990 resultados para South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services--Periodicals
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Includes bibliographies.
Resumo:
Description based on: Vol. 1, issue 2 (spring '88); title from cover.
Resumo:
Description based on: Jan. 31, 1946; title from cover.
Resumo:
Previous ed. issued by the body under its earlier name, Dept. of Mental Health.
Resumo:
As part of the Governor's effort to streamline State government through improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of operations, Executive Order 2004-06 ("EO6") provided for the reorganization (consolidation) of the Department of Insurance, Office of Banks and Real Estate, Department of Professional Regulation and Department of Financial Institutions. Through EO6 the four predecessor Agencies were abolished and a single new agency, The Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (hereafter referred to as "IDFPR") was created. The purpose of the consolidation of the four regulatory agencies was to allow for certain economies of scale to be realized primarily within the executive management and administrative functions. Additionally, the consolidation would increases the effectiveness of operations through the integration of certain duplicative functions within the four predecessor agencies without the denegration of the frontline functions. Beginning on or about July 1, 2004, the IDFPR began consolidation activities focusing primarily on the administrative functions of Executive Management, Fiscal and Accounting, General Counsel, Human Resources, Information Technology and Other Administrative Services. The underlying premise of the reorganization was that all improvements could be accomplished without the denegration of the frontline functions of the predecessor agencies. Accordingly, all powers, duties, rights, responsibilities and functions of the predecessor agencies migrated to IDFPR and the reorganization activities commenced July 1, 2004.
Resumo:
"Literature cited": p. 419-439.
Resumo:
Vols. for 1934-1952 include the annual report of the Dept. of Streets and Electricityy.
Resumo:
Referred to the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation and ordered printed February 12, and June 20, 1940.
Resumo:
"The work involved in developing and producing these materials was performed pursuant to Contract No. HEW-100-75-0055 with the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare ..."
Resumo:
Issues for 1929- published as: Sessional paper of the Legislative Assembly, no.22-
Resumo:
Background. The majority of Lyme disease cases in the United States are acquired on the east coast between northern Virginia and New England. In recent years the geographic extent of Lyme disease has been expanding, raising the prospect of Lyme disease becoming endemic in the southeast. Methods. We collected confirmed and probable cases of Lyme disease from 2000 through 2014 from the Virginia Department of Health and North Carolina Department of Public Health and entered them in a geographic information system. We performed spatial and spatiotemporal cluster analyses to characterize Lyme disease expansion. Results. There was a marked increase in Lyme disease cases in Virginia, particularly from 2007 onwards. Northern Virginia experienced intensification and geographic expansion of Lyme disease cases. The most notable area of expansion was to the southwest along the Appalachian Mountains with development of a new disease cluster in the southern Virginia mountain region. Conclusions. The geographic distribution of Lyme disease cases significantly expanded in Virginia between 2000 and 2014, particularly southward in the Virginia mountain ranges. If these trends continue, North Carolina can expect autochthonous Lyme disease transmission in its mountain region in the coming years.
Resumo:
According to the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), federal action to manipulate habitat for species conservation requires an environmental impact statement, which should integrate natural, physical, economic, and social sciences in planning and decision making. Nonetheless, most impact assessments focus disproportionately on physical or ecological impacts rather than integrating ecological and socioeconomic components. We developed a participatory social-ecological impact assessment (SEIA) that addresses the requirements of NEPA and integrates social and ecological concepts for impact assessments. We cooperated with the Bureau of Land Management in Idaho, USA on a project designed to restore habitat for the Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). We employed questionnaires, workshop dialogue, and participatory mapping exercises with stakeholders to identify potential environmental changes and subsequent impacts expected to result from the removal of western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis). Via questionnaires and workshop dialogue, stakeholders identified 46 environmental changes and associated positive or negative impacts to people and communities in Owyhee County, Idaho. Results of the participatory mapping exercises showed that the spatial distribution of social, economic, and ecological values throughout Owyhee County are highly associated with the two main watersheds, wilderness areas, and the historic town of Silver City. Altogether, the SEIA process revealed that perceptions of project scale varied among participants, highlighting the need for specificity about spatial and temporal scales. Overall, the SEIA generated substantial information concerning potential impacts associated with habitat treatments for Greater Sage-Grouse. The SEIA is transferable to other land management and conservation contexts because it supports holistic understanding and framing of connections between humans and ecosystems. By applying this SEIA framework, land managers and affected people have an opportunity to fulfill NEPA requirements and develop more comprehensive management plans that better reflect the linkages of social-ecological systems.
Resumo:
The purpose of this advisory opinion is to update SC Revenue Ruling #91-15 concerning interest exempt from South Carolina income taxes. This advisory opinion provides a discussion of the types of interest exempt from South Carolina income taxes,1 the taxability of exempt interest when distributed as a dividend from a mutual fund, and Section 265 of the Internal Revenue Code which disallows a deduction for expenses allocable to tax-exempt income. This document also provides examples of tax-exempt obligations and obligations which are not tax-exempt for South Carolina income tax purposes.