alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2438

AN ACT

To provide for the conveyance of lands to certain

for other purposes.individuals in Gunnison County, Colorado, and
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2438

AN ACT

To provide for the conveyance of lands to certain individuals

in Gunnison County, Colorado, and for other purposes.

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

•HR 2438 EH

1 SECTION 1. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT AND LAND CONVEY2 ANCE, RAGGEDS WILDERNESS, WHITE RIVER

3 NATIONAL FOREST, COLORADO.

4 (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following:

5 (1) Certain landowners in Gunnison County,

6 Colorado, who own real property adjacent to the por7 tion of the Raggeds Wilderness in the White River

8 National Forest, Colorado, have occupied or im9 proved their property in good faith and in reliance

10 on erroneous surveys of their properties that the

11 landowners reasonably believed were accurate.

12 (2) In 1993, a Forest Service resurvey of the

13 Raggeds Wilderness established accurate boundaries

14 between the wilderness area and adjacent private

15 lands.

16 (3) The resurvey indicated that a small portion

17 of the Raggeds Wilderness is occupied by adjacent

18 landowners on the basis of the earlier erroneous land

19 surveys.

20 (b) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this section to

21 remove from the boundaries of the Raggeds Wilderness

22 certain real property so as to permit the Secretary of Agri23 culture to use the authority of Public Law 97–465 (com24 monly known as the Small Tracts Act; 16 U.S.C. 521c–

25 521i) to convey the property to the landowners who occu26 pied the property on the basis of erroneous land surveys.
3

•HR 2438 EH

1 (c) BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.—The boundary of the

2 Raggeds Wilderness, Gunnison and White River National

3 Forests, Colorado, as designated by section 102(a)(16) of

4 Public Law 96–560 (16 U.S.C. 1132 note), is hereby

5 modified to exclude from the area encompassed by the wil6 derness a parcel of real property approximately 0.86-acres

in size situated in the SW1⁄4 of the NE1 7 ⁄4 of Section 28,

8 Township 11 South, Range 88 West of the 6th Principal

9 Meridian, as depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Encroachment10 Raggeds Wilderness’’, dated November 17, 1993. Such

11 map shall be on file and available for inspection in the

12 appropriate offices of the United States Forest Service,

13 Department of Agriculture.

14 (d) CONVEYANCE OF LAND REMOVED FROM WIL15 DERNESS AREA.—The Secretary of Agriculture shall use

16 the authority provided by Public Law 97–465 (commonly

17 known as the Small Tracts Act; 16 U.S.C. 521c–521i) to

18 convey all right, title, and interest of the United States

19 in and to the real property excluded from the boundaries

20 of the Raggeds Wilderness under subsection (c) to those

21 owners of real property in Gunnison County, Colorado,

22 whose real property adjoins the excluded lands and who
4

•HR 2438 EH

1 have occupied the excluded lands in good faith reliance

2 on an erroneous survey.

Passed the House of Representatives September 4,

1996.

Attest:

Clerk.
Ballast Engineering Analysis Workshop Agenda .
Terry Logee, introduction Purpose of Workshop - NOT PICKING STANDARDS Background 

### Next Steps Ike Turiel, introduction to LBL's engineering analysis. Presentation of ballast price analysis Presentation of wattage analysis Explanation of 10%, 50%, maximum efficiency
Lunch One hour around 12 noon 

### Barbara Atkinson, presentation on engineering/economic analysis Main assumptions Methodology New data since publication of tables (if any, eg. prices, operating hours) Tandem wiring Ike Turiel Equal light output correction (more fixtures/ballasts to normalize for ballast factor?) Sensitivity analysis: Distribute written materials Discussion General Discussion Items Non-energy factors Public Presentations Insert into the agenda when topic is discussed QUESTIONS ARE WELCOME AT ANY TIME DURING THIS WORKSHOP
#### § 32.635 Drug-free workplace.

*Drug-free workplace* means a site for the performance of work done in connection with a specific award at which employees of the recipient are prohibited from engaging in the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance.
#### § 372.300 Distances and population data.

In the application of this subpart, distances and population data shall be determined in the same manner as provided in 49 CFR 372.243. See also definitions in 49 CFR 372.239.

[62 FR 15422, Apr. 1, 1997]
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 7058** 

COREY LAMONDE JAMES , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. FRED NASTRI, HO; JOSEPH F. NEDER, Ex

- Warden NBCI; DAVID WILHELM, Sgt.; WARDEN BOBBY SHEARIN; JOHN ROWLEY, Ex

- Warden; BRIAN MOORE, Ex

- CO II NBCI; DAVE COWEN, Ex

- Sgt. NBCI; J. E. COMBS, Ex

- CO II NBCI; MAXINE BRYANT; AL DAVIS, HO , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , a t Greenbelt
. Alexander Williams, Jr. , District Judge. ( 8:10

- cv - 02272

- AW )

Submitted : December 15, 2011 Decided: December 20, 2011

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Corey Lamonde Jame s, Appellant Pro Se. Glen William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Corey Lamonde James appeals the district court ’ s order d enying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. James v. Nastri , No. 8:10

- cv - 02272

- AW (D. Md. filed July 13, 2011 & en tered July 14, 2011 ) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### § 233.7 Signal failure reports.

Each carrier shall report within 15 days each failure of an appliance, device, method, or system to function or indicate as required by part 236 of this title that results in a more favorable aspect than intended or other condition hazardous to the movement of a train. Form FRA F6180-14, “Signal Failure Report,” shall be used for this purpose and completed in accordance with instructions printed on the form.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2130-0007)
* 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. 03-41757

Conference Calendar

 

LORENZO THOMAS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JACKSON COMSTOCK, Individually & in his official capacity as 

Lieutenant; BOBBY PURVIS, Individually & in his official 

capacity as Sergeant; JERRY COWEN, Individually & in his 

official capacity as Correctional Officer III; SAMMY BROWN, 

Individually & in his official capacity as Correctional 

Officer III; TERRY VALENTINE, Individually & in his official 

capacity as Correctional Officer III; GARY HERRING, 

Sergeant; MICHAEL ROESLER, Captain; KATHRYN BELL, Captain; 

DENICIA JEFFERSON, Administrative Technician III; SYLVIA 

PIASTA, Chief of Classification; EUGENE HARBIN, Major; 

ROBERT TREON, Warden; CEDERIC MCKNIGHT, Warden,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 9:96-CV-378

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Lorenzo Thomas, Texas prisoner # 739840, appeals the

district court’s denial of his FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b) motion as

untimely. Thomas argues that the district court abused its

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 03-41757

-2-

discretion in denying his FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b)(3) motion as

untimely. He contends that he had no knowledge of the evidence

alleged to be newly discovered until more than a year after the

district court’s judgment was affirmed by this court. He argues

that he should not be held to the one year time limit of FED. R.

CIV. P. 60(b) because he did not become aware of the Internal

Affairs Division investigative report until he received it in the

initial disclosure in No. 9:99-CV-333.

This initial disclosure was made on June 12, 2000. Thus,

Thomas became aware of the alleged newly discovered evidence

within one year of final judgment. The district court did not

abuse its discretion in dismissing Thomas’s motion as untimely. 

Wilson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 873 F.2d 869, 871 (5th Cir.

1989).

Thomas’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. 

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). 

Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R.

42.2. Thomas’s motion to supplement the record is DENIED.

Thomas is hereby informed that the dismissal of this appeal

as frivolous counts as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir.

1996). We caution Thomas that once he accumulates three strikes,

he may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or

appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility
No. 03-41757

-3-

unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
#### § 222.45 When is a railroad required to cease routine sounding of locomotive horns at crossings?

On the date specified in a Notice of Quiet Zone Continuation or Notice of Quiet Zone Establishment that complies with the requirements set forth in § 222.43 of this part, a railroad shall refrain from, or cease, routine sounding of the locomotive horn at all public, private and pedestrian grade crossings identified in the Notice.
§ 38.127 Sleeping compartments. ( a ) Sleeping compartments required to be accessible shall be designed so as to allow a person using a wheelchair or mobility aid to enter, maneuver within and approach and use each element within such compartment. (See Fig. 5.)
( b ) Each accessible compartment shall contain a restroom complying with § 38.123(a) which can be entered directly from such compartment.
( c ) Controls and operating mechanisms (e.g., heating and air conditioning controls, lighting controls, call buttons, electrical outlets, etc.) shall be mounted no more than 48 inches, and no less than 15 inches, above the floor and shall have a clear floor area directly in front a minimum of 30 inches by 48 inches. Controls and operating mechanisms shall be operable with one hand and shall not require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist.
§ 37.75 Remanufacture of non-rail vehicles and purchase or lease of remanufactured non-rail vehicles by public entities operating fixed route systems. ( a ) This section applies to any public entity operating a fixed route system which takes one of the following actions: ( 1 ) After August 25, 1990, remanufactures a bus or other vehicle so as to extend its useful life for five years or more or makes a solicitation for such remanufacturing; or
( 2 ) Purchases or leases a bus or other vehicle which has been remanufactured so as to extend its useful life for five years or more, where the purchase or lease occurs after August 25, 1990, and during the period in which the useful life of the vehicle is extended.
( b ) Vehicles acquired through the actions listed in paragraph (a) of this section shall, to the maximum extent feasible, be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, including individuals who use wheelchairs.
( c ) For purposes of this section, it shall be considered feasible to remanufacture a bus or other motor vehicle so as to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, including individuals who use wheelchairs, unless an engineering analysis demonstrates that including accessibility features required by this part would have a significant adverse effect on the structural integrity of the vehicle.
( d ) If a public entity operates a fixed route system, any segment of which is included on the National Register of Historic Places, and if making a vehicle of historic character used solely on such segment readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities would significantly alter the historic character of such vehicle, the public entity has only to make (or purchase or lease a remanufactured vehicle with) those modifications to make the vehicle accessible which do not alter the historic character of such vehicle, in consultation with the National Register of Historic Places.
( e ) A public entity operating a fixed route system as described in paragraph (d) of this section may apply in writing to the FTA Administrator for a determination of the historic character of the vehicle. The FTA Administrator shall refer such requests to the National Register of Historic Places, and shall rely on its advice in making determinations of the historic character of the vehicle.
Exhibit 99.1 **CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER                  PURSUANT TO                  18 U.S.C SECTION 1350,                  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 

I, Joseph J. Lazzara, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of Scientific Technologies Incorporated for the quarterlyperiod ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the informationcontained in such Form 10-Q fairly represents in all material respects thefinancial condition and results of operations of Scientific TechnologiesIncorporated.    
 
By:        /s/Joseph J. Lazzara 
Name:     Joseph J. Lazzara 
Title: President and Chief Executive and Financial Officer
I, Richard O. Faria, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Scientific Technologies Incorporated for thequarterly period ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that theinformation contained in such Form 10-Q fairly represents in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of ScientificTechnologies Incorporated.    
 
By:        /s/Richard O. Faria 
Name:       Richard O. Faria 
Title: Vice President, Finance and Administration
exv10w30



 







EXHIBIT 10.30




WINLAND ELECTRONICS, INC.

DESCRIPTION OF 2006 INCENTIVE BONUS PLAN




     Winland Electronics, Inc. Incentive Bonus Plan (the “Plan”) is designed to reward all
employees, including executive staff, for performance contributing to pre-tax, pre-incentive plan,
net income in excess of minimum limits defined annually at the beginning of the year by the Board
of Directors. The aggregate amount allocated to the Plan pool is based on a percentage of each
incremental amount of net income before tax and before the Plan. The formula for 2006 as
recommended by the Compensation Committee and as approved by the Board is as follows:



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Net income before tax and	 	 	Incentive	 
	before incentive plan	 	 	Plan %	 
	0
	 	to	 	 	1,000,000	 	 	 	0	%
	1,000,000
	 	to	 	 	1,500,000	 	 	 	20	%
	1,500,001
	 	to	 	 	2,000,000	 	 	 	18	%
	2,000,001
	 	to	 	 	2,500,000	 	 	 	16	%
	2,500,001
	 	to	 	 	3,000,000	 	 	 	14	%
	3,000,001
	 	to	 	 	3,500,000	 	 	 	12	%
	3,500,001
	 	to	 	 	4,000,000	 	 	 	10	%
	4,000,001
	 	to	 	 	4,500,000	 	 	 	8	%
	4,500,001
	 	to	 	 	5,000,000	 	 	 	6	%
	5,000,001
	 	to	 	 	10,000,000	 	 	 	6	%






     The Plan provides that 80% of the Plan pool shall be disbursed to employees, including
executive officers (other than the Chief Executive Officer), in cash or other awards at the
discretion of the President and Chief Executive Officer, subject to the approval of the
Compensation Committee.



     The remaining 20% of the Plan pool is available for bonus awards to the President and Chief
Executive Officer based on the achievement of certain criteria established at or before the
beginning of the year. On September 20, 2005, the Compensation Committee set criteria for a
discretionary bonus for Mr. Krueger’s performance in 2006 from the 2006 bonus pool, which criteria
requires certain targets of performance with 20% allocated to Board contribution, 20% to feedback
of direct reports and 60% to meeting growth and profit plan.
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1111.html[7/22/2015 11:12:46 AM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvc-8ee2

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1111

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Ed Sutterfield

General Comment

Im smart enough to plan for my own retirement!
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 5/18/15 1:12 PM

Received: May 13, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8itt-rhud

Comments Due: July 06, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0273

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: Jeffrey Breaux

Address: 

111 Sandhurst Dr.

Lafayette, LA, 70508

General Comment

I have been a licensed financial adviser for 26 years. It is my belief that the vast majority of 

advisors strive to do what is best for their clients, even if it means a lower rate of compensation 

for them. The establishment of a fiduciary standard could potentially have the effect of 

increasing costs to certain IRA account holders.

In numerous instances, a client and I have jointly agreed to change their IRA account to a feebased account rather than remaining as a commission-based account. This was done with the 

expectation of lowering the total cost to the client. This effort was successful in many cases, but 

in some cases, it was discovered that the fee-based alternative resulted in higher expenses for 

the client and was subsequently abandoned.

Clients should be able to choose the pricing alternative which is best for them. This proposed 

regulation could force some investors into a fee-based account arrangement which could 

actually be to their detriment. Just as in most things in life, a "one size fits all", solution would 

most certainly not be best for all.

Page 1 of 1

https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481adea31&format=xml&show... 5/18/2015
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 129096 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 129096 COA: 260443 Jackson CC: 03-004015-FH ROBBIN KIRK JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for l eave to appeal the June 6, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

p1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2005

Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                            1825
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        5
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1830
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    1830
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               73
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        1757
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      1830
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    53
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       14
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   133
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (94)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (94)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (94)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.26)
        

</TABLE>
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2354

To provide for the continuance of oil and gas operations pursuant to certain

existing leases in the Wayne National Forest.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 19, 1995

Mr. CREMEANS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Resources

A BILL

To provide for the continuance of oil and gas operations

pursuant to certain existing leases in the Wayne National

Forest.

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

3 SECTION 1. ELECTION TO CONTINUE OIL AND GAS OPER4 ATIONS UNDER CERTAIN EXISTING LEASES.

5 In the case of the Wayne National Forest, an election

6 under section 17(b)(3) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30

7 U.S.C. 226(b)(3)), including an election made before the

8 date of enactment of this Act, shall be deemed to be an

9 election to continue operations pursuant to the existing

10 lease instead of an election to continue the lease as a non-
2

•HR 2354 IH

1 competitive lease under section 17(c)(1) of that Act, and

2 in the case of any such election, the provisions of subpara3 graphs (C) and (D) of such section 17(b)(3) shall not

4 apply. The preceding sentence shall not apply to any lands

5 subject to an election made by a leaseholder under such

6 section 17(b)(3) before the date of enactment of this Act

7 if the lease holder notifies the Secretary of the Interior

8 (within 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act)

9 that the leaseholder intends such election to remain an

10 election to continue the lease as a noncompetitive lease

11 under section 17(c)(1) of that Act.

Æ