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

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

**Who May Apply: (by category** Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), Local Education Agencies (LEAs), Nonprofit Organizations,Other Organizations and/or Agencies, State Education Agencies (SEAs)

**Who May Apply: (specifically)** Institutions of Higher Education, public and private agencies and organizations including community-based organizations with experience in serving disadvantaged youth, combinations of such institutions, agencies and organizations, and as appropriate to the purposes of the program; secondary schools.

Participants must reside in the target area served by an Educational Opportunity Center.  The students must be at least 19 years old and two-thirds of them must be potential first-generation college students and low-income persons.  If the services of a Talent Search program are not available in the target area, persons under 19 may be served.

TRIO Home
 Printable view  Last Modified: 09/29/2009How Do I Find...- Student loans, forgiveness
- College accreditation
- Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
- FERPA
- FAFSA
- 1098, tax forms

More >
Information About...- Transforming Teaching
- Family and Community Engagement
- Early Learning

 
No Related Topics Found*Our mission* is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers
Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a GrantEligibility for Grants
Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website
Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works Clearinghouse
About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy ProgramSubscribe to E-Mail Updates- Notices
- FOIA
- Privacy Policy
- Accessibility
- Security
- Information quality
- Inspector General
- Whitehouse.gov
- USA.gov
- Benefits.gov
- Regulations.gov
# C_2020216EN.01000401.xml

| 30.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

29 June 2020

(2020/C 216/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1284 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 121,07 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4531 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,91540 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4780 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0669 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 155,40 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,9013 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,848 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 356,30 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,4664 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,8440 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 7,7351 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6406 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5409 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7456 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7533 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5708 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 352,81 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 19,4262 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,9841 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5690 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 213,08 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8352 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,258 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 78,9169 |
| THB | Thai baht | 34,845 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 6,1105 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 25,9230 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 85,1920 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1284

JPY

Japanese yen

121,07

DKK

Danish krone

7,4531

GBP

Pound sterling

0,91540

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4780

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0669

ISK

Iceland króna

155,40

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,9013

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,848

HUF

Hungarian forint

356,30

PLN

Polish zloty

4,4664

RON

Romanian leu

4,8440

TRY

Turkish lira

7,7351

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6406

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5409

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7456

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7533

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5708

KRW

South Korean won

1 352,81

ZAR

South African rand

19,4262

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,9841

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5690

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 213,08

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8352

PHP

Philippine peso

56,258

RUB

Russian rouble

78,9169

THB

Thai baht

34,845

BRL

Brazilian real

6,1105

MXN

Mexican peso

25,9230

INR

Indian rupee

85,1920

---

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

---
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2012-1202 Directorate Identifier: 2012-NE-38-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

BR700 disk life 

reduction n 

replacemnt

20.0 $1,700.0

0

$0 $1,700.00 255 $433,500.00

reduction of disk 

life estimated cost

disk cost is 

$205,000 with a 

life reduction from 

15k or more down 

to 14K

is a 6.6% loss

$ 0.00 $13,500 $13,500.00 255 $3,442,500.0

0

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $3,876,000

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:
Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): ASE Estimate

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
36.609-1 Design within funding limitations. ( a ) The Government may require the architect-engineer contractor to design the project so that construction costs will not exceed a contractually specified dollar limit (funding limitation). If the price of construction proposed in response to a Government solicitation exceeds the construction funding limitation in the architect-engineer contract, the firm shall be solely responsible for redesigning the project within the funding limitation. These additional services shall be performed at no increase in the price of this contract. However, if the cost of proposed construction is affected by events beyond the firm's reasonable control (e.g., if there is an increase in material costs which could not have been anticipated, or an undue delay by the Government in issuing a construction solicitation), the firm shall not be obligated to redesign at no cost to the Government. If a firm's design fails to meet the contractual limitation on construction cost and the Government determines that the firm should not redesign the project, a written statement of the reasons for that determination shall be placed in the contract file.
( b ) The amount of the construction funding limitation (to be inserted in paragraph (c) of the clause at 52.236-22) is to be established during negotiations between the contractor and the Government. This estimated construction contract price shall take into account any statutory or other limitations and exclude any allowances for Government supervision and overhead and any amounts set aside by the Government for contingencies. In negotiating the amount, the contracting officer should make available to the contractor the information upon which the Government has based its initial construction estimate and any subsequently acquired information that may affect the construction costs.
( c ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.236-22, Design Within Funding Limitations, in fixed-price architect-engineer contracts except when ( 1 ) the head of the contracting activity or a designee determines in writing that cost limitations are secondary to performance considerations and additional project funding can be expected, if necessary,
( 2 ) the design is for a standard structure and is not intended for a specific location, or
( 3 ) there is little or no design effort involved.
[48 FR 42356, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 26903, June 28, 1985]
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

ALAN BOYD CURTIS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D19-127 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. )

) Opinion filed September 16, 2020. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Chris Helinger, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Richard J. Sanders, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and C. Todd Chapman, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. KHOUZAM, C.J., and BLACK, J., and CASE, JAMES R., ASSOCIATE SENIOR JUDGE, Concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 219 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 219

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
 United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Health 
 and Human Services relating to ``Supporting the Head Start Workforce 
                 and Consistent Quality Programming''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 13, 2024

Mr. Palmer submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred 
            to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
 United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Health 
 and Human Services relating to ``Supporting the Head Start Workforce 
                 and Consistent Quality Programming''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Department of Health and Human Services relating 
to ``Supporting the Head Start Workforce and Consistent Quality 
Programming'' (89 Fed. Reg. 67720; published August 21, 2024), and such 
rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
Order entered August 1 6 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 16

- 00298

- CR

MONTRANCE TYRONE ROB ERSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F15

- 51843

- N



### O RDER

The reporter’s record has not been filed in this appeal

. The Court ORDERS the trial

court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant has been deprived of the reporter’s

record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any other reason.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s re cord. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective
represen tation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact,
any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date

of this order.
The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal

shall be reinstated thi rty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
#### Ross-Gaffney, Inc., for Itself and as Assignee of Cinema Recording Corporation, et al., Appellants, et al., Plaintiff, v Noah Production Company, Respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered June 2, 1977, which, *inter alia,*granted defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, without costs or disbursements, to the extent of denying the cross motion and, except, as thus modified, affirmed. Special Term’s grant of the cross motion was based on a provision of the agreement of November, 1968 by which plaintiffs, as creditors of defendant, delegated to one Ross "the irrevocable authority and power to deal with Noah [the defendant] on their behalf with regard to the subject matter of this Agreement and [Ross represented] that he shall not be required to consult with the other creditors in the exercise of this power.” It was further provided that Ross’ "written authorizations shall be deemed *821those of all creditors, insofar as the performance of this agreement or any amendments thereof are concerned.” This same agreement acknowledged defendant’s respective indebtedness to plaintiffs, and is the basis of the complaint. The agreement also provided that defendant’s obligations were deferred to "no later than October 1, 1970.” Ross, however, states that he extended the due date, and subordinated plaintiffs’ claims to those of subsequent creditors. Thus, Special Term concluded that the complaint failed to state a cause of action. The letter, however, by which Ross professes to have deferred the due date, does not mention the date to which the obligation to pay was extended. In the absence of a specific date upon which the indebtedness was to be paid, the so-called extension may be void for indefiniteness. (See *Consolidated Film Ind. v Talking Picture Epics,*236 App Div 422.) It may be that Ross orally extended the time for payment to a date certain, but this presents an issue of fact, as does the threshold question of whether Ross had the authority to extend the due date, and, if so, for what duration. The cross motion should have been denied. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Lane, Markewich, Silverman and Bloom, JJ.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Addressing and Preventing Adult Sexual Misconduct in the School Setting Training      

# Resource: Addressing and Preventing Adult Sexual Misconduct in the School Setting Training

This training is designed to help education agencies learn about preventing and addressing adult sexual misconduct (ASM) in the school setting to protect students. After completing this course, participants will be able to: 
                  -  Define ASM  
                  -  Recognize ASM in a school setting  
                  -  Identify when reporting potential ASM in a school setting is required  
                  -  Describe the federally recommended six-step planning process for addressing and preventing ASM  

**Learn more.**
#### 2811.603 Procedures.

The HCA or designee is the agency head for the purposes of FAR 11.603.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 35 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 35

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
require individuals to demonstrate cognitive competence as a condition 
         of holding the office of President or Vice President.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 21, 2023

  Mr. DesJarlais submitted the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
require individuals to demonstrate cognitive competence as a condition 
         of holding the office of President or Vice President.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. No person shall be eligible to hold the office of 
President or Vice President unless the person demonstrates cognitive 
competence.
    ``Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article 
through appropriate legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
IIB 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 136 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2024 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘MultiPollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 

and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

HJ 136 RFS 

1 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the En2 vironmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘Multi-Pollut3 ant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later 

4 Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles’’ (89 Fed. Reg. 

5 27842 (April 18, 2024)), and such rule shall have no force 

6 or effect. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 20, 

2024. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
# CI2021034EN.01000101.xml

| 1.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 34/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 34/1

---

SIT 2021 – Call for proposals

Ideas that change the world: the EIBI’s 2021 Social Innovation Tournament

(2021/C 34 I/01)

EIB Institute organises its tenth Social Innovation Tournament

The SIT promotes innovative ideas and rewards initiatives that create social and environmental impact, covering projects in a wide range of fields – from education, healthcare and job creation, to new technologies, systems and processes. All projects compete for two prizes in a General Category, and projects addressing this year’s topic of sustainable living will also compete for two prizes in the Special Category. To mark the tenth anniversary of the SIT, winning projects in both categories will be awarded a first or second prize of EUR 75 000 or EUR 30 000 respectively, and an Audience Choice Award of EUR 10 000.

Follow us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/EibInstitute

For further information on this tournament and how to submit an innovative proposal, go to: http://institute.eib.org/programmes/social/social-innovation-tournament/

---
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Structure of pre-Cenozoic rocksin the vicinity of Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada--a potentialnuclear-waste disposal site**
 
Report | Plates: 01
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:1647
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000963909
 
October 18, 2018