alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Scientific Integrity

Protecting scientific integrity in government is vital to the Nation. Scientific integrity is defined as:

> “The adherence to professional practices, ethical behavior, and the principles of honesty and objectivity when conducting,		managing, using the results of, and communicating about science and scientific activities. Inclusivity, transparency, and protection		from inappropriate influence are hallmarks of scientific integrity.”

Scientific and technological information is essential for the development of evidence-based policies and the equitable delivery of		government programs intended to improve the environment and the health, security, safety, and well-being of all people. In turn,		government science and scientific activities must be held to the highest standards of scientific integrity, free from inappropriate		influence at all stages from development to dissemination. A strong culture of scientific integrity allows science and scientists at		Federal agencies to thrive and supports agencies' abilities to meet their missions.

In response to the 		2021 Presidential Memorandum on Restoring Trust in Government through Scientific Integrity and Evidence-Based		Policymaking, federal departments and agencies have been working to strengthen or develop scientific integrity policies and develop		a framework for regular assessment and iterative improvement of scientific integrity policies and practices. In response to the		Memorandum, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) established a Scientific Integrity Fast-Track Action Committee under		the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC).

In January 2022, the Committee published a report, 		Protecting the Integrity of Government Science, which identified good agency		practices on scientific integrity and areas in need of consistency across agencies. The report led to the development of a 		Framework for Federal Scientific Integrity Policy and Practice, which was published in January 2023, and includes a first-ever Government-wide		definition of scientific integrity, a roadmap of activities and outcomes to achieve an ideal state of scientific integrity, a Model		Scientific Integrity Policy, as well as critical policy features and metrics that OSTP will use to iteratively assess agency progress.		The Framework also includes a charter for the newly established 		NSTC Subcommittee on Scientific Integrity, which was established to coordinate, assess, and communicate on matters of federal scientific integrity.
§ 115.401 Frequency and scope of audits. ( a ) During the three-year period starting on August 20, 2013, and during each three-year period thereafter, the agency shall ensure that each facility operated by the agency, or by a private organization on behalf of the agency, is audited at least once.
( b ) During each one-year period starting on August 20, 2013, the agency shall ensure that at least one-third of each facility type operated by the agency, or by a private organization on behalf of the agency, is audited.
( c ) The Department of Justice may send a recommendation to an agency for an expedited audit if the Department has reason to believe that a particular facility may be experiencing problems relating to sexual abuse. The recommendation may also include referrals to resources that may assist the agency with PREA-related issues.
( d ) The Department of Justice shall develop and issue an audit instrument that will provide guidance on the conduct of and contents of the audit.
( e ) The agency shall bear the burden of demonstrating compliance with the standards.
( f ) The auditor shall review all relevant agency-wide policies, procedures, reports, internal and external audits, and accreditations for each facility type.
( g ) The audits shall review, at a minimum, a sampling of relevant documents and other records and information for the most recent one-year period.
( h ) The auditor shall have access to, and shall observe, all areas of the audited facilities.
( i ) The auditor shall be permitted to request and receive copies of any relevant documents (including electronically stored information).
( j ) The auditor shall retain and preserve all documentation (including, *e.g.,* video tapes and interview notes) relied upon in making audit determinations. Such documentation shall be provided to the Department of Justice upon request.
( k ) The auditor shall interview a representative sample of inmates, residents, and detainees, and of staff, supervisors, and administrators.
( l ) The auditor shall review a sampling of any available videotapes and other electronically available data (*e.g.,* Watchtour) that may be relevant to the provisions being audited.
( m ) The auditor shall be permitted to conduct private interviews with inmates, residents, and detainees.
( n ) Inmates, residents, and detainees shall be permitted to send confidential information or correspondence to the auditor in the same manner as if they were communicating with legal counsel.
( o ) Auditors shall attempt to communicate with community-based or victim advocates who may have insight into relevant conditions in the facility.
## HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE

SECTION 43000

‐ 43023.5

* * * * [deleted text] * * * *

43013.1. (a) The State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, in consultation with, and the state board, shall develop a timetable for the removal of MTBE from gasoline at the earliest possible date. In developing the timetable, the commission and the state board shall consider studies conducted by the commission and should ensure adequate supply and availability of gasoline. (b) The state board shall ensure that regulations for California Phase 3 Reformulated Gasoline (CaRFG3) adopted pursuant to Executive Order D-5-99 meet all of the following conditions: (1) Maintain or improve upon emissions and air quality benefits achieved by California Phase 2 Reformulated Gasoline in California as of January 1, 1999, including emission reductions for all pollutants, including precursors, identified in the State Implementation Plan for ozone, and emission reductions in potency-weighted air toxics compounds. (2) Provide additional flexibility to reduce or remove oxygen from motor vehicle fuel in compliance with the regulations adopted pursuant to subdivision (a). (3) Are subject to a multimedia evaluation pursuant to Section

43830.8. (c) On or before April 1, 2000, the State Water Resources Control Board, in consultation with the Department of Water Resources and the State Department of Health Services, shall identify areas of the state that are most vulnerable to groundwater contamination by MTBE or other ether-based oxygenates. The State Water Resources Control Board shall direct resources to those areas for protection and cleanup on a prioritized basis. Loans for upgrading, replacing, or removing tanks shall be made available pursuant to Chapter 8.5 (commencing with Section 15399.10) of Part 6.7 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. In identifying areas vulnerable to groundwater contamination, the State Water Resources Control Board shall consider criteria including, but not limited to, any one, or any combination of, the following: (1) Hydrogeology. (2) Soil composition. (3) Density of underground storage tanks in relation to drinking

water wells. (4) Degree of dependence on groundwater for drinking water supplies.

* * * * [deleted text] * * * *

Source: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi

‐ bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=42001

‐ 43000&file=43000

‐ 43023.5
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  SBA Blog 

# SBA blog

## Perspectives, news, and practical information for small businesses

                      -  SBA Releases FY 2020 Disaggregated Contracting DataBy U.S. Small Business Administration on December 1, 2021
For the first time SBA is releasing disaggregated federal contracting data by race and ethnicity. 
 
                      -  Protect Your Small Business from Cybersecurity AttacksBy Mark Madrid on October 29, 2021
Follow these steps to prevent your business from cybersecurity risks before you are attacked.
 
                      -  Selling Overseas Using E-Commerce?  Here Are Some Useful Resources for Trade ComplianceBy Michele Schimpp on October 7, 2021
Small businesses are increasingly buying and selling goods internationally through e-commerce, a trend that only accelerated through the COVID pandemic.
 
                      -  Register for the National Small Business Week Virtual Summit for Business Tips and ResourcesBy U.S. Small Business Administration on September 2, 2021
To honor the efforts of America’s small business community, the SBA is hosting the National Small Business Week Virtual Summit this September 13-15, 2021. Learn more and see how you can get involved.
 
                      -  Grow Your Small Business Through ExportingBy Michele Schimpp on June 8, 2021
Start developing an export plan with help from the SBA
 
                      -  Members of the Military: Let SBA Serve You on Your Entrepreneurship MissionBy Larry Stubblefield on May 26, 2021
The SBA offers targeted resources to help members of the military community thrive as small business owners.
 
                      -  Protect Your Small Business This Hurricane SeasonBy U.S. Small Business Administration on May 14, 2021
Follow these steps to bolster your business against hurricane risks before one ever strikes.
 
                      -  The U.S. Small Business Innovation for International Trade: By Michele Schimpp on May 11, 2021
A trip to an international trade show can open lucrative international sales for small businesses seeking to export.  
 
                      -  SME Counselors Stand Up North American Small Business Counseling Network PilotBy Michele Schimpp on May 10, 2021
Small business counselors in Mexico, Canada, and the United States are collaborating to help small businesses find success through exports.  
 
                      -  Understand Your Finances and Grow Your BusinessBy Mark Madrid on April 16, 2021
Take advantage of SBA tools to meet your small business’s financial goals.
 

#### Pagination

-  Previous 
-  ... 
-                  Page              5 
-                  Page              6 
-                  Page              7 
-                  Page              8 
-                  Current page              9 
-                  Page              10 
-                  Page              11 
-                  Page              12 
-                  Page              13 
-  ... 
-  Next
-  Home 

# In This Section

                      -  The GLS Today                          -  What does the GLS do? 
                        -  The St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation 
                        -  The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System 
                        -  Meet the Administrator 
                        -  Meet Our Team 
                        -  Careers at the GLS 
                        -  Contact the GLS 
                      -  Historic Photos and Other Artifacts 

# American Anchor: Stories From The Great Lakes & St. Lawrence Seaway

                      - American Anchor - Supply Chain for Sustainable Energy

 

 
                      - American Anchor - Agriculture

 
                      - American Anchor - The Supply Chain of Steel
#### § 16.31 Definition of identification record.

An FBI identification record, often referred to as a “rap sheet,” is a listing of certain information taken from fingerprint submissions retained by the FBI in connection with arrests and, in some instances, includes information taken from fingerprints submitted in connection with federal employment, naturalization, or military service. The identification record includes the name of the agency or institution that submitted the fingerprints to the FBI. If the fingerprints concern a criminal offense, the identification record includes the date of arrest or the date the individual was received by the agency submitting the fingerprints, the arrest charge, and the disposition of the arrest if known to the FBI. All arrest data included in an identification record are obtained from fingerprint submissions, disposition reports, and other reports submitted by agencies having criminal justice responsibilities. Therefore, the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services Division is not the source of the arrest data reflected on an identification record.

[Order No. 2258-99, 64 FR 52226, Sept. 28, 1999]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-20638

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LAWRENCE STOWE, also known as Dr. Larry Stowe,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:11-CR-803-1

Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Lawrence Stowe, federal prisoner #44190-424, previously filed a 28 

U.S.C. § 2255 motion, which the district court denied. We dismissed the 

resulting appeal based on Stowe’s failure to file a timely notice of appeal. See 

United States v. Stowe, No. 18-20171 (5th Cir. June 21, 2018). Following our

dismissal, Stowe filed a “Motion to Correct Plain Error” in the district court, 

which purportedly was based on Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b) and 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 17, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-20638 Document: 00514920458 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/17/2019
No. 18-20638

2

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4. The district court construed this as a 

motion to extend the time to file a timely notice of appeal and to reinstate the 

prior appeal. However, the district court dismissed the motion for lack of 

jurisdiction. Stowe appeals the dismissal of this motion and requests the 

appointment of counsel on appeal.

Stowe has not shown that the district court erred. To the extent he 

argues that his notice of appeal from his underlying Section 2255 motion was 

timely, we have already found it untimely and dismissed that appeal. Issues

of fact or law previously decided on appeal may not be reexamined by a district 

court or in a subsequent appeal. See United States v. Davis, 609 F.3d 663, 693

(5th Cir. 2010); see also Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007) (stating 

that equitable exceptions do not apply to the period for filing a notice of appeal 

in a civil action and that use of the “‘unique circumstances’ doctrine is 

illegitimate”).

Construction of Stowe’s motion as a motion to extend or reopen the time 

to file a notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4 is unavailing. Even if we had not 

already decided the timeliness of his appeal, such a motion would itself be 

untimely under both Rule 4(a)(5) and Rule 4(a)(6). Stowe’s reliance on Rule 

52(b) also is misplaced. Rule 52 defines plain error in criminal proceedings on 

appeal and does not provide a mechanism for challenges in the district court. 

Thus, a Rule 52(b) motion would be “meaningless” and “unauthorized,” and the 

district court lacked jurisdiction to consider it as such. See United States v. 

Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994). 

We conclude that the district court did not err in finding that it lacked 

jurisdiction to consider Stowe’s motion. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED.

 Case: 18-20638 Document: 00514920458 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/17/2019
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports.

Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum

opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain

computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of

Appeals and does not include the filing date. 

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

2 STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

3 Plaintiff-Appellee,

4 v. NO. 35,440

5 JORGE MORALES,

6 Defendant-Appellant.

7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF EDDY COUNTY

8 Lisa B. Riley, District Judge

9 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General

10 Santa Fe, NM

11 for Appellee

12 Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender

13 Kathleen T. Baldridge, Assistant Appellate Defender

14 Santa Fe, NM

15 for Appellant

16 MEMORANDUM OPINION

17 WECHSLER, Judge.
2

1 {1} Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction

2 of possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute. [MIO 1] This Court’s

3 notice of proposed summary disposition proposed to hold that the evidence offered

4 at trial was sufficient to support the verdict rendered. [CN 3] Defendant has filed a

5 memorandum in opposition to that disposition, which we have duly considered.

6 Unpersuaded, we now affirm.

7 {2} In order to obtain a conviction, the State was required to establish at trial that

8 Defendant possessed methamphetamine, knowing or believing that it was

9 methamphetamine, and intending to transfer possession of that methamphetamine to

10 someone else. [RP 119] At Defendant’s trial, testimony was offered that thirty-three

11 small baggies found in Defendant’s motel room contained methamphetamine. [DS 5]

12 During a subsequent interview with agents of the Pecos Valley Drug Task Force,

13 Defendant “told them that the methamphetamine was his, explained where he obtained

14 the drugs, how much he paid for the drugs and what he expected to earn from his sale

15 of the drugs.” [MIO 2] As suggested in our notice of proposed summary disposition,

16 the above-described evidence would generally be sufficient to lead a reasonable

17 person to believe that Defendant knowingly possessed methamphetamine, intending

18 to transfer that methamphetamine to someone else. [CN 3]
3

1 {3} When an appeal is assigned to the summary calendar, “the burden is on the

2 party opposing the proposed disposition to clearly point out errors in fact or law.”

3 Hennessy v. Duryea, 1998-NMCA-036, ¶ 24, 124 N.M. 754, 955 P.2d 683.

4 Defendant’s memorandum in opposition maintains that the evidence was insufficient,

5 but it does not point out any factual or legal error in the notice of proposed

6 disposition. Consequently, and for the reasons addressed in the notice of proposed

7 disposition, we affirm the judgment and sentence of the district court.

8 {4} IT IS SO ORDERED.

9 ________________________________

10 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge

11 WE CONCUR:

12 ________________________________

13 LINDA M. VANZI, Chief Judge

14 ________________________________

15 STEPHEN G. FRENCH, Judge
### SUBCHAPTER VI—POLAR BEARS
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45909-45910]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18210]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Colorado Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of 
the Colorado Advisory Committee to the

[[Page 45910]]

Commission will convene at 11:00 a.m. (MDT) and end at 1:00 p.m. on 
Thursday, August 22, 2013, at City Hall, Pikes Peak Conference Room, 
Suite 200, Colorado Springs, CO. The meeting is for project planning.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the regional office by Monday, September 
23, 2013. Comments may be mailed to the Rocky Mountain Regional Office, 
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 999-18th Street, Suite 1380 South, 
Denver, CO 80202, faxed to 303-866-1050, or emailed to 
ebohor@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact 
the Rocky Mountain Regional Office at 303-866-1040.
    Persons needing accessibility services should contact the Rocky 
Mountain Regional Office at least 10 working days before the scheduled 
date of the meeting.
    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced 
at the Rocky Mountain Regional Office, as they become available, both 
before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this 
advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Rocky Mountain Regional Office at the 
above phone number, email or street address.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated in Chicago, IL, on July 25, 2013.
David Mussatt,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2013-18210 Filed 7-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE
                                    TO THE
                         GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION
                 KEY SALARIED EMPLOYEES GROUP INSURANCE PLAN
                                PRE-1987 GROUP
             (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 1987)


         Pursuant to the authority granted to the Board of Directors of
Georgia-Pacific Corporation (the "Board") to amend the Georgia-Pacific
Corporation Key Salaried Employees Group Insurance Plan/Pre-1987 Group (the
"Plan") and in accordance with a resolution of the Board adopted July 29,
1991, the Plan has been amended effective January 1, 1991 as follows:

         1.   The last sentence of Section 2.3b of the Plan is amended and
restated as follows:

        "Pursuant to the three (3) foregoing alternatives, the Participant (or
        the Participant's beneficiary(ies)) will also receive a bonus with
        respect to each distribution under the selected alternative equal to
        the product of the amount of the distribution
        and the fraction

                                 T

                                1-T

        where T equals the sum of the highest statutory marginal federal and
        Georgia income tax rates, expressed in decimal form, applicable to
        individuals resident in Georgia on personal service income.  For
        purposes of calculating the above-described fraction, the ``highest
        statutory marginal federal and Georgia income tax rates'' shall be the
        appropriate rates in effect at the time the affected distribution is
        made.  The bonus shall not be distributed to the Participant (or the
        Participant's beneficiary(ies)) but shall be withheld for taxes."

         2.   Section 2.4 of the Plan is amended and restated as follows:

        2.4  Additional Compensation to Participants


         In addition to the basic annual salary paid to a Participant, the
         Company agrees to pay, to each actively employed Participant, a bonus
         equal to the product of the taxable value of the Company-provided
         death benefit coverage as determined under applicable law and the
         fraction


                                 T

                                1-T

         where T equals the sum of the highest statutory marginal federal and
         Georgia income tax rates, expressed in decimal form, applicable to
         individuals resident in Georgia on personal service income.  For
         purposes of calculating the above-described fraction, the "highest
         statutory marginal federal and Georgia income tax rates" shall be
         the appropriate rates in effect at the time the affected distribution
         is made.  The bonus shall not be distributed to the Participant (or
         the Participant's beneficiary(ies)) but shall be withheld for taxes."