alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements of OMNI Energy Services Corp. Annual Report of our report dated March
27, 2003, with respect to the 2002 consolidated financial statements of OMNI
Energy Services Corp. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 2003, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

     o    Form S-8 No. 333-49409 (OMNI Energy Services Corp. Stock Incentive
          Plan and Stock Option Agreements with Certain Employees)

     o    Form S-8 No. 333-80973 (OMNI Energy Services Corp. Stock Option Plan
          Stock Incentive Plan)

     o    Form S-8 No. 333-35816 (OMNI Energy Services Corp. 1999 Stock Option
          Plan)

     o    Form S-3 No. 333-69436 (OMNI Energy Services Corp. Registration
          Statement)


                                               /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


New Orleans, Louisiana
March 30, 2004
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 72982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30522]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

[Docket No. 2011-1]

Cable Statutory License: Specialty Station List; Correction

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of Congress.

ACTION: Notice of objections and specialty station filings; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Periodically, the Copyright Office (``Office'') seeks to 
update its list of specialty stations related to the use of the cable 
compulsory license. In response to the publication of an initial list 
of specialty stations for this purpose in April of this year, the 
Office received objections filed by the Motion Picture Association of 
America to the identification of certain stations as being entitled to 
specialty station status in accordance with the Federal Communications 
Commission's (``FCC'') definition of specialty station in effect on 
June 24, 1981. Corrections are being made to the specialty station list 
published on November 8, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Golant, Assistant General Counsel, 
Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 
20024. Telephone: (202) 707-8380. Telefax: (202) 707-8366.

Correction

    The Office corrects the following errors in the Notice of 
Objections published in the Federal Register on November 8, 2011 at 76 
FR 69288:
     On page 69289, WNYA-CA, Albany, NY was misidentified as 
WYNA-CA.
     On page 69289, W34DI, Port Jervis, NY was misidentified as 
W34d1.
     On page 69289, W46DQ, Port Jervis, NY was misidentified as 
W42DQ.
     On page 69289, W42CX, Port Jervis, NY was missing from the 
list as a station to which MPAA filed an objection (no evidence of 
construction or the type of programming broadcast should not be 
identified as specialty stations)

    Dated: November 21, 2011.
Maria A. Pallante,
Register of Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2011-30522 Filed 11-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-30-P
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                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 on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended June
30, 2004, of Synagro Technologies, Inc. (the "Company"), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
C. Boucher, Jr., certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company and that the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

                                    /s/ Robert C. Boucher, Jr.
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Robert C. Boucher, Jr.

                                    March 21, 2005
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.415 Maintenance of records. ( a ) *General.* An importer claiming preferential tariff treatment for a good imported into the United States must maintain, for five years after the date of importation of the good, a certification (or a copy thereof) or other information demonstrating that the good qualifies as originating, and any records and documents that the importer has relating to the origin of the good, including records and documents associated with: ( 1 ) The purchase of, cost of, value of, and payment for, the good;
( 2 ) Where appropriate, the purchase of, cost of, value of, and payment for, all materials, including recovered goods and indirect materials, used in the production of the good; and,
( 3 ) Where appropriate, the production of the good in the form in which the good was exported.
( b ) *Method of maintenance.* The records referred to in paragraph (a) of this section must be maintained by importers as provided in § 163.5 of this chapter.
[CBP Dec. 05-07, 70 FR 10873, Mar. 7, 2005, as amended by CBP Dec. 06-39, 71 FR 76133, Dec. 20, 2006]
### §1826. Easements for rights-of-way

#### (a) In general

The Architect of the Capitol may grant, upon such terms as the Architect of the Capitol considers advisable, including monetary consideration, easements for rights-of-way over, in, and upon the Capitol Grounds and any other public lands under the jurisdiction and control of the Architect of the Capitol.

#### (b) Limitation

No easement granted under this section may include more land than is necessary for the easement.

#### (c) Easement account

There is established in the Treasury an easement account for the Architect of the Capitol. The Architect of the Capitol shall deposit in the account all proceeds received relating to the granting of easements under this section. The proceeds deposited in that account shall be available to the Architect, in such amounts and for such purposes provided in appropriations acts.

#### (d) In-kind consideration

Subject to subsection (f), the Architect may accept in-kind consideration instead of, or in addition to, any monetary consideration, for any easement granted under this section.

#### (e) Termination of easement

The Architect of the Capitol may terminate all or part of any easement granted under this section for—

(1) failure to comply with the terms of the grant;

(2) nonuse for a 2-year period; or

(3) abandonment.

#### (f) Approval

The Architect of the Capitol may grant an easement for rights-of-way under subsection (a) upon submission of written notice of intent to grant that easement and the amount or type of consideration to be received, and approval by—

(1) the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate for easements granted on property under Senate jurisdiction;

(2) the House Office Building Commission for property under House of Representatives jurisdiction; and

(3) the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate and the House Office Building Commission for easements granted on any other property.

#### (g) Effective date

This section shall apply to fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter.

(Pub. L. 110–161, div. H, title I, §1307, Dec. 26, 2007, 121 Stat. 2243.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section is from the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2008, which is div. H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008.
**Exhibit 12.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| I, Enrique   Ostalé Cambiaso, certify that: |
|--------------------------------------------------|
|                                             |   |
| 1.                                               | I have   reviewed this amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 20-F of   Distribución y Servicio D&S S.A.; |
|                                             |   |
| 2.                                               | Based on my   knowledge, this amendment No. 1 to the annual 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. |
EXHIBIT 10(xxvii)





Amendment to Employment Agreement





This Amendment to Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is entered into effective as of this 31st day of December, 2010 by and among Bruce W. Elder (the “Executive”), Crescent Financial Corporation, a North Carolina corporation (the “Corporation”), and Crescent State Bank, a North Carolina-chartered bank and wholly owned subsidiary of Crescent Financial Corporation (the “Bank”) and amends that certain Employment Agreement effective as of September 10, 2008 among the aforesaid parties (the “Agreement”).  The Corporation and the Bank are hereinafter sometimes referred to together or individually as the “Employer.”





Whereas, the Executive and the Employer desire to clarify and conform certain provisions of the Agreement in order to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (“IRC”).





Now Therefore, in consideration of these premises, the mutual covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows.





1.  The following is added at the end of section 6.8 of the Agreement in order to incorporate IRC Section 409A reimbursement rules:





With regard to any provision herein that provides for reimbursement of expenses or in-kind benefits that are subject to Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, except as permitted by said Section 409A, (i) the right to reimbursement or in-kind benefits is not subject to liquidation or exchange for another benefit, and (ii) the amount of expenses eligible for reimbursement, or in-kind benefits, provided during any taxable year of the Executive shall not affect the expenses eligible for reimbursement, or in-kind benefits to be provided, in any other taxable year of the Executive, provided that (ii) above shall not be violated with regard to expenses reimbursed under any arrangement covered by Section 105(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 solely because such expenses are subject to a limit related to the period the arrangement is in effect. All reimbursements shall be reimbursed in accordance with the Employer’s reimbursement policies but in no event later than the end of the Executive’s taxable year following the Executive’s taxable year in which the related expense is incurred.




1





In Witness Whereof, the parties have executed this Amendment to Employment Agreement as of the date first written above.





Witnesses

Crescent Financial CorporationBy:Its:Witnesses

Crescent State BankBy:Its:





Witnesses

ExecutiveBruce W. Elder





County of Wake
)) ss:State of North Carolina)





Before me this ___ day of December, 2010, personally appeared the above named ____________________ and Bruce W. Elder, who acknowledged that they did sign the foregoing instrument and that the same was their free act and deed.





(Notary Seal)
Notary PublicMy Commission Expires:


2
## F I FTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D2023

- 2063
L.T. Case No. 2016

- CF

- 031426

- A

_____________________________

K HIRY M ARTE R EDDING

,

Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA

,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County. Charles G. Crawford, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender , and Susan A. Fagan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Roberts J. Bradford, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

June 18, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.

A FFIRMED

.

E DWARDS

, C.J., and L AMBERT and M AC I VER , JJ., concur

.__________________________ ___

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

.

_____________________________
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 01-122 October 15, 2001

NRC APPROVES POWER UPRATE

FOR COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a request by TXU Electric Company to

increase the generating capacity of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station by 1.4 percent for Unit 1,

and 0.4 percent for Unit 2. The plant is located near Glen Rose, Texas.

 The power increase will be immediately implemented at Unit 2 and next spring for Unit 1. The

application for the increase in power was submitted to the NRC on April 5.

The NRC's safety evaluation of the requested power uprate for the plant focused on several

areas, including nuclear steam supply systems, instrumentation and control systems, electrical systems,

accident evaluations, radiological consequences, operations and technical specification changes. The

NRC staff determined that the licensee could safely increase the power output of the reactor with minor

modifications to plant equipment because of technical refinements that permit more precise

measurements of reactor operating conditions.

###
#### David Shack, Respondent, v. Cecil Shapiro et al., Defendants, and Lena Shapiro et al., Defendants-Appellants.

Ho opinion. Close, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
(No. 36441.

#### The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, *vs.*Robert Taylor, Plaintiff in Error.

*Opinion filed November 30, 1962.*

Robert Taylor, *pro se.*

William G. Clark, Attorney General, of Springfield, and Daniel P. Ward, State’s Attorney, of Chicago, (Fred G. Leach and E. Michael O’Brien, Assistant Attorneys General, and Rudolph L. Janega and Edwin J. Belz, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel,) for the People.

Mr. Chief Justice Solfisburg

delivered the opinion of the court:

Robert Taylor, hereinafter called the defendant, and *460William Foster were indicted for conspiring with Virginia Clark to sell narcotic drugs. After pleading not guilty and waiving jury trial, they were tried by the court without a jury and were found guilty. Defendant was sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of not less than one year nor more than five years. He attempted to take his case directly to this court by writ of error, but we transferred the cause to the Appellate Court on the ground that the offense was a misdemeanor and that no constitutional question was involved. The Appellate Court, First District, affirmed the judgment of the trial court. (29 Ill. App. 2d 143.) Defendant now prosecutes a writ of error in this court to review the judgment of the Appellate Court.

On this writ of error, defendant contends that the evidence was circumstantial and insufficient to establish' his' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and that there is no evidence of communication between defendant and his alleged co-conspirator. These contentions were fully considered and resolved adversely to defendant in the Appellate Court. We concur with the determination of the Appellate Court, and its opinion is adopted as the opinion of this court.

*Judgment affirmed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SIGHT 
RESOURCE CORPORATION'S BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AS OF AND 
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY 
BY SUCH REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,883
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,024
<ALLOWANCES>                                       515
<INVENTORY>                                      4,133
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,384
<PP&E>                                          10,169
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,236
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,886
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,835
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            88
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,800
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    33,886
<SALES>                                         33,141
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,141
<CGS>                                           12,058
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,058
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,102
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 261
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (514)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (514)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (514)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsNASA/DOD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. Report 12: An initial investigation into the production and use of Scientific and Technical Information (STI) at five NASA centers: Results of a telephone surveyA study was conducted to provide NASA management with an 'initial' look at the production and use of scientific and technical information (STI) at five NASA centers (Ames, Goddard, Langley, Lewis, and Marshall). The 550 respondents who were interviewed by telephone held favorable views regarding the NASA STI system. About 65 percent of the respondents stated that it is either very or somewhat important for them to publish their work through the NASA STI system. About 10 percent of those respondents encountered problems using the NASA STI system services for publication. The most frequently reported problem was 'the process is too time consuming' (8.6 percent). Overall, those respondents using the NASA STI system to publish their work rated the system as excellent (24.6 percent) or good (37.6 percent). About 79 percent of the respondents stated that it is either very or somewhat important for them to use the NASA STI system to access information. The most frequently reported problems were 'the time and effort it takes to locate and obtain information through the system' (14.4 percent). Overall, about 83 percent of the respondents stated that the NASA STI system is important to performing their work. Overall, about 73 percent of the respondents stated that the NASA STI system meets their information needs.Document ID19920017927Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsGlassman, Nanci A.*(Continental Research Norfolk, VA, United States)*Pinelli, Thomas E.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1992Subject CategoryDocumentation And Information ScienceReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:104173NASA-TM-104173AD-A267664Accession Number92N27170Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19920017927.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
### §1929. Extraordinary expenses not expressly authorized

Where the ministerial officers of the United States incur extraordinary expense in executing Acts of Congress, the payment of which is not specifically provided for, the Attorney General may allow the payment thereof.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 957.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §577 (R.S. §846; Feb. 18, 1875, ch. 80, §1, Stat. 318; May 28, 1896, ch. 252, §13, 29 Stat. 183; May 27, 1908, ch. 200, §1, 35 Stat. 375; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167; Feb. 26, 1919, ch. 49, §7, 40 Stat. 1182; Oct. 13, 1941, ch. 431, §1, 55 Stat. 736).

Provision for payment of expenses under section 577 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., from appropriations for expenses of the judiciary was omitted as unnecessary. Such expenses are carried in the Judiciary Appropriation Acts and will continue without this provision.

The first sentence of said section 577 is incorporated in section 551 of this title.

The qualifying phrase "under the special taxation of the district court in which the said services have been or shall be rendered, to be paid from the appropriation for defraying the expenses of the Judiciary," was omitted, and the functions of allowing extraordinary expenses was vested in the Attorney General instead of the President. Neither the President nor the district judge should be burdened with such duty since the Attorney General only has the information upon which to act.

Changes were made in phraseology.