alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Program Office:**Adult Education and Literacy

**CFDA Number:** 84.002**Program Type:** Formula Grants

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This program provides grants to states to fund localprograms of adult education and literacy services,including workplace literacy services; family literacyservices; English literacy programs and integratedEnglish literacy-civics education programs.Participation in these programs is limited to adultsand out-of-school youths age 16 and older who are notenrolled or required to be enrolled in secondary schoolunder state law.

TYPES OF PROJECTS

NACTEP grantees use funds for expenses associated with developing rigorous academic and technical standards, especially in preparation for high-skill, high-wage, or in--demand occupations in established or emerging professions; providing professional development to improve the quality of career and technical education teachers, principals, administrators, and counselors; and providing stipends, tuition, books, fees, childcare, counseling, job placement, transportation, supplies, specialized tools and uniforms that are necessary for students to fully and effectively participate in CTE programs.
2809.402 Policy. ( a ) The SPE is the agency head for purposes of suspension and debarment under FAR subpart 9.4, and serves as the Suspension and Debarment Official (SDO) for both procurement and non-procurement matters.
( b ) Contracting activities shall consider recommending suspension or debarment of a contractor when cause is shown as listed under FAR 9.406-2 and 9.407-2. ( 1 ) If a determination is made that available facts do not justify debarment or suspension, the file should be documented accordingly and no additional action is required.
( 2 ) If the decision is made to recommend suspension or debarment of a contractor, in coordination with the activity's BPC and legal counsel, the bureau shall submit a memorandum to the SDO containing all relevant facts and analysis on which the recommendation is based. The submission also should include copies of all relevant documents.
The Communications and Customer Service Team (CCST) team serves OSERS and its constituents from strategic, communications, and technical standpoints in the following major functional areas:
      -  Public LiaisonDevelops and implements an OSERS Communication Strategy that promotes its mission, priorities and programs across the Department and with key stakeholders and constituents to best serve OSERS' diverse constituencies. CCST Incorporates a variety of strategies and communication avenues through press, social media, web publication, email, list servs, and infographics to ensure that OSERS messages are delivered timely prior to all events/announcements. 
      -  Media InquiriesCoordinates with OSERS colleagues on timely and accurate responses to media inquiries. 
      -  Information Product DevelopmentCCST undertakes OSERS information product development and production including: graphics, print and digital products, as well as Section 508 accessible alternative formats. 
      -  Digital Information DisseminationCCST develops and maintains both the OSERS' website and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) website. CCST also manages OSERS social media presence on such platforms as OSERS Blog, Twitter and YouTube. 
      -  Controlled Mail CorrespondenceCCST is the repository for OSERS official correspondence.  
      -  *Freedom of Information Act* (*FOIA*)Coordinates responses to OSERS *FOIA* requests in collaboration with OSERS components.  
      - Records Management  Oversees and promotes efficient operations to ensure that OSERS follows policies and procedures as it relates to the Records Management Information Program.

### Key Staff:

**Director:***Paul Steenen*

 Top

----

### OSERS Navigation

About OSERS | People and Offices | Programs and ProjectsGrants and Funding | Legislation and Policy | Publications, Products, Research and StatisticsAdditional Resources | Contact and Feedback
235.010 Scientific and technical reports. ( b ) For DoD, the Defense Technical Information Center is responsible for collecting all scientific and technical reports. For access to these reports, follow the procedures at PGI 235.010(b).
[69 FR 65092, Nov. 10, 2004]
## Loan Volume Updates

Summary loan volume data on the major student loan programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education.

## Federal Student Loan Programs Data Books

Federal Student Loans Programs Data Book FY 1997 - FY 2000 HTML Version | download filesPDF Version (1.6 MB)

Federal Student Loans Programs Data Book (tables only) FY 1997 - FY 2000

Federal Student Loan Programs Data Book for Fiscal Years 1994, 1995, 1996

## Federal Family Education Loan Programs Data - Largest Originators and Holders

More current data on loan originators, holders, as well as other data, may be found on the **Federal Student Aid Financial Partners Web site**.

Top 100 Originators of FFEL Loans -- FY 2002-2003 download filesExcel (42K)

Top 100 Originators of FFEL Loans -- FY 2001-2002 download filesExcel (41K)

Top 100 Originators of FFEL Loans -- FY 2000-2001 download filesExcel (42K)

Top 100 Holders of FFEL Loans -- FY 2001 download filesExcel (43K)

Top 100 Originators of FFEL Loans -- FY 2000 and FY 1999

Top 100 Originators of FFEL Loans -- FY 1999 and FY 1998

Top 100 Holders of FFEL Loans -- FY 1999

Top 100 Originators of FFEL Loans -- FY 1997 and FY 1998

Top 100 Holders of FFEL Loans -- FY 1997 and FY 1998

TopTop

OPE Program Data | OPE Policy Page

|Last Modified: 04/17/2009
|-------------------------
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES 

July 8, 2020 

Honorable Molly Spearman 

Superintendent of Education 

South Carolina Department of Education 

1006 Rutledge Building, 1429 Senate Street 

Columbia, South Carolina 29201 

scsupted@ed.sc.gov

Dear Superintendent Spearman: 

This letter grants final approval under Section 421(b) of the General Education Provisions Act 

for grant award H027A180081 and H173A180085. 

The Department received your June 9, 2020 request on behalf of the South Carolina Department

of Education for a waiver extending the period of availability for Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B grant award funds. 

With this approval, the FFY 2018 IDEA Part B grant award funds will be available for obligation 

through September 30, 2021 and may be liquidated through December 30, 2021. 

Please contact your Office of Special Education Programs State Lead, Lucille Sleger, at 

Lucille.Sleger@ed.gov if you have any questions. 

Sincerely, 

/s/

Mark Schultz 

Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration.

Delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties 

of the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services.

cc: State Director 

400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2600 

www.ed.gov 

The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness 

by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

LARRY BANKS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case No. 12 C 4999

)

CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT, )

et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This Court's June 26, 2012 memorandum order in this case began in this fashion:

Although multiple filer Larry Banks ("Banks") seeks in forma pauperis status in

connection with this putative 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Section 1983") lawsuit, he has

not complied with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) that require him to

provide a certified copy of his trust fund account statements for the six-month

period that preceded the filing of his Complaint. That makes it impossible for this

Court to determine whether he is enabled to pay the $350 filing fee in

installments or is required instead to pay that fee up front.

Some three weeks later Banks responded with what he captioned "Plaintiff Motion To Take

Judicial Notice," in which he reported:

1. At that point he had been at the Pinckneyville Correctional Center

("Pinckneyville") for less than 90 days (hence less than the

statutory six-month period).

2. Before that he had been housed at the Cook County Jail from

April 2011 forward.

3. Because he had filed earlier lawsuits that he claimed contained the

necessary information about the transactions in his account while

at the Cook County Jail, he asked this Court to retrieve the required

information from those earlier cases.

This Court essayed to do Banks' work for him without success, because the records filed
in those earlier actions did not provide the missing information from the portion of the relevant

six-month period preceding the filing of this lawsuit (see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) ) before he was 1

transferred to Pinckneyville. But more significantly, this Court's search on Banks' behalf turned

up Judge Edmond Chang's July 5, 2012 minute order dismissing an action (12 C 4997) that

Banks had filed immediately before this one, which order stated that it constituted Banks' third

"strike" under Section 1915(g).

That being the case, there is no need to search on Banks' behalf any longer. Instead

Section 1915(g) dictates that Banks must pay the $350 filing fee in this case in full and up front. 

Because he admittedly cannot do that, this action is dismissed.2

__________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: August 20, 2012

 Further citations to Title 28 provisions will simply take the form "Section --." 1

 This dismissal is not of course on the merits of Banks' claim (a subject on which this 2

Court expresses no view). It is accordingly entered without prejudice.

- 2 -
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 1 of 20 PageID #:1
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 2 of 20 PageID #:2
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 3 of 20 PageID #:3
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 4 of 20 PageID #:4
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 5 of 20 PageID #:5
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 6 of 20 PageID #:6
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 7 of 20 PageID #:7
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 8 of 20 PageID #:8
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 9 of 20 PageID #:9
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 10 of 20 PageID #:10
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 11 of 20 PageID #:11
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 12 of 20 PageID #:12
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 13 of 20 PageID #:13
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 14 of 20 PageID #:14
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 15 of 20 PageID #:15
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 16 of 20 PageID #:16
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 17 of 20 PageID #:17
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 18 of 20 PageID #:18
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 19 of 20 PageID #:19
Case: 1:12-cr-00411 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/31/12 Page 20 of 20 PageID #:20
#### DEMUTH GLASS MFG. CO., Appellant, v. ROYAL GLASS JAR & BOTTLE CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, "Second Department.

March 22, 1906.)

Action by the Demuth Glass Manufacturing Company ¿against the Royal Glass Jar & Bottle Company.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.
#### 2401.100 Scope of subpart.

This subpart describes the HUDAR and states its relationship to the FAR System. This subpart also provides the explanation of the purpose and the authorities under which the HUDAR is issued.
#### NICHOLS, Respondent, v. WHITEHALL LUMBER CO., Limited, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

November 11, 1903.)

Action by James E. Nichols, as trustee, etc., against the Whitehall Lumber Company, Limited.

No opinion. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.
#### First National Bank of East Hampton, Appellant, v Samuel T. Di Gate, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

— Order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated July 18, 1978, affirmed. No opinion. Appeal from a further order of the same court, dated September 28, 1978, dismissed. No appeal lies from an order denying reargument. Respondent is awarded one bill of $50 costs and disbursements. Gulotta, J. P., Shapiro, Cohalan and Hargett, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31(ii)
 SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Camco Financial Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light
of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this quarterly report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of Camco as of, and for, the periods presented in this
quarterly report;4.
    
    Camcos other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))
and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a 15(f) and
15d 15(f))for Camco and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to Camco, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;b.
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and
the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of Camcos disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusion about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this
annual report based on such evaluations; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in Camcos internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during Camcos fourth fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Camcos internal
control over financial reporting.
 5.
    
    Camcos other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of Camcos board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely
to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in Camcos internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date:  August 8, 2008
    By:

/s/ Kristina K. TiptonKristina K. Tipton, Principal Accounting Officer
# C_2016415EN.01000401.xml

| 11.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 415/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 415/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

10 November 2016

(2016/C 415/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0895 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 116,40 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4414 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87785 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,9090 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0762 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,0733 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,022 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 307,30 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3588 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5023 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,5280 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4336 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4689 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4495 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5132 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5348 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 264,88 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,1054 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,4065 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5045 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 473,88 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6883 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 53,358 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 69,6283 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,307 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,5815 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 22,0369 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,7085 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0895

JPY

Japanese yen

116,40

DKK

Danish krone

7,4414

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87785

SEK

Swedish krona

9,9090

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0762

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,0733

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,022

HUF

Hungarian forint

307,30

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3588

RON

Romanian leu

4,5023

TRY

Turkish lira

3,5280

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4336

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4689

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4495

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5132

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5348

KRW

South Korean won

1 264,88

ZAR

South African rand

15,1054

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,4065

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5045

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 473,88

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6883

PHP

Philippine peso

53,358

RUB

Russian rouble

69,6283

THB

Thai baht

38,307

BRL

Brazilian real

3,5815

MXN

Mexican peso

22,0369

INR

Indian rupee

72,7085

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
exh10_b1.htm


    A&B
EXCESS BENEFITS PLAN

    


    AMENDMENT NO.
1

    


    


    


    The
A&B Excess Benefits Plan, as amended and restated effective January 1, 2008,
hereinafter referred to as the “Plan,” is hereby amended effective January 1,
2008 as follows:

    


    
      	
              1.

            	
              Section
      3.01 is amended in its entirety to read as
  follows:

            


    

    


    


    “3.01           Eligibility.  Any employee of
A&B who is a participant in the A&B Retirement Plan or the A&B
Profit Sharing Plan and who is highly compensated or who is one of a select
group of management employees shall be eligible to participate in this
Plan.  However, an employee who is eligible for cash balance formula
benefits under the A&B Retirement Plan shall not be eligible for benefits
described under Section 4.01.”

    


    
      	
              2.

            	
              Except
      as modified by this Amendment, all terms and provisions of the Plan shall
      continue in full force and effect.

            


    

    


    IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, Alexander & Baldwin, Inc. has caused this Amendment to be
executed on its behalf by its duly authorized officers on this 9th day of
September, 2009.

    


    


    ALEXANDER
& BALDWIN, INC.

    


    By   /s/
Son-Jai Paik

    Its Vice President

    


    By   /s/
Alyson J. Nakamura

    Its Secretary
#### Hobby *et al. v.*Ashburn Lumber Company *et al.*

December 11, 1912.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Frank Park. Turner superior court. June 7, 1912.

*Z. Bass*and *Hay good &' Cutís,*for plaintiffs.

*John B. Hutcheson*and *A. S. Bussey,*for defendants.

Atkikson, J.

1. Assignments of error upon rulings of the court as to the admissibility of certain evidence were not referred to in the briefs of counsel for plaintiffs in error filed in the Supreme Court. Under repeated rulings of this court, such assignments of error will be treated as abandoned.

2. Under the pleadings and evidence the judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to grant an interlocutory injunction.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
# C_2017186EN.01000101.xml

| 10.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 186/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 186/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8404 — Volkswagen Financial Services/Logpay Financial Services/Logpay Transport Services)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 186/01)

On 4 May 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in German language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8404. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8404. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
#### 30.607 Subcontract administration.

When a negotiated CAS price adjustment or a determination of noncompliance is required at the subcontract level, the CFAO for the subcontractor shall furnish a copy of the negotiation memorandum or the determination to the CFAO for the contractor of the next higher-tier subcontractor. The CFAO of the contractor or the next higher-tier subcontractor shall not change the determination of the CFAO for the lower-tier subcontractor. If the subcontractor refuses to submit a GDM or DCI proposal, remedies are made at the prime contractor level.
**U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey**