alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit21**

 

SUBSIDIARIES OF RYERSON TULL,INC.

 

The subsidiaries of Ryerson Tull, Inc. (other thancertain subsidiaries which, considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, do not constitute a significant subsidiary), four of which are incorporated in the State of Delaware and one of which is incorporated in the State of Georgia, as notedbelow, and each of which is wholly owned by Ryerson Tull, Inc., are as follows: 

 

Joseph T. Ryerson & Son, Inc. 

(a Delaware corporation)

 

J. M. Tull Metals Company, Inc.

(a Georgia corporation) 

 

Ryerson Tull International, Inc. 

(a Delaware corporation) 

 

Ryerson Tull Procurement Corporation 

(a Delaware corporation) 

 

Ryerson Tull Receivables LLC 

(a Delaware limited liability company)
EXHIBIT 12
1996 Form 10-K




       Southern New England Telecommunications Corporation
                         Computation of
               Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                



Dollars in Millions, For the Year Ended December 31,                 1996
                                             
Income before income taxes                                          $300.4
                                             
Add:                                   
   Interest on indebtedness                                           88.2
   Portion of rents representative of    
     the interest factor                                               7.0
                                             
Earnings before fixed charges and income taxes (1)                  $395.6
                                          
Fixed charges                          
   Interest charges                                                 $ 95.4
   Portion of rents representative of    
     the interest factor                                               7.0
                                             
Fixed charges (2)                                                   $102.4
                                             
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges [(1) divided by (2)]               3.86
Appendix D Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project Maps 

APPENDIX D 

MAPS 

Appendix D Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project Maps D - 1 

APPENDIX D – MAPS 

Map 1 – Vicinity 

Map 2 – Management Areas 

Map 3 – Alternative B Potential Treatment Areas 

Map 4 – Alternative C Potential Treatment Areas 

Map 5 – Travel Management 

Map 6 – Alternative B Transportation 

Map 7 – Alternative C Transportation
Case 19-13574-BFK Doc 60 Filed 04/18/22 Entered 04/18/22 10:08:24 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 3
Case 19-13574-BFK Doc 60 Filed 04/18/22 Entered 04/18/22 10:08:24 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 3
Case 19-13574-BFK Doc 60 Filed 04/18/22 Entered 04/18/22 10:08:24 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 4,652

 4,427

 4,646

 4,302

 3,514

 2,601

 2,000

 2,199

 2,511

 570

 432

 321

 279

 305

 357

 327

 319

 406

 280

 263

 254

 273

 260

 279

 247

 239

 223

 237

 283

 360

 411

 315

 310

 314

 337

 344

 373

 287

 353

 305

 218

 229

 229

 234

 226

 229

 235

 239

 251

 238

 229

 225

 226

 220

 222

 214

 205

 195

 197

 201

 202

 203

 1,415

 1,365

 1,428

 1,380

 1,191

 893

 664

 668

 600

 328

 286

 256

 253

 261

 260

 263

 262

 280

 259

 248

 242

 240

 238

 233

 227

 218

 212

 211

 218

 226

 231

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2018 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 1, 2018

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 10,291

 10,769

 11,378

 12,215

 12,894

 13,276

 13,436

 13,645

 13,763

 13,608

 13,360

 12,891

 12,122

 10,988

 9,833

 8,731

 7,565

 6,465

 5,533

 4,888

 4,466

 4,038

 3,676

 3,581

 3,522

 3,484

 3,443

 3,393

 3,351

 3,314

 3,283

 735

 769

 813

 873

 921

 948

 960

 975

 983

 972

 954

 921

 866

 785

 702

 624

 540

 462

 395

 349

 319

 288

 263

 256

 252

 249

 246

 242

 239

 237

 235

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
### §2706. Effective date

(a) This chapter shall take effect on August 5, 1983.

(b) Repealed. Pub. L. 101–382, title II, §211, Aug. 20, 1990, 104 Stat. 655.

(Pub. L. 98–67, title II, §218, Aug. 5, 1983, 97 Stat. 395; Pub. L. 101–382, title II, §211, Aug. 20, 1990, 104 Stat. 655.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original "this subtitle" meaning subtitle A (§§211–218) of title II of Pub. L. 98–67 which enacted this chapter, amended section 1202 of this title, repealed section 2582 of this title, and enacted provisions set out as notes under sections 1202, 1319, 2251, and 2703 of this title and section 1311 of Title 33, Navigation and Navigable Waters. For complete classification of subtitle A to the Code, see Tables.

#### Amendments

1990—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–382 struck out subsec. (b) which related to termination of duty-free treatment. Notwithstanding directory language repealing "section 218 of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (19 U.S.C. 2706(b))", amendment was executed by repealing subsec. (b) to reflect the probable intent of Congress in view of catchline for section 211 of Pub. L. 101–382 which read "Repeal of termination date on duty-free treatment under the Act".
### The Helderberg Group and the position of the Silurian-Devonian boundary in North America

By: J.M. Berdan

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1180B

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### C. N. Folsom, appellee, v. Walter E. Pailing, appellant, et al.

Filed April 19, 1899.

No. 8858.

1. Set-Off: Partnership. A claim against a member of a partnership cannot be set off against a debt due the firm.

2. Conflicting Evidence: Review. A finding based on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal.

Appeal from the district court of Gass county. Heard below before Ramsey, J.

*Affirmed.*

*George W. Ciarle*and *D. E. Barr,*for appellant.

*C. S. Polle, contra.*

Norval, J.

This suit was instituted in the court below by O. N. Folsom to foreclose a mechanic’s lien on property of Walter E. Pailing, one of the defendants, and from a decree in favor of plaintiff Pailing prosecutes an appeal.

John Montgomery and Charles Stevens were partners engaged in the manufacture and sale of brick, and under an oral contract the firm sold and delivered to Pailing 44,600 brick, at the agreed price of $7.20 per thousand, to be used by the latter in the erection of a brick building on lot 361, in the village of Greenwood. At the time the contract was entered into Pailing was engaged in the mercantile business, and Montgomery, as well as Stevens, was indebted to him. Thereafter each purchased goods from the store on credit, and Pailing made certain cash payments on the brick. Subsequently Montgomery and Stevens filed a mechanic’s lien for $321.12, the total contract price of the brick, and then assigned the lien to plaintiff. The district court allowed Pailing credit only for the cash payments made by him, and disallowed, the amount of indebtedness due him from Montgomery and *479Stevens respectively. A. single question is presented for onr consideration, namely, did the court err in not allowing Pailing credit for the amount of the individual accounts of Montgomery and Stevens? Without a contract to that effect, the defendant had no right to set off against his debt to the firm his account against a mem-' ber of this firm. This proposition is so elementary as to make the citation of authorities in support thereof unnecessary. We have read the evidence and find that it is conflicting. That introduced by the plaintiff tends to show that no agreement was entered into between Pailing and Montgomery and Stevens that the former was to receive credit for the individual account of the members of the firm, or for the value of the goods subsequently purchased by Montgomery and Stevens respectively. As the evidence is sufficient to sustain the finding, the decree is

Affirmed.
#### § 11.24 Other than a bona fide sale.

“Other than a bona fide sale” includes, but is not limited to, sales in connection with which the industry member purchases or rents the display, shelf, storage or warehouse space to be occupied by such products at premises owned or controlled by the retailer.

[T.D. ATF-364, 60 FR 20427, Apr. 26, 1995]
Exhibit
10.3


FIRST AMENDMENT


TO


EXTRA
SPACE STORAGE INC.


2004
LONG TERM INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN


 


                WHEREAS, Extra Space
Storage Inc. (the “Company”) has adopted the Extra Space Storage Inc. 2004 Long
Term Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”); and


 


                WHEREAS, Section 13 of
the Plan permits the Board of Directors of the Company to amend the Plan,
subject to certain limitations; and


 


                WHEREAS, the Board of the Company desires to amend the Plan
to change the definition of Fair Market Value for purposes of determining
option exercise prices and other purposes under the Plan;


 


                NOW, THEREFORE, effective November 7, 2007, the definition
of “Fair Market Value” as contained in Section 1 of the Plan is hereby amended to
read as follows:


 


“Fair Market Value” per Share
as of a particular date means (i) if Shares are then listed on a national
stock exchange, the closing sales price per Share on the exchange for the
relevant date, or if no sales of Shares occurred on the relevant date, then the
closing sales price per Share on the next preceding date on which there was a
sale of Shares on such exchange, as determined by the Committee, (ii) if
Shares are not then listed on a national stock exchange but are then traded on
an over-the-counter market, the average of the closing bid and asked prices for
the Shares in such over-the-counter market on the relevant date, or if no
trading in the Shares occurred on the relevant date, then the closing sales
price per Share on the next preceding date on which there was trading of Shares,
as determined by the Committee, or (iii) if Shares are not then listed on
a national stock exchange or traded on an over-the-counter market, such value
as the Committee in its discretion may in good faith determine; provided that,
where the Shares are so listed or traded, the Committee may make such
discretionary determinations where the Shares have not been traded for 10 or
more trading days.”


                Except
to the extent herein above set forth, the Plan shall remain in full force and
effect.


 


                IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Directors of the Company
has caused this First Amendment to be executed by a duly authorized officer of
the Company as of November 7, 2007.


 


 




	
   

  	
  EXTRA SPACE STORAGE INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 10,253

 8,656

 8,553

 9,203

 9,160

 8,147

 7,403

 8,225

 9,220

 11,252

 10,603

 9,855

 7,981

 6,315

 5,789

 1,608

 773

 652

 438

 251

 167

 156

 145

 149

 164

 171

 174

 198

 165

 156

 160

 1,254

 1,431

 842

 737

 1,317

 1,654

 1,525

 1,324

 1,785

 3,290

 1,715

 309

 297

 228

 193

 161

 129

 121

 104

 113

 109

 121

 129

 125

 134

 148

 156

 152

 142

 137

 145

 5,363

 4,918

 4,349

 4,533

 4,824

 5,170

 4,552

 4,272

 4,912

 6,086

 6,019

 4,409

 3,165

 2,194

 1,853

 862

 337

 295

 193

 157

 132

 133

 137

 137

 146

 157

 162

 165

 153

 145

 151

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

DECEMBER 2016 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: January 5, 2017

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

COLLINSVILLE BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 1,187.80

 1,187.76

 1,187.72

 1,187.68

 1,187.63

 1,187.59

 1,187.55

 1,187.50

 1,187.46

 1,187.41

 1,187.37

 1,187.35

 1,187.31

 1,187.28

 1,187.25

 1,187.23

 1,187.18

 1,187.15

 1,187.12

 1,187.08

 1,187.05

 1,187.01

 1,186.97

 1,186.93

 1,186.95

 1,186.90

 1,186.87

 1,186.83

 1,186.79

 1,186.76

 31.97

 31.91

 31.86

 31.80

 31.74

 31.68

 31.63

 31.56

 31.50

 31.44

 31.38

 31.35

 31.30

 31.26

 31.22

 31.19

 31.12

 31.08

 31.04

 30.99

 30.95

 30.89

 30.84

 30.78

 30.81

 30.75

 30.71

 30.65

 30.60

 30.56

STORAGE

-0.05

-0.06

-0.05

-0.06

-0.07

-0.05

-0.06

-0.07

-0.05

-0.07

-0.05

-0.03

-0.06

-0.04

-0.04

-0.03

-0.07

-0.04

-0.04

-0.05

-0.04

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

+0.03

-0.07

-0.04

-0.05

-0.05

-0.04

CHANGE

9

4

10

9

2

10

10

4

12

3

10

16

2

10

10

19

1

12

14

8

13

4

6

6

44

-11

8

3

5

11

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

OUTLET

 16

 12

 17

 17

 16

 17

 18

 18

 19

 18

 17

 10

 10

 11

 10

 13

 15

 13

 15

 15

 14

 11

 13

 13

 10

 2

 8

 10

 12

 11

C.F.S.

 .37

 .27

 .38

 .39

 .36

 .38

 .40

 .42

 .44

 .42

 .38

 .23

 .23

 .26

 .23

 .30

 .35

 .30

 .34

 .35

 .32

 .26

 .30

 .30

 .22

 .05

 .18

 .24

 .27

 .25

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-ORLAND PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

SEPTEMBER 2001 EAST PARK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 10/26/2001

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -1.45 264 600 0 401 9.19 .00

ACRE-FEET -1,450 524 1,190 0 795

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 AM.

SUMMARY RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 1,190

 1,190

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .00

JULY 1, 2001 .00

 32.02
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 1,173.77

 1,173.09

 1,172.39

 1,171.68

 1,170.97

 1,170.24

 1,169.52

 1,168.80

 1,168.09

 1,167.38

 1,166.70

 1,166.01

 1,165.38

 1,164.73

 1,164.13

 1,163.53

 1,162.92

 1,162.31

 1,161.70

 1,161.04

 1,160.38

 1,159.67

 1,158.93

 1,158.21

 1,157.46

 1,156.73

 1,156.65

 1,156.65

 1,156.65

 1,156.66

 16.25

 15.66

 15.07

 14.48

 13.91

 13.35

 12.80

 12.27

 11.76

 11.27

 10.80

 10.35

 9.94

 9.54

 9.17

 8.81

 8.46

 8.11

 7.78

 7.42

 7.08

 6.72

 6.37

 6.03

 5.69

 5.37

 5.34

 5.34

 5.34

 5.34

STORAGE

-0.60

-0.59

-0.59

-0.58

-0.57

-0.57

-0.55

-0.53

-0.51

-0.50

-0.46

-0.46

-0.41

-0.41

-0.37

-0.36

-0.35

-0.35

-0.34

-0.35

-0.34

-0.36

-0.36

-0.34

-0.34

-0.32

-0.03

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

CHANGE

16

26

24

26

6

7

7

9

-4

4

0

-5

22

9

8

13

15

19

14

6

11

3

2

13

12

11

14

15

18

21

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 316

 316

 316

 316

 291

 291

 278

 272

 250

 250

 230

 221

 221

 210

 190

 190

 190

 190

 180

 180

 180

 180

 180

 180

 180

 170

 30

 14

 14

 14

OUTLET

 5

 7

 6

 4

 2

 2

 4

 4

 3

 4

 3

 4

 5

 4

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 4

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 1

 1

 1

 4

 5

C.F.S.

 .17

 .24

 .24

 .16

 .08

 .09

 .16

 .16

 .13

 .16

 .14

 .17

 .22

 .20

 .17

 .15

 .17

 .19

 .19

 .25

 .16

 .16

 .17

 .19

 .19

 .08

 .04

 .05

 .30

 .34

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-ORLAND PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2021 EAST PARK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 09/02/2021

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -11.54 342 6,040 0 103 5.12 .00

ACRE-FEET -11,540 678 11,980 0 204

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 AM.

SUMMARY RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 11,980

 11,980

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .00

JULY 1, 2020 2.40

 16.85

OCT 1, 2020 TO DATE = 2.36
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Release No. 71568 / February 19, 2014

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced the temporary suspension, pursuant 

to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), of trading 

in the securities of Imogo Mobile Technologies, Corp. (“IMTC”), of Bellevue, WA, at 

9:30 a.m. EST on February 19, 2014 through 11:59 p.m. EST on March 4, 2014.

The Commission temporarily suspended trading in the securities of IMTC because of 

questions that have been raised about the accuracy and adequacy of publicly disseminated 

information concerning, among other things, IMTC’s business, revenue, and assets. This 

order was entered pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Exchange Act.

The Commission acknowledges the assistance of FINRA in this matter.

The Commission cautions broker-dealers, shareholders, and prospective purchasers that 

they should carefully consider the foregoing information along with all other currently 

available information and any information subsequently issued by the company. 

Further, brokers and dealers should be alert to the fact that, pursuant to Rule 15c2-11 

under the Exchange Act, at the termination of the trading suspension, no quotation may 

be entered unless and until they have strictly complied with all of the provisions of the 

rule. If any broker or dealer has any questions as to whether or not he has complied with 

the rule, he should not enter any quotation but immediately contact the staff in the 

Division of Trading and Markets, Office of Interpretation and Guidance, at (202) 551-

5777. If any broker or dealer is uncertain as to what is required by Rule 15c2-11, he 

should refrain from entering quotations relating to IMTC’s securities until such time as 

he has familiarized himself with the rule and is certain that all of its provisions have been 

met. If any broker or dealer enters any quotation which is in violation of the rule, the 

Commission will consider the need for prompt enforcement action.

If any broker-dealer or other person has any information which may relate to this matter, 

they should contact Amy Weber, Senior Counsel, at (305) 416-6296 or Jeffrey Cook, 

Staff Attorney, at (305) 982-6344.
#### §§ 676.11-676.15 [Reserved]
#### Louis Ettlinger v. Theodore Kruger.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
§ 75.105 Annual priorities. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70320 , Aug. 29, 2024.
( a ) *What programs are covered by this section?* This section applies to any program for which the Secretary establishes priorities for selection of applications in a particular fiscal year.
( b ) *How does the Secretary establish annual priorities?* ( 1 ) The Secretary establishes final annual priorities by publishing the priorities in a notice in the Federal Register, usually in the application notice for that program.
( 2 ) The Secretary publishes proposed annual priorities for public comment, unless: ( i ) The final annual priorities will be implemented only by inviting applications that meet the priorities (Cross-reference: See 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1));
( ii ) The final annual priorities are chosen from a list of priorities already established in the program's regulations;
( iii ) Publishing proposed annual priorities would seriously interfere with an orderly, responsible grant award process or would otherwise be impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest;
( iv ) The program statute requires or authorizes the Secretary to establish specified priorities; or
( v ) The annual priorities are chosen from allowable activities specified in the program statute.
( c ) *How does the Secretary implement an annual priority?* The Secretary may choose one or more of the following methods to implement an annual priority: ( 1 ) *Invitations.* The Secretary may simply invite applications that meet a priority. If the Secetary chooses this method, an application that meets the priority receives no competitive or absolute preference over applications that do not meet the priority.
( 2 ) *Competitive preference.* The Secretary may give one of the following kinds of competitive preference to applications that meet a priority. ( i ) The Secretary may award some or all bonus points to an application depending on the extent to which the application meets the priority. These points are in addition to any points the applicant earns under the selection criteria (see § 75.200(b)). The notice states the maximum number of additional points that the Secretary may award to an application depending upon how well the application meets the priority.
( ii ) The Secretary may select an application that meets a priority over an application of comparable merit that does not meet the priority.
( 3 ) *Absolute preference.* The Secretary may give an absolute preference to applications that meet a priority. The Secretary establishes a separate competition for applications that meet the priority and reserves all or part of a program's funds solely for that competition. The Secretary may adjust the amount reserved for the priority after determining the number of high quality applications received.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)
[46 FR 3205, Jan. 14, 1981, as amended at 57 FR 30337, July 8, 1992; 60 FR 63873, Dec. 12, 1995]