text:
All hours are by appointment only.
Selezione Lamborghini Certified Pre-Owned is the official program to ensure the new driver of a pre-owned Lamborghini ultimate peace of mind.
The eligible vehicles are selected after a meticulous certification process and are prepared for sales by trained Lamborghini technicians, and with original parts only.
All the Selezione Vehicles benefit from Lamborghini protection and roadside assistance extended up to 12 months.
The Selezione Lamborghini Certified Pre-Owned Program is obtainable at Authorized Dealers and Service Centers only.
To be considered eligible for the program, a pre-owned Lamborghini must meet the following criteria:
- Have no more than 70,000 km/43,500 miles of use (Urus 100,000 kms/62,000 miles)
- Have less than 84 months of use (Urus – 120 months)
- Have undergone the regular scheduled maintenance indicated by Automobili Lamborghini
- Have passed a complete checklist test
To be part of the Selezione Lamborghini Certified Pre-Owned Program, each vehicle must pass over 150 checks.
The inspection covers all the car's main features. For instance:
- Vehicle history
- Vehicle interior & exterior, including luggage compartment
- Fluid levels
- Mechanics and electronics
- Tires, rims and brakes
Diagnostic tests and an on-road test drive are performed as well.
Every Selezione Certified Pre-Owned vehicle is covered by a minimum of 12 months Lamborghini warranty protection.
The protection covers parts and labour, and ensures all the operations are performed by trained Lamborghini technicians and with original parts only.
To ensure total peace of mind, each Selezione Certified Pre-Owned vehicle is offered with roadside assistance for the entire duration of the warranty.
The service is available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year*.
* Roadside assistance can be provided by partner companies in some countries;
Please note that the Selezione Lamborghini Program may vary from one country to another.
If you wish to receive detailed information about the advantages, eligibility criteria, and terms and conditions of the Selezione Lamborghini Program,
please contact your Authorized Lamborghini Dealer or Service Center.


text:
Slip into Style Icon Status
Every now and again, we come across a piece of fashion that transcends all bounds of true style. Although there are many pretty dresses out there that we wish we could covet for our wardrobes, there are just a few that top the list of worthy pieces that we. JUST. NEED in our lives (without question). And when it comes to planning an upcoming formal event or party bash, and brainstorming what to wear, you want to score an evening dress that makes a statement. So for today's FEATURED STYLE (as well as a top CLV.com pick), all eyes are feasted on this stunning and ever so CAPTIVATING long evening gown by yours truly. With its elegantly beaded bodice, capped sleeves, open back and floor-sweeping, flowing silhouette, it's truly love at first sight, wouldn't you agree? This dress certainly transcends all style bounds. It's the perfect look for homecoming, prom, bridesmaids and pretty much any event where chic style is the required dress code. It will be available in September, but you can certainly pre-order this beauty now! Happy shopping, lovelies!
80's dresses

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Lyrics: Hank Williams
Music: Hank Williams
Played during the Dylan/Dead rehearsals but never at a show. Also played by Jerry Garcia with Doug Sahm and Leon Russell in 1972.
Hear the lonesome whippoorwill
He sounds to blue to fly
The midnight train is a-winding low
I'm so lonesome I could cry
I've never seen a night so long
When time keeps crawling by
The moon is gone behind the clouds
To hide his face and cry
Have you ever seen a robin weep
When leaves have turned to brown?
Like me he's lost his will to live
I'm so lonesome I could cry
The silence of a falling star
Lights up a purple haze
And yes I wonder where you are
I'm so lonesome I could cry


text:
Viewing Louis D. Brandeis: "The Opportunity in the Law." (1905).
Louis D. Brandeis: "The Opportunity in the Law." (1905).
On May 4, 1905, Louis D. Brandeis, then a prominent Boston attorney, gave a famous talk to the Harvard Ethical Society on "the unusual opportunities for usefulness" offered the legal profession in America. He saw that the reputation of the bar had fallen in part because influential corporate lawyers had become subservient to their clients, that they did not consider the public interest when dealing with legislatures and public bodies.


text:
For me, the movie was auspicious in that I saw it seated between my pre-teen and teenage daughters. I am hopeful that the movie, with its uplifting music and message of the power of sisterly love, might prompt a thaw between them, as their relationship has entered a complicated phase of differing needs and expectations, as well as rivalry.
The relationship of the princesses in the movie reminded me of the trajectory of our daughters' relationship. For many years they were devoted to each other, the toddler adoringly stroking the baby's hand on the car ride home from the hospital, soothing her with a whispering lisp, "don't cwy (sic), baby". They were inseparable playmates spending countless hours playing house, trains or felt storyboards. The younger was bereft when the older went off to school. But now the elder is a teenager with more interest in privacy than play. In the movie, the plaintive song of the younger sister, "Do You Want to Build a Snowman?" resonated with me and had me tearing up. It did not help that the personalities of the two sisters in the movie remind me of my daughters, the older sister is serious and reserved, while the younger sister is impetuous and social.
But I love that, despite all evidence to the contrary, the younger sister does not give up on re-establishing a relationship with her older sister. Even after the older one sets an abominable snowman on her! What parent of a teenager cannot identify with such a monster of wrath and irritability? The younger sister persists in part because of her pal, Olaf, the goofy and devoted snowman that was also her sister's creation, and evidence of the love of which she is still capable, but too afraid to let herself feel since she cannot control the icy results of her emotions. In the end, it is through the younger sister's devotion and self-sacrifice that the older sister learns she can "Let it Go", but still control her emotions and powers, and reengage with the world.
I hope through this compelling story, my daughters understand that the relationship of sisters can survive the challenge of ages and stages of life, and, with effort, reemerge stronger.


text:
The Android Open Source Project maintains a public issue tracker where you can report bugs and request features for the core Android software stack. (For details on this issue tracker, see Reporting bugs). Reporting bugs is great (thank you!), but what happens to a bug report after you file it? This page describes the life of a bug.
This isn't a customer support forum. For support information, see the Pixel help center. Support for other devices is provided by the device manufacturers or by the carriers selling those devices.
Support for Google apps is through Google's support site. Support for third-party apps is with each app's developer, for example, through the contact information provided on Google Play.
Here are the key stages in the life of a bug:
- A bug is filed, and has the state New.
- An AOSP maintainer periodically reviews and triages bugs. Bugs are triaged into one of four buckets: New, Open, No-Action, or Resolved.
- Each bucket includes a number of states that provide more detail on the fate of the issue.
- Bugs marked Resolved will be included in a future release of the Android software.
Bucket details
We use the Status field in Issue Tracker to specify the status of an issue in the resolution process. This is consistent with the definitions specified in the Issue Tracker documentation.
New issues
New issues include bug reports that haven't been acted upon. The two states are:
- New: The bug report hasn't been triaged (that is, reviewed by an AOSP maintainer).
- New + Hotlist:NeedsInfo: The bug report has insufficient information to act upon. The person who reported the bug needs to provide additional details before it can be triaged. If enough time passes and no new information is provided, the bug may be closed by default, as one of the No-Action states.
Open issues
This bucket contains bugs that need action, but that are still unresolved, pending a change to the source code.
- Assigned: The bug report has been recognized as an adequately detailed report of a legitimate issue and the bug has been assigned to a specific contributor to assess and analyze.
- Accepted: The assignee has acknowledged the issue and has started to work on it.
Typically, a bug starts in Assigned, and remains there until someone intends to resolve it, at which point it enters Accepted. However, note that this isn't a guarantee, and bugs can go directly from Assigned to one of the Resolved states.
In general, if a bug is in one of the Open states, the AOSP team has recognized it as a legitimate issue, and a high-quality contribution fixing that bug is likely to get accepted. However, it's impossible to guarantee the completion of a fix in time for any particular release.
No-Action issues
This bucket contains bugs that are deemed to not require any action.
- Won't Fix (Not reproducible): An AOSP contributor attempted to reproduce the behavior described, and was unable to do so. This sometimes means that the bug is legitimate but simply rare or difficult to reproduce, or there wasn't enough information to fix the issue.
- Won't Fix (Intended behavior): An AOSP maintainer has determined that the behavior described isn't a bug, but is the intended behavior. This state is also commonly referred to as working as intended (WAI). For feature requests, an AOSP maintainer has determined that the request isn't going to be implemented in Android.
- Won't Fix (Obsolete): The issue is no longer relevant due to changes in the product.
- Won't Fix (Infeasible): The changes that are needed to address the issue aren't reasonably possible. This status is also used for issues reported that can't be handled in AOSP, typically because it's related to a customized device or to an external app, or the reporter mistook this tracker as a help forum.
- Duplicate: There was already an identical report in the issue tracker. Any actual action will be reported on that report.
Resolved issues
This bucket contains bugs that have had action taken, and are now considered resolved.
- Fixed (verified): This bug has been fixed, and is included in a formal release. When this state is set, we try to also set a property indicating which release it was fixed in.
- Fixed: This bug has been fixed (or feature implemented) in a source tree, but might not yet been included in a formal release.
Other stuff
The states and lifecycle above are how we generally try to track software. However, Android contains a lot of software and gets a correspondingly large number of bugs. As a result, sometimes bugs don't make it through all the states in a formal progression. We try to keep the system up to date, but we tend to do so in periodic bug sweeps where we review the database and make updates.


text:
Welcome to 2013. This newsletter begins with an article by Sean Casteel about the UMMO Affair. Next, Diane Tessman, asks will 2013 become what we feared in 2012? Chris Holly begins the new year with a ghost story. Jon Kelly writes about ET remarks and occult psychology and UFOs. Roger Marsh reports on various UFO sightings. Scott Corrales submits UFO sighting reports and a time-slip article. Doc Vega writes about Texas alien abductions and official contact. Christian Mace examines more anomalies on Mars. Ron Murdock takes a look at the full moon. Finally, Louis Hart writes about the dawn of a new age. Enjoy Dirk.
If you can't see the newsletter below click on this link:
Sponsored by Marks Friday Funnies!
Home Page | Book Reviews | Movie Reviews | UFO Videos | Contributors
The UMMO Affair: Are Extraterrestrials Living Among Us? by Sean Casteel. The UMMO phenomenon is an anomaly unto itself in the world of UFOlogy. It is as yet a still unsolved mystery and cannot be easily dismissed in spite of how unlikely it would appear to be on the surface. Is this a genuine case of extraterrestrials reaching out to make contact with mankind in terms humans can understand? Something more direct and open than New Age channeling or the searching through by regressive hypnosis of people claiming to be abductees? More…
COMETS of 2013: Is 2013 To Be What 2012, Was Not? by Diane Tessman. Two comets will be traveling very close to Earth in 2013 and all those ancient legends, warnings, and prophecies find their way into our worried minds again. No, I'm truly not trying to kick the can down the road to 2013! And for the record, I never thought 2012 was the End of Days; it is simply that these two comets approach us with all the mysticism, fear and eventual spirituality, with which comets have always been associated. More…
Ghosts: When Their Mother's Spirit Spoke by Chris Holly. During the holiday season I was able to visit and catch up with friends and relatives. One of my friends comes from a large Irish family living here on Long Island New York. My friend told me the following account of a strange situation that took place with his family during the past year. His life and that of his family was both saved and changed by the warnings of his mother's ghost. Below find the story exactly as my friend shared it with me. This is what he told me happened to his middle brother as well as his older brother and sister. The event took place on the east end of Long Island New York: More…
January: The Doorway Opens by Pat Regan. Subsequent to the festivities of Yuletide and the Midwinter Solstice in December, we quickly arrive at the start of another contemporary year. I emphasise the word contemporary because calendars have so frequently changed over the centuries. The pastoral, pre-Christian, Celtic land dwellers regarded the time we now call Halloween as the end of summer and commencement of winter. It marked the start of the New Year. More…
Russian prime minister's ET remarks follow 1997 official disclosure by Jon Kelly. The Telegraph reported on Dec. 8, 2012 how Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev's supposed off-camera remarks concerning his government's secret files on extraterrestrials described an "absolutely secret special service" exerting control over ETs operating under cover in northern Asia. The London-based newspaper, once owned by Canadian-born Conrad Black, reported that the former Russian president cited "Men in Black," (a 1997 Hollywood movie glamorizing domestic black operations and government UFO cover-ups), as a source for "more detailed information" concerning the status of ETs in his country today. More… Also read: Occult Psychology Reflected In UFOs!
UFO Appeared To Be Watching Scared Witness by Roger Marsh. A Westland, MI, witness appeared to be followed by a UFO and became frightened just after 7 a.m. on December 26, 2012, as the object shined four beams of light to the ground level, according to testimony from the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) witness reporting database. More… Also read: UFO Year in Review: 2012 Also read: UFO expanded to reveal 'silver plated top': Queens witness
Another "Time Slip" Reported in La Pampa, Argentina by Scott Corrales. Two young men whose duties cause them to travel National Route No. 5 on a regular basis between the communities of Catriló and Santa Rosa reported feeling "disoriented" during the trip on three separate occasions. After several minutes had elapsed, they noticed that they continued the trip without any further incident, but without any recollection of the distance they had already covered. More… Also read: Hunters Startled by UFOs in Serra de Grandola, Portugal
The baffling stories of alien abductions by Doc Vega. From all over the world bizarre witness reports of strange aerial objects and the kidnapping of hapless victims from China to South America, spanning the United States and Europe make their way into the media. On this article, however, we will concentrate our sightings to Texas and it's residents. More… Also read: How long until the day of official verification of contact?
MicMaq Indian star, Egyptian Sirius, and Magi Star of the East by Carol Shield. The MicMaq Indians of Nova Scotia had hieroglyphic writing and we have evidence of this writing in which the MicMacs wrote the prayer "Our Father who art in Heaven" MicMaq Indians are the people who lived in Acadia (Arcadia) when the first European and Viking explorers came to its shores. Their flag is a red cross on field of white with a five pointed star and crescent moon. The red cross on a field of white flag resembles the Crusader flag of the Crusades. The MicMaq wizards were said to received their power from the master magicians. More…
More Strange Shapes In Curiosity Photos From Mars by Christian Macé. Curiosity took pictures of these strange shapes on Mars December 28, 2012! For many more photographs and analysis of the Curiosity rover photographs follow the links below. More…
Full Moon: Not Quite What's It's Cracked Up To Be by Ron Murdock. I've been life long skeptic on how the full moon affects people yet some swear on how it affects human behaviour. I don't put much stock on studies or statistics as they can be worded in such a manner to prove anything. Lunar cycles is another example of this. As I've said before, after working close to forty full moons only three could be called weird. Not a very consistent pattern to say anything paranormal happens. Self fulfilling prophecy, power of suggestion or selective memory is a more credible tale to tell. More…
Dawn Of A New Age by Louis Hart . It is truly the beginning of a new age. The world as we have known it will slowly cease to be. In the days ahead a rejuvenation of not only the earth and all things on it but the very consciousness of humankind will take place. Incredible changes of a magnitude never believed possible will come about. Make no mistake about it, the Golden Age has dawned. More…
Free UFO Digests Apps
FREE UFO Digest APP for your Android! Receive up-to-the-minute UFO news, reviews and videos.
• Click on this link to download your FREE Android UFO Digest APP!
As regular readers of the UFO Digest newsletter could you please forward a copy to friends or associates you believe may be interested in our articles. The newsletter is an important element of UFO Digest and I would really like to increase its membership.
Thanks Dirk.
You are receiving this once-weekly e-mail newsletter because you signed up for it at UFODIGEST.COM.
Send your comments and suggestions to me. Feel free to forward this newsletter to your friends. Keep your eyes to the skies. See you next time. Dirk.
For all subscription information (to subscribe or unsubscribe) please go to the bottom of this mailing. Thanks Dirk.


text:
Description Accessories Files
Professional-Grade Airband Transceiver w/Navigation Display – Pilot Series
The Vertex Standard VXA-300 is a compact, stylish, solid hand-held transceiver providing communication (transmit and receive) capability on the International Aircraft Communication Band ("COM" band: 118 ~ 136.975 MHz), and it additionally provides VOR and CDI navigation features on the "NAV" band (108 ~ 117.975 MHz).
The VXA-300 boasts 0.8 Watt of clean audio output from its 1.4" (36-mm) diameter loudspeaker, and it also provides 8.33 kHz synthesizer steps for the receiving of the new narrow-band channel plan. The VXA-300 includes both Temperature and Supply Voltage displays with our exclusive Omni-GlowTM display back-lighting for minimal degradation of your night vision, NOAA weather band monitoring, 8-character Alpha/Numeric Display, 150 Memory Channels, and up to 100 "Book Memory" Channels. The channel configurations can be easily reprogrammed in minutes using the optional PC Programming Kit and your PC.
The VXA-300 Pilot III comes packaged with: antenna, antenna adapter (CN-3) to convert from SMA to BNC, desktop charger, NiMH battery, and headset adapter (CT-96)
Ultra Rugged, Submersible Case ConstructionThe Pilot III is built inside a rugged Aluminium250 Programmable Memory Channels
case, carefully sealed to protect against water
ingress. Built to survive immersion in water
up to 30 minutes at a depth of three feet,
Pilot III can keep you communicating even if
gets wet if you have to ditch!The 150 regular memory channels and 100 preprogrammedNOAA Weather Channels (U.S.A. Only)
"Book" memory channels can store just about any commonly-used operating frequencies that you choose. And the memories
may be labeled with an Alpha-numeric title of
up to 8 characters, for easy recognition.The Pilot III can receive all 10 NOAA weatherOther Features
broadcast frequencies. The Automatic Active
Weather Channel Locator (a Vertex Standard
exclusive) automatically scans for active NOAA
weather stations in your area when WX band is
selected.•Automatic Noise LimiterReceiver Audio Pitch Control
•Ambient Temperature monitor
•One-Touch Squelch (Monitor) Control
•External DC Jack (12V) •Battery Voltage Display
•8.33 or 25 kHz Channel Steps •Stop Watch and Count Down Timers
•Easy-to use Menu System for Custom Configuration •PC ProgrammableFor improved reception under difficult conditions,One Touch Squelch Control
the receiver's audio frequency response may be
quickly adjusted by the user, to enhance either
the high-frequency or low-frequency components,
depending on the noise and/or interference
encountered. A Vertex Standard exclusive!Breaking the squelch threshold has never been
easier. Press the monitor (MON) button for two
seconds to open the Pilot III's squelch
continuously. Press MON again to restore the
original squelch settings. This is TRUE one-
handed operation, without the need to fumble
around with tightly spaced concentric knobs.
Model Antennas | Antenna Adapters ATV-10
ATV-10 Antenna for VXA-220/300 (use P/N Q3000194)
SMA to BNC Adaptor
Battery Packs FNB-83
1400mAh Ni-MH Battery
Battery Trays - Dry Cell FBA-25A
Alkaline Battery Tray
Belt Clips | Cases CLIP-14
Quick Draw Belt Clip
Chargers CD-28
Charger Cradle (use P/N Q7000495)
110VAC Overnight Charger
220VAC Overnight Charger
VAC-370C 220V Desktop Rapid Charger Chargers - DC | Vehicular E-DC-6
DC Cable; plug and wire only
Headsets | Headset Adapters CT-96
CT-96 Headset Adapter for the VXA-220/300/710 (use P/N Q7000451)
Programming Cables CT-29 PC to adaptor programming cable. Requires CT-97 (adaptor to radio). CT-97 Programming cable adaptor. Requires CT-29. USB-57B USB Programming Cable
USB-57B USB Programming Cable
Speaker Microphones MH-44B4B
LT Duty Speaker Microphone for the VXA-220, 300, 710 Models
Aviation \ Brochures
VXA-300 Brochure ( 2.18 MB )
Aviation \ Manuals \ Owners Manual
VXA-300 Operating Manual ( 1.52 MB )
Aviation \ Product Images
VXA-300 Pilot3.jpg ( 0.97 MB )
VXA-300-2.jpg ( 893.49 KB )
vxa-300water.jpg ( 577.19 KB )
Aviation \ Software
VXA-300/FTA-310 Programming Software ( 3.40 MB )
COPYRIGHT©2003-2023 Yaesu USA.


text:
How can I safely turn off the front passenger airbag in a Vauxhall (Opel) Zafira MkII (2005-), so that a child seat can be fitted? This is commonly done with a key in the glove box or switch on dashboard end in other makes of car.
I have found and discarded the following ideas:
- Discard existing car seats and buy special expensive Vauxhall seats fitted with airbag transponder (discarded as not available online nor at my local dealer).
- Persuade your local dealer to disable it electronically. Some people online seem have succeeded in this, albeit expensively, but apparently most have not, due to "safety concerns" which the mythical seat mentioned in 1. avoids somehow. (my dealer will not do it, discarded as apparently impossible).
- Trigger the airbag (discarded as unsafe and stupid).
- Several apparently untested suggestions to either disconnect or remove the airbag manually (discarded so far as either impractical, ineffective, unsafe, illegal or combination).
Any practical suggestions would be very welcome.


text:
I've been a big fan of historical games for as long as I can recall. I've settled colonies throughout the Roman world back in the days of Julius Caesar, led knights and men at arms in battles against French knights, commanded Moorish cavalry, and I was even a Viking once. Numerous German soldiers have fallen before me from the pixilated realm of Wolfenstein, to the better animated world of Call of Duty 1 and 2. With all this experience in my gaming resume, I felt well prepared to undertake whatever challenges Hour of Victory had in store for me. But as I waited for the package to be dropped into my mailbox worrying reports came from other troops in the field. The game was boring. The AI was dumber then a bag of bricks. You could stand still to heal. Despite this I remained hopeful that when, at last, the game did reach me it would justify my hopes.
Sadly, it didn't.
What I will say right off the bat is that all the bad things that people have been saying about Hour of Victory are right. But I want to give the game a fair shake and say that some parts of the game, just some mind you, were actually enjoyable. Grabbing hold of the MG-42 and watching it shake violently as it spluttered round after round of ammo at the enemy, watching the bolt of the MP40 fly back with each pull of the trigger… in was in these moments that I found some brief enjoyment. For, despite its flaws, the game looks pretty good. The environments and characters are pretty well modeled, and if the developers didn't take the time to properly model at JU-87… well, I'll forgive them… this time.
I've seen bricks smarter than this…
But here, friends, is where it does not get enjoyable. The weakest element is by far the AI which, if the game was a high school dance, would be persistently dancing the hokey-pokey all night. A case in point… I'm running through a building. I run up some stairs, I turn right, and I run down another set of stairs before coming to a doorway. Just inside the door is a pile of sandbags behind which crouches a German soldier, his back to me, and helmet appearing just above the bags. I pull the trigger and the MP40 fires and knocks the helmet off the soldier's head. Triumphant I move forward but…wait…what's this? He's still alive… but… he hasn't even moved. So I take aim and fire once again… down he goes.
Congratulations buddy. You're at the top of the Darwin Awards this year.
Another thing is that the ragdoll physics… well, they could use some work. I can't recall all the times that I've fired at a soldier before they've stiffened up, bowed, and then jumped up into the air and fell forward. It was like an ad hoc ballet conducted right there in the street. I often felt as if, instead of fighting actual German troops, I was fighting a group of extras combed from other games, who were all amateur dramatics. That guy there who slides across the sand while still in a crouch… clearly an expert baseball player. That guy who can turn his feet up at the ankles so that he touches his forelegs with the tips of his toes before falling over… clearly a contortionist of some repute. And over there is Sergeant Schultz.
In Call of Duty you also played three different characters, but they all had the same levels of strength, speed, and endurance. What they've done in Hour of Victory, though, is that they've given you three characters with differing abilities. Now, that worked just fine in RE, but that same shoe doesn't fit here, no. Taggert is a Covert Ops guy… he can sneak up behind people and stab them with his big knife and also pick locks to get into areas the other two can't.
Least we know now who Jill Valentine's Granddad is.
Bull is a sniper. He can climb ropes to get to sniping spots. Ross is a commando who can just charge through levels, spraying bullets around, and thwacking enemy soldiers with the butt of his gun. It's a neat idea, but the downside is that all you need is Ross. I never needed to pick a locked door or climb up a rope… I just needed Ross to charge around the level, shooting them up and smacking them down, until the level was done. Good idea, bad planning.
Another thing about the game is that it lacks little sense of urgency… you start taking serious damage… eh, no trouble. Just duck behind some cover and stand still for a while; it'll make everything better. Enemy soldiers will stand out in the open, carefully reloading their weapons, without even thinking to duck for cover even if you happen to be standing close enough near them to smack them upside the head for such wanton stupidity. I saw a German soldier actually run past me, crouch behind a pile of sandbags, and then turn around to shoot at me.
The only theme song this game needed was the theme song to Team America… or perhaps just Cleavon Little's words in Blazing Saddles after outwitting the town's people by taking himself hostage would do: "Oh, baby… you are so talented… and they are so dumb…"
In summation all I can say is that, if you really want to get your hands on a WW2 FPS worth playing, get Call of Duty. Anything else will lead to, as the boys in Deep 13 used to say, "Deep hurting! Deep hurting!"


text:
SECAUCUS, N.J. -- Forget about setting up those kegs or buffet tables in the parking lot before this season's Super Bowl at MetLife Stadium. There will be no tailgating, according to the game's committee CEO, Al Kelly.
"You will be allowed to have food in your car and have drink in your car," Kelly said. "And provided you're in the boundaries of a single parking space, you'll be able to eat or drink right next to your car. However, you're not going to be able to take out a lounge chair, you're not going to be able to take out a grill, and you're not going to be able to take up more than one parking space. And it'll all be watched very carefully."
The tailgating news came during the committee's Monday news conference regarding transportation and safety for the Feb. 2, 2014, game.
There will be only three ways for the expected 80,000 ticket holders to get to the game. The committee will charter buses called the Fan Express, which will cost $51 and pick up and drop off passengers at nine locations around the region. Fans can also take N.J. Transit to the MetLife Stadium stop or be dropped off by vehicles that must have parking passes.
There will be fewer than 13,000 parking spots available for fans.
And hiring a black car, taxi or limo won't be an option for VIPs who will spend thousands of dollars per ticket. No cars will be allowed near the stadium on game day without parking passes, and any car that drops off a passenger will have to wait at the stadium.
"Nobody's going to be dropped off by black car," Kelly said. "You can have a black car, a green car, a white car, a red car as long as you have parking, and the car needs to stay on the premises the entire time."
Fans who had considered parking farther from the stadium and getting there on foot will not be allowed to enter.
"You cannot walk to the Super Bowl," Kelly said. "You can get your hotel to drop you off at one of the New Jersey Transit locations or get the shuttle to take you to a Fan Express location, but you cannot walk."
Ultimately, Kelly said he expects that between 70 and 80 percent of all ticket holders will get to the game via public transportation or shuttle bus. There will be 1,600 parking spots for buses.
The reduced parking capacity is a result of the large security perimeter needed for the Super Bowl. Fans will have to go through security screenings at the train station and again at the stadium, Kelly said.
Kelly and fellow host committee members Woody Johnson (New York Jets owner) and Steve Tisch (New York Giants co-owner) have been calling Super Bowl XLVIII the public transportation Super Bowl ever since they started working on the logistics.
Kelly introduced officials from the MTA, NJ Transit and NJ Path to discuss the added schedules and plans for the week of the Super Bowl, when New York City and New Jersey could see an influx of 400,000 travelers.
NJ Transit will offer a Super Pass for $50 that will be good for all trains, light rail and bus service it provides.
The committee had tried to put together a transit card that would have allowed Super Bowl visitors to switch between all three forms of transit on a single ticket, but it fell apart. Kelly said the different technologies used by the organizations made it a complicated undertaking, though the desire was there.
James Simpson, the commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Transportation, said the department will suspend all construction before the week of the game and planned to staff Super Bowl media day and game day at the same level it does for a weather emergency.
Lanes will be dedicated exclusively to official Super Bowl vehicles on game day. The goal, Simpson said, is to keep traffic moving smoothly on all highways and bridges during a potentially high-traffic time period.
Of course, there is potential for snow and ice. A blizzard might make for great television viewing but would be a logistical nightmare for Super Bowl organizers. Simpson said New Jersey has the equipment and personnel to manage any kind of weather, however.


text:
Weak but improving, the second American Ebola patient to arrive on U.S. soil was wheeled into an Atlanta hospital Tuesday by workers in biohazard suits and taken to an isolation unit for treatment.
Nancy Writebol, one of two aid workers who contracted the deadly virus in Liberia, was flown from Africa overnight in a specially equipped plane and driven by ambulance to Emory University Hospital.
"We're grateful to everyone who was joined us in praying for this moment," her son Jeremy said in a statement.
At Emory, Writebol joins Dr. Kent Brantly, who arrived at the hospital on Saturday. Brantly, 33, was strong enough to walk into the hospital. Writebol, 59, was taken in by stretcher, her head slightly elevated.
Inside the Isolation Rooms that Guard Against Ebola, DiseaseAug. 5, 201403:46
Her husband said from Liberia that she was "very weak" but getting better, and felt well enough before leaving the country to eat yogurt, according to an account given by Bruce Johnson, president of SIM USA, the Christian missionary organization that Writebol works with.
Writebol and Brantly were working with Ebola patients in Liberia when they contracted Ebola. Johnson said it was still not clear how they were infected.
"We're grateful to everyone who was joined us in praying for this moment."
Both aid workers received doses of an experimental Ebola drug, derived in part from tobacco plants and never before tested on humans, before they left Liberia. Brantly got an additional dose at Emory.
See Patient with Ebola Be Admitted Into U.S. HospitalAug. 5, 201400:39
As relayed to reporters by Johnson, the husband, David Writebol, said that her care in Liberia had been exceptional.
He said that going to visit here there was "like going into a nuclear reactor," complete with hot, clumsy, uncomfortable biohazard suits. Still, he said, watching her medical care was "like watching the love of Christ take place right before your eyes."
A week ago, the husband said, the family was thinking about funeral arrangements.
Johnson said that the episode might yet provide some good to the world in that it has focused attention on the plight of West Africa.
Ebola Patient Is Weak, but ImprovingAug. 5, 201402:22
More than 1,400 Ebola cases have been confirmed in the worst known outbreak of the disease, and more than 800 people have died. Most of the cases have been in the countries of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone.
If the experimental drug or anything else about the infections ultimately leads to an Ebola cure, "That would be incredible," Johnson said.
Watching her medical care was "like watching the love of Christ take place right before your eyes."
Brantly's wife, Amber, said in a statement Tuesday that he is still improving.
The Brantly and Writebol families met for the first time Monday night, said a spokesman for Samaritan's Purse, Brantly's aid organization. The Brantlys had spent time together praying for Writebol, and the Writebols thanked the Brantlys for those prayers, the spokesman said.
Amber Brantly's statement said: "Our families are united in our faith in Jesus, and we will walk through this recovery time together. Please continue to pray for Kent, Nancy and the people of Liberia."


text:
of Health and Human Services
Participating Organizations
National Institutes of Health (NIH), (http://www.nih.gov)
of Participating Organizations
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) (http://www.nigms.nih.gov/)
Title: Research on Interventions that Promote Research Careers (R01)
Announcement Type
Update: The following update relating to this announcement has been issued:
NOTICE: Applications submitted in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for Federal assistance must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov) using the SF424 Research and Related (R&R) forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide
This FOA must be read in conjunction with the application guidelines included with this announcement in Grants.gov/Apply for Grants (hereafter called Grants.gov/Apply).
A registration process is necessary before submission and applicants are highly encouraged to start the process at least four weeks prior to the grant submission date. See Section IV.
Request for Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-GM-08-005
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
Key Dates
Release/Posted Date: June 5, 2007
Opening Date: September 24, 2007 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): September 24, 2007
NOTE: On time submission requires that applications be successfully submitted to Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization).
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): October 22, 2007
AIDS Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): Not Applicable
Peer Review Date(s): February-March, 2008
Council Review Date(s): May, 2008
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): July 1, 2008
Additional Information To Be Available Date (Activation Date): Not Applicable
Expiration Date: October 23, 2007
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable
Overview Content
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Part I Overview Information
Part II Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives
Section II. Award Information
1. Mechanism of Support
2. Funds Available
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
A. Eligible Institutions
B. Eligible Individuals
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Request Application Information
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
3. Submission Dates and Times
A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
1. Letter of Intent
B. Submitting an Application Electronically to the NIH
C. Application Processing
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements
Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
2. Review and Selection Process
A. Additional Review Criteria
B. Additional Review Considerations
C. Sharing Research Data
D. Sharing Research Resources
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Section VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
3. Reporting
Section VII. Agency Contacts
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)
2. Peer Review Contact(s)
3. Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)
Section VIII. Other Information - Required Federal Citations
Part II - Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Research Objectives
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recognizes that there is a significant under-representation of minority scientists engaged in biomedical and behavioral research in the U.S. Consequently, over the past 30 years the NIGMS, other institutes of the NIH, other agencies of the federal government and private foundations have instituted a variety of programs designed to redress this disparity. To accomplish this goal, the programs have supported three main types of objectives: a) increasing the participant pool generally by stimulating students' interest at multiple stages, starting as early as middle school; b) retaining the participant pool via remediation, support services such as tutoring and financial aid, bridging programs, and activities designed to motivate; and c) strengthening the participant pool via acquisition of knowledge, academic enrichment and development of skills deemed important for success as a scientist. The types of interventions supported by the various programs have almost always included financial support and encouragement to underrepresented minority undergraduate and graduate students to participate in biomedical and behavioral research in a variety of academic institutions. Emphasis has also been placed on providing financial support and encouragement directly to institutions, with the expectation that they would use their enhanced capacity and resources to encourage and sustain such research among both faculty and students.
While these objectives and interventions are generally held to be necessary and sufficient, the specifics of their implementation are based on implicit assumptions, such as: 1) when students are provided the opportunity to engage in state-of-the-art biomedical and behavioral research, with appropriate facilities, support and mentorship, their appetite will be whetted to enter careers in such research; and 2) once focused, they will show improvement in academic and other skills needed to successfully pursue a research career in these fields. These assumptions are consistent with the experience of many successful scientists and make intuitive sense, and many different programmatic interventions have evolved over the years. These include creation of institutional environments that promote research among students and faculty, on- or off-campus summer research experiences, attendance at professional scientific conferences and research seminars, tutoring in "gate-keeper" courses (e.g., organic chemistry, calculus), subsidy of GRE preparatory courses, post-baccalaureate transitional research experiences (pre-graduate school), and individual research fellowship support or training-grant-type support.
To date, the assumptions underlying these interventions have generally not been systematically analyzed. Neither have the interventions been subjected to rigorous research study. A notable exception is the Merit Workshop at the University of California, Berkeley, which grew out of Uri Treisman's observations of study behaviors of at-risk students that challenged prevailing assumptions (College Mathematics Journal 23: 362-372, 1992). Some of the other relevant works in this field include a critique of the literature on underrepresentation of African Americans in science (Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 9 :361-373, 2003), a longitudinal study on factors that contributed to successful completion of Ph.D. degree in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) disciplines at the University of California (http://cshe.berkeley.edu/publications/docs/minority_phd_final_report.pdf), and studies on the impact of undergraduate research opportunities in pursuing Ph.D. degree in STEM (Science 316:548-549, 2007), interracial interactions on student-faculty relationships and intellectual self-concept (Journal of Higher Education 78: 249-281, 2007), and work-group size and organizational climate on becoming a scientist (Journal of Higher Education 78:311-336, 2007). Nevertheless, there is a need for more research designed to improve our understanding of the existing interventions and develop an empirical base of evidence for new innovative interventions.
The purpose of this funding opportunity is to support research that will test explicitly identified assumptions and hypotheses that undergird existing or potential interventions intended to increase interest, motivation and preparedness for careers in biomedical and behavioral research, with a particular interest in those interventions specifically designed to increase the number of underrepresented minority students entering careers in biomedical and behavioral research. While the expression "careers in biomedical and behavioral research" is intentionally general, it is meant to include basic and/or clinical research in academic, governmental, and/or corporate environments. Applicants should state their specific aims, objectives, goals and, in particular, the expected generalizable lessons to be learned by their proposed research. Since the focus of this FOA is on minority students underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research careers, proposed research involving non-minority students should be comparative, rather than addressing non-minority students exclusively.
Applicants should explicitly identify the assumptions underlying the research question(s) to be studied. Examples of some basic types of questions that might inform this purpose are, but not limited to these:
We recognize that some of these questions and the assumptions underlying them are complex in nature, and expect that their study will require multidisciplinary approaches. Therefore, this FOA strongly encourages collaboration among natural, behavioral and social scientists, and other appropriate experts, as needed. A desirable outcome of the proposed research would be the identification of new principles that would inform practice. Applicants should discuss how recommendations based on the new evidence could be used to modify and/or reinforce existing practices, and/or inform novel interventions. Applicants should also note that this funding opportunity is not designed to support evaluation of (an) existing program(s). The purpose is to stimulate research on the underlying assumptions or hypotheses upon which they are built. If development of a database that is designed to address specific research questions is proposed, the rationale for selection of the specific elements must be explained and justified.
This FOA will result in grants supporting individual and possibly multi-site multidisciplinary research projects. Applicants are advised to incorporate all of the following elements into the proposed experimental design: a) sound and explicit theoretical basis for the hypothesis to be tested; b) appreciation of the unique socio-cultural qualities and issues of the student population(s) selected for study; c) incorporation of appropriate comparison or control group(s) and data analysis methodology, including statistics; d) expected outcomes and/or lessons to be learned. To foster rigor, validity, generalizability, and integration of these elements, a collaborative effort among researchers, program administrators, educators, psychologists, sociologists, biostatisticians, and/or economists, etc., as appropriate, is encouraged. It is expected that the research findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals.
See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal
Citations, for policies related to this
Section II. Award Information
1. Mechanism of Support
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) will use the NIH Research Project Grant (R01) award mechanism.
The applicant will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project.
This FOA uses "Just-in-Time" information concepts. It also uses the modular as well as the non-modular budget formats (see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm). Specifically, if you are a U.S. organization and are submitting an application with direct costs in each year of $250,000 or less (excluding consortium Facilities and Administrative [F&A] costs), use the PHS398 Modular Budget component provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Package and SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (see specifically Section 5.4, "Modular Budget Component," of the Application Guide).
U.S. applicants requesting more than $250,000 in annual direct costs must complete and submit budget requests using the Research & Related Budget component found in the application package for this FOA. See NOT-OD-06-096, August 23, 2006.
Funds Available
Because the nature and scope of the proposed research will vary from application to application, it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. Although the financial plans of the Institutes and Centers (ICs) provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of funds and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
The NIGMS intends to commit approximately $2.4 million dollars (total direct costs) in fiscal year 2008 to fund 6-8 applications.
NIH grants policies as described in the NOT-OD-05-004,
November 2, 2004.
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
1.A. Eligible Institutions
You may submit an application(s) if your institution/organization has any of the following characteristics:
1.B. Eligible Individuals
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the PD/PI is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
More than one PD/PI, or multiple PDs/PIs, may be designated on the application for projects that require a "team science" approach that clearly does not fit the single-PD/PI model. Additional information on the implementation plans and policies and procedures to formally allow more than one PD/PI on individual research projects is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi. All PDs/PIs must be registered in the NIH eRA Commons prior to the submission of the application (see http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/preparing.htm for instructions).
The decision of whether to apply for a single PD/PI or multiple PD/PI grant is the responsibility of the investigators and applicant organizations and should be determined by the scientific goals of the project. Applications for multiple PD/PI grants will require additional information, as outlined in the instructions below. The NIH review criteria for approach, investigators, and environment have been modified to accommodate applications involving either a single PD/PI or multiple PDs/PIs. When considering multiple PDs/PIs, please be aware that the structure and governance of the PD/PI leadership team as well as the knowledge, skills and experience of the individual PD/PIs will be factored into the assessment of the overall scientific merit of the application. Multiple PDs/PIs on a project share the authority and responsibility for leading and directing the project, intellectually and logistically. Each PD/PI is responsible and accountable to the grantee organization, or, as appropriate, to a collaborating organization, for the proper conduct of the project or program, including the submission of required reports. For further information on multiple PDs/PIs, please see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi.
Cost Sharing or Matching
This program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement.
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Applicants may submit more than one application, provided each application is scientifically distinct.
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
To download a SF424
(R&R) Application Package and SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for
completing the SF424 (R&R) forms for this FOA, link to http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html and follow the directions provided on that Web site.
A one-time registration is required for institutions/organizations at both:
PDs/PIs should work with their institutions/organizations to make sure they are registered in the eRA Commons.
Several additional separate actions are required before an applicant institution/organization can submit an electronic application, as follows:
1) Organizational/Institutional Registration in Grants.gov/Get Registered
2) Organizational/Institutional Registration in the eRA Commons
3) Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) Registration in the NIH eRA Commons: Refer to the NIH eRA Commons System (COM) Users Guide.
Both the PD/PI(s) and AOR/SO need separate accounts in the NIH eRA Commons since both are authorized to view the application image.
Note that if a PD/PI is also an NIH peer-reviewer with an Individual DUNS and CCR registration, that particular DUNS number and CCR registration are for the individual reviewer only. These are different than any DUNS number and CCR registration used by an applicant organization. Individual DUNS and CCR registration should be used only for the purposes of personal reimbursement and should not be used on any grant applications submitted to the Federal Government.
Several of the steps of the registration process could take four weeks or more. Therefore, applicants should immediately check with their business official to determine whether their organization/institution is already registered in both Grants.gov and the Commons. The NIH will accept electronic applications only from organizations that have completed all necessary registrations.
1. Request Application Information
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.
Only the forms package directly attached to a specific FOA can be used. You
will not be able to use any other SF424 (R&R) forms (e.g., sample forms,
forms from another FOA), although some of the "Attachment" files may
be useable for more than one FOA.
For further assistance, contact GrantsInfo: Telephone 301-710-0267, Email: firstname.lastname@example.com.
Telecommunications for the hearing impaired: TTY 301-451-5936.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
Prepare all applications using the SF424 (R&R) application forms and in accordance with the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.
The SF424 (R&R) Application Guide is critical to submitting a complete and accurate application to NIH. There are fields within the SF424 (R&R) application components that, although not marked as mandatory, are required by NIH (e.g., the "Credential" log-in field of the "Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile" component must contain the PD/PI's assigned eRA Commons User ID). Agency-specific instructions for such fields are clearly identified in the Application Guide. For additional information, see "Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications."
The SF424 (R&R) application has several components. Some components are required, others are optional. The forms package associated with this FOA in Grants.gov/APPLY includes all applicable components, required and optional. A completed application in response to this FOA includes the data in the following components:
Required Components:
SF424 (R&R) (Cover component)
Research & Related Project/Performance Site Locations
Research & Related Other Project Information
Research & Related Senior/Key Person
PHS398 Cover Page Supplement
PHS398 Research Plan
PHS398 Checklist
PHS398 Modular Budget or Research & Related Budget, as appropriate (See Section IV.6., "Special Instructions," regarding appropriate required budget component.)
Optional Components:
PHS398 Cover Letter File
Research & Related Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form
Applications with Multiple PDs/PIs
When multiple PDs/PIs are proposed, NIH requires one PD/PI to be designated as the "Contact" PI, who will be responsible for all communication between the PDs/PIs and the NIH, for assembling the application materials outlined below, and for coordinating progress reports for the project. The contact PD/PI must meet all eligibility requirements for PD/PI status in the same way as other PDs/PIs, but has no other special roles or responsibilities within the project team beyond those mentioned above.
Information for the Contact PD/PI should be entered in item 15 of the SF424 (R&R) Cover component. All other PDs/PIs should be listed in the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component and assigned the project role of "PD/PI." Please remember that all PDs/PIs must be registered in the eRA Commons prior to application submission. The Commons ID of each PD/PI must be included in the "Credential" field of the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component. Failure to include this data field will cause the application to be rejected.
All projects proposing Multiple PDs/PIs will be required to include a new section describing the leadership of the project.
Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, a new section of the research plan, entitled "Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan" (Section 14 of the Research Plan Component in the SF424 (R&R)), must be included. A rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described. The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the research project should be described, including communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PDs/PIs and other collaborators.
If budget allocation is planned, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PDs/PIs should be delineated in the Leadership Plan. In the event of an award, the requested allocations may be reflected in a footnote on the Notice of Award.
Applications Involving a Single Institution
When all PDs/PIs are within a single institution, follow the instructions contained in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Applications Involving Multiple Institutions
When multiple institutions are involved, one institution must be designated as the prime institution and funding for the other institution(s) must be requested via a subcontract to be administered by the prime institution. When submitting a detailed budget, the prime institution should submit its budget using the Research & Related Budget component. All other institutions should have their individual budgets attached separately to the Research & Related Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form. See Section 4.8 of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for further instruction regarding the use of the subaward budget form.
When submitting a modular budget, the prime institution completes the PHS398 Modular Budget component only. Information concerning the consortium/subcontract budget is provided in the budget justification. Separate budgets for each consortium/subcontract grantee are not required when using the Modular budget format. See Section 5.4 of the Application Guide for further instruction regarding the use of the PHS398 Modular Budget component.
Submission Dates and Times
See Section IV.3.A. for details.
3.A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
Opening Date: September 24, 2007 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): September 24, 2007
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): October 22, 2007
Peer Review Date(s): February-March, 2008
Council Review Date(s): May, 2008
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): July 1, 2008
3.A.1. Letter of Intent
Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the
review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC
staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed in Section IV.3.A.
The letter of intent should be sent to:
Shiva P. Singh, Ph.D.
Division of Minority Opportunities in Research
National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH
45 Center Drive , Suite 2As.37, MSC 6200
Bethesda, MD 20892-6200
Telephone: (301) 594-3900
Email: email@example.com
3.B. Submitting an Application Electronically to the
To submit an application in response to this FOA, applicants should access this FOA via http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html and follow steps 1-4. Note: Applications must only be submitted electronically. PAPER APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
Application Processing
Applications may be submitted on or after the opening date and must be successfully received by Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization) on the application submission/receipt date(s). (See Section IV.3.A. for all dates.) If an application is not submitted by the receipt date(s) and time, the application may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed.
Once an application package has been successfully submitted through Grants.gov, any errors have been addressed, and the assembled application has been created in the eRA Commons, the PD/PI and the Authorized Organization Representative/Signing Official (AOR/SO) have two business days to view the application image.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for
completeness by the CSR and responsiveness by the NIGMS. Incomplete and
non-responsive applications will not be reviewed.
There will be an acknowledgement of receipt of applications from Grants.gov and the Commons. The submitting AOR receives the Grants.gov acknowledgments. The AOR and the PI receive Commons acknowledgments. Information related to the assignment of an application to a Scientific Review Group is also in the Commons.
Note: Since email can be unreliable, it is the responsibility of the applicant to check periodically on their application status in the Commons.
The NIH will not accept any application in response to this funding opportunity that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. However, when a previously unfunded application, originally submitted as an investigator-initiated application, is to be submitted in response to a funding opportunity, it is to be prepared as a NEW application. That is, the application for the funding opportunity must not include an "Introduction" describing the changes and improvements made, and the text must not be marked to indicate the changes from the previous unfunded version of the application.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
5. Funding Restrictions
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable.
A grantee may, at its own risk and without NIH prior approval, incur
obligations and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the beginning
date of the initial budget period of a new or competing renewal (formerly
"competing continuation") award if such costs: are necessary to conduct the
project, and would be allowable under the grant, if awarded, without NIH prior
approval. If specific expenditures would otherwise require prior approval, the
grantee must obtain NIH approval before incurring the cost. NIH prior approval
is required for any costs to be incurred more than 90 days before the beginning
date of the initial budget period of a new or competing renewal award.
The incurrence of pre-award costs in anticipation of a competing or non-competing award imposes no obligation on NIH either to make the award or to increase the amount of the approved budget if an award is made for less than the amount anticipated and is inadequate to cover the pre-award costs incurred. NIH expects the grantee to be fully aware that pre-award costs result in borrowing against future support and that such borrowing must not impair the grantee's ability to accomplish the project objectives in the approved time frame or in any way adversely affect the conduct of the project. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
6. Other Submission Requirements
PD/PI Credential (e.g., Agency Login)
The NIH requires the PD/PI(s) to fill in his/her Commons User ID in the "PROFILE – Project Director/Principal Investigator" section, "Credential" log-in field of the "Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile" component.
Organizational DUNS
The applicant organization must include its DUNS number in its Organization Profile in the eRA Commons. This DUNS number must match the DUNS number provided at CCR registration with Grants.gov. For additional information, see "Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications."
PHS398 Research Plan Component Sections
Items 2-5 of the PHS398 Research Plan component are limited to 25 pages. While each section of the Research Plan component needs to be uploaded separately as a PDF attachment, applicants are encouraged to construct the Research Plan component as a single document, separating sections into distinct PDF attachments just before uploading the files. This approach will enable applicants to better monitor formatting requirements such as page limits. All attachments must be provided to NIH in PDF format, filenames must be included with no spaces or special characters, and a .pdf extension must be used.
All application instructions outlined in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide are to be followed, incorporating "Just-in-Time" information concepts, and with the following additional requirements:
Special Instructions for Modular Grant applications
R01 applications from U.S. institutions/organizations requesting up to $250,000 per year in direct costs (excluding consortium F&A costs) must be submitted in a modular budget format. Additional information on modular budgets is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm. When submitting a modular budget, the applicant organization will include only the PHS398 Modular Budget component. See Section 5.4 of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for further instructions regarding the use of the PHS398 Modular Budget component.
Appendix Materials
NIH has published new limitations on grant application appendix materials to encourage applications to be as concise as possible while containing the information needed for expert scientific review. See https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-07-018.html.
Applicants must follow the specific instructions on Appendix materials as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (See https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/index.htm).
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations of the Research Plan component. An application that does not observe the required page limitations may be delayed in the review process.
Note: While each section of the PHS398 Research Plan component needs to be uploaded separately as a PDF attachment, applicants are encouraged to construct the Research Plan component as a single document, separating sections into distinct PDF attachments just before uploading the files. This approach will enable applicants to monitor better formatting requirements such as page limits. All attachments must be provided to NIH in PDF format, filenames must be included with no spaces or special characters, and a .pdf extension must be used.
Plan for Sharing Research Data
The precise content of the data-sharing plan will vary, depending on the data being collected and how the investigator is planning to share the data. Applicants who are planning to share data may wish to describe briefly the expected schedule for data sharing, the format of the final dataset, the documentation to be provided, whether or not any analytic tools also will be provided, whether or not a data-sharing agreement will be required and, if so, a brief description of such an agreement (including the criteria for deciding who can receive the data and whether or not any conditions will be placed on their use), and the mode of data sharing (e.g., under their own auspices by mailing a disk or posting data on their institutional or personal Web site, through a data archive or enclave). Investigators choosing to share under their own auspices may wish to enter into a data-sharing agreement. References to data sharing may also be appropriate in other sections of the application.
All applicants must
include a plan for sharing research data in their application. The data sharing
policy is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing.
All investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a
description of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data
sharing is not possible.
The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data will be assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
Sharing Research Resources
policy expects that grant recipients make unique research resources readily
available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific
community after publication (See the NIH Grants Policy Statement https://grants.nih.gov/archive/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm#_Toc54600131).
Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a sharing
research resources plan addressing how unique research resources will be shared
or explain why sharing is not possible.
The adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any related data sharing plans will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section VI.3., "Reporting."
Section V. Application Review Information
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
2. Review and Selection Process
Applications that are complete and responsive to the FOA will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by NIGMS in accordance with the review criteria stated below.
As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:
Applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
The goals of NIH supported research are to advance our understanding of biological systems, to improve the control of disease, and to enhance health. In their written critiques, reviewers will be asked to comment on each of the following criteria in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will be addressed and considered in assigning the overall score, weighting them as appropriate for each application.
Note that an
application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to
have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority score. For
example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work that by its
nature is not innovative but is essential to move a field forward.
Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field? If the aims of the application are achieved, what is the likelihood that novel interventions can result that will increase the numbers of underrepresented minority students who enter mainstream biomedical and/or behavioral research careers at highly competitive levels?
Approach: Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, is the leadership approach, including the designated roles and responsibilities, governance, and organizational structure, consistent with and justified by the aims of the project and the expertise of each of the PDs/PIs? Is the sample size adequate to provide meaningful information?
Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?
Investigators: Are the PD/PI(s)
and other key personnel appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this
work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal
investigator and other researchers? Does the PD/PI(s) and investigative team
bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?
Environment: Do(es) the scientific environment(s) in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?
2.A. Additional Review Criteria
In addition to the above criteria, the following items will continue to be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the priority score:
Protection of Human Subjects from Research Risk: The involvement of human
subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation in
the proposed research will be assessed. See the "Human Subjects Sections"
of the PHS398 Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R)..
Inclusion of Women, Minorities and Children in Research: The adequacy of plans to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research will be assessed. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. See the "Human Subjects Sections" of the PHS398 Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R)
2.B. Additional Review Considerations
Budget and Period of Support: The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the appropriateness of the requested period of support in relation to the proposed research may be assessed by the reviewers. The priority score should not be affected by the evaluation of the budget.
2.C. Sharing Research Data
Sharing Plan: The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not
sharing research data will be assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers
will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of
scientific merit or the priority score. The presence of a data sharing plan
will be part of the terms and conditions of the award. The funding organization
will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing policy.
2.D. Sharing Research Resources
NIH policy expects that grant recipients make unique research resources readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication (See the NIH Grants Policy Statement https://grants.nih.gov/archive/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm#_Toc54600131). Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a sharing research resources plan addressing how unique research resources will be shared or explain why sharing is not possible.
Program staff will be responsible for the administrative review of the plan for sharing research resources.
adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any related data sharing plans will
be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making
recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource
sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each Non-Competing Grant
Progress Report (PHS 2590), See Section VI.3.,
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Not applicable
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Award Notices
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the NIH eRA Commons.
the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request
"just-in-time" information from the applicant. For details,
applicants may refer to the NIH
Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards,
Subpart A: General.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document. Once all administrative and programmatic issues have been resolved, the NoA will be generated via email notification from the awarding component to the grantee business official.
Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs. See Section IV.5., "Funding Restrictions."
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities.
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
encourage your inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the
opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall
into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants
management issues:
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s):
Shiva P. Singh, Ph.D.
Division of Minority Opportunities in Research
National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH
45 Center Drive , Suite 2As.37, MSC 6200
Bethesda, MD 20892-6200
Telephone: (301) 594-3900
Email: email@example.com
2. Peer Review Contact(s):
Helen R. Sunshine,
Chief, Office of Scientific Review
National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH
45 Center Drive , Room 3AN.12, MSC 6200
Bethesda, MD 20892-6200
Telephone: (301) 594-2881
Email: email@example.com
3. Financial/Grants Management Contact(s):
Antoinette Holland
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH
45 Center Drive , Room 2AN.50B, MSC 6200
Bethesda, MD 20892-6200
Telephone: (301) 594-5132
Email: hollanda @nigms.nih.gov
Section VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
Human Subjects
Federal regulations (45 CFR 46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).
Sharing Research Data:
Investigators submitting an NIH application seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year are expected to include a plan for data sharing or state why this is not possible (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
Investigators should seek guidance from their institutions, on issues related to institutional policies and local IRB rules, as well as local, State and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy Rule. Reviewers will consider the data sharing plan but will not factor the plan into the determination of the scientific merit or the priority score.
to Research Data through the Freedom of Information Act:
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm. Applicants may wish to place data collected under this funding opportunity in a public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include information about this in the budget justification section of the application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider use of data collected under this award.
Inclusion of Women And Minorities in Clinical Research:
It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling justification is provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing clinical research should read the "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research" (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html); a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm. The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials consistent with the SF424 (R&R) application; and updated roles and responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences.
Inclusion of Children as Participants in Clinical Research:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included in all clinical research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them.
All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in research involving human subjects (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).
Required Education on the Protection of Human Subject Participants:
NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators submitting NIH applications for research involving human subjects and individuals designated as key personnel. The policy is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
NIH Public Access Policy:
NIH-funded investigators are requested to submit to the NIH manuscript submission (NIHMS) system (http://www.nihms.nih.gov/) at PubMed Central (PMC) an electronic version of the author's final manuscript upon acceptance for publication, resulting from research supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH. The author's final manuscript is defined as the final version accepted for journal publication, and includes all modifications from the publishing peer review process.
NIH is requesting that authors submit manuscripts resulting from 1) currently funded NIH research projects or 2) previously supported NIH research projects if they are accepted for publication on or after May 2, 2005. The NIH Public Access Policy applies to all research grant and career development award mechanisms, cooperative agreements, contracts, Institutional and Individual Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards, as well as NIH intramural research studies. The Policy applies to peer-reviewed, original research publications that have been supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH, but it does not apply to book chapters, editorials, reviews, or conference proceedings. Publications resulting from non-NIH-supported research projects should not be submitted.
For more information about the Policy or the submission process, please visit the NIH Public Access Policy Web site at http://publicaccess.nih.gov// and view the Policy or other Resources and Tools, including the Authors' Manual.
Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information:
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued final modification to the "Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information", the "Privacy Rule", on August 14, 2002. The Privacy Rule is a federal regulation under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection of individually identifiable health information, and is administered and enforced by the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR website (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/) provides information on the Privacy Rule, including a complete Regulation Text and a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered entity?" Information on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes involving the review, funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative agreements, and research contracts can be found at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs in NIH Grant Applications or Appendices:
All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. For publications listed in the appendix and/or Progress report, Internet addresses (URLs) or PubMed Central (PMC) submission identification numbers must be used for publicly accessible on-line journal articles. Publicly accessible on-line journal articles or PMC articles/manuscripts accepted for publication that are directly relevant to the project may be included only as URLs or PMC submission identification numbers accompanying the full reference in either the Bibliography & References Cited section, the Progress Report Publication List section, or the Biographical Sketch section of the NIH grant application. A URL or PMC submission identification number citation may be repeated in each of these sections as appropriate. There is no limit to the number of URLs or PMC submission identification numbers that can be cited.
People 2010:
The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This FOA is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
Authority and Regulations:
This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
Office of Extramural
Research (OER)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.


text:
|Instrument(s): Violin and Piano
|Style: Classical
|Arranger(s): n/a
|Opus: KV 379
|Date of composition: 1781
|Source: Schirmer, 1906, ed. H. Schradieck
|Copyright: Public Domain
|Last updated: 2005/Jul/25. View change history
|Music ID Number: Mutopia-2005/07/25-571
|Typeset using: LilyPond, version 2.6.1
|LilyPond files (zipped)
|MIDI files (zipped)
|A4 PDF files (zipped)
|Letter PDF files (zipped)
This edition is a reproduction of an old XIX-century edition. The reproduction is as faithful as possible: however, I chose to remove pedal markings because of reasons stated below.
I compared this old edition with the Neue Mozart Ausgabe (NMA), which is considered to be the "reference" edition and closely follows the autograph. The present edition shows significant discrepances from the NMA in slurs, dynamics and articulations in general. For instance, while Mozart used distinctly dots and strokes above noteheads to indicate staccato and spiccato, in the present edition all Mozart's strokes are changed into dots (e.g. Violin, bar 67 in the Allegro have strokes above the last three G, and the same for the following similar bars). The unknown editor chose to extensively use pedal markings, which I chose not to reproduce in this edition, considering that Mozart never notated them explicitly in his autographs and therefore we cannot know exactly how he used the pedal (however, we do know that he enjoyed a lot using it!).
An interesting article about the composition of this beautiful violin sonata was written by Dennis Pajot and published on the MozartForum (http://www.mozartforum.com). You can read it at the following address:
July 2005
Maurizio Tomasi
|Maintainer: Maurizio Tomasi
|zio_tom78 (at) hotmail.com