alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Go to Content

U.S. Department of the InteriorBureau of ReclamationLower Colorado Region

Contact UsSite Index

LC Region Home Page

Area Offices

Regional Office Home

About Us

Programs & Activities

Water Operations

Facilities

Photos and Features

Employment 

Links

U.S. Department        of the Interior

Reclamation HomeReclamation OfficesNewsroomLibraryProjects & Facilities

**Colorado River Basin Water Supply & Demand Study  Interim Report No.1  Interim Report No. 1, which documents the Study’s progress through  January 31, 2011, was comprised of six elements:- Executive Summary:   Provided a summary of the Interim Report.  
- Status  Report:   Provided an overview of the Study  and summaries of the Technical Reports.    
-  Technical  Report A – Scenario Development:  Described the scenario planning approach  used to incorporate uncertainty in future water supply and demand.    
-  Technical  Report B – Water Supply Assessment:  Described the water supply scenarios  and presents the analysis and comparison of those scenarios.    
- Technical  Report C – Water Demand Assessment:  Described the water demand scenarios  currently under development and presents the historical consumptive use for the  period 1971 to 2008.    
- Technical  Report D – System Reliability Metrics:  Described the metrics that have been  identified for use in the assessment of reliability of the system to meet the  needs of the resources under future supply and demand scenarios. 

Note: All files are formatted as .pdf files and require Adobe Acrobat Reader to view.

Interim    Report No. 1

File    Size

Executive Summary

 466 KB

Status Report (and appendices)

1.9 MB

Technical Report A – Scenario Development (and appendices)

1.3 MB

Technical Report B – Water Supply Assessment                                       AppendicesUpdated February 2012

2.7 MB      4.8 MB      HTML page      

Technical Report C – Water Demand Assessment (and appendices)Technical Memorandum C - Quantification of Water Demand Scenarios - May 2012

2.8 MB      HTML page

Technical Report D – System Reliability Metrics (and appendices)Updated February 2012

1.2 MB        HTML page      
Comments were received on this report through July 8, 2011, in one of the following ways:    - E-mail to  ColoradoRiverBasinStudy@usbr.gov 
- U.S. mail to: Bureau of Reclamation                                  Attention: Ms. Pam Adams, LC-2721                         P.O. Box  61470                         Boulder City, NV 89006-1470 
- By  facsimile transmission to 702-293-8418
To request a printed or CD copy of the report, please contact: ColoradoRiverBasinStudy@usbr.govphone: 702-293-8500fax:  702-293-8418TTY/TDD Relay: Dial 711**Return to Colorado River Basin Study Home Page** 
Webmaster: sha-lcr-webcomments@usbr.gov
**
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6040

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WAYNE JOHNSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CR-99-119, CA-00-814)

Submitted: April 17, 2003 Decided: April 22, 2003

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wayne Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. John Staige Davis, V, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. An appeal may not be taken to this

court from the final order denying a motion under § 2255 unless a

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will

not issue for claims addressed by a district court on the merits

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell,

123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003). As to claims dismissed by a district

court solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability

will not issue unless the movant can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that

jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition

states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right’ and

(2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the

district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’” Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529

U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not

satisfied either standard. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Johnson’s motion to

expedite the appeal as moot. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
3

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1169 Introduced in House (IH)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1169

 To amend the Truth in Lending Act to prohibit issuers of credit cards 
   from limiting the ability of Federal, State, and local government 
   agencies to impose fees for honoring credit cards, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 8, 1995

  Mr. Moran introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Truth in Lending Act to prohibit issuers of credit cards 
   from limiting the ability of Federal, State, and local government 
   agencies to impose fees for honoring credit cards, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ACCEPTANCE OF CREDIT CARDS BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 2 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
1631 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 138. Acceptance of credit cards by governmental agencies
    ``(a) Prohibition on Limiting Ability To Impose Fees.--A card 
issuer shall not prohibit or otherwise limit the ability of Federal, 
State, or local governmental agencies to impose on the user of a credit 
card issued by the card issuer a fee for honoring the credit card.
    ``(b) Limitation on Amount of Fees.--A Federal, State, or local 
governmental agency shall not impose, for the use of a credit card to 
make a payment to the agency, any fee that is in excess of any amount 
that the agency is required to pay for that use to the card issuer.
    ``(c) Limitation on Payments for Which Fee May Be Imposed.--A 
Federal, State, or local governmental agency shall not impose a fee for 
the use of a credit card to make a payment to the agency, other than a 
payment of--
            ``(1) a tax;
            ``(2) a fine or other criminal or civil penalty;
            ``(3) a motor vehicle or other registration fee; or
            ``(4) a fee charged for the performance of any other 
        inherently governmental function.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
that chapter is amended by adding at the end the following:

``138. Acceptance of credit cards by governmental agencies.''.
                                 <all>
```
IV

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 85

Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for an event sponsored by the

American Iron and Steel Institute to demonstrate the use of steel building materials in the construction of residential homes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 20, 1995

Mr. QUINN (for himself, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mr. CREMEANS, Mr. HOLDEN, Ms.

KAPTUR, Mr. DOYLE, Mr. HOKE, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mr. SHUSTER,

Mr. RAHALL, Mr. CHRYSLER, Mr. EVANS, Mr. MASCARA, Mr. BEVILL,

Mr. DURBIN, Mr. MCHALE, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mrs. THURMAN, and Mr.

WISE) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for an event

sponsored by the American Iron and Steel Institute to

demonstrate the use of steel building materials in the

construction of residential homes.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. USE OF THE CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR AMER4 ICAN IRON AND STEEL INSTITUTE EVENT.

5 The American Iron and Steel Institute shall be per6 mitted to sponsor a public event on the Capitol Grounds
2

•HCON 85 IH

1 on September 1, 1995, or on such other date as the Speak2 er of the House of Representatives and the President pro

3 tempore of the Senate may jointly designate, to dem4 onstrate the use of steel building materials in the con5 struction of residential homes.

6 SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

7 The event to be carried out under this resolution shall

8 be free of admission charge to the public and arranged

9 not to interfere with the needs of Congress, under condi10 tions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and

11 the Capitol Police. The American Iron and Steel Institute

12 shall assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabil13 ities incident to all activities associated with the event.

14 SEC. 3. STRUCTURE AND EQUIPMENT.

15 For purposes of this resolution, the American Iron

16 and Steel Institute is authorized to erect upon the Capitol

17 Grounds, subject to the approval of the Architect of the

18 Capitol, a single level steel frame structure and such other

19 structures and equipment as may be necessary for the

20 event to be carried out under this resolution.

21 SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

22 The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police

23 Board are authorized to make any such additional ar24 rangement that may be required to carry out the event

25 under this resolution.
3

•HCON 85 IH

1 SEC. 5. LIMITATIONS ON REPRESENTATIONS.

2 The American Iron and Steel Institute (including its

3 members) shall not represent, either directly or indirectly,

4 that this resolution or any activity carried out under this

5 resolution in any way constitutes approval or endorsement

6 by the Federal Government of the American Iron and

7 Steel Institute (or its members) or any product or service

8 offered by the American Iron and Steel Institute (or its

9 members).

Æ
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2504

AN ACT

To designate the Federal Building located at the

Baley Federal Complex’’.in Asheville, North Carolina, as the ‘‘VeachUnited States Courthouse located on Otis Street,corner of Patton Avenue and Otis Street, and the
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2504

AN ACT

To designate the Federal Building located at the corner

of Patton Avenue and Otis Street, and the United States

Courthouse located on Otis Street, in Asheville, North

Carolina, as the ‘‘Veach-Baley Federal Complex’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 2504 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The Federal building located at the corner of Patton

3 Avenue and Otis Street, and the United States Courthouse

4 located on Otis Street, in Asheville, North Carolina, shall

5 be known and designated as the ‘‘Veach-Baley Federal

6 Complex’’.

7 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

8 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

9 paper, or other record of the United States to the build10 ings referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a ref11 erence to the ‘‘Veach-Baley Federal Complex’’.

Passed the House of Representatives December 18

(legislative day, December 15), 1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 248.2 Delegation of authority to issue substitute checks.

Pursuant to authority contained in section 3646 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, and subject to such procedural requirements as may be prescribed by the Treasury Department, there is hereby delegated to heads of departments and agencies whose disbursing officers issue depositary checks, authority to authorize officers or employees of their respective departments or agencies to issue substitutes of such checks, prior to the close of the fiscal year next following the fiscal year in which the checks are issued, and to receive and approve undertakings to indemnify the United States in such cases. The Commissioner of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Treasury Department, is hereby delegated authority to issue substitutes of depositary checks drawn by the Director, Operations Group, Treasury Department, or by officers disbursing under delegation from the Director, Operations Group, and to receive and approve undertakings of indemnity in such cases. The authority delegated to the Commissioner of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service may be redelegated by him to such disbursing officers.

[39 FR 20969, June 17, 1974, as amended at 49 FR 47001, 47002, Nov. 30, 1984]
February 13 , 2017

Mr. Mark Baker

President and C hief Executive Office r Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association 421 Aviation Way

Frederick

, MD 21701

Mr. Jack Pelton

Chief Executive Office r & Chairman of the Board Experimental Aircraft Association

3000 Po berezny Road Oshkosh, WI 54902

Dear Mr. Baker and Mr. Pelton :

Th is is a response to your letter posted to the public docket on March 22, 2012, docket

number FAA

- 2012

- 0350

, petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf

of the Aircraft Ow ners and Pilots Association (AOPA) and the Experimental Aircraft

Association (EAA) for an exemption from § § 61.3 and 61.23 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations ( 14 CFR)

. That exemption, if granted, would allow members represented by

AOPA and EAA to ope rate aircraft recreationally without having to hold an FAA

- issued medical certificate of any class under certain operation al limitations and restrictions

.

The Federal Aviation Administration Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 (Public

Law 114

- 190 ) (FESSA) was enacted on July 15, 2016. Section 2307 of the FESSA, Medical certification of certain small aircraft pilots , directed the FAA to issue or revise regulations to

ensure that an individual may operate as pilot

- in

- command (PIC) of a covered airc raft if the pilot and aircraft meet certain prescribed conditions

. The FAA was required to codify the

relief in FESSA no later than 180 days. A copy of Public Law 114

- 190 is enclosed for your

information.

On Ja nuary 10, 2017, the FAA issued the Medical Ce rtification of Small Aircraft Pilot (BasicMed) final rule (Docket No. FAA

- 2016

- 9157 ) allowing general aviation pilots to fly without holding an FAA medical certificate under certain circumstances outlined in Public

Law 111

- 190. Effective May 1, 2017, those pilots may t ake advantage of the regulatory relief2

in the BasicMed rule or opt to continue to use their FAA medical certification. A copy of

BasicMed is enclosed for your information.

Because the relief you seek is now covered under the new rule, we will take no further action on your petition.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan Director, Flight Standards Service
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Additional Steps Taken to Impose Visa Restrictions in Response to Anti-Democratic Actions in Guatemala

# 											Additional Steps Taken to Impose Visa Restrictions in Response to Anti-Democratic Actions in Guatemala									

Press Statement

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

December 11, 2023

The United States stands with those seeking to safeguard democracy and rule of law in Guatemala and ensure that the will of the Guatemalan people is respected.  Under Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, we are taking steps to impose visa restrictions on nearly 300 Guatemalan nationals, including over 100 members of the Guatemalan congress, as well as private sector representatives and their family members for undermining democracy and the rule of law.  The United States will continue to take steps to impose such restrictions on any individuals who undermine Guatemala’s democracy. 

The United States strongly condemns ongoing anti-democratic actions by Guatemala’s Public Ministry and other malign actors who undermine Guatemala’s rule of law.  Most recently, the Public Ministry’s announcement of arrest warrants for electoral workers and party representatives, its request to remove the immunity of President-elect Arévalo, and its attempts to annul electoral results constitute evidence of its clear intent to delegitimize Guatemala’s free and fair elections and prevent the peaceful transition of power. These actions are plainly inconsistent with the Inter American Democratic Charter. 

These brazen measures follow a long list of other anti-democratic actions including: the lifting of immunity of electoral magistrates, the political targeting of opposition members, the intimidation of peaceful protestors, raids on storage facilities housing election result records, and the opening of ballot boxes.

Today’s actions reinforce previous measures by the U.S. government to promote accountability for corrupt and undemocratic actors in Guatemala and to support the will of the Guatemalan people. The Guatemalan people have spoken.  Their voices must be respected.

Tags

Anti-Corruption and TransparencyBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborBureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsDemocracyElectionsGuatemalaHuman Rights and DemocracyOffice of the SpokespersonVisas

Back to Top
#### MARIA L. OVERTON ET AL. v. THE UNITED STATES.

[Not reported in C. Cls. R.; 239 TJ. S. R., 658.]

*On the plaintiffs appeal.*

No opinion was delivered by the court below. Defendants’ demurrer was sustained and petition dismissed. On appeal reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings December 9,1915.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Assistant Secretary Nichols’ Travel to Brazil

# 									Assistant Secretary Nichols’ Travel to Brazil							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

May 18, 2023

Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs Brian A. Nichols will travel to Brazil, May 21-26.  In Brasília, Assistant Secretary Nichols will participate in the U.S.-Brazil Human Rights Dialogue and in meetings on the U.S.-Brazil Joint Action Plan to Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Discrimination and Promote Equality (JAPER).  He will also participate in a groundbreaking ceremony for the new U.S. embassy building.  In São Paulo, Assistant Secretary Nichols will meet with business and industry leaders.  He will speak at the Fundacão Getulio Vargas law school.  In Recife, Assistant Secretary Nichols will engage with human rights defenders, Afro-Brazilian leaders, and LGBTQI+ rights organizations.

For further information, please contact WHAPress@state.gov, and follow @WHAAsstSecty on Twitter.

Tags

BrazilBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborBureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsDiscriminationHuman RightsLGBT RightsOffice of the SpokespersonOfficial International Travel

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Avanir Pharmaceuticals;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of
registrants Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Dated: August 8, 2008
    
    /s/ Christine G. OcampoChristine G. OcampoVice President, Finance[Principal Financial and Accounting Officer]
HomeReports – Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor...Advancing Freedom and Democracy

# 									Advancing Freedom and Democracy							

October 27, 2022

## 								Summary							

        -  The Advancing Freedom and Democracy Report describes efforts by the U.S. Government to support democracy and human rights in nondemocratic countries and countries undergoing democratic transitions worldwide. The U.S. Department of State submits this report in accordance with the ADVANCE Democracy Act of 2007. 

**October 2022** – Annual Report on Advancing Freedom and Democracy [436 KB]

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top