alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    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 the Interior

###### National Park Service 

                    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-109 section 102(c)), the National Park Service (NPS) is preparing an                           ( print page 35663)                        Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Lower East Side Tenement National Historic Site (NHS), located in the city of Borough of Manhattan, New York, New York. The purpose of the EA is to assess the environmental consequences of alternative management strategies that will be described in the general management plan for Lower East Side Tenement NHS. A number of alternatives will be formulated for cultural resource protection, visitor use and interpretation, facilities development, and operations.                 

The NPS will hold a public meeting June 14, 2000 that will provide an opportunity for public input into the scoping for the GMP/EA. The meeting will begin at 7:00 PM, at the Lower East Side Tenement Museum, 97 Orchard Street, New York, New York. 

The purpose of this meeting is to obtain both written and verbal comments concerning the future direction and development of Lower East Side NHS. Those persons who wish to comment verbally or in writing or who require further information should contact Ruth Abram, President, Lower East Side Tenement Museum. 66 Allen Street, New York, New York 10002, (212) 431-0233 Ext. 212. 

The draft GMP/EA is expected to be completed and available for public review in fall 2000. After public and interagency review of the draft document comments will be considered, and a final EA followed by a Record of Decision will be prepared. 

Dated: May 15, 2000. 

Thomas Dyer, 

Chief of Planning, Northeast Region Development Office. 

[FR Doc. 00-13911 Filed 6-2-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Internet
Cable Corporation
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0001075202
<NAME>         Internet Cable Corporation

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                      MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                               989,264
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                      1,857,294
<ALLOWANCES>                        (235,000)
<INVENTORY>                          354,039
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   3,146,647
<PP&E>                               997,054
<DEPRECIATION>                      (101,469)
[OTHER-ASSETS]                     7,349,059
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    11,391,291
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              2,038,295
<BONDS>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                              10,213
<OTHER-SE>                         9,613,312
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      11,391,291
<SALES>                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   2,424,573
<CGS>                              1,608,170
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      1,774,463
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      43,752
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     5,123
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (1,006,935)
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (1,006,935)
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      400,136
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                      (1,407,071)
<EPS-BASIC>                             (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (.14)



</TABLE>
#### § 553.232 Overtime pay requirements.

If a public agency pays employees subject to section 7(k) for overtime hours worked in cash wages rather than compensatory time off, such wages must be paid at one and one-half times the employees' regular rates of pay. In addition, employees who have accrued the maximum 480 hours of compensatory time must be paid cash wages of time and one-half their regular rates of pay for overtime hours in excess of the maximum for the work period set forth in § 553.230.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-40621

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN CARLOS RUIZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-00-CR-578-3

--------------------

May 8, 2002

Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Carlos Ruiz appeals from a guilty-plea conviction for

smuggling an illegal alien in the United States in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1324(a). Ruiz argues that the district court erred in

adding eight levels to his base offense level for a death that

occurred during the course of the offense. See U.S.S.G. 

§ 2L1.1(b)(6)(4). 

We review the district court’s application of the Sentencing
No. 01-40621

-2-

Guidelines de novo and findings of fact for clear error. See

United States v. Paul, 274 F.3d 155, 161 (5th Cir. 2001). The

record in Ruiz’s case establishes by a preponderance of the

evidence that the eight-level increase was justified. See id. at

164. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence of the district

court is AFFIRMED.
Joint Meeting of the 

RAISE & SGRG Advisory Councils 

July 27, 2023 

To turn on closed captioning, click the “CC” icon 

at the bottom of your screen. 
Call to Order 

Welcome Remarks 

Alison Barkoff 

Acting Administrator and 

Assistant Secretary for Aging 

Principal Deputy Administrator 

2 
 

 

Swearing In of Non-Federal 

RAISE Council Members 

RAISE Council Members please turn on your cameras. 

3 
 

Swearing In of Non-Federal 

SGRG Council Members 

SGRG Council Members please turn on your cameras. 

4 
COUNCIL MEMBER INTRODUCTIONS 

5 
 

 

o the nation?

SETTING OUR AGENDA FOR THE WORK AHEAD 

1. What is one area of the 2022 National Strategy that should 

be focused on over the next year? 

2. What information do you think is needed to help your council 

showcase this area in the updated National Strategy? 

3. How could that information be communicated to the nation? 

6 
 

 

Looking Ahead: Tasks and Next Steps 

Post meeting activities 

• Co-chair self-nomination – non-federal members 

• Continued visioning and goal-setting for upcoming meetings – 

all members 

• Completion of council member profiles – non-federal members 

• Preparatory emails for September 19 meeting – all members 
Looking Ahead: September 19, 2023 

Meeting time: 12:30 – 4:30 pm, Eastern (Tentative agenda) 

• Announcement of Council Co-Chair selections 

• Introductory presentations by: 

– The John A. Hartford Foundation 

– National Academy for State Health Policy 

– Grandfamilies & Kinship Support Network 

• Presentations 

– Analysis of public comments to the National Strategy 

– Analysis of federal actions 

• Federal agency progress reports 

• Council member discussion 
ADJOURN 

9
Editorial Note on Part 148
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 148 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36284, June 25, 2010.

§ 148.276 When must the application be approved or denied? ( a ) In 33 U.S.C. 1504, the Act provides strict timelines for action on a license application, which, if closely observed, can lead to action in just under 1 year. The Coast Guard, in concurrence with MARAD, can suspend the process if an applicant fails to provide timely information or requests additional time to comply with a request.
( b ) The Coast Guard must conduct public hearings in each Adjacent Coastal State within 240 days of publishing the notice of receipt of a deepwater port license application.
( c ) MARAD issues a Record of Decision (ROD) approving or denying a license application within 90 days after the final public hearing. Actual issuance of a license may not take place until certain conditions imposed by the ROD have been met. Those conditions may include how the applicant must address design, construction, installation, testing, operations, and decommissioning of the deepwater port, or meet the requirements of other agencies.
[USCG-1998-3884, 71 FR 57651, Sept. 29, 2006, as amended by USCG-2013-0397, 78 FR 39177, July 1, 2013]
###### Editorial Note on Part 149

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 149 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36284, June 25, 2010.

#### § 149.324 What are the requirements for litters?

Each manned deepwater port must have at least one Stokes or other suitable litter, capable of safely hoisting an injured person. The litter must be readily accessible in an emergency.
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

§ 117.255 Potomac River. ( a ) The draw of the Woodrow Wilson Memorial (I-95) bridge, mile 103.8, between Alexandria, Virginia, and Oxon Hill, Maryland— ( 1 ) Shall open on signal at any time only for a vessel in distress, notwithstanding the provisions of § 117.31.
( 2 ) Shall open for the passage of a commercial vessel at any time except: ( i ) From Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays), 5 a.m. to 8 p.m.
( ii ) Saturday, Sunday, and Federal holidays, 2 p.m. to 7 p.m.
( 3 ) Need not open for the passage of a commercial vessel under paragraph (a)(2) of this section unless— ( i ) The owner or operator of the vessel provides the bridge tender with an estimate of the approximate time of that passage at least 12 hours in advance at (703) 836-2396; and
( ii ) the owner or operator of the vessel notifies the bridge tender at least 4 hours in advance of the requested time for that passage.
( 4 ) Shall open for the passage of a recreational vessel at any time except: ( i ) Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays), 5 a.m. to 12 midnight;
( ii ) Saturday, Sunday, and Federal holidays, 7 a.m. to 12 midnight, except as provided in paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of this section;
( iii ) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section, the bridge may open beginning at 10 p.m. on Saturday, Sunday, or a Federal holiday for the passage of a recreational vessel if the owner or operator of the vessel notifies the Bridge Tender of the time of that passage by not later than 12 hours before that time.
( 5 ) Need not open for the passage of a recreational vessel under paragraph (a)(4) of this section unless— ( i ) The owner or operator of the vessel provides the bridge tender with an estimate of the approximate time of that passage at least 12 hours in advance at (703) 836-2396; and
( ii ) the owner or operator of the vessel notifies the bridge tender at least 4 hours in advance of the requested time for that passage.
( 6 ) A recreational vessel may pass through the drawspan at any time it is open for the passage of a commercial vessel.
( b ) The draws of all other bridges need not be opened for the passage of vessels.
( c ) This section is also issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
[CGD 90-064, 57 FR 54178, Nov. 17, 1992, as amended byCGD05-06-083, 71 FR 51480, Aug. 30, 2006; USCG-2001-10881, 71 FR 70310, Dec. 4, 2006; 72 FR 50876, Sept. 5, 2007; USCG-2008-1216, 74 FR 31182, June 30, 2009]
ACL COVID-19 Response · <TITLE HERE> · Page 2 

# FAQ – FAMILIES FIRST CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE ACT (ffcra)

## For Grantees under Title VI of the Older Americans Act

March 27, 2020

These FAQs are provided in response to questions received by the ACL on the supplemental funding provided by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) for Title VI nutrition programs.  Grant awards were issued by the ACL on March 25, 2020.

# Using your FFCRA Funds

What can we spend these funds on?  Is it the same as Title VI?

Funds are approved for the nutrition and supportive services typically provided under Title VI Part A/B.  Please also reference the Older Americans Disaster Relief FAQ.

How should we plan to report on these funds?

For financial reporting and accounting purposes grantees should track these funds separately from the Title VI Older Americans Act grants.

FFCRA funds have been issued under a separate grant award number; therefore, funds must be accounted for separately from the regular issuance of Title VI Older Americans Act funding.

Grantees are required to continue maintaining appropriate records and documentation to support the charges against the Federal awards.

Additional information will be coming out very shortly on programmatic reporting requirements.  At a minimum and where possible, grantees should record the number of clients to whom service is provided, the service provided and the number of units of service provided.

We closed our congregate site and are allowing drive-through and take-out meals only.  Can we use this FFCRA funding to pay for those meals?

Yes.

Can we use these funds to pay for supplies and equipment related to COVID-19 response?

Yes, these funds can pay for supplies and equipment directly related to your Title VI Nutrition Programs.  For example, such supplies and equipment may include carry-out containers, warming bags or coolers, and other supplies needed to support healthy living for elders during this COVID-19 pandemic and extended isolation period.

# image2.jpg

# image1.jpg
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

§ 117.603 Manchester Harbor. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Bridge at mile 1.0 in Manchester, shall operate as follows: ( a ) The draw shall open on signal— ( 1 ) From Memorial Day through September 30 from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.;
( 2 ) From April 1 to Memorial Day and from October 1 to November 1 from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. to 6 p.m.
( b ) At all other times, the draw shall open on signal with at least four hours notice.
( c ) The owner of this bridge shall provide and keep in good legible condition, clearance gauges for each draw with figures not less than twelve (12) inches high designed, installed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of section 118.160 of this chapter.
[CGD01-97-022, 62 FR 50509, Sept. 26, 1997]
BEIRNE, MAYNARD & PARSONS, L.L.P.

1300 POST OAK BOULEVARD

SUITE 2500

HOUSTON, TEXAS 77056-3000

(713) 623-0887

FAX (713) 960-1527

January 12, 2015

Christopher A. Prine

Clerk, First Court of Appeals

301 Fannin

Houston, Texas 77002-2066

Re: 01-15-00006-CV; Paula Hill et. al. v. Baylor College of Medicine et. al.

Parties’ Joint Notice of Impending Settlement

Dear Mr. Prine:

The appellants and appellees in the above-captioned appeal jointly inform

the Court that they are in the process of settling this case. The parties expect to

finalize their settlement very shortly. Once the settlement agreement is signed, the

appellants will file a motion with the Court this week to dismiss the appeal.

Due to their impending settlement, the parties also jointly request that the

Court abate consideration of appellants’ pending Motion to Extend Time for Filing

Notice of Appeal and also correspondingly abate appellees’ deadline to file a

response thereto. That pending motion will become moot upon dismissal of the

appeal.

Thank you for your usual courtesy and cooperation.

Respectfully submitted,

TWOMEY | MAY, PLLC

By: /s/ George F. May

George F. May

State Bar No. 24037050

George@twomeymay.com

2 Riverway, 15th Floor

Houston, Texas 77056

BEIRNE, MAYNARD & PARSONS, L.L.P.

By: /s/ N. Terry Adams, Jr.

Thomas P. Sartwelle

State Bar No. 17656000

tsartwelle@bmpllp.com

N. Terry Adams, Jr.

State Bar No. 00874010

N. TERRY ADAMS, JR.

PARTNER

Direct Dial (713) 960-7319

Email: tadams@bmpllp.com

ACCEPTED

01-15-00006-CV

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

1/12/2015 2:23:46 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 1/12/2015 2:23:46 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
Christopher A. Prine, Clerk

First Court of Appeals

January 12, 2015

Page 2

939690v.1 003765/050175

Telephone:(713) 659-0000

Facsimile: (713) 201-8485

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS /

PLAINTIFFS PAULA HILL ET. AL.

VINSON & ELKINS LLP

By: /s/ Patrick W. Mizell

Patrick W. Mizell

State Bar No. 14233980

pmizell@velaw.com

Stacey N. Vu

State Bar No. 24047047

svu@velaw.com

1001 Fannin Street, Suite 2500

Houston, Texas 77002-3014

Telephone:(713) 758-2932

Facsimile: (713) 615-5912

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE /

DEFENDANT TEXAS CHILDREN’S

HOSPITAL

tadams@bmpllp.com

Forrest J. Wynn

State Bar No. 24037750

fwynn@bmpllp.com

1300 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2500

Houston, Texas 77056-3000

Telephone: (713) 623-0887

Facsimile: (713) 960-1527

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES /

DEFENDANTS BAYLOR COLLEGE OF

MEDICINE, SALWA SHENAQ, M.D.,

INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR OFTHE

ESTATE OF SALEH SHENAQ, M.D.,

AND FELIX R. SHARDONOFSKY, M.D.
Exhibit 32

# Certifications
Furnished Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,  as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Robert E. Switz and Gokul V.
Hemmady, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of ADC
Telecommunications, Inc., hereby certify that:

| | 1. | The annual report on form 10-K of ADC Telecommunications, Inc. for the year
ended October 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of sections
13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2. | The information contained in the above-mentioned report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of ADC
Telecommunications, Inc.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Robert E. Switz Robert E. Switz January 15, 2004
| | ----------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Gokul V. Hemmady  Gokul V. Hemmady January 15, 2004
| | -------------------------------------------------------

---
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-11250

HENRY REBEL CORNETT

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of Texas

(4:97-CV-426-A)

August 12, 1998

Before REYNALDO G. GARZ A, HIGGINBOTHAM, and EMILIO M. GARZA,

Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Cornett petitions this court for a C e rtificate of

Appealability from the district court’s denial of his application

for federal habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We

conclude that Cornett has not made a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right, see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), and

accordingly refuse to grant him a COA.2

Cornett’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence

underlying his guilty plea does not rise to the level of a federal

constitutional issue. S ee Smith v. McCotter

, 786 F.2d 697, 702

(5th Cir. 1986). Cornett, for the first time on appeal, asserts

arguments regarding the revocation of his probation. At best, we

review such issues for plain error. S ee United States v. McPhail

,

112 F.3d 197, 199 (5th Cir. 1997). We find no plain error under

these fact, espec ially because the decision to revoke deferred

adjudication probation is not appealable under Texas law. S ee

Phynes v. State , 828 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992).

Finally, Cornett contends that his counsel was ineffective for

faili ng to perfect an appeal from the judgment following the

revocation of his probation. The state habeas court found that

Cornett had pursuant to an agreement with the prosecutor waived his

right to appeal from that judgment and sentence, a fact finding we

presume to be correct. These findings were adopted by the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1); Carter v.

J ohnson, 110 F.3d 1098, 1107, n.11 (5 t h Cir. 1997); Flores v.

Johnson

, 957 F. Supp. 893, 915 (W.D. Tex. 1997). Moreover, our

independent review of the affidavit of Cornett’s attorney convinces

us that Cornett understood that he was relinquishing his right to

challenge the sentence as well as the decision to revoke probation.

Cornett acceded to this agreement after his attorney instructed him

that an appeal from the outcome of the revocation proceeding would

not likely be effective anyway.3

AFFIRMED.
#### § 155.110 Definitions.

Except as specifically stated in a section, the definitions in part 151 of this chapter, except for the word “oil”, and in part 154 of this chapter, apply to this part. The following definition also applies to this part:

*Merchant mariner credential or MMC* means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service.

[USCG-2006-24371, 74 FR 11212, Mar. 16, 2009]