alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

|                                        |
|----------------------------------------|
|                                        | PurposeFunding StatusEligibilityLaws, Regs, & GuidanceApplicant InfoResourcesAwardsFAQsPerformanceContacts |  |
| Office of Postsecondary Education Home |
|                                        |

**Who May Apply: (by category)** Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs)

**Who May Apply: (specifically)** Only eligible institutions designated by the Secretary of Education as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) are eligible to borrow from this program.  An eligible institution is a Title III Part B institution as defined in Section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA).

Section 322(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), defines an HBCU as "... any historically black college or university that was established prior to 1964, whose principal mission was, and is, the education of Black Americans, and that is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association determined by the Secretary  to be a reliable authority as to the quality of training offered or is, according to such an agency or association, making reasonable progress toward accreditation...."

It is  important to note that an institution does not receive a loan by only being a  HBCU.  The HBCU must meet credit criteria  such as showing the ability to repay all of its debts based on financial  analysis, providing enough collateral for the loan it seeks, and meeting loan  and bond covenants. 

Institutional Service Home

----

 

 Printable view

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - Higher Education Rulemaking
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Elevating Teaching
          - Early Learning
          - Engage Every Student
          - Unlocking Career Success
          - Cybersecurity

 

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a Grant

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works ClearinghouseOpen Data PlatformCOVID Relief Data

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy Program

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
          - vote.gov
Fourth Amendment to Savings and Investment Plan


 Exhibit 10.8d 
 FOURTH AMENDMENT 
 OF 
 FMC TECHNOLOGIES, INC. SAVINGS
AND INVESTMENT PLAN 
 WHEREAS, FMC Technologies, Inc. (the
“Company”) maintains the FMC Technologies, Inc. Savings and Investment Plan (the “Plan”); and 
 WHEREAS,
the Plan provision relating to Cashout of Small amounts states that if a Participant’s Account Balance is not larger than $5,000 the Account Balance will be paid in one lump sum to the Participant as soon as practicable after the
Participant’s separation from service, without his or her consent or the consent of his or her spouse.; 
 WHEREAS,
the Company now deems necessary and desirable to amend the Plan to eliminate Cashout of Small Amounts to be consistent with new IRS regulations related to the administrative handling of Cashout of Small Lump Sums if offered or required under the
Plan; and 
 NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the authority reserved to the Company by Section 10.1 of the Plan, the
Plan is hereby amended effective as of January 1, 2005 to eliminate Article VI, Section 6.1 that reads as follows: 
 Section 6.1. Cashout of Small Accounts is here by amended by deleting the following to the end thereof: 
 “Notwithstanding any other Plan provision, if a Participant’s Account Balance is not larger than $5,000 the Account Balance will be paid in one lump sum to the Participant as soon as practicable after the Participant’s
separation from service, without his or her consent or the consent of his or her spouse.” 
 IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the undersigned officer has executed the foregoing amendment on behalf of the Company, this 20th day of July 2005. 
  


			
	FMC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Michael W. Murray

		 	Vice President
		 	Human Resources
#### 32.1000 Scope of subpart.

This subpart provides policy and procedures for performance-based payments under noncommercial purchases pursuant to Subpart 32.1.

[72 FR 73220, Dec. 26, 2007]
# Predominantly Black Institutions (PBI) Program - Competitive Grants 

# FY 2016 Non-Competing Continuation (NCC) Awards

9/26/2016
2816.505 Ordering. ( a ) Justifications for exceptions to the fair opportunity process specified in FAR 16.505(b)(2) shall be approved in accordance with JAR 2806.304.
( b ) In accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(8), the DOJ task order and delivery order ombudsman is the DOJ Competition Advocate.
( c ) HCAs shall designate a bureau task order and delivery order ombudsman. This person may be the bureau Competition Advocate.
( d ) Bureau ombudsmen shall review and resolve complaints from contractors concerning task or delivery orders placed by the bureau.
( e ) Contractors not satisfied with the resolution of a complaint by a bureau ombudsman may request the DOJ ombudsman to review the complaint.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 14-1788

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Gonzalo Romero-Madera

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

 Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

____________

 Submitted: September 5, 2014

Filed: September 23, 2014

[Unpublished]

____________

Before MURPHY, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Gonzalo Romero-Madera appeals from the within-Guidelines-range sentence

that the District Court imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His counsel

1

The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the

1

Western District of Arkansas.
has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), challenging the reasonableness of Romero-Madera’s sentence. After careful

review, we conclude that the District Court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. 

See Gall v. United States, 552U.S. 38, 51 (2007) (describing appellate review of

sentencing decisions and noting that if a sentence is within the Guidelines range, the

court of appeals may apply a presumption of reasonableness). Further, having

independently reviewed the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. We therefore affirm the judgment

of the District Court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw subject to counsel

informing Romero-Madera about proceduresfor seeking rehearing orfiling a petition

for certiorari.

______________________________

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,579
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,469
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      7,133
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,066
<PP&E>                                           5,275
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,310
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  17,436
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,362
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           13,100
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,974
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,436
<SALES>                                         16,593
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                            8,670
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,755
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,332
<INCOME-TAX>                                       535
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       797
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08
        

</TABLE>
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 1 of 37 PageID #:1201
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 2 of 37 PageID #:1202
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 3 of 37 PageID #:1203
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 4 of 37 PageID #:1204
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 5 of 37 PageID #:1205
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 6 of 37 PageID #:1206
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 7 of 37 PageID #:1207
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 8 of 37 PageID #:1208
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 9 of 37 PageID #:1209
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 10 of 37 PageID #:1210
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 11 of 37 PageID #:1211
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 12 of 37 PageID #:1212
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 13 of 37 PageID #:1213
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 14 of 37 PageID #:1214
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 15 of 37 PageID #:1215
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 16 of 37 PageID #:1216
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 17 of 37 PageID #:1217
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 18 of 37 PageID #:1218
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 19 of 37 PageID #:1219
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 20 of 37 PageID #:1220
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 21 of 37 PageID #:1221
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 22 of 37 PageID #:1222
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 23 of 37 PageID #:1223
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 24 of 37 PageID #:1224
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 25 of 37 PageID #:1225
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 26 of 37 PageID #:1226
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 27 of 37 PageID #:1227
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 28 of 37 PageID #:1228
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 29 of 37 PageID #:1229
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 30 of 37 PageID #:1230
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 31 of 37 PageID #:1231
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 32 of 37 PageID #:1232
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 33 of 37 PageID #:1233
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 34 of 37 PageID #:1234
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 35 of 37 PageID #:1235
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 36 of 37 PageID #:1236
Case: 1:12-cv-02473 Document #: 160 Filed: 05/29/13 Page 37 of 37 PageID #:1237
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000714719
<NAME> FIRST COLONIAL GROUP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          11,949
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             835
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 3,600
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     59,049
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          20,054
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            20,188
<LOANS>                                        194,136
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,443
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 298,514
<DEPOSITS>                                     254,102
<SHORT-TERM>                                    13,096
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,906
<LONG-TERM>                                        643
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,355
<OTHER-SE>                                      17,412
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 298,514
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 16,896
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,861
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   139
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                21,896
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               8,332
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,252
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           12,644
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,798
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  22
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 11,204
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,916
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,401
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,401
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.98
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.72
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,181
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,115
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,187
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,758
<RECOVERIES>                                       216
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,443
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,443
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

RONALD DENNIS FERLINGERE, 

Petitioner, 

vs. 

THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF 

WASHOE; AND THE HONORABLE 

LIDIA STIGLICH, DISTRICT JUDGE, 

Respondents. 

No. 70441 

FILED 

JUN 2 0 2016 

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT 

OF PROHIBITION OR MANDAMUS 

This original pro se petition for a writ of prohibition or 

mandamus challenges a May 12, 2016, district court order, which appears 

to pertain to service by mail and respondents' continued jurisdiction over 

the underlying case. 

Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we 

are not persuaded that the district court exceeded its jurisdiction or 

arbitrarily or capriciously abused its discretion in entering the May 12 

order, a copy of which was not included with petitioner's supporting 

documents, or that a writ should issue to preclude respondent, the 

Honorable Lidia Stiglich, from exercising jurisdiction over the underlying 

case due to "lack of jurisdiction" or "fraud on the court." NRS 34.160; NRS 

34.320; NRAP 21(a)(4); Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Din. 

Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); Pan v. Eighth Judicial 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947k Ro-Fifis 
Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004); Smith v. Eighth 

Judicial Din. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). 

Accordingly, we 

ORDER the petition DENIED. 

Douglas 

Gibbons 

cc: Hon. Lidia Stiglich, District Judge 

Ronald Dennis Ferlingere 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A
#### 3452.216-71 Award-Term.

As prescribed in 3416.470, insert a clause substantially the same as the following in all solicitations and contracts where an award-term arrangement is anticipated:

# Award-Term (OCT 2023)

(a) The initial [insert initial contract term] contract term or ordering period may be extended or reduced on the basis of contractor performance, resulting in a contract term or an ordering period lasting at least [insert minimum contract term] years from the date of contract award, to a maximum of [insert maximum contract term] years after the date of contract award.

(b) The contractor's performance will be measured against stated standards by the performance monitors, who will report their findings to the Award Term Determining Official (or Board).

(c) Bilateral changes may be made to the award-term plan at any time. If agreement cannot be made within 60 days, the Government reserves the right to make unilateral changes prior to the start of an award-term period.

(d) The contractor will submit a brief written self-evaluation of its performance within X days after the end of the evaluation period. The self-evaluation report shall not exceed seven pages, and it may be considered in the Award Term Review Board's (ATRB's) (or Term Determining Official's) evaluation of the contractor's performance during this period.

(e) The contract term or ordering period requires bilateral modification to reflect the ATRB's decision. If the contract term or ordering period has one year remaining, the operation of the contract award-term feature will cease and the contract term or ordering period will not extend beyond the maximum term stated in the contract.

(f) Award terms that have not begun may be cancelled (rather than terminated), should the need for the items or services no longer exists. No equitable adjustments to the contract price are applicable, as this is not the same procedure as a termination for convenience.

(g) The decisions made by the ATRB or Term Determining Official may be made unilaterally. Alternate Dispute Resolution procedures shall be utilized when appropriate.

(End of clause)
3.502-1 Definitions. As used in this section— *Kickback,* means any money, fee, commission, credit, gift, gratuity, thing of value, or compensation of any kind which is provided to any prime contractor, prime contractor employee, subcontractor, or subcontractor employee for the purpose of improperly obtaining or rewarding favorable treatment in connection with a prime contract or in connection with a subcontract relating to a prime contract.
*Person,* means a corporation, partnership, business association of any kind, trust, joint-stock company, or individual.
*Prime contract,* means a contract or contractual action entered into by the United States for the purpose of obtaining supplies, materials, equipment, or services of any kind.
*Prime Contractor,* means a person who has entered into a prime contract with the United States.
*Prime Contractor employee,* as used in this section, means any officer, partner, employee, or agent of a prime contractor.
*Subcontract,* means a contract or contractural action entered into by a prime contractor or subcontractor for the purpose of obtaining supplies, materials, equipment, or services of any kind under a prime contract.
*Subcontractor* — ( 1 ) Means any person, other than the prime contractor, who offers to furnish or furnishes any supplies, materials, equipment, or services of any kind under a prime contract or a subcontract entered into in connection with such prime contract; and
( 2 ) Includes any person who offers to furnish or furnishes general supplies to the prime contractor or a higher tier subcontractor.
[52 FR 6121, Feb. 27, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 34226, Sept. 2, 1988; 66 FR 2127, Jan. 10, 2001; 79 FR 24196, Apr. 29, 2014; 84 FR 19840, May 6, 2019]
- Training Opportunities for TRIO Programs' Staff
- A Profile of the Federal TRIO Programs and Child Care Access Means Parents in School Program:  2008 MS Word (446K) | PDF (267K)
- The Office of Federal TRIO Programs partnered with the Educational Credit Management Corporation (ECMC) Foundation to distribute ***Realizing the College Dream***, a guide that supports teachers, counselors, and community-based organization staffs in their work to increase the expectations of attending college by low-income, first-generation college students and their families. A free copy of the guide can be downloaded at:  http://www.ecmcfoundation.org/index.html.
- Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Applicant and Grantee Resources

TRIO Home
236.303-1 Phase One. ( a ) (4) In lieu of the limitations on the maximum number of offerors that may be selected to submit phase-two proposals at FAR 36.303-1(a)(4), for DoD— ( i ) If the contract value exceeds $4.5 million, the maximum number of offerors specified in the solicitation that are to be selected to submit phase-two proposals shall not exceed five, unless— ( A ) The solicitation is issued for an indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity contract for design-build construction; or
( B ) The head of the contracting activity, delegable to a level no lower than the senior contracting official within the contracting activity, approves the contracting officer's decision with respect to an individual solicitation, that a maximum number greater than five is in the best interest of the Government and is consistent with the purposes and objectives of the two-phase selection procedures. The decision shall be documented in the contract file (10 U.S.C. 3241(d)).
( ii ) If the contract value is at or below $4.5 million, the maximum number of offerors specified in the solicitation that are to be selected to submit phase-two proposals is at the discretion of the contracting officer.
[84 FR 4373, Feb. 15, 2019, as amended at 85 FR 61504, Sept. 29, 2020; 87 FR 76995, Dec. 16, 2022]