alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4552 

AN ACT 

To extend the program for authority to acquire innovative 

commercial items using general solicitation procedures. 

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

†S 4552 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Extension of Authority 

3 to Acquire Innovative Commercial Items Act of 2022’’. 

4 SEC. 2. INNOVATIVE COMMERCIAL ITEMS. 

5 Section 880 of the National Defense Authorization 

6 Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (41 U.S.C. 3301 note) is amend7 ed— 

8 (1) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ 

9 and inserting ‘‘$25,000,000’’; 

10 (2) by amending subsection (f) to read as fol11 lows: 

12 ‘‘(f) DEFINITIONS.—In this section— 

13 ‘‘(1) the term ‘commercial product’— 

14 ‘‘(A) has the meaning given the term ‘com15 mercial item’ in section 2.101 of the Federal 

16 Acquisition Regulation; and 

17 ‘‘(B) includes a commercial product or a 

18 commercial service, as those terms are defined 

19 in sections 103 and 103a, respectively, of this 

20 title; and 

21 ‘‘(2) the term ‘innovative’ means— 

22 ‘‘(A) any new technology, process, or meth23 od, including research and development; or 

24 ‘‘(B) any new application of an existing 

25 technology, process, or method.’’; and 
3 

†S 4552 ES

1 (3) in subsection (g), by striking ‘‘2022’’ and 

2 inserting ‘‘2027’’. 

Passed the Senate September 20, 2022. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4552 

AN ACT 

To extend the program for authority to acquire intion procedures. novative commercial items using general solicita-
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 501.98

 502.39

 502.55

 503.04

 502.32

 502.34

 502.24

 502.47

 502.47

 502.73

 502.96

 502.85

 503.02

 502.88

 503.11

 503.42

 503.21

 503.36

 504.05

 504.00

 503.99

 504.24

 505.07

 505.04

 504.71

 504.89

 504.29

 503.66

 504.25

 504.55

 57,468

 57,927

 58,106

 58,656

 57,848

 57,871

 57,759

 58,016

 58,016

 58,308

 58,565

 58,442

 58,633

 58,476

 58,735

 59,089

 58,849

 59,020

 59,808

 59,750

 59,739

 60,028

 60,989

 60,954

 60,571

 60,780

 60,086

 59,362

 60,039

 60,386

STORAGE

+496

+459

+179

+550

-808

+23

-112

+257

+0

+292

+257

-123

+191

-157

+259

+354

-240

+171

+788

-58

-11

+289

+961

-35

-383

+209

-694

-724

+677

+347

CHANGE

1,579

1,484

1,377

1,574

858

1,293

1,184

1,407

1,184

1,357

1,313

1,034

1,338

1,153

1,275

1,243

851

1,122

1,635

1,377

1,642

1,994

2,141

1,447

1,239

1,593

1,294

1,441

2,291

1,901

INFLOW

 1,324

 1,249

 1,271

 1,289

 1,260

 1,272

 1,231

 1,267

 1,172

 1,199

 1,126

 1,095

 1,236

 1,227

 1,139

 1,058

 967

 1,028

 1,232

 1,403

 1,641

 1,846

 1,651

 1,458

 1,421

 1,479

 1,635

 1,798

 1,941

 1,602

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 52

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 116

OUTLET

 5

 4

 16

 8

 5

 9

 9

 10

 12

 11

 5

 1

 6

 5

 5

 7

 5

 8

 6

 3

 7

 2

 6

 7

 11

 9

 9

 8

 9

 8

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2022 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 05/01/2022

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +3,414 42,621 40,517 0 168 216

ACRE-FEET +3,414 84,539 80,365 0 333 428

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 80,365

SPILL 0 80,698

 56,972

OUTLET 333

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 1,546

 1,478

 1,383

 1,568

 866

 1,284

 1,158

 1,422

 1,176

 1,345

 1,303

 1,049

 1,340

 1,136

 1,283

 1,196

 848

 1,119

 1,622

 1,371

 1,601

 1,985

 2,165

 1,416

 1,225

 1,566

 1,321

 1,449

 2,279

 1,916

 42,416

 84,132

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND EVAPORATION.

(1) EVAPORATION RECORDS TAKEN FROM NEW MELONES PAN.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ No. 1D 18

- 3554

_____________________________ J UDY A NN J EAN K EETER , e t a l , Appellant,

v.

T HE B ANK OF N EW Y ORK M ELLON FICA T HE B ANK OF N EW Y ORK , a s Trustee f or t he Certificateh olders o f C WALT , Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2006

- 0 A 11, Mortgage Pass

t hrough Certificates , Series 2006

- 0A11; UNKNOWN TENANT IN POSSESSION OF THE SU BJECT PROPERTY , Appellee s.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval Coun ty

. Virginia Norton , Judge

. December 3, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
D ISMISSED

. W OLF , K ELSEY , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____ ________________________

Judy Ann Jean Keeter, pro se , Appellant.
No appearance for Appellee s

.
§ 2520.0-5 Definitions. ( a ) As used in the desert-land laws and the regulations of this subpart: ( 1 ) *Reclamation* requires conducting water in adequate amounts and quality to the land so as to render it available for distribution when needed for irrigation and cultivation.
( 2 ) *Cultivation* requires the operation, practice, or act of tillage or preparation of land for seed, and keeping the ground in a state favorable for the growth of crops.
( 3 ) *Irrigation* requires the application of water to land for the purpose of growing crops.
( 4 ) *Crop* includes any agricultural product to which the land under consideration is generally adapted and which would return a fair reward for the expense of producing it.
( 5 ) *Water supply,* to be adequate, must be sufficient to irrigate successfully and to reclaim all of the irrigable land embraced in an entry.
( 6 ) *Water right* means the authority, whether by prior ownership, contract, purchase, or appropriation in accordance with state law, to use water on the land to be irrigated.
#### Maynard H. Tompkins, Appellant, v. Waldo C. Tompkins et al., Defendants, and Sarah J. Sheldon et al., Defendants-Respondents.

Ho opinion. Present — Close, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 974

 916

 955

 934

 870

 856

 813

 794

 759

 733

 706

 719

 718

 593

 393

 375

 338

 326

 311

 315

 318

 314

 311

 306

 294

 292

 292

 293

 284

 274

 899

 861

 882

 870

 834

 797

 769

 740

 722

 694

 668

 626

 586

 393

 359

 332

 317

 305

 292

 295

 291

 298

 292

 269

 268

 280

 270

 262

 263

 255

 930

 892

 926

 902

 844

 825

 787

 762

 739

 709

 688

 658

 629

 489

 371

 353

 326

 312

 302

 305

 302

 306

 301

 288

 285

 287

 285

 279

 273

 266

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2002 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 8, 2002

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

30 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

30 DAY

AVG 

MEAN

 930

 1,822

 2,748

 3,650

 4,494

 5,319

 6,106

 6,868

 7,607

 8,316

 9,004

 9,662

 10,291

 10,780

 11,151

 11,504

 11,830

 12,142

 12,444

 12,749

 13,051

 13,357

 13,658

 13,946

 14,231

 14,518

 14,803

 15,082

 15,355

 15,621

 930

 911

 916

 913

 899

 887

 872

 859

 845

 832

 819

 805

 792

 770

 743

 719

 696

 675

 655

 637

 621

 607

 594

 581

 569

 558

 548

 539

 529

 521

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

30 DAY ACCUM MEAN and 30 DAY AVG MEAN columns are 30 day runnings, except for April 1 and September 1, 

 where they do not go back 30 days.

VERNALIS ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
### §1778e. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 106–568, title VI, §607, Dec. 27, 2000, 114 Stat. 2911, which related to conveyances to certain water districts of permanent flowage easements as to Indian trust lands and Federal lands, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-50266 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MANUEL ESPARZA, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-95-CV-358

- - - - - - - - - - December 3, 1996 Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Manuel Esparza, Jr., has filed a motion to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) the district court’s denial of his motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Having reviewed Esparza’s motion, appellate brief and the record, we find that Esparza knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to seek relief under § 2255. See United States v. Wilkes , 20 F.3d 651, 653 (5th Cir. 1994). The court has not yet decided whether a certificate ofNo. 96-50266 - 2 - appealability (“COA”) is required under the circumstances of this appeal or whether the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) applies to appeals from the denial of federal habeas relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; see also Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (PLRA). We need not resolve those issues here because we conclude that the appeal does not involve a nonfrivolous appellate issue. Accordingly, we DENY the motion for IFP and DISMISS the appeal as frivolous. Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Esparza’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED also.
IFP DENIED; APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
#### Herve Fonkou TAKOULO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-1835.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 31, 2006.

Decided March 1, 2006.

Edwin K. Fogam, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, James A. Hunolt, Office of Immigration Litigation, Meredith L. Burrell, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Herve Fonkou Takoulo, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) adopting and affirming the immigration judge’s denial of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.

In his petition for review, Takoulo challenges the determination that he failed to *756establish his eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” *INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Takoulo fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Accordingly, we cannot grant the relief that he seeks.

Additionally, we uphold the denial of Takoulo’s request for withholding of removal. “Because the burden of proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum — even though the facts that must be proved are the same — an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” *Camara v. Ashcroft,*378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir.2004). Because Takoulo fails to show that he is eligible for asylum, he cannot meet the higher standard for withholding of removal.1

Accordingly, although we grant the pending motion to file a supplemental appendix, we deny the petition for review.2 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED*

1

. Takoulo does not challenge the immigration judge's denial of his request for protection under the Convention Against Torture in his petition for review.

2

. To the extent that Takoulo challenges the immigration judge’s refusal to allow his witness to testify, we find that he has waived this claim by failing to raise it before the Board. *See Astka v. Ashcroft,*362 F.3d 264, 267 n. 3 (4th Cir.2004); *Farrokhi v. INS,*900 F.2d 697, 700 (4th Cir.1990).
§ 2806.20 What is the rent for a linear right-of-way grant? ( a ) Except as described in § 2806.26 of this chapter, the BLM will use the Per Acre Rent Schedule (see paragraph (c) of this section) to calculate rent for all linear right-of-way authorizations, regardless of the granting authority (FLPMA, MLA, and their predecessors). Counties (or other geographical areas) are assigned to an appropriate zone in accordance with § 2806.21. The BLM will adjust the per acre rent values in the schedule annually in accordance with § 2806.22(a), and it will revise the schedule at the end of each 10-year period in accordance with § 2806.22(b).
( b ) The annual per acre rent for all types of linear right-of-way facilities is the product of 4 factors: The per acre zone value multiplied by the encumbrance factor multiplied by the rate of return multiplied by the annual adjustment factor (see § 2806.22(a)).
( c ) You may obtain a copy of the current Per Acre Rent Schedule from any BLM state, district, or field office or by writing the address found under § 2804.14(c) of this part. We also post the current rent schedule at *http://www.blm.gov .*
[73 FR 65071, Oct. 31, 2008, as amended at 81 FR 92216, Dec. 19, 2016; 89 FR 25964, Apr. 12, 2024; 89 FR 35680, May 1, 2024]
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Jerry Donell Hart, Appellant

No. 06-23-00236-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 102nd District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

23F0624-102). Panel consists of Chief 

Justice Stevens and Justices van Cleef and 

Rambin. Memorandum Opinion delivered 

by Justice van Cleef. 

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Jerry Donell Hart, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 4, 2024

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

SCOTT E. STEVENS

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 840.50

 840.50

 840.50

 840.51

 840.52

 840.52

 840.52

 840.52

 840.52

 840.52

 840.53

 840.55

 840.56

 840.56

 840.55

 840.55

 840.55

 840.55

 840.54

 840.53

 840.52

 840.53

 840.54

 840.54

 840.55

 840.55

 840.54

 840.54

 840.50

 840.50

 840.50

 49.74

 49.74

 49.74

 49.75

 49.76

 49.76

 49.76

 49.76

 49.76

 49.76

 49.78

 49.80

 49.82

 49.82

 49.80

 49.80

 49.80

 49.80

 49.79

 49.78

 49.76

 49.78

 49.79

 49.79

 49.80

 49.80

 49.79

 49.79

 49.74

 49.74

 49.74

STORAGE

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.01

+0.01

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.01

+0.03

+0.01

+0.00

-0.01

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

-0.01

-0.01

-0.01

+0.01

+0.01

+0.00

+0.01

+0.00

-0.01

+0.00

-0.05

+0.00

+0.00

CHANGE

54

54

54

60

61

54

55

51

52

56

63

67

61

54

49

53

52

54

47

47

47

61

61

54

59

54

45

54

28

52

52

INFLOW

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

SPILL

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

OUTLET

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 15

 11

 12

 16

 16

 14

 14

 14

 16

 13

 12

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 12

 14

 12

 14

 14

 12

 12

C.F.S.

 .33

 .33

 .33

 .35

 .34

 .34

 .36

 .26

 .30

 .38

 .40

 .35

 .35

 .35

 .39

 .32

 .30

 .35

 .34

 .34

 .33

 .34

 .33

 .33

 .30

 .34

 .30

 .33

 .33

 .30

 .30

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

AUGUST 2006 RUN DATE: 12/19/2006

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +.00 1,665 620 620 425 10.34 .00

ACRE-FEET +0 3,303 1,230 1,230 843

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 1,230

OUTLET

TOTAL

 1,230

 2,460

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .00

JULY 1, 2006 .00

 49.74

STONY GORGE RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS
#### § 702.392 Appeals; what may be appealed.

An appeal raising a substantial question of law or fact may be taken from a decision with respect to a claim under the Act. Such appeals may be taken from compensation orders when they have been filed as provided for in § 702.349.
#### § 2916.1-1 Commencement of operations; stocking lands.

The lessee shall, within one year from the date of issuance of the lease, commence operations by taking possession of the leased area, and by placing thereon within that period such improvements as may be needed for such operations and as will show good faith, and shall thereafter develop the fur-farming enterprise on the leased area with reasonable diligence. The lessee shall stock the leased area with the minimum of fur-bearing animals required by the lease within the periods specified in the lease.
§ 3175.112 Sampling probe and tubing. ( a ) All gas samples must be taken from a sample probe that complies with the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
( b ) *Location of sample probe.* ( 1 ) The sample probe must be located in the meter tube in accordance with API 14.1, Subsection 6.4.2 (incorporated by reference, see § 3175.30), and must be the first obstruction downstream of the primary device.
( 2 ) The sample probe must be exposed to the same ambient temperature as the primary device. The operator may accomplish this by physically locating the sample probe in the same ambient temperature conditions as the primary device (such as in a heated meter house) or by installing insulation and/or heat tracing along the entire meter run. If the operator chooses to use insulation to comply with this requirement, the AO may prescribe the quality of the insulation based on site specific factors such as ambient temperature, flowing temperature of the gas, composition of the gas, and location of the sample probe in relation to the orifice plate (i.e., inside or outside of a meter house).
( c ) *Sample probe design and type.* ( 1 ) Sample probes must be constructed from stainless steel.
( 2 ) If a regulating type of sample probe is used, the pressure-regulating mechanism must be inside the pipe or maintained at a temperature of at least 30 °F above the hydrocarbon dew point of the gas.
( 3 ) The sample probe length must be the shorter of: ( i ) The length necessary to place the collection end of the probe in the center one third of the pipe cross-section; or
( ii ) The recommended length of the probe in Table 1 in API 14.1, Subsection 6.4 (incorporated by reference, see § 3175.30).
( 4 ) The use of membranes, screens, or filters at any point in the sample probe is prohibited.
( d ) Sample tubing connecting the sample probe to the sample container or analyzer must be constructed of stainless steel or nylon 11.
**EXHIBIT 10.8**

 

 

**AMENDMENT TO THE 2000 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN**

 

Section 3 of the Incentive Plan is hereby deleted and the following shall be inserted in lieu thereof: 

 

“3.     Shares Subject to the Plan.  Subject to adjustment in accordance with Section 17, the total of the number of shares of Common Stock which shall be available for the grant of Awards under the Plan shall not exceed 5,000,000; provided, that, for purposesof this limitation, any shares subject to an Option which is canceled or expires without exercise shall again become available for Award under the Plan. Upon forfeiture of Awards in accordance with the provisions of the Plan and the terms andconditions of the Award, such shares shall no longer be counted against any determination of the number of shares available under the Plan and shall be available for subsequent Awards. Shares tendered by a Participant to pay all or part of theoption price of an Option or to pay all or part of the taxes associated with the exercise of such Option or shares of Common Stock which are withheld upon exercise of an Option which would have otherwise been issued upon exercise of such Optionshall be again available for issuance pursuant to Nonqualified Stock Options under the Plan. Subject to adjustment in accordance with Section 17, no Participant shall be granted, during any calendar year, Options to purchase more than 5,000,000shares of Common Stock. Common Stock available for issue or distribution under the Plan shall be authorized and unissued shares or shares reacquired by the Company in any manner.”
### §1680k. Repealed. Pub. L. 111–148, title X, §10221(a), Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 935

Section, Pub. L. 94–437, title VIII, §821, as added Pub. L. 102–573, title VIII, §809, Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4587; amended Pub. L. 104–313, §2(g), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3822, related to establishment of demonstration projects for the delivery of home- and community-based services to functionally disabled Indians.

The repeal is based on section 124(a)(2) of title I of S. 1790, One Hundred Eleventh Congress, as reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate in Dec. 2009, which was enacted into law by section 10221(a) of Pub. L. 111–148.
EXHIBIT 32.2








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Quarterly Report of MEDTOX Scientific, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Kevin J. Wiersma, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)                      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)                      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:   October 28, 2010
By:   /s/ Kevin J. WiersmaKevin J. Wiersma

Chief Financial Officer