Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Section 106 Process is further explained and defined in 36 CFR 800. Meeting four times a year, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation consists of 23 members from both public and private sectors, with the chairman appointed by the president. [18] The council's role is to advise the President and Congress on historic preservation ...
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 ... Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; ...
Town and Country Planning Act 1990#Section 106; ... Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.
Old Slater Mill, a historic district in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, the first property listed in the National Register, on November 13, 1966 [1] George B. Hartzog Jr., director of the National Park Service from 1964 to 1972 [2] U.S. Secretary of the Interior Cecil Andrus, who removed the National Register from the jurisdiction of the National Park Service in 1978
Pub. L. 115–105 (text) 115-106: January 8, 2018 No Human Trafficking on Our Roads Act To disqualify from operating a commercial motor vehicle for life an individual who uses a commercial motor vehicle in committing a felony involving human trafficking. Pub. L. 115–106 (text) 115-107: January 8, 2018
Pub. L. 106–2 (text) 106-3: March 23, 1999 (No short title) An act to deem as timely filed, and process for payment, the applications submitted by the Dodson School Districts for certain Impact Aid payments for fiscal year 1999 Pub. L. 106–3 (text) 106-4: March 25, 1999 Nursing Home Resident Protection Amendments of 1999
A section 106 order is a unilateral administrative order issued by EPA to PRP(s) to perform remedial actions at a Superfund site when the EPA determines there may be an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare or the environment because of an actual or threatened release of a hazardous substance from a facility ...
Although the defendants were found liable for trespass, conversion, and negligence, the jury awarded the artist $120,000 for only four undisclosed, unnamed works of art from over 4,000. The federal judge found that the jury's VARA award was properly included within the jury's other damages, thus reducing the amount of the total judgment.