alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 162.226 To whom can rent payments be made under an agricultural lease? ( a ) An agricultural lease must specify whether rent payments will be made directly to the Indian landowners or to us on behalf of the Indian landowners. If the lease provides for payment to be made directly to the Indian landowners, the lease must also require that the tenant retain specific documentation evidencing proof of payment, such as canceled checks, cash receipt vouchers, or copies of money orders or cashier's checks, consistent with the provisions of §§ 162.112 and 162.113 of this part.
( b ) Rent payments made directly to the Indian landowners must be made to the parties specified in the lease, unless the tenant receives notice of a change of ownership. Unless otherwise provided in the lease, rent payments may not be made payable directly to anyone other than the Indian landowners.
( c ) A lease that provides for rent payments to be made directly to the Indian landowners must also provide for such payments to be suspended and the rent thereafter paid to us, rather than directly to the Indian landowners, if: ( 1 ) An Indian landowner dies;
( 2 ) An Indian landowner requests that payment be made to us;
( 3 ) An Indian landowner is found by us to be in need of assistance in managing his/her financial affairs; or
( 4 ) We determine, in our discretion and after consultation with the Indian landowner(s), that direct payment should be discontinued.
Statement Pursuant to Section
906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned, Richard Rubin, CEO, CFO and
Chairman of Peregrine Industries, Inc, a Florida corporation, hereby makes the following
certification as required by Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, with
respect to the following of this report filed pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934: Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31,
2006.

The undersigned certifies that the above
quarterly report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in the above report fairly presents, in
all respects, the financial condition of Peregrine Industries, Inc. and results of its
operations.

Date: February 9, 2007/s/ Richard RubinCEO, CFO and Chairman
#### John C. Calhoun, Appellant, v. Commonwealth Trust Company, Respondent.

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion.
Ute Mountain Ute/EPA Consultation Re: Subpart W Rulemaking 

July 10, 2014- Towaoc, CO and Washington, DC 

Attendees 

NAME AFFILIATION 

Manual Heart Ute Mountain Ute – Chairman 

Priscilla BlackHawk Rentz Ute Mountain Ute – Secretary 

Deanne Wall Ute Mountain Ute – Council Woman 

Celene Hawkins Ute Mountain Ute – General Counsel’s Office 

Scott Clow Ute Mountain Ute – Environmental Programs 

Michael King Ute Mountain Ute – Environmental Programs 

Colin Larrick Ute Mountain Ute – Environmental Programs 

Tomoe Natori Ute Mountain Ute – Environmental Programs 

H. Michael Keller Ute Mountain Ute – Utah Legal Counsel (VanCott firm) 

Reid Rosnick U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (by phone) 

Mike Flynn U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (by phone) 

Jonathan Edwards U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (by phone) 

Tom Peake U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (by phone) 

Ingrid Rosencrantz U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (by phone) 

Jed Harrison U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (by phone) 

Pat Childers U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation (by phone) 

Alfreda Mitre U.S. EPA Region 8 Tribal Assistance Program/Senior Policy Advisor 

Deb Thomas U.S. EPA Region 8 Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Affairs 

Angelique Diaz U.S. EPA Region 8 Air Program 

Art Palomares U.S. EPA Region 8 Water Enforcement Program (by phone) 

Paul Logan U.S. EPA Region 8 Office of Regional Counsel (by phone) 

Over the course of the meeting the Tribe and the Agency held discussions on issues related to the 

Subpart W rulemaking. The issues centered on radon emissions from evaporation ponds, liner 

requirements for conventional mills and potential for radon emissions in the impoundments 

during the active life of the impoundments. The Tribe and the Agency agreed to meet again, at a 

later date, to have further discussions on these issues.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# Americans, Koreans Honor Bayonet Hill Soldiers

By Airman 1st Class Ashley J. Thum51st Fighter Wing Public Affairs

                OSAN AIR BASE, Republic of Korea  –              http://www.osan.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123379596

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
#### § 162.249 Will any special fees be assessed on delinquent rent payments due under an agricultural lease?

The following special fees will be assessed if rent is not paid in the time and manner required, in addition to any interest or late payment penalties that must be paid to the Indian landowners under an agricultural lease. The following special fees will be assessed to cover administrative costs incurred by the United States in the collection of the debt:

| The tenant will pay * * * | For * * * |
| --- | --- |
| (a) $50.00 | Administrative fee for dishonored checks. |
| (b) $15.00 | Administrative fee for BIA processing of each notice or demand letter. |
| (c) 18% of balance due | Administrative fee charged by Treasury following referral for collection of delinquent debt. |
### §20405. Force shaping authority

(a) Authority.—The Secretary of the Air Force may, solely for the purpose of restructuring the Space Force—

(1) discharge an officer described in subsection (b); or

(2) involuntarily release such an officer from sustained duty.

(b) Covered Officers.—

(1) The authority under this section may be exercised in the case of an officer of the Space Force serving on sustained duty who—

(A) has completed not more than six years of service as a commissioned officer in the armed forces; or

(B) has completed more than six years of service as a commissioned officer in the armed forces, but has not completed the minimum service obligation applicable to that officer.

(2) In this subsection, the term "minimum service obligation", with respect to a member of the Space Force, means the initial period of required active duty service applicable to the member, together with any additional period of required active duty service incurred by that member during the member's initial period of required active duty service.

(c) Regulations.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall prescribe regulations for the exercise of the Secretary's authority under this section.

(Added Pub. L. 118–31, div. A, title XVII, §1718(a), Dec. 22, 2023, 137 Stat. 658.)
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite ofcataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in theevent that publications are no longer available from the original publishingagency site. (Historical purposes)

**Title:** Out of the crucible 

pdf;epub;mobi

SuDoc:D 104.2:C 73/4
Item Number:0351-A (online)
CGP system Number: 001037253
Exhibit 33.3



|     |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |                                    
|---- |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------------
|LOGO |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1 Mortgage Way Mt. Laurel, NJ
08054

REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA

PHHMortgage Corporation (the Asserting Party) is responsible for assessing compliance as of December 31, 2017 and for the period from
January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the Reporting Period) with the servicing criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of Federal Regulations (the CFR), except for criteria set forth in
Section 229.1122(d)(3)(i)(c), (d)(4)(xv) and (d)(1)(iii) of the CFR, which the Asserting Party has concluded are not applicable to the servicing activities it performs with respect to the transactions covered by this report (the
Applicable Servicing Criteria). The criteria set forth in Section 229.1122 (d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(4)(iv), (d)(4)(vii), (d)(4)(viii) and (d)(4)(xi) of the CFR are performed by outsource providers on behalf of the Asserting Party;
however, the Asserting Party has monitored the outsourcing of these criteria and assumes responsibility for compliance. The transactions covered by this report include all non-agency loan sale agreements
executed after January 1, 2006 as well as all re-securitization transactions after January 1, 2006 for which the Asserting Party served as servicer (the Platform).

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2017 and for the Reporting Period and has concluded that
the Asserting Party has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria with respect to the Platform taken as a whole.

Deloitte & Touche, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the
Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Period as set forth in this assertion.



|                               
|-------------------------------
|PHH Mortgage Corporation       
|                               
|Date: February 23, 2018        
|                               
|/s/ Robert B. Crowl            
|Robert B. Crowl                
|President                      
|                               
|/s/ Stephen Staid              
|Stephen Staid                  
|Senior Vice PresidentServicing
§ 1000.301 When may the Secretary reassume a Federal program operated by a Tribe/Consortium under an AFA? The Secretary may reassume any Federal program operated by a Tribe/Consortium upon a finding of imminent jeopardy to: ( a ) A physical trust asset;
( b ) A natural resource; or
( c ) Public health and safety.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

JACK M. HAMILTON , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 2023

- 1949

[ February 29, 2024 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Caroline C. Shepherd

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 2008

- CF

- 004881

- AXXX

- MB

.
Jack M. Hamilton, Florida City, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed.

C I KLIN , L EVINE and A RTAU , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Order entered January 10, 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 16 - 00540 - CR No. 05 - 16 - 0054 1 - CR JAAIBER DENZEL RANDA LL, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee O n Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F16 - 52855 - L & F16 - 52856 - L



### O RDER The Court has before it appellant’s motion to extend time to file his pro se response. We GRANT the motion and ORDER his pro se r esponse filed on or before February 3, 2017.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
Exhibit 31.2

AVALON HOLDINGS CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

CERTIFICATION

I, Timothy C. Coxson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Avalon Holdings Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly 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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a
date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the Evaluation Date); and

c) presented in this quarterly
report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The
registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability
to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and

6. The registrants other certifying officer and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: November 10, 2006



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Timothy C. Coxson  
|Timothy C. Coxson      
|Chief Financial Officer
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# Korean American Friendship Festival Strengthens Bonds 

By Senior Airman Matthew Lancaster

                OSAN AIR BASE, Republic of Korea  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

pacom

news

articles
§ 162.447 What is the approval process for an amendment to a business lease? ( a ) When we receive an amendment that meets the requirements of this subpart, we will notify the parties of the date we receive it. We have 30 days from receipt of the executed amendment, proof of required consents, and required documentation to approve or disapprove the amendment or inform the parties in writing that we need additional review time. Our determination whether to approve the amendment will be in writing and will state the basis for our approval or disapproval.
( b ) Our letter informing the parties that we need additional review time must identify our initial concerns and invite the parties to respond within 15 days of the date of the letter. We have 30 days from sending the letter informing the parties that we need additional time to approve or disapprove the amendment.
( c ) If we do not meet the deadline in paragraph (a) or this section, or paragraph (b) of this section if applicable, the amendment is deemed approved to the extent consistent with Federal law. Unless the lease provides otherwise, provisions of the amendment that are inconsistent with Federal law will be severed and unenforceable; all other provisions of the amendment will remain in force.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Pacific Partnership Concludes Successful Visit to Solomon Islands

By Sgt. James GulliverNavy Public Affairs Support Element West

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News/Articles
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE FELIPE AREVALO-TICAS,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-73285

Agency No. A088-016-851

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 22, 2015** 

Before: GOODWIN, BYBEE, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Jose Felipe Arevalo-Ticas, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 

FILED

APR 27 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

evidence the agency’s factual findings, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070

(9th Cir. 2008), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Arevalo-Ticas

failed to establish past persecution or a fear of future persecution on account of a

protected ground based on threats and extortion by gang members in El Salvador. 

See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An alien’s desire to be

free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang

members bears no nexus to a protected ground.”); see also Parussimova v.

Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009) (the REAL ID Act “requires that a

protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s

persecution”). We do not consider Arevalo-Ticas’s social group claim because the

BIA did not decide the issue, see Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 829

(9th Cir. 2011) (review limited to the grounds relied on by the BIA), and ArevaloTicas does not contend the BIA erred in finding that his social group claim was not

properly before it, see Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.

1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are

waived). Thus, Arevalo-Ticas’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. 

See Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2001).

2 11-73285
We lack jurisdiction to review the denial of Arevalo-Ticas’s CAT claim,

because he failed to exhaust his challenge before the BIA. See Barron, 358 F.3d at

677-78. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

3 11-73285