alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.2CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

       In connection with the annual reportof CNB Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, L. FordSanders, II, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the CNBCorporation, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002that:
| 1. | The  above-listed Form 10-K 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 above-listed Form 10-K fairly presents, in all  material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the  Company. |
| Date:  March  16, 2011 | */s/L. Ford Sanders, II*          L. Ford  Sanders, II  Executive Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer |
|----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                  |                                                                                                                                                                 |
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
   I, Stephen H. Hollis, certify that: 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Double Eagle Petroleum Co.; 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 small business issuer as, and for, the periods presented inthis report; 4.  The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for small business issuers and have:
 (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  (c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 (a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: May 14, 2005 /s/ Stephen H. Hollis   Stephen H. Hollis   Chief Executive Officer  
19
Telephone conversation between Patrick Mccullen, I AS and Alice Tome, Abt Associates Inc. June 22, 2011. (Direct extension x3309) e- mail pmccullen@iasonline.org

IAS is a signatory to both the IAF and the ILAC. Becoming a signatory is a year-long pr ocess that involves IAF or ILAC coming and auditing the organizati on that is applying - they watch as an audit(s) is done by the applicant. IAF does product certificat ion by Guide 65. Soon (maybe by the end of 2011) Guide 65 will be replaced by ISO 17065 (there will lik ely be a phase in period of a year or two).

The cost of becoming a signatory involves a fee, t he audit costs and travel. It is in the thousands of dollars and Patrick M. will try to give me a cost estimate. The cost of the audit depends on both the number of disciplines being accredited (such as build ing materials or electrical) and the size of the accrediting body - for example IAS does 500 disciplines and A2LA does many more - it will cost A2LA.Ai more (not just a multiplier).

IAS's parent is the ICC - the International C ode Council- they write the codes for the US.

ILAC does testing 17025 and inspection 17020 and 17020 and IAF does product certification. So if you want a signatory to those you will need both organi zations. IAS is both ILAC and APLAC (sp.) signatory APLAC is a regional organization of APLAC. Once y ou are a signatory you will need to be reinspected at least every 4 years but this depends on how well you did on the last inspection and if there are problems they may come out every two years. IAS gets an inspection every 3 years.

If there were to be a new standard requiring ABs, Patrick doubts that there would be new AB market entrants because of the start-up costs and time fram e. You would need ILAC and IAF audits and to write documentation procedures - this would take at least a year and also would be costly.

IAS does many MOU's with government and Patrick di dn't think there would be a lot of expense unless there were very particular requirements that were diffe rent from the way they cu rrently do business. If the

standards were above ILAC or IAF there would be not problem - and he thinks the standards should be. He thought there would be legal review but other than that didn't think it would cost them much.

IAS when they inspect requires that if a TPC is request ing product certification ac creditation if they use a

lab that is not theirs the lab must be 17025 accredited by ILAC.
### §30702. Foreign contract limitation

The Administration shall not enter into any agreement or contract with a foreign government that grants the foreign government the right to recover profit in the event that the agreement or contract is terminated.

(Pub. L. 111–314, §3, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3371.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 30702 | 42 U.S.C. 2475b. | Pub. L. 106–391, title III, §305, Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1592. |

Section
### §2528. Repealed. Pub. L. 112–239, div. C, title XXXI, §3133(e)(1)(A), (2), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2192, 2193

Section, Pub. L. 107–314, div. D, title XLII, §4208, formerly Pub. L. 104–106, div. C, title XXXI, §3152, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [div. C, title XXXI, §3192], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–480; renumbered Pub. L. 107–314, div. D, title XLII, §4208, by Pub. L. 108–136, div. C, title XXXI, §3141(e)(9), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1759; Pub. L. 110–181, div. C, title XXXI, §3112(b)(1), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 577, required the Secretary of Energy to submit to Congress in odd-numbered years reports on the nuclear test readiness of the United States.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3133(e)(1)(A) of Pub. L. 112–239 repealed section 4208 of Pub. L. 107–314, which was classified to this section. Section 3133(e)(2) of Pub. L. 112–239 repealed section 3152 of Pub. L. 104–106, which was transferred and redesignated as section 4208 of Pub. L. 107–314, and section 3133(e)(2) is treated as also repealing this section, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.
### §404n–3. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 404n–3, comprising former section 827 of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, Pub. L. 107–306, was editorially reclassified as a note under section 3036 of this title.
Hwy 46 Project Vicinity Map

REY R4E | RSE ROE
—— T
ER Lake
Hwy 22 bi
wren ¥
.
7 be
a
| “* C L
h . ’
Wey % Detrot Reservoir
rad ss
Te eee T1908.
‘
%
a %
5 . |
. a
4
a
¢
4 TNS.
ca
?
r]
vA -
t
1: Msrion Lake
2
1
1 T2s.
Breen Peter Res ervoir d
1
| ios
I v _
| ’
me .
le T.135.
leet
- sae
LU Vouend at Hwy 20, ~« 1
| eg im Pe io ed Hwy 126 his GF OGUE is reDeGUCEG OM RST MEN DIEDETES By
_ ne USOA Forex Sevice or tom onersuaplers The Forest
= = Hohway I Seven srmet smure ne reso or sunseiy othe tH
N | rtormeton fr @pertaier pursese The oss ave ersouc: accu sty
Lakes P mney var) Gut ts compinten trom wsrius sources Rousng mesting
0.1.25 25 5 Miles: poo voercreison era may not mee: Nevers Mes Acarec) Swasss|
[| Hwy 46 Project Boundary W- This intommason may Deuecanes correcasoromewsemeates |! T1425
. witout nowfeston. For mare inorms:0n ©
[EY cetcit Boundary 4.300.000 wmantne Natena! sores: susevsnts Owee ereetaz5-€300
s -900, ' The UEDA s on onus! cosermunly SURE srs 26 er
I I Smith Reseqvoir_» 7
# C_2023017EN.01000601.xml

| 18.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 17/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 17/6

---

Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 17/05)

Decision granting an authorisation

| Reference of the decision (2) | Date of decision | Substance name | Holder(s) of the authorisation | Authorisation number | Authorised use | Date of expiry of review period | Reasons for the decision |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| C(2023) 199 | 11 January 2023 | 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol, ethoxylated
  (4-tert-OPnEO)
  EC No: -, CAS No:- | Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB, 11276 Stockholm, Sweden | REACH/22/46/0
  REACH/22/46/1 | As a surfactant for virus inactivation in manufacture of biopharmaceuticals
  As a surfactant for post-production cleaning in manufacture of biopharmaceuticals | 4 January 2028
  4 January 2025 | In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the uses of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies. |

Reference of the decision (2)

Date of decision

Substance name

Holder(s) of the authorisation

Authorisation number

Authorised use

Date of expiry of review period

Reasons for the decision

C(2023) 199

11 January 2023

4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol, ethoxylated

(4-tert-OPnEO)

EC No: -, CAS No:-

Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB, 11276 Stockholm, Sweden

REACH/22/46/0

REACH/22/46/1

As a surfactant for virus inactivation in manufacture of biopharmaceuticals

As a surfactant for post-production cleaning in manufacture of biopharmaceuticals

4 January 2028

4 January 2025

In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the uses of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.

---

(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: Authorisation (europa.eu).

---
#### In re CULLINAN. In the matter of Patrick W. Cullinan (in the matter of Rollino).

(Supreme Court, Appelate Division, First Department.

November 13, 1903.)

No opinioi Motion granted, so far as to dismiss appea with $10 costs.
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 of Constar International Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Michael J. Hoffman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.



|                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ MICHAEL J. HOFFMAN                                  
|Michael J. Hoffman President and Chief Executive Officer

November 14, 2006
### §4557. Liability for compliance with invalid regulations; discrimination against orders or contracts affected by priorities or allocations

No person shall be held liable for damages or penalties for any act or failure to act resulting directly or indirectly from compliance with a rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant to this chapter, notwithstanding that any such rule, regulation, or order shall thereafter be declared by judicial or other competent authority to be invalid. No person shall discriminate against orders or contracts to which priority is assigned or for which materials or facilities are allocated under subchapter I of this chapter or under any rule, regulation, or order issued thereunder, by charging higher prices or by imposing different terms and conditions for such orders or contracts than for other generally comparable orders or contracts, or in any other manner.

(Sept. 8, 1950, ch. 932, title VII, §707, 64 Stat. 818; June 30, 1952, ch. 530, title I, §118, 66 Stat. 306.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning act Sept. 8, 1950, ch. 932, 64 Stat. 798, known as the Defense Production Act of 1950, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 4501 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 2157 of the former Appendix to this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Amendments

1952—Act June 30, 1952, in first sentence struck out "his" before "compliance with".
#### In the Matter of Shane Peek, Petitioner, v Robert Dennison, as Chairman of New York State Division of Parole, Respondent.

[835 NYS2d 783]—

*1240Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County [Harold L. Galloway, J.], dated October 26, 2006) to review a determination of respondent. The determination, after a hearing, revoked petitioner’s parole.

It is hereby ordered that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking review of the determination revoking his parole. We reject petitioner’s contention that respondent improperly denied him a preliminary hearing. Contrary to the contention of petitioner, he was not entitled to a preliminary hearing pursuant to Executive Law § 259-i (3) (c) (i) inasmuch as he had been convicted upon his plea of guilty of a new crime *(see id.; People ex rel. Johnson v Russi,*258 AD2d 346, 347 [1999], *appeal dismissed and lv denied*93 NY2d 945 [1999]). To the extent that petitioner became eligible for a preliminary hearing when he withdrew his plea on March 10, 2004, he should have raised that issue at the first appearance for the final revocation hearing on March 18, 2004, at which time the Hearing Officer would have “had an opportunity of effectively” addressing the matter (CPL 470.05 [2]; *see generally People ex rel. Martinez v New York State Bd. of Parole,*56 NY2d 588, 590 [1982]). His failure to do so renders this issue unpreserved for our review, and we further note that petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to this issue *(see generally Matter of Shapard v Zon,*30 AD3d 1098 [2006]). The determination that petitioner violated the conditions of his parole is supported by substantial evidence *(see Matter of Mosley v Dennison,*30 AD3d 975, 976 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 712 [2006]; *Matter of Westcott v New York State Bd. of Parole,*256 AD2d 1179, 1180 [1998]). Contrary to the contention of petitioner, he was not found guilty solely on the basis of inadmissible hearsay. Rather, the inculpatory statements made by petitioner to his parole officer were admissible under the exception to the hearsay rule for party admissions *(see People v Thomas,*300 AD2d 1034, 1035 [2002], *lv denied*99 NY2d 633 [2003]). Nor do we agree with petitioner that the 15-month time assessment against him was excessive in light of the mitigating evidence that he presented *(see*9 NYCRR 8005.20 [c] [1] [vi]). We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are lacking in merit. Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Gorski, Smith, Fahey and Green, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.921 How do I analyze my platform for cumulative fatigue? ( a ) If you are required to analyze cumulative fatigue on your platform because of the results of an inspection or platform assessment, you must ensure that the safety factors for critical elements listed in § 250.908 are met or exceeded.
( b ) If the calculated life of a joint or member does not meet the criteria of § 250.908, you must either mitigate the load, strengthen the joint or member, or develop an increased inspection process.
### §§991, 992. Repealed. Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, §53, 70A Stat. 641

Section 991, act July 9, 1952, ch. 608, pt. II, §248, 66 Stat. 495, provided for discharge of commissioned officers and other members of reserve components. See sections 12681 and 12682 of Title 10, Armed Forces.

Section 992, act July 9, 1952, ch. 608, pt. II, §249, 66 Stat. 495, related to limitation on discharges, dropping from rolls, and character of discharge. See sections 12683 to 12686 of Title 10.
§ 845.19 Request for hearing. ( a ) The person charged with the violation may contest the proposed penalty or the fact of the violation by submitting a petition and an amount equal to the proposed penalty or, if a conference has been held, the reassessed or affirmed penalty to the Office of Hearings and Appeals (to be held in escrow as provided in paragraph (b) of this section) within 30 days from receipt of the proposed assessment or reassessment or 30 days from the date of service of the conference officer's action, whichever is later. The fact of the violation may not be contested if it has been decided in a review proceeding commenced under 30 CFR 843.16.
( b ) The Office of Hearings and Appeals shall transfer all funds submitted under paragraph (a) of this section to the Office, which shall hold them in escrow pending completion of the administrative and judicial review process, at which time it shall disburse them as provided in 30 CFR 845.20.
[47 FR 35640, Aug. 16, 1982, as amended at 56 FR 10063, Mar. 8, 1991]
###### Editorial Note on Part 75

#### Editorial Note:

The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

#### § 75.1400-1 Hoists; brakes, capability.

Brakes on hoists used to transport persons shall be capable of stopping and holding the fully loaded platform, cage, or other device at any point in the shaft, slope, or incline.
### §4406. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–91, div. C, title XXXV, §3502(a)(1), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1910

Section, act Mar. 8, 1946, ch. 82, §12, 60 Stat. 49; Sept. 28, 1950, ch. 1093, §§1, 2, 64 Stat. 1078; Pub. L. 97–31, §12(158), Aug. 6, 1981, 95 Stat. 168; Pub. L. 101–225, title III, §307(12), Dec. 12, 1989, 103 Stat. 1925, related to reconversion of vessels for normal commercial operation.
#### BEATTYS, Respondent, v. WILEY, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 20, 1903.)

Action by George D. Beattys, as trustee in bankruptcy, etc., against Milnor Wiley.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
### SUBCHAPTER IV—PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
# Federal Reserve Education

## EQUIPPING EDUCATORS | EDUCATING STUDENTS | EMPOWERING CONSUMERS

### Find Your District

Learn more about the Reserve Bank in your area.

### Order Publications

Access and order classroom resources available in print.

### Events

Connect with events and programs for educators, students, and the public.

## Featured Events and Resources

### PACED Pretzels

                                        Students learn about the five-step PACED decision-making process and complete a decision-making grid through a taste test.                                

### Let Them Play

                                        Learn about resources, scarcity and human capital after reading a book about an all-Black Little League team.                                

### Learning and Earning Digital Badges

                                        Learn about dynamic digital badge programs from the St. Louis Fed to acquire and demonstrate knowledge.                                

### Getting Entrepreneurial In Person, Hybrid, or Online

                                        In this Classroom ECONnections webinar, several Federal Reserve banks collaborated to present K-12 entrepreneurship resources.                                

**