alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Program Instructions

AoA-PI-97-04 - June 16, 1997

TO : STATE AGENCIES ON AGING ADMINISTERING PLANS UNDER TITLE III OF THE OLDER 

AMERICANS ACT, AS AMENDED 

SUBJECT : Certification on Maintenance of Effort for Fiscal Year 1996

LEGAL AND RELATED

REFERENCES : 45 CFR 1321.49; and Section 309(c) of the Older Americans Act, as Amended

This program instruction requests the authorized official in each state agency on aging to submit a 

certification on maintenance of effort under Title III of the Older Americans Act for fiscal year 1996. As 

set forth in 45 CFR 1321.49, the state agency maintenance of effort level is to be determined 

annually:

"In order to avoid a penalty, each fiscal year the State Agency, to meet the required nonfederal share 

applicable to its allotments under this part, shall spend under the State plan for both services and 

administration at least the average amount of state funds it spent under the plan for the three 

previous fiscal years. If the State Agency spends less than this amount, the Assistant Secretary 

reduces the State's allotments for supportive and nutrition services under this part by a percentage 

equal to the percentage by which the State reduced its expenditures."

In reporting the amount of state expenditures for the maintenance of effort requirement, states may 

include expenditures incurred under the cost allocation plan for the state agency. The authorized 

official in each state agency is requested to certify to the Administration on Aging the amount of state 

resources expended in fiscal year 1996 to meet the maintenance of effort requirements under Title III 

of the Older Americans Act, and whether that amount was or was not equal to the required 

maintenance of effort level.

Attached is a certification form which has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). The certification form must be signed by the authorized state agency official and submitted to 

the Regional Administrators, Administration on Aging, no later than July 31, 1997.

DUE DATE : Due July 31, 1997, to Regional Administrators, Administration on Aging.

ATTACHMENT : Certification of Maintenance of Effort Form OMB-0980-0180

INQUIRIES : State agencies should address inquiries to Regional Administrators, Administration on 

Aging, HHS regional offices.
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant

Secretary for Aging
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO



In connection with the Quarterly Report of China Broadband Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "Report"), I, Matthew Heysel, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)	The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: November 12, 2002 | By: | /s/ MATTHEW HEYSELName:	Matthew Heysel
Title:	Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|----------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 99.1





In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of StorageNetworks, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that: (1) the Report fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





By:

/s/    PETER W.
BELLPeter W. Bell Chief Executive
Officer





Dated: November 13 , 2002





By:

/s/    PAUL C.
FLANAGANPaul C. Flanagan Chief
Financial Officer





Dated: November 13, 2002
#### § 779.514 Period for preserving records.

Basic records, such as payroll records, certificates issued or required under the Act, and employment agreements and other basic records must be preserved for at least 3 years. Supplementary records such as time and earnings cards or sheets, wage rate tables, work time schedules, or order, shipping and billing records, and similar records need be preserved for only 2 years.
Editorial Note on Part 101
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 101 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35009, June 19, 2008.

§ 101.510 Assessment tools. Ports, vessels, and facilities required to conduct security assessments by part 103, 104, 105, or 106 of this subchapter may use any assessment tool that meets the standards set out in part 103, 104, 105, or 106, as applicable. These tools may include USCG assessment tools, which are available from the cognizant COTP or at *https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/NVIC/*, as set out in the following: ( a ) Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular titled, “Guidelines for Port Security Committees, and Port Security Plans Required for U.S. Ports” (NVIC 9-02 series);
( b ) Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular titled, “Security Guidelines for Vessels”, (NVIC 10-02 change 1); and
( c ) Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular titled, “Security Guidelines for Facilities”, (NVIC 11-02 change 1).
[USCG-2012-0306, 77 FR 37313, June 21, 2012, as amended by USCG-2013-0397, 78 FR 39173, July 1, 2013; USCG-2022-0323, 88 FR 10028, Feb. 16, 2023]
### Compilation of records of surface waters of the United States through September 1950: Part 11-A. Pacific slope basins in California, except Central Valley

By: J. V. B. Wells

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1315B

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 2**                            (3724 pdf)                        
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
SERVED: June 16, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

SHARP 29 CORP 

dba Aloha State Sales Co., Inc. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA 2013- 1084 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter referred to· as "Complainant") 

filed a Complaint dated March 6, 2014. Sharp 29 Corp. (hereinafter referred to as 

"Respondent") filed a Request for Hearing on February 23, 2014. Respondent filed a 

Request to withdraw Request for Hearing dated June 5, 2014. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Request to Withdraw Request for 

Hearing/ Answer having been read and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. Respondent's Request to Withdraw Request for Hearing be and is hereby 

granted; and 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment- Service List 

1 
SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

James Shaip, Vice President 

Sharp 29 Corporation, 

ONE COPY 

d/b/a Aloha State Sales, Inc., Respondent 

2909 Ualena Street 

Honolulu, HI 96819 

TEL: 808-844-2929 

FAX: 808-839-5412 

Lisa J. Toscano, Complainant's Counsel. 

Office of the Regional Counsel, WesternPacific Region, A WP-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009..:2007 

TEL: 310-725-7110 

FAX: 310-725-6816 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 · 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-1084 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal. 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

. 2
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 520 

Designating May 16, 2008, as ‘‘Endangered Species Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 17, 2008 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Ms. COLLINS, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. LIEBERMAN, 

Mrs. CLINTON, Mr. KERRY, Mr. BROWN, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. LEVIN, Mrs. 

BOXER, and Mr. FEINGOLD) submitted the following resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating May 16, 2008, as ‘‘Endangered Species Day’’. 

Whereas, in the United States and around the world, more 

than 1,000 species are officially designated as at risk of 

extinction and thousands more also face a heightened 

risk of extinction; 

Whereas the actual and potential benefits that may be derived from many species have not yet been fully discovered and would be permanently lost if not for conservation efforts; 

Whereas recovery efforts for species such as the whooping 

crane, Kirtland’s warbler, the peregrine falcon, the gray 

wolf, the gray whale, the grizzly bear, and others have resulted in great improvements in the viability of such species; 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 520 IS 

Whereas saving a species requires a combination of sound research, careful coordination, and intensive management 

of conservation efforts, along with increased public 

awareness and education; 

Whereas 2⁄3 of endangered or threatened species reside on 

private lands; 

Whereas voluntary cooperative conservation programs have 

proven to be critical to habitat restoration and species recovery; and 

Whereas education and increasing public awareness are the 

first steps in effectively informing the public about endangered species and species restoration efforts: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates May 16, 2008, as ‘‘Endangered 

3 Species Day’’; 

4 (2) encourages schools to spend at least 30 

5 minutes on Endangered Species Day teaching and 

6 informing students about— 

7 (A) threats to endangered species around 

8 the world; and 

9 (B) efforts to restore endangered species, 

10 including the essential role of private land11 owners and private stewardship in the protec12 tion and recovery of species; 

13 (3) encourages organizations, businesses, pri14 vate landowners, and agencies with a shared interest 

15 in conserving endangered species to collaborate in 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•SRES 520 IS 

1 developing educational information for use in 

2 schools; and 

3 (4) encourages the people of the United 

4 States— 

5 (A) to become educated about, and aware 

6 of, threats to species, success stories in species 

7 recovery, and opportunities to promote species 

8 conservation worldwide; and 

9 (B) to observe the day with appropriate 

10 ceremonies and activities. 

Æ 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 By Notice dated April 25, 2011, and published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on May 4, 2011, 76 FR 25375, Rhodes Technologies, 498 Washington Street, Coventry, Rhode Island 02816, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances: Drug
ScheduleTetrahydrocannabinols (7370)
IMethylphenidate (1724)
IICodeine (9050)
IIDihydrocodeine (9120)
IIOxycodone (9143)
IIHydromorphone (9150)
IIHydrocodone (9193)
IIOripavine (9330)
IIThebaine (9333)
IIOxymorphone (9652)
IINoroxymorphone (9668)
IIFentanyl (9801)
II
 The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for conversion and sale to dosage form manufacturers. No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Rhodes Technologies to manufacture the listed basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has investigated Rhodes Technologies to ensure that the company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed. Dated: August 10, 2011. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. 2011-21080 Filed 8-17-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
**Exhibit 31.1**

CERTIFICATION OFPRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Steve Curd,Chief Executive Officer of VantageMed Corporation, certify that:

1.      I havereviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of VantageMed Corporation;

2.      Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.      Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.      Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)    designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)   evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)    disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.      Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors:

(a)    allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information ; and

(b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
|                             | /s/ STEVE CURD           |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------|
|                        | Steve Curd               |
|                        | Chief Executive  Officer |
| Dated:  March 31, 2006 |                     |

 

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ESMERALDA MARISOL MUNOZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 12-72937

Agency No. A099-828-392

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 13, 2014** 

Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Esmeralda Marisol Munoz, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro

se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary dismissal of

her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for

asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. 

FILED

MAY 19 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an abuse of

discretion the BIA’s summary dismissal of an appeal. Singh v. Gonzales, 416 F.3d

1006, 1009 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for

review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in summarily dismissing Munoz’s

appeal because she failed to file a brief or statement as she indicated on her Notice

of Appeal, and the Notice of Appeal itself lacked sufficient specificity regarding

the grounds for appeal. See Singh v. Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1152, 1157 (9th Cir. 2004)

(“The BIA simply cannot evaluate the merits of an appeal unless the petitioner

clearly expresses what he considers to be the factual and/or legal inadequacies of

the IJ’s challenged decision.”). We reject Munoz’s contention that the BIA failed

to sufficiently articulate the reasons for its decision.

We lack jurisdiction to review Munoz’s contentions regarding the merits of

her claims. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

2 12-72937
§ 110.81 Muskegon Lake, Mich. ( a ) *Muskegon Lake West.* The waters of the southwest side of Muskegon Lake enclosed by a line beginning at latitude 43°13′24′′ N., longitude 86°19′18.5′′ W.; thence 145°T to latitude 43°13′07.5′′ N., longitude 86°19′02.5′′ W.; thence 230°T to latitude 43°13′04′′ N., longitude 86°19′08.5′′ W.; thence along the shoreline to the point of origin.
( b ) *Muskegon Lake East.* The waters of the southeast side of Muskegon Lake enclosed by a line beginning at latitude 43°14′04′′ N., longitude 86°15′47′′ W.; thence 277°T to latitude 43°14′06.5′′ N., longitude 86°16′27′′ W.; thence 205°T to the shore; thence along the shoreline to the point of origin.
Note:
Administration of the Special Anchorage Area is exercised by the City of Muskegon pursuant to local ordinances.
[CGD 79-171, 46 FR 48195, Oct. 1, 1981]