alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. Department of the Treasury 

Emergency Rental Assistance Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 

Notice Regarding Deadline to Obligate Reallocated Funds

July 29, 2022

Section 501 of Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (Act) authorizes the 

Emergency Rental Assistance program (ERA1). As amended by Section 3201 of the American 

Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the Act provides that funds paid to state, territorial, local, and Tribal 

governments participating in ERA1 (Grantees) shall remain available to Grantees through 

September 30, 2022. 

The Act also provides that Grantees may request a 90-day extension of the September 30, 2022

deadline for funds received through reallocation, subject to the approval of the U.S. Department 

of the Treasury (Treasury).1 The Request for Reallocated Funds submitted by all Grantees 

seeking additional funds—either via the initial electronic form or the current application portal—

includes language making this request. Accordingly, any Grantee that requested and received 

reallocated funds has already requested an extension, and no further action is required.

Treasury has approved all pending requests for 90-day extensions of the September 30, 

2022 deadline for ERA1 funds received through reallocation. Any Grantee that, prior to the 

date of this notice, has submitted a Request for Reallocated Funds under the ERA1 program may 

obligate reallocated funds received pursuant to that request through December 29, 2022.

Any reallocated ERA1 funds not obligated or expended by December 29, 2022 must be returned 

to Treasury at that time. ERA1 funds received through an initial allocation (i.e., not through the 

reallocation process) that are not obligated or expended by September 30, 2022 must be returned 

to Treasury at that time, even if the Grantee retains additional funds received through 

reallocation that it may continue to obligate through December 29, 2022.

* * *

If you have any questions, please contact emergencyrentalassistance@treasury.gov and include 

your ERA1 Grantee number.

1 Treasury reiterated the statutory deadline and the allowance for extension requests in its ERA1 reallocation 

guidance, available at https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Updated-ERA1-Reallocation-Guidance%203-30-

%202022.pdf.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 230 (Monday, December 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63550-63551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31351]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention: Notice 
of Charter Renewal

    This gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 
92-463) of October 6, 1972, that the Advisory Committee on Childhood 
Lead Poisoning Prevention (ACCLPP), Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services, has been 
renewed for a 2-year period beginning October 31, 1997 through October 
31, 1999.
    For further information, contact Henry Falk, M.D., Division of 
Environmental Hazards and Health Effects, National Center for 
Environmental Health, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, m/s F42, Building 101, 
Room 1122, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3724.


[[Page 63551]]


    Dated: November 24, 1997.
John C. Burckhardt,
Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 97-31351 Filed 11-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
#### Dennis Gary MONGER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 41038.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 9, 1971.

Rehearing Denied July 6, 1971.

CARLTON, ADKINS, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ROBERTS, C. J., and BOYD, J., dissent.

ERVIN, J., dissents with opinion.

ERVIN, Justice

(dissenting):

I think it is altogether *too technical*to refuse to give credence to notices of ap*434peals filed ante to judgments or sentences being reduced to writing and placed in a minute or judgment book after they have been pronounced in open court and reflected in the minutes. A person convicted should not be delayed in taking an appeal or commencing service of sentence. A notice of appeal is not necessarily invalid because it antedates a written judgment. It picks up when the judgment is entered unless the state can show some prejudice by early filing of the notice, which it can’t in this case.
#### Farrell J. LEJEUNE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Alvin RACHAL, Sr., Defendant and Appellee.

No. 3979.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

Oct. 27, 1972.

Clant-on & Johnson by John W. Johnson, Eunice, for plaintiff-appellant.

Edwards, Stefanski & Barousse by Homer E. Barousse, Jr., Crowley, for defendant-appellee.

Before FRUGÉ, CULPEPPER and DO-MENGEAUX, JJ.

CULPEPPER, Judge.

This is a suit for damages caused when defendant’s left turning tractor struck plaintiff’s overtaking automobile. The district judge held both drivers negligent. From a judgment rejecting both plaintiff’s demand and defendant’s reconventional demand, only the plaintiff has appealed.

The facts show that the plaintiff was driving in a westerly direction on State Highway No. 368, a blacktopped thoroughfare with one lane for traffic in each direction. He approached a tractor also being driven in a westerly direction by defendant’s 15 year old son. The weather was clear and dry and it was during hours of daylight.

*160Plaintiff saw the tractor and turned into the passing lane. When he was about opposite the tractor, it turned left, intending to enter a small graveled road.

The district judge correctly found the tractor driver negligent for turning left at a time when it was not reasonably safe, LSA-R.S. 32:104.

As to the automobile driver, this may not be an intersection within the meaning of LSA-R.S. 32:76, which forbids passing at an intersection. Nevertheless, the district judge correctly found plaintiff negligent for attempting to pass after the tractor driver gave a left turn hand signal at this intersecting gravel road, which was clearly visible and with which plaintiff was familiar.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed is affirmed. All costs of this appeal are assessed against the plaintiff appellant.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 26 (Friday, February 7, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5790-5791]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3114]


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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-42, RM-8988]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Charlevoix, MI

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition filed by 
Peninsula Broadcasting Company proposing the allotment of Channel 300A 
to Charlevoix, Michigan, as that community's second FM broadcast 
service. The coordinates for Channel 300A are 45-14-30 and 85-23-01. 
There is a site restriction 12.6

[[Page 5791]]

kilometers (7.8 miles) sourthwest of the community. Canadian 
concurrence will be requested for this allotment.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before March 24, 1997, and reply 
comments on or before April 8, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In 
addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should 
serve the petitioner's counsel, as follows: Henry E. Crawford, 1150 
Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite 900, Washington, DC. 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 97-42, adopted January 24, 1997, 
and released January 31, 1997. The full text of this Commission 
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the Commission's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, 
NW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, 
Washington, DC. 20037, (202) 857-3800.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contact.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-3114 Filed 2-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
Exhibit 12.1
 Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges (c)
 Resolute Energy Corporation
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
(In thousands, except ratios)
 February 26, 2007Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
    
    
    (inception) to2010
    
    
    2009
    
    
    2008
    
    
    December 31, 2007Earnings:Income (loss) before income taxes
    
    $
    8,574
    
    
    $
    (65,130
    )
    
    $
    6,041
    
    
    $
    4,118Fixed charges, excluding
capitalized interest
    
    
    6,905
    
    
    
    2,205
    
    
    
    40
    
    
    
    10Earnings
    
    $
    15,479
    
    
    $
    (62,925
    )
    
    $
    6,081
    
    
    $
    4,128Fixed charges:Interest expense, including
capitalized interest
    
    $
    5,317
    
    
    $
    1,538
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    Estimate of interest within
rental expense
    
    
    2,047
    
    
    
    667
    
    
    
    40
    
    
    
    10Fixed charges
    
    $
    7,364
    
    
    $
    2,205
    
    
    $
    40
    
    
    $
    10Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    2.1
    
    
    
    
    (a)
    
    
    152.0
    
    
    
    412.8
 Predecessor Resolute
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
(In thousands, except ratios)
 For the 267 DayPeriod Ended
    
    
    Fiscal Year Ended December 31,September 24, 2009
    
    
    2008
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006Earnings:Income (loss) before income taxes
    
    $
    (46,611
    )
    
    $
    (108,666
    )
    
    $
    (102,672
    )
    
    $
    46,042Fixed charges
    
    
    19,948
    
    
    
    35,813
    
    
    
    37,226
    
    
    
    23,238Earnings
    
    $
    (26,663
    )
    
    $
    (72,853
    )
    
    $
    (65,446
    )
    
    $
    69,280Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    18,416
    
    
    $
    33,139
    
    
    $
    35,898
    
    
    $
    22,293Estimate of interest within
rental expense
    
    
    1,532
    
    
    
    2,674
    
    
    
    1,328
    
    
    
    945Fixed charges
    
    $
    19,948
    
    
    $
    35,813
    
    
    $
    37,226
    
    
    $
    23,238Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    
    (b)
    
    
    
    (b)
    
    
    
    (b)
    
    
    3.0
 
 a)
    
    Ratio is less than one; earnings are inadequate to cover fixed charges. The dollar
amount of the coverage deficiency for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 was $65.1
million.b)
    
    Ratio was less than 1.0; the coverage deficiency was $46.6 million for the 267 day period
ended September 24, 2009, and $108.7 million and $102.7 million for the fiscal years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007 respectively.c)
    
    Fixed charges consist of interest expensed and capitalized and an estimate of the interest
within rental expense.
Exhibit 31.2

I, Thomas N. Chewning, certify that:

          1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Consolidated Natural Gas Company;

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

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d- 5(e)) for the registrant and have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 5, 2004
 
 
    /s/ Thomas N. Chewning
Attachment 14

Sustainable Futures Sanitized
Exhibit 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Congoleum Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roger
S. Marcus, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

      (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.


November 13, 2006

/s/ Roger S. Marcus
-------------------
Roger S. Marcus
Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 229 (Friday, November 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63385-63386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31198]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Order Pursuant to the Clean Water 
Act

    Notice is hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United 
States v. The Glidden Company, Civil Action No. 3:96CV7198, has been 
lodged with the United States District Court for the Northern District 
of Ohio on November 17, 1997.
    The Consent Decree resolves the claims alleged against defendant, 
The Glidden Company (``Glidden''), under the Clean Water Act (``Act''), 
33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq. The proposed Consent Decree provides that 
Glidden shall discharge process wastewaters from its facility at 300 
Sprowl Road, Huron, OH, to the Erie County Sanitary Sewer System, and 
shall comply with the applicable National Pollutant Discharge

[[Page 63386]]

Elimination System (``NPDES'') permit and with standards contained in 
the Consent Decree. The proposed decree also provides that Glidden 
shall perform a compliance program for the facility, and submit reports 
regarding its compliance with the Consent Decree. The proposed Consent 
Decree also provides for the payment by Glidden of a civil penalty of 
$1,555,000 for its alleged failures to comply with its NPDES permit and 
with an EPA Administrative Order.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the 
proposed Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General of the Environment and Natural Resources Division, 
U.S. Department of Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044, and 
should refer to United States v. The Glidden Company, D.J. Ref. 90-5-1-
1-5062.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the office of the 
United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, Four Seagate, 
Third Floor, Toledo, OH 43604-2624, at the Office of Regional Counsel, 
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, and at the Consent Decree 
Library, 1120 G Street NW., 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 624-
0892. A copy of the proposed Consent Decree may also be obtained in 
person or by mail from the Consent Decree Library. In requesting a 
copy, please enclose a check in the amount of $9.50 (25 cents per page 
reproduction costs) payable to the ``Consent Decree Library.''
Joel Gross,
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 97-31198 Filed 11-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
IIB 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1975 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 3, 2021 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

AN ACT 

To take certain land located in San Diego County, California, 

into trust for the benefit of the Pala Band of Mission 

Indians, 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, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1975 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pala Band of Mission 

3 Indians Land Transfer Act of 2021’’. 

4 SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF LAND IN TRUST FOR THE PALA BAND 

5 OF MISSION INDIANS. 

6 (a) TRANSFER AND ADMINISTRATION.— 

7 (1) TRANSFER OF LANDS INTO TRUST.—If, not 

8 later than 180 days after the date of the enactment 

9 of this Act, the Tribe transfers title to the land re10 ferred to in subsection (b) to the United States, the 

11 Secretary, not later than 180 days after such trans12 fer, shall take that land into trust for the benefit of 

13 the Tribe. 

14 (2) ADMINISTRATION.—The land transferred 

15 under paragraph (1) shall be part of the Pala Indian 

16 Reservation and administered in accordance with the 

17 laws and regulations generally applicable to land 

18 held in trust by the United States for an Indian 

19 Tribe. 

20 (b) LAND DESCRIPTION.—The land referred to in 

21 subsection (a)(1) is the approximately 721.12 acres of 

22 land located in San Diego County, California, generally 

23 depicted as ‘‘Gregory Canyon Property Boundary’’ on the 

24 map titled ‘‘Pala Gregory Canyon Property Boundary and 

25 Parcels’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 1975 RFS

1 (c) RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act 

2 shall— 

3 (1) enlarge, impair, or otherwise affect any 

4 right or claim of the Tribe to any land or interest 

5 in land that is in existence before the date of the en6 actment of this Act; 

7 (2) affect any water right of the Tribe in exist8 ence before the date of the enactment of this Act; 

9 or 

10 (3) terminate or limit any access in any way to 

11 any right-of-way or right-of-use issued, granted, or 

12 permitted before the date of the enactment of this 

13 Act. 

14 (d) RESTRICTED USE OF TRANSFERRED LANDS.— 

15 The Tribe may not conduct, on the land taken into trust 

16 for the Tribe pursuant to this Act, gaming activities— 

17 (1) as a matter of claimed inherent authority; 

18 or 

19 (2) under any Federal law, including the Indian 

20 Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) 

21 and regulations promulgated by the Secretary or the 

22 National Indian Gaming Commission under that 

23 Act. 

24 (e) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this section: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
4 

HR 1975 RFS

1 (1) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

2 the Secretary of the Interior. 

3 (2) TRIBE.—The term ‘‘Tribe’’ means the Pala 

4 Band of Mission Indians. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 2, 

2021. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Demonstration that Limits on Individual Suspensions Are Satisfied

Pursuant to IRC Sections 432(e)(9)(D)(i) through (iii)

Proposed Benefit Suspension

A. Benefit prior to Suspension: $2,000.00

B. Benefit after Suspension (A x (1-100%), prior to statutory limit: $0.00

C. Cut without limits (A - B):........................................................................ $2,000.00

Limitations

1. 110% of PBGC Maximum Guarantee Limit

D. Credited Service: 20.00

E. Plan accrual rate (A / D): $100.00

F. PBGC maximum benefit guarantee accrual rate: $35.75

(100% of first $11 plus 75% of next $33 of E)

G. PBGC maximum benefit guarantee (D x F): $715.00

H. Benefit to 110% of PBGC maximum (G x 110%): $786.50

I. 110% limitation (A - H):..................................................................$1,213.50

2. Disability Limit

J. Benefit attributable to disability: $1,000.00

K. Disability limit (A - J): $1,000.00

L. Cut with limits 1& 2 (min C, I, K):........................................................................ $1,000.00

3. Age limit

M. Effective Date of Suspension: 04/01/2017

N. The month after the effective date: May-2017

O. Date of Birth: 08/01/1940

P. The month the Participant turns 80: Aug-2020

Q. Months in the period from N to P (months away from age 80): 40

R. "Applicable Percentage" 67%

[for Age-based limitation: proration factor (Q/60, not<0 or >1)]

S. Cut with all limits (incl. Age based limit, L x R):.................................... $666.67

T. Benefit after Suspension, with limitations (A - S):...................................................... $1,333.33

Z:\009 5\p\Misc Corr\2016\Suspension\Application\Attachments\Sample limitation calcs 5 15.xlsx