alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2CERTIFICATIONI, Michael B. Wheeler, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2007of Tufco Technologies, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 14, 2007                     /s/ Michael B. Wheeler   Michael B. Wheeler   Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officerand Chief Operating Officer
#### Helen S. Steinberg, Appellant, v. Abraham *&*Straus, Inc., Respondent.

No opinion. Present — Close, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Lewis, JJ.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

No. I-97-32 March 31, 1997

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan

NRC STAFF TO MEET WITH PUBLIC TO DISCUSS MOLYCORP

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with the

public on Thursday, April 3, to discuss the NRC's decommissioning

process and the status of Molycorp licensing actions. The staff

also will answer questions from the public.

The meeting, which begins at 7 p.m., will be held at the

Canton Township Volunteer Fire Company, 701 Weirich Avenue, in

Washington, Pennyslvania.

#
### §64p. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act June 16, 1933, ch. 105, 48 Stat. 311, authorized legalization of manufacture and sale of 3.2 beer in State of Oklahoma.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532-4351

Contact: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663

RIII-99-48

December 9, 1999

NRC CHAIRMAN RICHARD A. MESERVE TO HOLD NEWS CONFERENCE

ON DEC. 13 FOLLOWING VISIT TO D. C. COOK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Richard A. Meserve will visit the D. C. Cook Nuclear Power

Station on Monday, December 13. Dr. Meserve will tour the site and meet with plant officials and members of

the NRC staff. He will hold a news conference at the close of his plant visit.

The plant, near Bridgman, Michigan, is operated by American Electric Power Co.

The news conference will begin at 6 p.m. in the D. C. Cook Visitor's Center, located near the plant

entrance. The plant is at 7700 Red Arrow Highway between Bridgman and Stevensville, Michigan.

Dr. Meserve was sworn in as Chairman of the NRC on October 29. A brief biography can be found on

the NRC's web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRC/WHATIS/meserve.vitae.html .

#####
#### The City of New York, Appellant, v. William A. Jamison, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Mo opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
<page>                                               EXHIBIT 32.02

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 Dean Witter World
Currency Fund L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period
ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey D. Hahn,
Chief Financial Officer, Demeter Management Corporation, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, 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 my knowledge:
(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13 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 Partnership.









By:  /s/Jeffrey D. Hahn

Name:	   Jeffrey D. Hahn
Title:  Chief Financial Officer

Date:	November 14, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1790

MARK A. PANOWICZ,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

SHARON L. HANCOCK, in individual capacity; SHARON L. 

HANCOCK, Clerk of the Circuit Court for Charles County (in 

official capacity),

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District 

Judge. (8:11-cv-02417-DKC)

Submitted: October 22, 2013 Decided: October 24, 2013

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark A. Panowicz, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Scott Curtis, OFFICE OF 

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Mark A. Panowicz seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying the parties’ cross-motions for reconsideration of 

the court’s order granting in part and denying in part 

Defendant’s motion to dismiss Panowicz’s civil action and 

denying Panowicz’s motion for leave to amend his complaint. 

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 

U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral 

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. 

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The 

order Panowicz seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an 

appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### LEOLA TOWNSHIP, a Municipal Corporation, Appellant, v. McPHERSON COUNTY, South Dakota, Respondent.

(197 N. W. 785.)

(File No. 5513.

Opinion filed March 18, 1924.)

Appeal and Error — Briefs—Court Buies — Judgment Affirmed Where Appeal Abandoned by Default in Filing Briefs.

Where no brief was filed by appellant within the time for filing appellant’s brief, and no other action of any kind was taken in prosecuting appeal or complying with the Supreme (Court rules, the appeal will be deemed abandoned, and the judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

Appeal from Circuit Court, McPherson County; Hon. J. H. Bottum, Judge.

*B. C. Sigler,*of Sioux Falls, for Appellant.

*Theo. J. P. Geidt,*of Eureka, for .Respondent.

PER QURIAM.

Notice of appeal and undertaking in this case were served on respondent, and the same with proof of service filed with the clerk of the circuit court of McPhérson county, S. D., on September 24, 1923; and all said papers were filed with the clerk of this court on September 26, 1923. Since then no briefs or other papers of any kind have been filed with this court. The appellant, having utterly failed to comply with rules 5-, 6, 7, and 13, of this court within the time therein prescribed, the appeal is deemed abandoned, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 197 N. W. 785. See, Headnote, Appeal and error, 3 C. J. Sec. 1607; 4 C. J. Sec. 2437.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

As required by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-454), Chairman Michael K. Powell appointed the following executives to the Performance Review Board: Julius Knapp, Renee Licht, Mary Beth Richards, and David Solomon. 

Federal Communications Commission.

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 04-23291 Filed 10-15-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### James Glynn, Respondent, v. Christie & Leiser, Inc., Defendant, and J. J. Fisher Co., Inc., Appellant.

The record presented questions of fact as to negligence, contributory negligence and the nature and extent of the injuries caused by the accident. Present — Nolan, P. J., Johnston, Sneed, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ.
#### Rose Allen et al., Appellants, v. Ben Mendelson et al., Doing Business under the Name of King John Food Center, Respondents.

Close, P. J., Hag-arty, Carswell, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-97-37 April 16, 1997

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC TO HOLD PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE WITH CENTERIOR SERVICE CO.

ON APPARENT VIOLATIONS OF NRC REQUIREMENTS AT PERRY PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet April 18 with

representatives of Centerior Service Company for a predecisional enforcement

conference on apparent violations at the Perry Nuclear Power Station. The

plant is located 7 miles northeast of Painesville, Ohio.

The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. in the Third Floor Conference Room

of the NRC Region III Office, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois. It will

be open to public observation.

Discussions will focus on instances of inadequate testing and corrective

actions by Centerior Service Company. In March of last year, the utility

installed an electrical circuit breaker which supplies power to safety-related

ventilation systems including control room filtration which would be needed

during certain accident conditions. An NRC inspection last November

determined that inadequate testing of the breaker by the utility failed to

detect a manufacturing wiring error, which rendered the ventilation system

inoperable for a certain period of time last year.

[Note to Editors: This is the apparent violation that was scheduled for

a predecisional enforcement conference on February 5 but was postponed]

In November of last year, an operator attempted to place a flow control

valve back into service with a blown fuse in its circuitry. The valve

unexpectedly opened and increased the reactor water flow which resulted in a

power increase. NRC inspectors noted in a recent inspection that corrective

actions had been previously developed by the utility for similar types of

events at the plant but have been ineffective.

In 1992, NRC issued a notice reporting that a fire in the control room

could cause electrical shorts that might damage some safety-related motoroperated valves in the plant. In response to the NRC's notice, Centerior

Service Corporation made corrective modifications to its fuse design in 1994.

However, an NRC inspection late last year discovered that the utility's

initial corrective actions did not consider NRC requirements for manual

operation of the valves if a fire affected automatic operation.

The decision to hold an enforcement conference does not mean the NRC has

determined that a violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be

taken. Rather, the purpose is to discuss apparent violations, their causes

and safety significance; to provide the licensee an opportunity to point out

any errors that may have been made in the NRC inspection report; and to enable

the company to outline its proposed corrective actions.

No decisions on apparent violations or any contemplated enforcement

action, such as a fine, will be made at this conference. Those decisions will

be made by senior NRC officials at a later date.

####
### §674. Audit of grant recipient; maintenance of records; contents of records; access to books, etc.

(a) Each recipient of a grant under this chapter shall keep such records as the Secretary or the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall prescribe, including records which fully disclose the amount and disposition by such recipient of the proceeds of such grant, the total cost of the project or undertaking in connection with which such grant is made or used, and the amount of that portion of the cost of the project or undertaking supplied by other sources, and such other records as will facilitate an effective audit.

(b) The Secretary or the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, shall have access for the purpose of audit and examination to any books, documents, papers, and records of the recipients of any grant under this chapter that are pertinent to any such grant.

(Pub. L. 91–596, §25, Dec. 29, 1970, 84 Stat. 1615; Pub. L. 96–88, title V, §509(b), Oct. 17, 1979, 93 Stat. 695.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Change of Name

"Secretary of Health and Human Services" substituted in text for "Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare" pursuant to section 509(b) of Pub. L. 96–88 which is classified to section 3508(b) of Title 20, Education.
§ 4.830 Production of documents and things and entry upon land for inspection and other purposes. ( a ) After the notice of hearing has been filed, any party may serve on any other party a request to produce and/or permit the party, or someone acting on his behalf, to inspect and copy any designated documents, phonorecords, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained and which are in the possession, custody, or control of the party upon whom the request is served. If necessary, translation of data compilations shall be done by the party furnishing the information.
( b ) After the notice of hearing has been filed, any party may serve on any other party a request to permit entry upon designated property in the possession or control of the party upon whom the request is served for the purpose of inspection, measuring, surveying or photographing, testing, or sampling the property or any designated object.
( c ) Each request shall set forth with reasonable particularity the items to be inspected and shall specify a reasonable time, place, and manner of making the inspection and performing the related acts.
( d ) The party upon whom the request is served shall respond within 15 days after the service of the request. The response shall state, with respect to each item, that inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested, unless there are objections in which case the reasons for each objection shall be stated. The party submitting the request may move for an order under § 4.831 with respect to any objection to or other failure to respond.
1

From: Beardsley, Michelle

Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 11:40 AM

To: frenchsl@dhec.sc.gov

Cc: Garner, Lynne

Subject: Corrected SRS sheet

Attachments: South Carolina SRS (3).pdf

Ms. French, during an internal review of your file, it was discovered that the State Regulation Sheet incorrectly 

listed that our review of RATS ID 2015-3 had no comments. It has been corrected to reflect that there were 

comments identified during the review. Please see the attached corrected version of the South Carolina 

SRS. I apologize for any inconvenience caused. Please contact me if you have any further questions. 

Regards, 

Michelle 

Michelle Beardsley, Health Physicist 

State Regulation Review Coordinator 

State Agreement and Liaison Programs Branch

Division of Materials Safety, Security, State, and Tribal Programs 

Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

301-415-0275

michelle.beardsley@nrc.gov
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Scott C. Harvard, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Shore Financial Corporation;



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                     |  |  |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 18, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/    SCOTT C. HARVARD              
|                     |  |  |  | Scott C. Harvard                     
|                     |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer



68
* 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. 96-10686

Conference Calendar

 

JULIAN ROBLES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 

TRANSITIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 

NORTHERN DIVISION OR NORTHERN REGION INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:95-CV-331

- - - - - - - - - -

October 23, 1996

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Julian Robles, Texas prisoner #625056, appeals the judgment

of the district court dismissing his civil rights action as

frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). He argues

that he was denied parole in violation of his right of due

process. We have reviewed the record and Robles’ brief and

AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal for essentially the reasons
No. 96-10686

- 2 -

adopted by the district court. Robles v. Texas Department of

Criminal Justice, No. 2:95-CV-331 (N.D. Tex. May 13, 1996).

AFFIRMED.