BEE-spoke-data/govdocs1-by-extension huggingface dataset:
Philadelphia Area Hotels

**Best Western Independence Park** 215 922-4443

235 Chestnut St.

The Bellevue Hotel 215 893-1776

Broad & Walnut

Four Seasons Hotel 215 963-1500

One Logan Square

Franklin Wyndham Plaza 215 448-2000

17^th^ & Race

Doubletree Hotel 215 893-1600

Broad & Locust

Embassy Suites 215 561-1776

1776 Ben Franklin Pkwy.

Holiday Inn 215 923-8660

4^th^ and Arch

Holiday Inn 215 735-9300

13^th^ and Walnut

Korman Communities 215-222-7275

222 West Rittenhouse Square

[www.kormancommunities.com](http://www.kormancommunities.com/)

**Marriott Hotel** 215 624-2900

1201 Market St.

Courtyard Marriot 215-496-3200

21 Juniper Street

**The Omni** 215 925-0000

4^th^ & Chestnut

Ritz Carlton 215 563-8215

17^th^ and Chestnut

**Sheraton Society Hill** 215 238-6000

1 Dock St.

Airport Hilton 215 365-4150

4509 Island Ave.

Hilton Phila at Penn 800-445-8667

3400 Sansom St.

Westin 215 563-1600

Sheraton Rittenhouse 215 546-9400

Roadway Inn 215 546-7000

1208 Walnut St.

Penn's View 215 922-7600

Front & Market St.

Hawthorne Suites 215 829-8300

1100 Vine St.

Sheraton University City 800 246-8357

3549 Chestnut St

The Latham Hotel 215 563-7474

135 South 17th Street

[www.lathamhotel.com](http://www.lathamhotel.com/)

\*Hotels in bold are within walking distance of Philadelphia USEAC and
accept government rates
Statement of Work

Proteus Syndrome Skeletal Biology Workshop

9/26/2007-9/28/2007

NHGRI and Children's National Medical Center with the support of the
Office of Rare Diseases Research and the Society for Bone and Mineral
Research are planning a workshop that is to be held at the NIH Building
40 conference room that will deal with the skeletal biology and
orthopedic complications of a rare disorder called Proteus syndrome. We
are requesting the following support for this workshop.

1-Provide travel support for 20-25 domestic participants and 2 foreign
participants- one from Canada and another from Japan (this is a
tentative list and awaits acceptances from the participants). This
support will include contacting participants to verify whether they
require airline tickets and provide ticket assistance and arrangements
to those still needing this to be done. Provide reimbursement to
travelers who have already purchased coach class tickets in advance.
Provide per diem support to all travelers for all travel days in the
amount of \$38.25. Provide full per diem support for those individuals
staying over on 9/28/07. Provide for all allowable local travel
reimbursement to all participants that will occur here in Bethesda and
also in their home cities or departure sites.

We anticipate that most of these participants will be traveling on
9/26/07 with most return flights being done on 9/28/07.

2-We are securing 25 single rooms for each night at the government rate
for the nights of 9/26/07 -- 9/28/07 (two nights with checkout on 9/28)
with the Marriott (Pooks Hill) in Bethesda. Any unused rooms will be
cancelled upon receiving information gathered from participants on their
scheduling needs. The deadline for these changes is 1 month prior to the
reservation. Provide reimbursement to the Marriott for the normal
overnight accommodations needed for these participants. We are only
authorizing the government rate fee and tax charges only-no
reimbursement for any other charges.

3-Work with the caterers for food and drinks for am and pm breaks on
9/27/07, the am break on 9/28/07, and the lunches on 9/27 and a boxed
lunch on 9/28 and make payment reimbursement for these needed functions.
The approved lunches provided will be deducted from the daily per diem
reimbursement to the participants.

Contact Iesha Baskins at 301-402-2146 or Mike Philippi at 301-496-7909
with any questions concerning these requirements.
**10 pm December 30th Observations**\
\
North Central Minnesota

CITY SKY/WX TMP DP RH WIND PRES REMARKS

BAUDETTE FRZ RAIN 31 29 92 E13 30.08F WCI 21

FLAG ISLAND MIX PCPN 30 28 93 E7 30.12F

INTL FALLS FRZ RAIN 30 28 93 E9 30.12F WCI 22

WASKISH MIX PCPN 34 32 93 E8 30.06F WCI 27

BIG FORK RAIN 34 32 93 SE9G16 30.11F WCI 26

LONGVILLE RAIN 34 34 100 SE5G24 30.06F

GRAND RAPIDS CLOUDY 34 28 80 SE12G17 30.12F WCI 25

CRANE LAKE MIX PCPN 34 32 93 CALM 30.18F

ORR MIX PCPN 32 32 100 SE8 30.11F WCI 25

COOK MIX PCPN 34 34 100 SE5 30.15F

Northeast Minnesota

DULUTH FRZ RAIN 32 31 96 E17 30.17F VSB 1 WCI 21

ELY MIX PCPN 34 N/A N/A SE12 30.18F WCI 25

HIBBING MIX PCPN 32 31 96 SE10 30.14F FOG WCI 24

EVELETH MIX PCPN 34 30 86 E8 30.17F WCI 27

DULUTH HARBOR MIX PCPN 34 32 93 NE21 30.21F WCI 22

TWO HARBORS DRIZZLE 32 27 80 E13G18 30.23F WCI 22

SILVER BAY MIX PCPN 34 32 93 E9G16 30.23F VSB 1/2 WCI 26

GRAND MARAIS N/A 36 30 79 E12 30.32F

G MARAIS ARPRT FOG 28 27 93 E8 30.26F VSB 1 WCI 20\
West Central Minnesota

FERGUS FALLS DRIZZLE 36 34 93 S5 30.04S

WHEATON LGT SNOW 34 32 93 W6 30.06S

MORRIS LGT RAIN 37 37 100 W8 30.01F

ALEXANDRIA MIX PCPN 36 36 100 SE6 30.02F FOG

WADENA RAIN 34 34 100 CALM 30.02F

GLENWOOD LGT RAIN 39 39 100 S5 30.01F VSB 3/4

APPLETON LGT RAIN 34 34 100 W6 30.03F

BENSON MIX PCPN 39 37 93 CALM 30.02F VSB 3/4

ORTONVILLE MIX PCPN 32 32 100 NW7 30.04S

MADISON MIX PCPN 34 34 100 NW7 30.04F

WILLMAR RAIN 43 41 93 S6 30.03F
**§4.66 Sacroiliac joint.**

The common cause of disability in this region is arthritis, to be
identified in the usual manner. The lumbosacral and sacroiliac joints
should be considered as one anatomical segment for rating purposes.
X-ray changes from arthritis in this location are decrease or
obliteration of the joint space, with the appearance of increased bone
density of the sacrum and ilium and sharpening of the margins of the
joint. Disability is manifest from erector spinae spasm (not accounted
for by other pathology), tenderness on deep palpation and percussion
over these joints, loss of normal quickness of motion and resiliency,
and postural defects often accompanied by limitation of flexion and
extension of the hip. Traumatism is a rare cause of disability in this
connection, except when superimposed upon congenital defect or upon an
existent arthritis; to permit assumption of pure traumatic origin,
objective evidence of damage to the joint, and history of trauma
sufficiently severe to injure this extremely strong and practically
immovable joint is required. There should be careful consideration of
lumbosacral sprain, and the various symptoms of pain and paralysis
attributable to disease affecting the lumbar vertebrae and the
intervertebral disc.

**§4.67 Pelvic bones.**

The variability of residuals following these fractures necessitates
rating on specific residuals, faulty posture, limitation of motion,
muscle injury, painful motion of the lumbar spine, manifest by muscle
spasm, mild to moderate sciatic neuritis, peripheral nerve injury, or
limitation of hip motion.
Gail Galligan,DC

1221 Floral Parkway

Wilmington, NC 28403

 

 

 

Dear Ms. McVicker:

 

It is an honor and a privilege to be a Doctor of Chiropractic in the
Untied States of America today. I underwent many classroom hours and
National Board of Examinations to have this privilege.

 

When it comes to a Medical Doctor having authority to refer a patient to
a Doctor of Chiropractic this is the utmost absurdity. It is, as I tell
my patients, \"I can tell you *all* about the heart; its chambers, blood
flow, nerve impulses, red blood cells, white blood cell, etc\.... BUT I
cannot tell you about heart surgery because *this is NOT WHAT I DO!\"*

 

Giving an MD authority to choose and say who and when a patient sees a
Doctor of Chiropractic is just like the above example. The MD does not
know enough to make this decision!!!!!

 

I strongly object to the use of medical gatekeepers to control access to
chiropractic services. The American public has the freedom to choose
chiropractors without referral by MD\'s; our veterans deserve that same
right.  As the committee correctly points out, anti-chiropractic bias
still exists among some MD\'s, and a patient\'s right to have access to
D.C.s would ultimately be determined by the personal prejudices of his
or her medical provider.

 

Thank you for allowing me to allowing me to provide these comments,

 

Truly, 

 

Dr. Gail S. Galligan 

 

August 26, 2003
![](media/image1.png){width="0.55in" height="0.7027777777777777in"}

CONTACT: Mark Herberger, Minuteman Missile NHS, 605-433-5552

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 17, 2007

The Man Who saved The World Visits

MINUTEMAN MISSILE NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Minuteman Missile National Historic Site welcomed a distinguished
visitor to the site on May 7^th^ & 8^th^, Stanislav Petrov. Mr. Petrov
was visiting Minuteman Missile as part of filming for the documentary
"The Man Who Saved The World" due for worldwide released in 2008. Mr.
Petrov was once a Russian Strategic Rocket Forces lieutenant colonel. On
September 26, 1983 he was the officer on duty at a military bunker near
Moscow. His duty that night was to monitor the Soviet satellite early
warning network. Just after midnight the system showed five incoming
Intercontinental Ballistic Nuclear Missiles launched from the United
States. It was Petrov's responsibility to inform of an incoming nuclear
attack against the Soviet Union. Petrov surmised that the system was in
error, concluded there was no nuclear attack and did not send this
initial false information up the chain of command. If he had, it is
likely that the Soviet's would have launched a full scale counterstrike
against the United States.

The result of Petrov's decision for humanity was that life as we know it
went on unabated. The result of Petrov's decision on his military career
was quite different. His decision had brought to light problems in the
Soviet early warning system and embarrassed his superiors. He was denied
promotions over the coming years, reassigned and took early retirement.
The story was not even known outside the secretive world of the Soviet
military until the late 90s.

In the documentary, Mr. Petrov will visit several areas of the United
States, meeting both dignitaries and ordinary citizens who are amazed
and grateful to hear his story. Mr. Petrov was especially excited to
visit Minuteman Missile since he had never seen an actual underground
Minuteman Launch Control Center or silo. He stated that "he would never
have imagined being able to visit one of the enemy's securest sites." As
a matter of fact, Mr. Petrov was not even able to travel outside of his
own country during his military career. He also enjoyed the opportunity
to meet Minuteman Missile Park Guide and former Launch Control officer
Kerry Davis. Ranger Davis was truly humbled by their historic meeting
and expressed the hope "that one day I can visit a former Soviet launch
site." The two former missile officers then shared diverse perspectives
and stories on the Cold War.

A five person Danish-Swedish film crew and Russian translator
accompanied Mr. Petrov. They shot several hours of footage at both
Delta-01 and Delta-09 as well as the park's Visitor Contact station. Mr.
Petrov enjoyed his visit to the region though the early spring heat left
him a bit sunburned after filming at the silo on Tuesday. It seems that
Mr. Petrov has an uncanny knack for placing himself in hot situations.

More information about the site can be found on the internet at
[www.nps.gov/mimi](http://www.nps.gov/mimi)
PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGIC DRUGS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

**CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH**

# **CHAIRPERSON**

Tamminga, Carol A., M.D.

Professor, Dept. of Psychiatry

University of Maryland at Baltimore

Maryland Psychiatric Research Center

Spring Grove Hospital, White Bldg.

Baltimore, Maryland 21228

## MEMBERS

## CONSUMER REPRESENTATIVE

Banister, Gaurdia E., Ph.D. 6/30/02

Director of Behavioral Health Sciences

Seton House, Umoja Treatment Service

1150 Varnum Street, NE

Washington, DC 20017

Cook, Edwin H., Jr., M.D. 6/30/02

Director, Laboratory of Developmental Neuroscience

Department of Psychiatry, MC3077 University of Chicago

5841 South Maryland Avenue

Chicago, Illinois 60637

Fyer, Abby J., M.D. 6/30/02

Anxiety Disorders Clinic

New York State Psychiatric Institute

College of Physicians and Surgeons

Columbia University

722 S. 168^th^ Street, Unit 82

New York, New York 10032

Hamer, Robert M., Ph.D. 6/30/01

University of North Carolina

Medical Schoolwing D

Room 256 CB#7160

Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599

##### Winokur, Andrew, M.D., Ph.D. 6/30/02

Director of Psychopharmacology

Department of Psychiatry-NTRTC

University of Connecticut Health Center

263 Farmington Avenue - MC 1517

Farmington, Connecticut 06030-1517

#### EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

Titus, Sandra, Ph.D.

Food and Drug Administration

Center for Drug Evaluation Research

HFD-21

5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1093

Rockville, Maryland 20857

301/827-7001 Fax301/827-6776

<tituss@cder.fda.gov>

Grady-Weliky, Tana A., M.D. 6/30/02

Associate Professor of Psychiatry

University of Rochester Medical Center

300 Crittenden Blvd.

Rochester, New York 14642

Malone, Richard P., M.D. 6/30/04

Associate Professor

### Eastern Pennsylvania Psychiatric Institute

MCP Hanneman University

School of Medicine

3200 Henry Avenue

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19129

Ortiz, Irene E., M.D. 6/30/04

Assistant Professor of Psychiatry

Veterans Administration Medical

Center (116C)

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87108

Oren, Dan, M.D. 6/30/04

Associate Professor of Psychiatry

Psychiatry Department

Yale Univeristy

9050 Campbell Avenue, Mail Stop 116A

West Haven, Connecticut 06516

Rudorfer, Matthew V., M.D. 6/30/04

Associate Director, Treatment Research

National Institute of Mental Health

Division of Services and Intervention

Research

60001 Executive Boulevard, Rm. 7163

MSC 9635

Rockville, Maryland 20892

#### PDAC Meeting - February 14 & 15 2001

#### 

#### CONSULTANTS - Voting

Grundman, Michael, M.D., M.P.H.

Associate Director

Alzeimer's Disease Cooperative Study

University of California, San Diego

8950 Villa Jolla Drive, Suite 2200

La Jolla, California 92037

#### PDAC Meeting - February 14,2001

#### GUESTS

Barbey, Jean, M.D.

4040 Chancery Court

Washington, DC 20007

Pritchett, Edward, M.D.

Duke South Hospital

Room 04280, DUMC 3477

Durham, North Carolina 27710
**Cruise:** EX0645S

**Dates:** November 4 - 12, 2006

**Chief Scientists:** not applicable

**Equipment**: Surface samples collected.

**Total number of stations:** VOS Underway Cruise

**Chemical measurements:**

**DIC:** 10 locations, 20 samples each 500-ml, 20 duplicate samples

PI: Dr. Rik Wanninkhof

Collected by: Kevin Sullivan

Analyzed by: Esa Peltola

**Salinity:** Salinity from the ship's thermosalinograph on the
Practical

Salinity Scale

**TALK:**

PI: Dr. Frank Millero

Collected by: Kevin Sullivan

Analyzed by: Alex Abrams

**Details:**

**DIC:**

Analysis date: December 4, 2006

Coulometers used: AOML1 and AOML2

Blank range: 13.4-28.6 counts/min

CRM \# used and assigned value (include both DIC and salinity): Batch
59, c: 2007.1 umol/kg,S: 33.316

CRM value measured: AOML 1: offset 10.6 umol/kg (2017.7 umol/kg)

AOML-2: offset 10.1 umol/kg (2017.2 umol/kg)

Average run time, minimum run time, maximum run time: 10 min, 8 min, 17
min

Reproducibility: (# samples and average difference): 10 sets of
duplicate samples, average difference 1.6 umol/kg

CRM, salinity and HgCl2 correction applied: Salinity correction was
applied for the AOML1 samples, the AOML2 samples were calculated using
TSG salinity; CRM and HgCl2 volume correction was applied

Location of analyses files: Esa\'s computer file/directory/name: My
Documents/SOMMA/Lab Studies/2006 (12) Explorer /

Remarks-

The volume correction was applied due to added HgCl2 (Measured
DIC\*1.00037).

The first CRM of each cell was used for a CRM correction.

There was a good agreement between the duplicate samples All 20 samples
were sent to Millero\'s lab for alkalinity analysis
February 8, 2008

**Subject:** Minutes of the Environmental Management System Committee
Meeting on January 31, 2008

**To:** Location EMS Committee Members

Research Leaders

**From:** Tamara Snipes, Chemist/EMS Coordinator

The EMS Committee met on January 31, 2008 at 11:00 AM in the CPMRU
Conference Room. T. Snipes, L Marshall, J. Merriman, T. Strickland, T.
Hendricks, R. Hornbuckle, K. Marchant, and R. Scarborough were the
committee members in attendance. The main purpose of the meeting was to
discuss targets for FY08. The targets we focus on for the year are
usually chosen and approved by this time. However, we were told in
December 2007 that the reporting period was transitioning to the
calendar year. Since then, the reporting period has been redirected to
the fiscal year.

The meeting began by discussing the visit of Willis Hunter, Chief of
Environmental Safety at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center near
Brunswick, GA. Mr. Hunter contacted T. Snipes in mid-December requesting
help with their EMS program after locating the Tifton EMS webpage. Mr.
Hunter and his secretary visited Tifton on January 4, 2008. T. Snipes
met with them and went over how our program was being organized, various
reporting forms, and other EMS topics of concern. While here, Mr. Hunter
mentioned the Federal Electronics Challenge (FEC) when he learned about
our e-Cycling initiatives. He agreed to mentor our facility in the FEC
since his facility participated last year and received an award. This
will become a FY08 target. We will write and implement a policy for the
purchase of electronic equipment that will be consistent with standards
set in Executive Order 13423.

The committee has requested the cleanout and replacement of all mercury
containing devices that can be easily replaced with a mercury
alternative. T. Hendricks has collected many thermometers and other
devices. The next step in the mercury reduction plan will be to
inventory all federal buildings for mercury containing thermostats.
These may be replaced as part of R&M, but should be disposed of properly
at that time. This will become our second target for FY08.

The third target will involve drafting a vehicle policy which includes
carpooling, taking the most efficient vehicle to meetings, and possibly
purchasing some hybrid vehicles as sedans come up for replacement.

Annual refresher training was held on January 18, 2008. Beth Anderson
visited Tifton to provide on-site training. She also provided Hazardous
Waste training for those that work with or potentially work with
hazardous chemicals. We currently have 83% participation with the annual
training. Those who could not attend the training have been given the
deadline of February 15 to complete the training online.

The next meeting of the Location EMS Committee will be scheduled
tentatively for mid-April 2008.
> **JSC INDUSTRY ASSISTANCE**

-   Located on the corner of Saturn and the main entrance at JSC (Gate
    1), on the right-hand side of the entrance, Building 111.

-   Phone Number: 281-483-4511

> **JSC SMALL BUSINESS SPECIALISTS**

Monica Craft Cheryl Harrison

JSC Small Business Specialist JSC Small Business Specialist

281-483-4134 281-483-3734

<monica.f.craft@nasa.gov> <cheryl.a.harrison@nasa.gov>

Charles Williams

Industry Assistance Specialist

281-483-5933

<Charles.T.Williams@nasa.gov>
**Tips for "Pause for Thought: Should You Install A ROPS Yourself?**

# Lessons Learned"

## Content

This is a story about an older part-time farmer and his two part-time
farmer sons when they installed a ROPS and seat belt on a tractor.

## Objectives

The purpose of this activity is to:

-   Raise awareness about what is involved in installing a ROPS and seat
    belt on a farm tractor, the equipment required, and the typical
    problems encountered

-   Share an interesting story with other farmers who may be
    contemplating installing a ROPS on their tractors

-   Weigh the advantages and disadvantages of having an equipment dealer
    install a ROPS on a tractor versus the farmer doing it himself or
    herself

-   Identify and think about ways to overcome common barriers to getting
    ROPS installed on tractors

## Intended Audience

-   Young and adult farm men and women

-   Family members involved in planning to have ROPS and seat belts
    installed on their tractors

-   Farm equipment dealers, extension agents, and others who advise
    farmers concerning farm equipment and maintenance

## How to Use These Materials

-   Read this Tip sheet and skim through the story.

-   Decide with which groups and individuals the story might be useful.

-   Use the story in any of these ways.

-   As a discussion activity and/or a presentation at a local farm
    community meeting

-   As the basis for a discussion with a single farm family member or
    with a few family members or farmers in one-on-one meetings

-   As a story included in a newspaper or a newsletter or some similar
    publication (You may want to edit and shorten the story using only
    the portions you think may be most useful.)

## Materials Needed

-   Multiple copies of the story or portions of the story

## Discussion Questions and Teaching Points

Use these and/or similar questions as discussion topics after people
have read and responded to the story or parts of the story.

1.  What relevance does this story have for you and your family? For
    other people in this community?

2.  What tradeoffs were involved for the Cole family when they delayed
    having a dealer put a ROPS on the tractor so that they could install
    the ROPS themselves?

3.  What barriers and problems prevent farmers from having equipment
    dealers retrofit their tractors with ROPS rather than trying to do
    so themselves?

4.  What tempts farmers to construct their own ROPS and what are the
    problems and risks in doing so?

5.  When a farmer purchases a used tractor from a tractor dealer, and
    when that tractor has no ROPS and seat belt, what are some good
    strategies for getting a ROPS and seat belt installed on the
    tractor?

6.  What barriers may prevent you (or other farmers) from getting ROPS
    and seat belts on tractors? In what ways might you (or they)
    overcome these barriers?

## Ideas, Notes, and Comments

Write down your ideas and plans for using this activity.
![](media/image1.png){width="0.6541666666666667in"
height="0.6604166666666667in"}PUBLIC NOTICE

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

445 12^th^ Street, S.W., TW-A325

[WASHINGTON, DC 20554 DA 01-1963]{.underline}

News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On Demand 202/418-2830 Internet:
http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov

**Released: August 21, 2001**

**WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU GRANTS REQUEST**

**OF JOSEPH J. SIMONS, ESQ., TRUSTEE, TO EXTEND DIVESTITURE TRUST**

Pursuant to sections 4(i) and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 310(d), and sections 0.331 and 20.6 of
the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.331, 20.6, the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau ("Bureau") grants the request of Joseph J.
Simons, Esq., Trustee, to extend the duration of the wireless asset
divestiture trust involving PCS license WPQL237 held by Chicago 20 MHz,
LLC until fifteen business days following the date when the grant of the
application to transfer control to PrimeCo Acquisition LLC (ULS File No.
0000499462) becomes final. The application appeared as consented on WTB
Report No. 935, rel. August 8, 2001. No comments were received in
response to the public notice of the request to extend the trust. *See*
Joseph J. Simons, Trustee, Seeks Extension of Wireless Assets Trust,
*Public Notice*, DA 01-1757 (WTB, rel. July 24, 2001).

The Bureau finds that extending the trust under these circumstances
serves the public interest and grants the extension through October 9,
2001.

Pursuant to section 1.103 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.103,
the consent granted herein is effective upon release of this Public
Notice. Pursuant to sections 1.106(f) and 1.115(a) of the Commission's
rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.106(f), 1.115(a), petitions for reconsideration
and applications for review may be filed within thirty days of the
release of this public notice.

For further information, contact Lauren Kravetz Patrich or John
Branscome, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Commercial Wireless
Division, at (202) 418-7240.

**-FCC-**
**WG8 Programme of Work**

**Project No. Title Ref. Doc. WG Editor WD DP DIS IS**

**JTC1.18.15** Computer Languages for Processing Text

**JTC1.18.15.1** ISO 8879-1986ðInformation Processingð ISO 8879-1986 8
Charles F. Goldfarb Approved ISO Standard

Text and Office Systemsð

Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML)

Amendment 1 8 Published July 1988

Amendment 2 WG8 N680, 701 8 5/89 12/89

**JTC1.18.15.2** TR XXXX Information Processingð WG8 N484, 565, 8 John
Oberholzer

Text and Office Systemsð 650

Operational Model for Text Description

and Processing Languages

**JTC1.18.15.3** ISO TR 9544 Information Processingð WG8 N545 8 Paul
Ellison Approved ISO Technical Report

Computer-Assisted PublishingðVocabulary

**JTC1.18.15.5** Information Processingð

SGML and Text-entry Systems

**JTC1.18.15.5.1** DTR 10037 Information Processingð WG8 N626, 707 8
Mike Cowlishaw 12/87 9/88 2/89 12/89

SGML and Text-entry Systemsð

Guidelines for SGML Syntax-Directed

Editing Systems

**JTC1.18.15.5.2** TR XXXX Information Processingð WG8 N672 8 Martin
Bryan 10/89 6/90

SGML and Text-entry Systemsð

Retroactive Conversion

**JTC1.18.15.6** Information Processingð

Text Compositionð

**JTC1.18.15.6.1** ISO XXXX Information Processingð WG8 N538, 540 8
Sharon Adler 9/88 6/89 10/90 12/91

Text Compositionð 581, 606, 706,

Document Style Semantics and 779

Specification Language

**JTC1.18.15.6.2** ISO XXXX Information Processingð SC18 N1402 8 Matt
Foley, 2/88 5/89 3/90

Text Compositionð WG8 N509, 559, Steve Strasen

Standard Page Description Language 560, 561,

773, 783, 786

**JTC1.18.15.7** Information Processingð

SGML Support Facilitiesð

**JTC1.18.15.7.**1 ISO 9069 Information Processingð ISO 9069-1988 8
Charles F. Goldfarb Approved ISO Standard

SGML Support Facilitiesð

SGML Document Interchange Format (SDIF)

**JTC1.18.15.7.2** ISO TR 9573 Information Processingð ISO TR 9577 8
Anders Berglund Approved ISO Technical Report

SGML Support Facilitiesð

Techniques for Using SGML

**JTC1.18.15.7.3** ISO 9070 Information Processingð ISO 9070-1988 8
Charles F. Goldfarb Approved ISO Standard

SGML Support Facilitiesð

Registration Procedures for Public Text

Owner Identifiers

**JTC1.18.27** Information Processingð 8 Edwin J. Smura

Description and Identification of Glyph Fonts

**JTC1.18.27.1** DIS 9541-1ðInformation Processingð WG8 N687, 689, 8 Jim
Flowers 5/86 5/87 10/89 7/90

Font and Glyph Information Interchangeð 700, 776, 778

Architecture

**JTC1.18.27.2** DIS 9541-2ðInformation Processingð WG8 N 687, 689 8
Alan Griffee 10/86 5/87 10/89 7/90

Font and Character Information Interchangeð 700, 778

Interchange Format

**JTC1.18.27.**3 DIS 9541-3ðInformation Processingð WG8 N 686, 687, 8
Jim Flowers 10/89 5/90 5/91 5/92

Font and Character Information Interchangeð 689, 700

Glyph-Shape Representations

**JTC1.18.27.?** DIS 10036-1ðInformation Processingð WG8 N686, 688 8
Edwin J. Smura 5/86 5/87 10/89 7/90

Font and Character Information Interchangeð 689, 700, 777

Procedure for Registration of

Glyph and Glyph-Collection Identifiers
ShellRun Licence Agreement

==========================

This is a legal agreement between you and PHD Computer Consultants Ltd
(PHD),

United Kingdom.

The features available in ShellRun are listed on the ShellRun

documentation Web site

http://www.phdcc.com/shellrun/

You may purchase ShellRun licences either direct from PHD or through

one of our outlets, as listed on the ShellRun Web site.

The intellectual property, software, documentation and images for
ShellRun are

Copyright (c) 1998-2000 PHD Computer Consultants Ltd.

This licence describes the Freeware and Standard licence terms.

The Freeware version of ShellRun may be used for free.

A ShellRun licence entitles you to use the ShellRun development kit on
one

computer. The ShellRun.exe executable may be distributed as a part of
your

product for any number of products.

You may have a single working copy of the ShellRun software on one
computer

and keep a single copy on a backup medium.

You are entitled to upgrades from PHD for one year from the date that
the

licence was purchased.

PHD supplies ShellRun in electronic form only.

You do not receive a physical copy of the software.

You may not assign or resell your ShellRun licence or otherwise make

ShellRun available to others without the consent of PHD.

PHD will make a reasonable attempt to answer any relevant queries from
Standard

licence holders for 12 months from the date that the licence was
purchased.

You can have a full refund if you have a legitimate problem with the
software

within 30 days of purchase.

PHD does not agree to fix any apparent defects or limitations in the
software.

However if you notify PHD of the problem or have positive suggestions
then

PHD may change the software accordingly in the next release.

You must not re-use, decompile or otherwise mis-use the software.

Unless agreed otherwise, this agreement is governed by English law.

NO WARRANTIES. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, PHD

expressly disclaims any warranty for this software. This software and

its documentation are provided \"as is\" without warranty of any kind,

either express or implied, including, without limitation, the implied

warranties or merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

The entire risk arising out of use or performance of this software

remains with you.

NO LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. To the maximum extent permitted
by

applicable law, in no event shall PHD or its suppliers be liable for any

damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of

business profit, loss of business information, business interruption,

or any other pecuniary loss) arising out of the use or inability to use

this PHD product.

If this licence is not acceptable to you or is not legally enforceable
then

PHD reserves the right to declare it void and return any fee paid.

1.2 January 2000
**LENDER CREDIT ANALYSIS OUTLINE**

(NOTE: THE FOLLOWING OUTLINE IS A SUGGESTED FORMAT FOR LENDERS IN
PREPARING THE REQUIRED ANALYSIS NOTED IN FORM 4279-1, \"APPLICATION FOR
LOAN GUARANTEE, PART B, \"COMPLETED BY LENDER\", ITEM NO. 22)

**[MANAGEMENT:]{.underline}**

-   Lender\'s evaluation of borrower\'s management as to experience and
    capacity to manage the proposed operation. This should include
    historical performance and comments on credit reports on the
    principals.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Lender evaluation of the business plan submitted.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Lender\'s evaluation of company credit reports and those of any
    parent, affiliate, or subsidiary.

**[FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY:]{.underline}**

-   Lender\'s assessment of three (3) years of historical financial
    statements, proforma balance sheet at start up and two (2) years
    projected balance sheet and income statements which reflect balance
    sheet items as a percentage of assets and income and expense as a
    percentage of sales. Discussion will include appropriate financial
    ratios and comparison with industrial standards as reported by firms
    such as D&B or RMA.

-   Lender\'s assessment on the reliability of proforma financials
    inclusive of supporting assumptions given historical performance or
    feasibility report. Discussion is to include, but should not be
    limited to, adequacy of working capital to support operations,
    company liquidity, cash flow to current maturities, and leverage
    position.

-   Lender discussion of historical trend in equity position and/or
    adequacy of proposed equity at closing.

-   Lender discussion of any related party transactions and their
    impact.

**[COLLATERAL:]{.underline}**

-   Lender\'s evaluation of collateral appraisals as to their support of
    reconciled values.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Presentation and discussion of rationale for collateral adjustments
    used.

**[CLASSIFICATION/RISK ANALYSIS:]{.underline}**

-   Lender discussion of the basis for the proposed loan classification.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Lender comments on risk analysis assessments performed in the
    underwriting process.

**[FEASIBILITY REPORTS (As Applicable):]{.underline}**

-   Lender assessment as to reliability of the feasibility report
    containing required analysis as outlined in RD Instruction 4279-B,
    Attachment A.
![](media/image1.jpeg){width="1.5506944444444444in"
height="0.6055555555555555in"}

**FEMA/Taxpayer-Funded \$800 Louis Vuitton Handbags for Katrina
Evacuees**

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="1.1319444444444444in" height="1.375in"}As
part of their Katrina relief efforts, FEMA distributed \$2,000 debit
cards to many of the hurricane victims.  In a recent [*Washington Post*
article](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/07/AR2005090701469.html),
former FEMA Director Michael Brown, said the debit card program was
"aimed at those with the most pressing needs."  However, as the
following *New York Daily News* article outlines, two Katrina evacuees
will now be able to carry around their government debit cards in a brand
new, \$800 Louis Vuitton handbag.

> **Lavish tastes of card-carrying lowlifes**\
> *[New](http://www.nydailynews.com/06-11-2004/news/col/widdicombe/story/345034p-294601c.html)
> York Daily News*, September 11, 2005
>
> Profiteering ghouls have been using debit cards distributed in the
> wake of Hurricane Katrina - intended to buy essentials for evacuated
> families - in luxury-goods stores as far away as Atlanta.
>
> \"We\'ve seen three of the cards,\" said a senior employee of the
> Louis Vuitton store at the Lenox Square Mall in affluent Buckhead, who
> asked not to be named. \"Two I\'m certain have purchased; one actually
> asked if she could use it in the store. This has been since
> Saturday.\"
>
> The distinctive white cards were distributed by the Red Cross and the
> Federal Emergency Management Agency and carry a value of up to
> \$2,000. \"It doesn\'t say anything on the card other than alcohol,
> tobacco and firearms cannot be purchased with it,\" the store employee
> told me. \"There\'s nothing legally that prevents us from taking it,
> unfortunately. Other than morally, it\'s wrong.\"
>
> The source told me that the two women who had made purchases with the
> card each bought a signature monogrammed Louis Vuitton handbag in the
> \$800 range. \"They didn\'t look destitute by any stretch. You would
> never have said, \'They must be one of the evacuees.\' \... The one
> that I dealt with yesterday was 20. She\'ll be 21 next month.\" The
> source described the reaction of other store-keepers in the mall -
> which includes luxury brands Ferragamo, Burberry, Judith Leiber and
> Neiman Marcus - as \"outrage.\"
>
> \"It doesn\'t say anywhere on there, but it would have to be a good
> amount to be shopping in here,\" the source said with a dark chuckle.

Staff Contact: Joelle Cannon, 202.226.9717
> **Subject: CLASS DEVIATION TO REFLECT CHANGES TO THE COOPERATIVE AUDIT
> STRATEGY**
>
> **References:**
>
> DEAR 970.5203-1 Management Controls
>
> DEAR 970.5232-3 Accounts, Records, and Inspection
>
> DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 70.4 Cooperative Audit Strategy
>
> **When is this Acquisition Letter (AL) Effective?**
>
> This AL is effective upon issuance. The use of the clauses authorized
> by the attached class deviation shall be used in all solicitations and
> contracts in place of the parallel clauses currently contained in the
> DEAR.
>
> **When Does This AL Expire?**
>
> This AL remains in effect until superseded by the publication of a
> final rule incorporating the clauses that are the subject of the class
> deviation into the DEAR.
>
> **Who is the Point of Contact?**
>
> Contact Robert Webb of the Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy
> at (202) 287-1338 or by email at <Robert.Webb@hq.doe.gov> .
>
> Visit our website at [www.pr.doe.gov](http://www.pr.doe.gov/) for
> additional information on Acquisition Letters and other policy issues.

**What is the Purpose of this Acquisition Letter?**

The purpose of this Acquisition Letter (AL) is to provide a class
deviation that incorporates changes that support DOE's Cooperative Audit
Strategy into the Management Controls clause at 970.5203-1 and the
Accounts, Records, and Inspection clause at 970.5232-3.

**What is the Background?**

The DOE Inspector General (IG), in consultation with the Chief Financial
Officer (CFO), and the Office of Procurement and Assistance Management
(OPAM), and the Contractor Internal Audit Council, developed and
implemented the Cooperative Audit Strategy in October 1992 to maximize
the overall audit coverage at management and operating contractors and
fulfill its responsibility for auditing the costs incurred by DOE's
major facilities contractors. The Cooperative Audit Strategy enhances
DOE's efficient use of available audit resources by allowing the IG to
rely on the work of Contractor internal audit activities. The success of
the Cooperative Audit Strategy depends on the IG and Contractor Internal
Auditors working closely with the CFO, DOE's and NNSA's OPAM,
Departmental Contracting Officers, and related Departmental program
functions.

The class deviation transmitted by this Acquisition Letter modifies the
Management Controls clause at DEAR 970.5203-1 and Accounts, Records, and
Inspection clause at DEAR 970.5231-3 to enhance contract coverage of the
Cooperative Audit Strategy. The revised versions of the two clauses are
attached to the deviation determination.

Contracting Officers shall incorporate the two modified clauses into
solicitations for management and operating contracts and awards.
Additionally, Contracting Officers shall attempt to negotiate these
clauses in existing M&O contracts at the next annual negotiation.

Attachment:

Class Deviation to Reflect Changes to the Cooperative Audit Strategy
Industrial Funding Fee --15 Day Grace Period

Thirteen years ago, the schedules program only had to concern itself
with about 3,000 contractors reporting 2.7 billion dollars in sales.

Today, it's 18,000 contractors reporting over 36 billion dollars in
sales resulting from an overall schedules program growth of about 10 to
12% per year. Despite that phenomenal growth, for the past thirteen
years, we only allow our vendor partners just 30 days to collect,
summarize and itemize 36 billion dollars in sales and then [pay the
Industrial Funding Fee against those sales in the same 30 day
period]{.underline}.

It is simply impractical to expect 36 billion dollars (9 billion dollars
per quarter) worth of sales to collected, summarized and paid to GSA in
such a short 30 day period.

I offer the following suggestion as part of an industry GSAM
announcement: Report the IFF in the 30-day window following a quarter's
end (no change), however, encourage our vendor partners to pay the IFF
within the same 30-day period but then allow a 15-day "grace" period for
industry to pay the IFF electronically. (Note that the proposed GSAM
changes now require electronic payment, i.e. no more paper checks as IFF
submittals).

The benefit to industry will be enormous -- too many firms have
sophisticated accounts payable software, processing times from one
department (collecting the sales) to the next (accounts payable) is
simply not conducive to a 30-day turnaround. A grace period is just that
-- we are not changing our expectation that the IFF is still required to
be paid in 30 days, we are simply acknowledging that some firms have
more complicated processing times that others.
**4^th^ World Water Forum, Mexico City**

**Session Title:** Management Link for Freshwaters and Coasts --
Progress in Local Actions **(FT2.31)**

**Schedule:** Saturday, March 18, 2006, 14:30-16:30

**Location**: Casa Montejo, Room #1 (Banamex Center)

**Convening Organizations:**

-   UNEP-Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
    Environment from Land-based Activities

-   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Ocean
    Service

-   Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands

-   Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT), Mexico

**Session Objectives:**

1.  Present the concept of freshwater-to-oceans linkages;

2.  Describe various approaches to promote the concept;

3.  Provide report on the previous dialogue on freshwater-to-oceans
    interlinkages and preparations for the 2^nd^ GPA Intergovernmental
    Review (IGR-2);

4.  Present the approach of the NOAA/GPA agreement to develop
    GPA-National Program of Action in the Wider Caribbean; and

5.  Share case study experiences, best management practices, and lessons
    learned in the implementation of the GPA and in the partnership on
    linking Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and Integrated
    Coastal and Ocean Management (ICM)

**Program:**

***Overview of Freshwater to Oceans Linkages***, Biliana Cicin-Sain,
Co-Chair, Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands (5 minutes)

***Perspectives of Freshwater to Oceans by GEF International Waters
Program***, Takehiro Nakamura, Project Management Officer, IW-GEF UNEP
(5 minutes)

***Overview of the GPA National Programs of Action Process as a Tool for
Integrated Freshwater to Oceans Management***, Clement Lewsey, Director,
NOAA/NOS International Program Office (5 minutes)

***Report of the Mexico Workshop on Freshwater-Coastal-Marine Management
Interlinkages**, Mexico, January 2006*, Patricia Muñoz, IPN (5 minutes)

***Preparations for IGR-2***, Cees van de Guchte, UNEP-GPA (5 minutes)

***Presentation of Case Studies*** (45 minutes)

1.  Dr. Jorge Euan. GPA implementation process experience in the Yucatan
    Peninsula, Mexico (LA 1774)

2.  Ms. Donna Spencer. GPA implementation process experience in Trinidad
    & Tobago (LA1775)

3.  Mr. A.K. Pattnaik. Experience of Chilika Lagoon, India (LA 0469)

> 4\. Mr. Emil Cherrington , GPA Experience in Panama

***Panel-led Discussion*** (50 minutes)

Panelists:

1.  Representative from CATHALAC

2.  Representative from UNEP-GPA

3.  Session speakers and representatives from NOAA/GPA node office,
    UNEP-GPA, Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands, and SEMARNAT
    -DGPAIRS)

***Wrap-up*** (5 minutes)

Announcement of the Integrated Water Resources Management and Integrated
Coastal and Ocean Management integration open discussion at the IUCN
Venue (time and day to be scheduled -- check with IW:LEARN)
IDHE Prototyping Program

David Harding

6 April 2004

We want to explore the effect of adding some steel plates to existing
IDH magnets in order to improve the linearity of the current response
above 15 A. 30 A, the peak current at which we measured the NuMI water
cooled trims, seem to me a sensible peak for these measurements. The
magnets will be ramped to these currents briefly during operation, so
the extra water cooling required by NuMI\'s application will not be
necessary.

To distinguish these magnets from other variants of the IDH strain, we
will designate them IDHE. The various trial configurations will be
designated with rework numbers.

We are fabricating three sets of plates to add to the tops and bottoms
of the magnet. A top plate is a single piece. The a bottom set is three
plates in regions divided by the two support feet. Corner chamfers are
provided to minimize the interference with weld beads. The plates may be
held in place by non-magnetic clamps, by strapping or bands, or by some
other clever method. Top and bottom plates will be installed
symmetrically (one layer on the bottom for every layer on the top).

We are also fabricating three sets of plates that will fit against the
core between the coils. These may be secure in any way convenient that
does not involve significant masses of steel. Left and right plates will
be installed symmetrically (one layer on the left for every layer on the
right).

For each configuration we want the standard excitation and harmonics
curves.

  ----------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
  Magnet rework number    Number top/bottom       Number side plates
                          plates                  

  IDHE126-0               0                       0

  IDHE126-1               1                       0

  IDHE126-2               2                       0

  IDHE126-3               3                       0

  IDHE126-4               3                       1

  IDHE126-5               3                       2

  IDHE126-6               3                       3

  IDHE126-7\                                      
  to be determined                                
  ----------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------

There should be no change in the resistance or inductance of the magnet
through these changes.
September 5, 2003

Honorable Inez M. Tenenbaum

State Superintendent of Education

South Carolina Department of Education

1006 Rutledge Building

1429 Senate Street

Columbia, SC 29201

Dear Superintendent Tenenbaum:

I am writing to follow up on Under Secretary Hickok's letter of July 1,
2003 in which he outlined the conditions of approval for South
Carolina's State accountability plan under Title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2001 (NCLB).

South Carolina indicated in Element 3.2 of its accountability plan its
intent to compare the current year assessment results with an average of
the most recent three years' results (including the current year) and to
use the most favorable results to make school AYP determinations. As Dr.
Hickok's letter indicated, South Carolina may use this procedure but, as
a condition of approval, must provide us information on the impact and
implications of this approach. This letter provides guidance on the
information to be provided.

There are at least two critical questions that should guide your
collection and analysis of the data with respect to this issue: 1) How
many schools and districts made AYP because this procedure was applied?
2) How many years of data were used to determine whether schools or
districts made AYP? Our understanding of this approach is that each
subgroup, within a particular school, will be judged upon the same
number of years of data in making AYP decisions. If this understanding
is incorrect and subgroups within a school will be judged upon different
numbers of years of data in AYP decisions, please provide an answer to a
third question: 3) How many schools were treated in such a fashion?

If you have a data collection format that provides this data already,
please let us know. If not, please visit with your State contact to
identify a format that will facilitate your providing the needed data.
Please provide this first year of data to us no later than November 1,
2003.

Please note that we may find it necessary to collect this information
for two school years; we will notify you about this possibility, if
needed, during the 2003-04 school year. If you have any questions about
this issue, please contact Kerri Briggs at (202) 205-2540 or Grace Ross
at (202) 260-0967.

The Secretary has stated repeatedly that States should be granted
maximum flexibility in the implementation of NCLB provided this
flexibility does not undermine the goals of NCLB. I appreciate your
efforts to ensure that this balance is appropriately achieved in South
Carolina.

Sincerely,

Ronald J. Tomalis

Acting Assistant Secretary

cc: Wanda Rushing