alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 111 (Thursday, June 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 36425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14394]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Columbia Gulf Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

June 1, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 26, 2000, Columbia Gulf Transmission 
Company (Columbia Gulf) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff 
sheets with a proposed effective date of May 1, 2000:

Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 144
Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 145
Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 147

    Columbia Gulf states on March 31, 2000, it filed tariff sheets in 
Docket No. RP00-238 to revise its tariff to comply with the 
Commission's changes in its Order No. 637 to the right-of-first-refusal 
(ROFR) afforded certain firm shippers in 18 CFR 284.221(d)(2)(ii). In 
Order No. 637, the Commission revised the ROFR to limit its 
applicability. Columbia Gulf revised General Terms and Conditions (GTC) 
Section 4, which contains the procedures for the awarding of existing 
firm capacity and the exercise of the ROFR on Columbia Gulf, to reflect 
these changes. On April 26, 2000, the Commission accepted the filed 
tariff sheets to be effective May 1, 2000, subject to Columbia Gulf 
making certain revisions within 30 days. The instant filing is being 
made to comply with the April 26 Order.
    Columbia Gulf states that copies of its filing have been mailed to 
all firm customers, interruptible customers, and affected state 
commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. 
This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-14394 Filed 6-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
EX-10.1





 Exhibit 10.1 
  


			
	October 23, 2019	  	





 Sandra Broderick 
 1601 Elm St.,
Suite 800 
 Dallas, TX 75201 
 Dear Sandra: 

We are pleased to affirm your current role with Santander Consumer (“SC”) and your new role with Santander Holdings, Inc. (“SHUSA” or
“Santander”). This letter (“Offer Letter”) outlines the details of these changes. 
  

					
		 	Company Entity:	  	SHUSA / SC
		 	Title:	  	SHUSA SEVP Head of Operations / SC EVP Head of Operations
		 	Location Address:	  	Santander Consumer Corporate Offices, Dallas, TX
	        	 	Manager:	  	SHUSA and SC CEO
		 	Annualized Salary:	  	$1,000,000
		 	Incentive Plan:	  	$1,150,000 target opportunity under the SC Executive Incentive Plan*
		 	Effective Date:	  	October 23, 2019

 All other terms and conditions set forth in your SC offer letter dated Sept. 19, 2017 remain in effect. By signing below, you
agree that the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A to your Sept. 19, 2017 offer letter apply to the services you provide to SHUSA. SHUSA and SC agree to pay the annualized salary in the Offer Letter beginning in the fourth quarter of 2019.

 We anticipate that you will spend the majority of your time on SC matters and that approximately 30% of your time will be spent on SHUSA matters. We
defer to you with respect to the precise allocation of your time, including with respect to how you divide your time among Santander offices and locations. 

Sandra, we are very enthusiastic about you taking on additional responsibilities with SHUSA and look forward to a mutually rewarding working
relationship. We believe we can offer you opportunities that challenge and reward you, and we look forward to you accepting this offer. 
 Respectfully
yours,
  

	
	 /s/ Mikenzie Sari

	 Mikenzie Sari
 Santander Consumer USA
CHRO


  

							
	Acknowledged:	 		 		 	
				
	/s/ Sandra Broderick                                	 	            	 	                                      
              	 	10/23/19
	Sandra Broderick	 		 		 	Date

 * Note: Any incentive awards you receive will be payable in a combination of (a) cash, and (b) SC shares and/or
SAN American Depositary Receipts (ADRs), as determined by SHUSA and SC in their sole discretion.
2018 Annual Conference Agenda

** Sessions will not be available via WebEx

Time Session

7:45am – 9:30am Registration Opens

8:00am – 8:30am Optional Morning Networking Activity

8:30am – 8:45am Welcome & Opening Remarks 

8:50am – 9:30am

Keynote Address: Creating a Conflict Competent Organization

 Dr. Brian Polkinghorn - Distinguished Professor of Conflict Analysis and Dispute 

Resolution, Program Director in the Department of Conflict Analysis and Resolution and 

Executive Director of the Center for Conflict Resolution at Salisbury University.

9:35am – 10:15am

Plenary 1: The Center Cannot Hold: Challenges to Ombuds in Federal Agencies

 Dr. Howard Gadlin - Retired Ombudsman, National Institutes of Health

10:15am – 10:30am Morning Break

10:30am – 11:10am

Plenary 2: When People Don’t Want to Change: Using Motivational Interviewing for More Productive 

Visitor Interactions

 Jim Doorley - Clinical Psychology Doctoral Student, Department of Psychology, George 

Mason University

11:15am – 11:45pm Speed Mentoring/Networking**

11:45am – 1:00pm Lunch

1:00pm – 1:40pm

Concurrent Sessions 1

Can Neutrality and Moral Indignation Co-exist? The Values of Quietude in the Face of Gender-Based Violence

 Jason Byron - Associate Ombudsman, National Institutes of Health

Influence & Empathy for Third-Party Neutrals**

 Mary Beth Stevens - Laboratory Ombudsman, Los Alamos National Laboratory

1:50pm – 2:30pm

Concurrent Sessions 2

Setting the Stage for a Facilitated Discussion**

 Rea Wynder - FEMA Ombuds, Federal Emergency Management Agency

Annual Reports and the Data Within 

 David Michael - Deputy Ombudsman, National Institutes of Health 

 Panel 

2:30pm – 2:45pm Afternoon Break

2:45pm – 3:05pm

Plenary 3: Legal & Legislative Update

 Chuck Howard - Partner & General Counsel, Shipman & Goodwin, LLP

3:10pm – 3:50pm

Plenary 4: Keep Calm and Ombuds On: Hot Topics in Ombuds

 Deanna Yuille - Associate Ombudsman, US Food & Drug Administration

 Dr. Bina Patel - Ombudsman, National Ground Intelligence Center

 Brian Bloch – Ombudsman, Department of the Interior 

 Rea Wynder - FEMA Ombuds, Federal Emergency Management Agency

3:55pm – 4:35pm

Plenary 5: Navigating Conflict Through the Art of Neuroscience

 Dr. Thomas A. Van Dillen - Health of the Command Psychologist, United States Army 

Intelligence and Security Command

4:35pm – 5:00pm COFO Executive Committee & Closing
#### § 80.1104 San Diego Harbor, CA.

A line drawn from Zuniga Jetty Light “V” to Zuniga Jetty Light “Z”; thence to Point Loma Light.

[CGD 84-091, 51 FR 7787, Mar. 6, 1986. Redesignated by CGD 87-008b, 52 FR 25218, July 6, 1987]
No. 99-40136 -1-

* Pursuant to 5 TH 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. 99-40136 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ERNESTO URIBE-DELEON, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-96-CR-251-1

-------------------- March 23, 2000 Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ernesto Uribe-DeLeon appeals his conditional guilty-plea conviction for possession with the intent to distribute marijuana. He argues that his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was infringed by the 24-month delay between his indictment and his arrest. Our review of the record and the briefs on appeal reveals that the district court did not err in its conclusion that Uribe-DeLeon’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was not infringed. See Robinson v. Whitley , 2 F.3d 562, 568-71 (5th Cir. 1993). The judgment of the district court isNo. 99-40136 -2-
AFFIRMED.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-18-00241-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.E.P. and E.D.P., Children

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017PA00213

Honorable Karen Crouch, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order is AFFIRMED. 

No costs of court are taxed in this appeal. 

SIGNED October 10, 2018.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
1

Ogulei, David

From: Garnett, Kim

Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 11:59 AM

To: Ogulei, David

Subject: FW: Xact mm CEMS

Per your request! 

From: John Cooper [mailto:jacooper@cooperenvironmental.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 12:01 PM 

To: Garnett, Kim 

Cc: Bivins, Dan; andreag@cooperenvironmental.com; kragp@cooperenvironmental.com

Subject: Xact mm CEMS 

Kim, 

As you know, I have responded to yours and Dan’s earlier questions concerning the feasibility of using the Xact multimetals CEMS on hazardous waste incinerators (HWI) such as the Veolia HWI in Sauget, IL. The details of my responses 

are in these earlier emails (May 28th and June 14th), as well as Eli Lilly and Company’s Alternative Monitoring Petitions 

submitted in 2005. Of particular relevance are the “Method 301 Evaluation of Candidate Conditional Methods” and 

more specifically Section 7.0 “Range of Method Application.” This previously sent material demonstrates the robustness 

of the Xact methodology and instrumentation over a broad range of source conditions. In addition, CES’ conditions of 

sale are no different than those of other manufacturers of pollution control and monitoring instrumentation. These 

results plus those in the material I sent previously clearly show that the Xact has demonstrated its ability to operate 

accurately and reliably for extended periods of time (6+ years) under a wide range of stack conditions that included 

those likely to be found in the Veolia stack, and that such monitors are commercially available from Cooper 

Environmental Services LLC. 

Let me emphasize that it should be clear from this material previously sent that the Xact multi-metals CEMS has 

demonstrated its applicability under a wide range of conditions including the conditions expected at the Sauget Veolia 

HWI; i.e. both wet and dry conditions and temperatures exceeding 350°F. It should also be clear that Cooper 

Environmental Services LLC is a viable commercial supplier of the Xact CEMS, having developed them and sold them 

commercially prior to licensing the Pall Corp. to build and sell the units. CES has all the same staff and facilities that that 

were used to build them before licensing the technology to Pall and worked closely with Pall over the past two years 

helping them learn to build Xacts. In addition, even though the Pall Corp. announced just last February that they were 

vacating the license agreement, CES took its first new order for an Xact in March and shipped it to China in June, three 

and a half months later. In addition, even though each facility has its own unique set of probe, transport, data 

acquisition and data handling requirements, these are typically handled simultaneously with the building of the Xact or 

any other CEMS. As such, CES should have no problem delivering, installing and starting up an Xact-based multi-metal 

CEMS within six months of receiving a purchase order and down payment. 

John 

John A. Cooper, Ph. D. 

President 

Cooper Environmental Services LLC 

10180 SW Nimbus Ave. 

Suite J6 

Portland, OR 97223
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001100730
<NAME> MILLENNIUM SOFTWARE, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          2,154
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                2,154
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  6,867
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          64,338
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       20,394
<OTHER-SE>                                          0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    6,867
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    0
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     0
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                        0
<EPS-BASIC>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0


</TABLE>
§ 245.20 Determination of hazard to navigation. ( a ) Upon receiving a report of a wreck or other obstruction, District Engineers will consult with the Coast Guard district to jointly determine whether the obstruction poses a hazard to navigation.
( b ) Factors to be considered, as a minimum, include: ( 1 ) Location of the obstruction in relation to the navigable channel and other navigational traffic patterns.
( 2 ) Navigational difficulty in the vicinity of the obstruction.
( 3 ) Clearance or depth of water over the obstruction, fluctuation of water level, and other hydraulic characteristics in the vicinity.
( 4 ) Type and density of commercial and recreational vessel traffic, or other marine activity, in the vicinity of the obstruction.
( 5 ) Physical characteristics of the obstruction, including cargo, if any.
( 6 ) Possible movement of the obstruction.
( 7 ) Location of the obstruction in relation to existing aids to navigation.
( 8 ) Prevailing and historical weather conditions.
( 9 ) Length of time the obstruction has been in existence.
( 10 ) History of vessel accidents involving the obstruction.
V

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5105

For the relief of Regina Smith.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 27, 2000

Mr. OWENS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Regina Smith.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR REGINA

4 SMITH.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a)

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality

7 Act, Regina Smith shall be eligible for issuance of an im8 migrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an alien

9 lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon filing an

10 application for issuance of an immigrant visa under sec11 tion 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful

12 permanent resident.
2

•HR 5105 IH

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Regina Smith en2 ters the United States before the filing deadline specified

3 in subsection (c), she shall be considered to have entered

4 and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be

5 eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 of the

6 Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the en7 actment of this Act.

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.—

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Regina Smith, the Secretary of State shall in16 struct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the current

17 or next following fiscal year, the total number of immi18 grant visas that are made available to natives of the coun19 try of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) of the Immi20 gration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total

21 number of immigrant visas that are made available to na22 tives of the country of the alien’s birth under section

23 202(e) of such Act.

24 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

25 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural
3

•HR 5105 IH

1 parents, brothers, and sisters of Regina Smith shall not,

2 by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, privi3 lege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Æ
§ 97.315 Requirements for authorized approval organizations. Approved organizations will enter into a written agreement with the Coast Guard that specifies— ( a ) The period the authorization is valid;
( b ) Which duties and responsibilities the organization may perform and what approval letters it may issue on behalf of the U.S.;
( c ) Reports and information the organization must send to the Commandant;
( d ) Actions the organization must take to renew the agreement when it expires; and
( e ) Actions the organization must take if the Commandant revokes authorization pursuant to 33 CFR 97.320.
BARRY L. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
                        Certified Public Accountant


1582 TULITA DRIVE                           OFFICE (702) 361-8414
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89123                    FAX NO. (702) 896-0278


                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


To Whom It May Concern:
                                                         January 17, 2000

The  firm  of  Barry  L. Friedman, P.C., Certified  Public
Accountant consents  to  the inclusion of their report of January
17,  1999,  on  the Financial Statements of Lazzara Financial
Asset Recovery, Inc., as of December 31 1999, in any filings  that
are  necessary  now  or  in the near future with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.



Very truly yours,

/s/ Barry Friedman

Barry L. Friedman
Certified Public Accountant
|  2010 Corporate Accounts IOP1 Bookings Plan   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|  New Bookings*                                     |   Transaction Value2 |   % Commission |  % Accelerated Commission  |
| >$250,000                                                 | 14% | 20% |
| $100,000 - $249,000                                          | 10% | 15% |
| $30,000 –  $99,000                           | 7% | 10% |
| $20,000 - $29,000                                            | 4% | 4% |
| <$20,000                                                  | 1% | 1% |
|  Renewed Accounts*                                 |  Percentage of ExistingAccounts Renewed  |   % Commission |
| Up to 80%                                                    | 3% |
| Above 80%                                                    | 7% |
|  New Bookings from National Account*               |  Transaction Value  |  % Commission |
| >$20,000                                                  | 7% |
|  Renewed Bookings from National Account*           |  Percentage of IOP Bookings Plan  |  % Commission |
| Up to 80%                                                    | 0% |
| Above 80%                                                    | 5% |

----
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16

- 742 V

(Not to be published)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

*

AMANDA BIERS

- MELCHER

, *

*

Petitioner

, *

* Filed: April 17 , 2017

v

. *

* Decision on Attorneys’

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Fees and Costs

HUMAN SERVICES *

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

DECISION (ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS)

HASTINGS, Special Master

In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 1 I issue d a

Decision on March 20, 2017

. On April 4 , 2017 , Petitioner filed an application for attorneys’ fees

and costs in this matter. Petitione r requests a total award of $11,641.08, representing $11,149.40

fo r attorneys’ fees, and $491.68 for at torneys’ costs

.

On April 6 , 2017, Respondent filed a Response to Petitioner’s Application for Attorneys’

Fees and Costs, which stated that “Respondent is satisfied the statutory requirements for an

award of attorneys’ fees and costs ar e met in this case.” (ECF No. 27 , p. 2.) However,

Respondent provided no specific comments concerning the amounts requested, and simply

“recommends that the special master exercise his discretion [ to] determine a reasonable award.”

( Id

. , p. 3.)

I find that this Petition was filed and pursued in good faith and with a reasonable basis.

Thus, a n award for fees and costs is appropriate at this time, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300a a

- 15(b)

1 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 10 et seq . (2012).and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amounts seem reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, I

hereby award the following attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(b) and

(e)(1):

• a l ump sum of $ 11,641.08 , in the form of a che ck paya ble jointly to P etitioner

and P etiti on er ’s counsel, Edward Kraus , on account of services performed by

counsel’s law firm.

In the absence of a timely

- filed motion for review filed pursuant to Appendix B of the

Rules of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the clerk of the court shall enter judgment in

accordance herewith. 2

IT IS SO ORDERED

/s/ George L. Hastings, Jr.

George L. Hastings, Jr.

Special Master

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing the

right to seek review.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 7162

HARVEY R. JOHNSON , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. WARDEN HUDGINS , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Wheeling

. John Preston Bailey , District Judge. ( 5:19

- cv
- 002 96

- JPB

- JPM )

Submitted : Febr uary 23 , 2021 Decided: February 26, 2021

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Harvey R. Johnson , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Harvey R. Johnson, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court ’s order granting Respondent’s dispositive motion and denying relief on Johnson’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 p etition and its subsequent order denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Johnson v. Hudgins , No. 5:19

- cv
- 002 96

- JPB

- JPM (N.D.W. Va. July 21 & Aug

. 4 , 2020)

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED