alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1621o. Indian youth grant program

#### (a) Grants

The Secretary, acting through the Service, is authorized to make grants to Indian tribes, tribal organizations, and urban Indian organizations for innovative mental and physical disease prevention and health promotion and treatment programs for Indian preadolescent and adolescent youths.

#### (b) Use of funds

(1) Funds made available under this section may be used to—

(A) develop prevention and treatment programs for Indian youth which promote mental and physical health and incorporate cultural values, community and family involvement, and traditional healers; and

(B) develop and provide community training and education.

(2) Funds made available under this section may not be used to provide services described in section 1665g(c) of this title.

#### (c) Models for delivery of comprehensive health care services

The Secretary shall—

(1) disseminate to Indian tribes information regarding models for the delivery of comprehensive health care services to Indian and urban Indian adolescents;

(2) encourage the implementation of such models; and

(3) at the request of an Indian tribe, provide technical assistance in the implementation of such models.

#### (d) Criteria for review and approval of applications

The Secretary shall establish criteria for the review and approval of applications under this section.

(Pub. L. 94–437, title II, §216, as added Pub. L. 102–573, title II, §212, Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4554; amended Pub. L. 111–148, title X, §10221(a), Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 935.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–148 is based on sections 101(b)(4) and 131 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 were enacted into law by section 10221(a) of Pub. L. 111–148.

#### Amendments

2010—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 111–148 substituted "section 1665g(c) of this title" for "section 1621h(m) of this title".

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 111–148 struck out subsec. (e) which authorized appropriations for fiscal years 1993 to 2000.
#### Stanley Forma, Respondent, v. John E. Moran, Appellant.

In a summary proceeding to recover possession of real property, the order of the City Court of Yonkers, entered after trial, dismisses the landlord’s petition. The order of the County Court, Westchester County, reverses the City Court *819order and grants to the landlord a final order and warrant of possession. Order of the County Court unanimously affirmed, with costs. The lease instrument provides, “It is further understood and agreed that the tenant shall have the first option to renew this lease for a further term at the expiration thereof, at a renewal to be then agreed upon.” The phrase, “first option to renew”, grants a conditional option, meaning that the tenant may renew if the landlord again leases the premises. No additional evidence was necessary to clarify the meaning of that phrase, and the evidence which was received does not indicate that it has any other meaning. Moreover, the phrase, “at a renewal to be then agreed upon”, is too indefinite to form a material part of an enforcible agreement. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of VAALCO Energy, Inc. (the “**Company**”) onForm 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “**Report**”), I, Robert L. Gerry, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: November *7*, 2007
AFS-10-090-E 

Jul 21, 2010 

Captain Peter Blessing 

Vice President, Flight Operations 

ASTAR Air Cargo, Inc. 

7310 Turfway Road 

Florence, KY 41042 

Dear Capt. Blessing: 

This is in response to your letter dated December 1, 2009, petitioning the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) on behalf of ASTAR Air Cargo, Inc., for an exemption from 

§ 119.65(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. 

The FAA has fully considered your supporting information and finds that an exemption is not 

the correct vehicle for this request. ASTAR should request a management deviation from its 

local Flight Standards District Office. 

The FAA will take no further action on your petition and Docket No. FAA-2009-1145 is 

being closed. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Raymond Towles 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service
Exhibit 10.48


 


AMENDMENT
TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT


 


This
Amendment (the “Amendment”) dated and effective on June 4, 2021 is by and between DEEP GREEN WASTE & RECYCLING, INC.,
a Wyoming corporation, whose address is 13110 NE 177th Place, #293, Woodinville,
WA 98072 (the “Company”) and Sylios Corp (the “Consultant”), a Florida corporation whose address
is 501 1st Ave N., Suite 900, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, (individually, a “Party”; collectively, the “Parties”).


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS,
on May 10, 2021, the Company and Consultant entered into a Consulting Agreement (the “Agreement”); and


 


WHEREAS,
the Company and Consultant have agreed to modify Section 5 of the Agreement, the Compensation to the Consultant.


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained, the Parties hereto hereby agree as follows:


 


	 	1.	Consultant shall receive a total of $35,000 cash compensation as follows:
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	a.	$15,000
    shall be paid to Consultant on or before June 9, 2021;
	 	 	 	b.	$10,000
    shall be paid to Consultant on or before September 10, 2021; 
	 	 	 	c.	$10,000
    shall be paid to Consultant on or before December 10, 2021; and
	 	 	 	d.	Consultant
    shall receive no shares of common stock for compensation.


 


IN
WITNESS, WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly executed, all as of the day and year first above written.


 





	COMPANY:	 	CONSULTANT:
	DEEP
    GREEN WASTE & RECYCLING, INC.	 	SYLIOS
    CORP
	 	 	 
	By:	 	By:
		 	 
	Lloyd
    Spencer	 	Jimmy
    Wayne Anderson
	Its:
    Chief Executive Officer	 	Its:
    President
	Date:
    June 4, 2021	 	Dated:
    June 4, 2021
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 Bucyrus International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Timothy
W. Sullivan, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Craig R. Mackus, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:



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



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



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Timothy W. Sullivan              
|Timothy W. Sullivan                  
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|November 7, 2008                     
|                                     
|/s/ Craig R. Mackus                  
|Craig R. Mackus                      
|Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
|November 7, 2008                     

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 4.452-5 Conduct of hearing.

So far as not inconsistent with a prehearing order, the administrative law judge may seek to obtain stipulations as to material facts and the issues involved and may state any other issues on which he may wish to have evidence presented. He may exclude irrelevant issues. The contestant will then present his case following which the other parties (and in private contests the Bureau, if it intervenes) will present their cases.
§ 3732.1 Act ineffective as to other withdrawals. ( a ) The Act in section 2(c) provides as follows: Nothing in this act shall affect the validity of withdrawals or reservations for purposes other than power development.
( b ) If the power site lands are also affected by any other type of withdrawal which prevents mining location in whole or in part, the provisions of the Act apply only to the extent that the lands are otherwise open to location.
[35 FR 9737, June 13, 1970]
1

MEMORANDUM

To : C ISWI Docket

From : Amy Hambrick , US EPA

Date: July 23, 2012

Subject: Meeting with C EMEX

, September 8, 2011

EPA met with CEMEX on September 8, 2011. CEMEX discussed their attached presentation with

EPA.
Case 1:20-cv-21927-RKA Document 22-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/30/2020 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-21927-RKA Document 22-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/30/2020 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-21927-RKA Document 22-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/30/2020 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-21927-RKA Document 22-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/30/2020 Page 4 of 4
### Subpart C—Discount on Short-Term Obligations

Sec.
1281.
Current inclusion in income of discount on certain short-term obligations.
1282.
Deferral of interest deduction allocable to accrued discount.
1283.
Definitions and special rules.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Angelo Rosati, Respondent, against Despatch Shops, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appeal by the employer and carrier from an award of compensation for partial loss of hearing, classified as an occupational disease. The award is challenged on the ground claimant is not disabled as that term is defined in section 37 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Also upon the ground that there was no evidence to show that the percentage loss of hearing was permanent. The award should be affirmed *(Matter of Slawinski*v. *Williams é Go.,*273 App. Div. 826). Award affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Hill, P. J., Heffernan and Russell, JJ., concur; Brewster and Poster, JJ., dissent.
#### Orndorff v. Commonwealth.

May 18, 1943.

C. B. Crossland, Jr., for appellant.

Hubert Meredith, Attorney General, and W. Owen Keller, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Ratliff

Affirming.

The grand jury of McCracken county, Kentucky, returned a joint indictment against appellant and Robert Broyles, Jr., charging them with the crime of burglary by breaking and entering a dwelling house of Frank Baker and taking therefrom certain household goods and other articles of value. Appellant was tried separately and sentenced to five years in the state penitentiary. Broyles testified for the Commonwealth implicating appellant with the commission of the crime. The only *349question presented on this appeal is whether or not the evidence of the accomplice, Broyles, was sufficiently corroborated under the provisions of section 241 of the Criminal Code of Practice.

On December 16,1942, Baker moved from Tennessee to Paducah, or near the city limits of Paducah, and the driver of the moving van employed appellant and Broyles to help him unload the furniture at the house into which Baker was moving. On that night the house was broken into and the personal property described in the indictment was taken therefrom, including a pistol, Christmas presents, money, a clock, and numerous other articles. In the early morning of December 20 the police officers of the city of Paducah, having a warrant of arrest for appellant and. Broyles charging them with the offense of attempted rape, located, them in the home of Tommie. Pox, who was then in a hospital. It'appears that with, the permission of Pox, Broyles was occupying his home while he, Pox, was absent. When the officers arrived at the Pox home, they knocked on the door and informed the occupants that they were officers and asked them to open the door., and while Broyles was opening the door appellant escaped through a window but was subsequently apprehended. The officers entered the Pox home and found numerous articles which had been taken from the Baker home, including a pistol which was under a pillow and a clock between the pillows of the bed that appellant and Broyles occupied.

Broyles testified that he and appellant broke into the Baker home and took therefrom the personal property referred to above and brought it to the Pox home. Appellant denied having any connection with or knowledge of the commission of the offense, or any knowledge that the stolen property was in the Pox home, stating that he had merely accepted an invitation by Broyles to spend the night in the Pox home with him. All the facts and circumstances involved in this case and the law applicable thereto are the same as that in the ease of Wayne Orndorff v. Commonwealth, 294 Ky. 344, 171 S. W. (2d) 984, involving a charge of storehouse breaking, wherein we held that the evidence of the accomplice witness was. sufficiently corroborated and affirmed the judgment. Since the facts in the two cases are the same with respect to. the sufficiency of the corroborative evidence, it becomes unnecessary to repeat them in this case.

*350Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed upon authority •of the case, supra.
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

 812.68

 812.46

 812.20

 811.98

 811.68

 811.34

 811.00

 810.72

 810.41

 810.13

 809.90

 809.55

 809.21

 808.90

 808.59

 808.29

 807.88

 807.50

 807.12

 806.62

 806.23

 805.82

 805.45

 805.03

 804.70

 804.30

 803.96

 803.61

 803.27

 802.90

 20.92

 20.75

 20.54

 20.37

 20.14

 19.88

 19.63

 19.42

 19.19

 18.98

 18.81

 18.56

 18.31

 18.09

 17.87

 17.65

 17.37

 17.10

 16.84

 16.50

 16.23

 15.96

 15.71

 15.44

 15.22

 14.97

 14.75

 14.53

 14.31

 14.08

STORAGE

-0.18

-0.17

-0.20

-0.17

-0.23

-0.26

-0.26

-0.21

-0.23

-0.21

-0.17

-0.26

-0.25

-0.22

-0.22

-0.21

-0.29

-0.27

-0.26

-0.34

-0.26

-0.28

-0.25

-0.28

-0.21

-0.26

-0.22

-0.22

-0.21

-0.23

CHANGE

239

243

230

247

218

200

200

221

212

225

243

198

200

210

212

218

178

192

193

152

189

180

200

182

213

187

210

207

210

200

INFLOW

 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

 324

 323

 323

 323

 323

 322

 322

 321

 320

 320

 319

 318

 318

 318

 317

 317

 316

 315

 315

 314

 313

 313

 313

 311

 311

 310

 309

 309

 308

 307

OUTLET

 6

 6

 9

 10

 11

 9

 8

 6

 8

 9

 9

 9

 6

 4

 6

 8

 7

 11

 10

 10

 9

 6

 11

 10

 10

 7

 10

 9

 10

 9

C.F.S.

 .22

 .25

 .37

 .42

 .43

 .37

 .31

 .24

 .33

 .36

 .40

 .40

 .25

 .18

 .25

 .34

 .30

 .47

 .44

 .47

 .42

 .30

 .50

 .48

 .47

 .36

 .50

 .42

 .51

 .47

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .06

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

JUNE 2020 RUN DATE: 11/30/2020

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -7.03 6,209 9,492 0 253 11.23 .06

ACRE-FEET -7,030 12,316 18,827 0 502

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 18,827

 18,827

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .06

JULY 1, 2019 9.21

 21.10

STONY GORGE RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS

OCT 1, 2019 TO DATE = 9.09
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the form 10-KSB of Health Discovery Corporation formerly
Direct Wireless Communications Inc. for the Year ended December 31, 2004, I,
Robert S. Braswell IV, Chief Financial Officer of Health Discovery Corporation,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that;

such Form 10-KSB for the year ended, December 31, 2004, fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and

the information contained in such Form 10-KSB for the year ended, fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operation of Health Discovery Corporation.

/s/ Robert S. Braswell IV
----------------------------
Robert S. Braswell IV
Chief Financial Officer
(No. 4721

#### International Business Machines Corporation, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed February 21, 1957.*

Beamish, Edwards and Brunnemeyer, Attorneys for Claimant.

Latham Castle, Attorney General; Thomas G. Cronin, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Fearer, J.

A claim was filed herein on May 7,1956 in the amount of $1,668.00, in accordance with a contract between claimant and the Northern Illinois State College, DeKalb, Illinois, for the rental of certain machines set forth in said contract, and invoice voucher attached to the complaint and made a part thereof.

The record consists of the following:

> Complaint.

> Commissioner’s Report.

> Transcript of evidence.

> Motion of claimant for leave to waive the filing of brief.

> Order of the Chief Justice granting the motion of claimant for leave to waive the filing of brief.

*497The evidence offered conforms to the complaint, and the Commissioner’s Report so found that the claim was based upon a contract dated March 30, 1950, which was claimant’s exhibit No. 1, and the rental period covered was from January 1, 1955 through March 30, 1955, and involved the sum of $1,668.00. The aforesaid rental claim was made by claimant on August 31, 1955, and claimant was informed by letter from the Senior Accountant of Northern Illinois State College, dated January 27, 1956, (a copy of said letter being claimant’s exhibit No. 3) to the effect that the billings occurred after the appropriation for the biennium had lapsed, which in this case had occurred on June 30, 1955. The rentals for the machines set forth in the voucher did not cover the same machines as were set forth in the contract, due to changes in the machines by agreement of both parties, as provided for in the contract.

Respondent did not introduce any testimony. Claimant’s exhibit No. 3, herein referred to, written by the Senior Accountant, Mr. Hayden, assigns as the only reason for failure to pay the rental provided for was the lapse of the appropriation, referring to the last bienium covering the period from July 1, 1953 through June 30, 1955. In the letter Mr. Hayden states that, in order for all bills and invoices to be paid covering services or merchandise received between those two dates, it is necessary by state law that invoices be in the College’s office prior to June 30,1955.

There is no question but what the funds were on hand at the time the contract was entered into. Therefore, this Court has held many times that the mere lapse of the appropriation, as long as the funds were available at the *498time the contract was made, would not defeat claimant’s right to recover, there being no other dispute involved.

It is, therefore, the order of this Court that claimant be awarded the sum of $1,668.00.
**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 March 31, 2007 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:   May 3, 2007 | By:   /s/ Kevin J. Wiersma                |
|----------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|                 | Kevin J. Wiersma

Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

 

 

33
# Single Contract Pmt Page-SAMPLE
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsProbing the Big Bang with LEPIt is shown that LEP probes the Big Bang in two significant ways: (1) nucleosynthesis, and (2) dark matter constraints. In the first case, LEP verifies the cosmological standard model prediction on the number of neutrino types, thus strengthening the conclusion that the cosmological baryon density is approximately 6 percent of the critical value. In the second case, LEP shows that the remaining non-baryonic cosmological matter must be somewhat more massive and/or more weakly interacting than the favorite non-baryonic dark matter candidates of a few years ago.Document ID19900014896Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsSchramm, David N.*(Illinois Univ. Chicago, IL, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1990Subject CategoryAstrophysicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-181060FERMILAB-CONF-90/120-ANAS 1.26:181060Meeting InformationMeeting: La Thuile WorkshopStart Date: March 1, 1990Accession Number90N24212Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAGW-1321CONTRACT_GRANT: NSF AST-88-22595CONTRACT_GRANT: NAGW-1340Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900014896.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024