with whom we do not acknowledge any relationship. For the most

part, the most sensitive aspect of the relationship with our

covert contractors lies with the association of SAFSP with their

acknowledged space role and those contractors specializing in

optics, photography, imagery and sensors having a reconnaissance

application.

OF

HANDLE VIA cuisswiliceillINNIssourt Num

OENINAL 1/CNIONAI OP 4411.1111p ottionsva masa twns ININPNON CATE . 101P-ICRETCONTROL sy EN OOVI INICLASOPY ON OP Oat

com111111111gig: 73

COPY OF COPIES

FACIEr.'". OE 2 PAGES
-HIP-SECREV

CONTROL SYSTEM

I would appreciate any assistance you could provide in

this regard. I additional information is needed, please

contact Capta n my Staff at 0X5-2725. I would

also like to brief you on the current activities of the NRO

sometime when you are in Washington. Perhaps we can get.

together for a couple of hours for this purpose.

Many thanks.

E. KULPA, JR.

rigadier General, USAF

Director

1 Attachment

List of Covert Contractors

CONTROL SYSTEM

cumDel unwr....

spasm. Ric. IV4110n111

$11121011MI MOM IMO I.twnew tam

MN, YR INKIANIN • alb MP gat

CONTRA 1110108 285-73

COPY OF COPIES

PAGE -2—OP -2-PAGES
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                              13,884
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      109,078
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         18,840
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   159,187
<PP&E>                                           2,341,234
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,105,398
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,441,463
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              183,019
<BONDS>                                            622,314
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             6,426
<OTHER-SE>                                         556,041
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,441,463
<SALES>                                            318,953
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   318,953
<CGS>                                               27,127
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      392,210
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (2,027)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  28,490
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (115,504)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (31,001)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (84,503)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     (1,031)
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (85,534)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (1.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (1.36)
        


</TABLE>
# C_2004118EN.01003902.xml

| 30.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/39

---

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 23 March 2004

in Case T-216/99: Ter Huurne's Handelsmaatschappij BV, supported by the Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Failure of applicant to act - No need to give a decision)

(2004/C 118/84)

Language of the case: Dutch

In Case T-216/99: Ter Huurne's Handelsmaatschappij BV, established in Haaksbergen (Netherlands), represented by H.C van der Sijs, lawyer, supported by the Kingdom of the Netherlands, represented by M. Fierstra and L. Cuelenaere, subsequently by L. Cuelenaere and V. Koningsberger and, finally, by H.G. Sevenster, acting as Agents, against the Commission of the European Communities (represented initially by G. Rozet and H. Speyart, subsequently by G. Rozet and H. van Vliet, Agents) – application for annulment of Commission Decision 1999/705/EC of 20 July 1999 concerning aid granted by the Netherlands to 633 Dutch service stations in the region bordering Germany (OJ 1999 L 280, p. 87) – the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber, Extended Composition), composed of J. Pirrung, President, V. Tiili, A.W.H. Meij, M. Vilaras and N. J Forwood, Judges; Registrar, H. Jung (Administrator), made an order on 23 March 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | There is no need to give a decision on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to give a decision on the present action.

| 2. | The applicant shall bear its own costs and pay those of the Commission. The Kingdom of the Netherlands shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant shall bear its own costs and pay those of the Commission. The Kingdom of the Netherlands shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 6, 8.1.2000

1

---
#### Olson, Administratrix, Plaintiff and Respondent, vs. Rahr-Green Bay Brewing Corporation, Defendant and Respondent: American Motorists Insurance Company, Appellant.

For the appellant: *North, Bie, Duquaine, Welsh & Trow-bridge*of Green Bay.

For the respondent (plaintiff) : *M. E. Davis,*attorney, and *Isadore G. Aik*of counsel, both of Green Bay.

For the respondent (defendant) : *Clifford & Dilweg*of Green Bay.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1254 

To provide for the issuance and sale of a semipostal by the United States 

Postal Service to support effective programs targeted at improving permanency outcomes for youth in foster care. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2015 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Ms. STABENOW) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To provide for the issuance and sale of a semipostal by 

the United States Postal Service to support effective 

programs targeted at improving permanency outcomes 

for youth in foster care. 

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 ‘‘Families for Foster 

5 Youth Stamp Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FAMILIES FOR FOSTER YOUTH SEMIPOSTAL. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—In order to increase funding for 

8 effective programs targeted at improving permanency outVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:55 May 13, 2015 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1254.IS S1254

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1254 IS

1 comes for youth in foster care, the United States Postal 

2 Service shall, for a period of not less than 4 years, provide 

3 for the issuance and sale of a semipostal, in accordance 

4 with section 416 of title 39, United States Code, subject 

5 to subsection (b) of this section. 

6 (b) DISPOSITION OF AMOUNTS.—Any amounts be7 coming available from the sale of the semipostal under this 

8 Act shall be transferred to the Secretary of Health and 

9 Human Services for programs and activities authorized 

10 under section 203 of the Child Abuse Prevention and 

11 Treatment and Adoption Reform Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 

12 5113) that specifically target improvement in permanency 

13 outcomes for youth in foster care through adoption, guard14 ianship, or kinship care. 

15 (c) DEFINITION.—In this Act, the term ‘‘semipostal’’ 

16 has the meaning given that term in section 416 of title 

17 39, United States Code. 

18 (d) LIMITATION.—For purposes of section 416 of 

19 title 39, United States Code (including any regulation pre20 scribed under subsection (e)(1)(C) of that section), the 

21 semipostal issued under this Act shall not apply to any 

22 limitation relating to whether more than 1 semipostal may 

23 be offered for sale at the same time. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
.1%,p.IATIONALRECONNAISSANCEOFFICE

WASHI NIGTON. I).0

THE NRO STAFF 4 January 1975

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. PLUMMER

SUBJECT: NASA-NRO

Following your discuision with Secretary Schlesinger,

you asked us for a paper which would discuss the issues

facing us today with respect to our relationship with NASA

and attach to this discussion documentation which demonstrates the facts behind this evolving relationship. In

addition, you'asked for a redefinition of reconnaissance and

intelligence and an identification of options available to us

to clarify the apparent conflict in missions between NASA and

NRO. Attached is a point paper which discusses our basic

relationship with NASA, identifies the political and technical issues we are facing and lists options available to

resolve these issues.

Following is our definition of space reconnaissance.

We view reconnaissance from space as being that kind of

data gathering activity which can be viewed as being

intrusive on another nation's sovereignty. This kind of

space reconnaissance should be conducted on a classified

basis without acknowledgement by our government. Openly

conducted earth observation programs should be only those

which would not be viewed as being intrusive and would,

therefore, not likely be protested to by other governments.

This definition does not place space reconnaissance in the

classical sense of military versus economic intelligence.

CLASSere'D NY *1001,43g rm.r raw

OtNENAt OSCIASSINCIMON SOH OtILS Or 

ESSOITIVI OWEN 11.1.2 SINPHON CATS TOP SECRET

OONY SO2 orimAssiFy ON NAP OS 1

CON 1 HOL NO Internal

COP Y 01 C.0411t

Piked 1 01 I 11 AGIS
#### ROCK-HILL-URIS, INC., and Hilton Hotels Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Ivan C. McLEOD, as Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board, Second Region, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 414, Docket 29432.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued April 1, 1965.

Decided April 20, 1965.

*698Sidney Orenstein, of Drechsler & Leif, New York City (Mortimer Horowitz, Herbert Ferster, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiffs-appellants.

George H. Cohen, Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Solomon I. Hirsh, Washington, D. C., Samuel Kaynard, New York City, on the brief), for defendant-appellee.

Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, and SWAN and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The plaintiffs, in this action to enjoin a representation *election,*have failed to establish a direct violation of the specific prohibition in Section 9(b) (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 159(b)(3), which bars the National Labor Relations Board from *certifying*any labor organization “as the representative of employees in a bargaining unit of guards if such organization admits to membership, or is affiliated directly or indirectly with an organization which admits to membership, employees other than guards.” The District Court therefore properly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, for the reasons stated in Judge Wein-feld’s opinion, reported at 236 F.Supp. 395 (S.D.N.Y.1964). See Leedom v. Kyne, 358 U.S. 184, 79 S.Ct. 180, 3 L.Ed. 2d 210 (1958); Boire v. Greyhound Corp., 376 U.S. 473, 481, 84 S.Ct 894, 11 L.Ed. 2d 849 (1964); Local 130, I. U. E. W. v. McCulloch, 345 F.2d 90 (D.C.Cir. March 25, 1965); Boire v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 343 F.2d 17 (5 Cir. March 11, 1965).

Affirmed.
WM&

.:-

MI1111111111

01141111Pfts

WASHINGTON, O.C.

OFFICE OF DI RECTOR February 26, 1974 

[1.

. I

•

MIUMMLUOMMN FOR DR. ALBERT C. HALL, ASD(I)

SUBJECT: NRO Responsibility for Aircraft Overflights

Immediately following our luncheon I looked up the charter

reference that I referred to regarding NRO responsibility for

aircraft operations. Three statements in the August 11, 1965

Agreement relate to this subject: •

Para A.1. states: "The NRP is a single program,

national in character, to meet the intelligence needs of the

Government under a strong national leadership, for the development, management, control and operation of all projects, both

current and long range for the collection of intelligence and of

mapping and geodetic information obtained through overflights

(excluding peripheral reconnaissance operations)."

Para A.2. states: "The 'National Reconnaissance

Program shall be responsive directly and solely to the intelligence collection requirements and priorities established by the

United States Intelligence Board. Targeting requirements and

priorities and desired frequency of coverage of both satellite

and manned aircraft missions over denied areas shall continue

to be the responsibility of USIB, subject to the operational

approval of the 303 Committee." (The 303 Committee is now the

40 Committee).

c. Para D.1.e. states that the NRP Executive Committee

will: "Assign operational responsibility for various types of

manned overflight missions to CIA or DOD subject to the concurrence

of the 303 Committee."

In addition, as Director of the NRO, I am the Chairman of

the Interdepartmental Contingency Planning Committee responsible

for approving contingency plans for aircraft overflights.

"4,

.cor 1111111 . . Y..41111lW" $

PAGE.....1_oc...2_, PAGES

. NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

.1••n••n•n••n • •n•••1.11,••n••••
All of these lead to the observation that the NRO has

some responsibility for aircraft operations but it is not

well defined. As soon as I complete the present study on

the subject of NRO responsibility for aircraft operations,

I will be back to you for review.

Plummer

•

COPY OP COPIES

PAGE_LOP 2 PAGES