alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 202 (Friday, October 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 72528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23148]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

[245A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900]


Johnson-O'Malley Program

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Final Report.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Johnson-O'Malley (JOM) Act of 1934, as amended by 
the JOM Supplemental Indian Education Program Modernization Act of 
2018, the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) is publishing a Final Report 
that describes the initial determination of the number of eligible 
Indian students served or potentially served by each eligible entity, 
the data used for BIE to make such determination, feedback gained 
during the comment period, and justification for not applying feedback 
gained during the comment period.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Spike Bighorn, Program Manager, Office 
of Sovereignty in Indian Education, Bureau of Indian Education, via 
email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a9dad9c0c2cc87cbc0cec1c6dbc7e9cbc0cc87cccddc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e09390898b85ce828987888f928ea0828985ce858495">[email protected]</span></a> or telephone at (202) 499-0482.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Johnson-O'Malley Supplemental Indian 
Education Program Modernization Act of 2018, Public Law 115-404, 
directed the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to publish a 
preliminary report describing the number of eligible Indian students 
served or potentially served by each eligible entity, using the most 
applicable and accurate data from the fiscal year preceding the fiscal 
year for which the initial determination is to be made. See 84 FR 
57880, dated October 29, 2019. The 60-day comment period ended on 
December 30, 2019.
    The BIE received feedback on the preliminary report from four 
entities. On June 16, 2022, BIE submitted to Congress a final report 
(JOM Final Report) on the initial determination of the number of 
eligible Indian students served or potentially served by each eligible 
entity, including justification for not including feedback gained 
during the consultation period. On July 14, 2023, BIE published the JOM 
Final Report on the BIE website where it remains publicly available at 
https://www.bie.edu/supplemental-education-programs.

Brian Newland,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2023-23148 Filed 10-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 32.1**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of America Service GroupInc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.Dated: August 7, 2007      Name:      /s/ Michael Catalano Title:  Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the company and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION FURNISHED PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 This certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and accompanies Amendment No. 2 on Form 10-K/A (the “Form 10-K/A”) to the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 of China Clean Energy Inc. (the “Company”).  I, Tai-ming Ou, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that, based on my knowledge:
 
 (1) The Form 10-K/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (2) The information contained in the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in this report.
 
 Date: June 8, 2010
 
 By:
/s/ Tai-ming OuName:
Tai-ming OuTitle:
President and Chief Executive Officer 
(Principal Executive Officer)
 
 The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-K/A pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United S tates Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K/A for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
Federal Reserve Board of Governors

Course Description for Retail Credit

Risk Seminar

Last Revised: January 16, 2019
2 P a g e

Course Overview

This 3 day training course provides examiners, with general credit knowledge, a sector-specific 

background necessary for assessment of credit risk for retail exposures. Retail exposures 

covered include auto lending, mortgage and home equity products, credit card lending, and 

additional consumer lending such as student loans and unsecured personal loans. This course 

will delve into several retail topics viewed through the credit risk lens, including business 

strategies, loan origination strategies and channels, credit policy, underwriting and collection 

practices. Topics follow a model/solutions life cycle approach and each key component is 

accompanied by a case study breakout session. Range of practice will be a focus for the case 

studies.

This course also covers credit risk estimation methods such as models and judgmental 

approaches, both from a business-as-usual perspective as well as stress testing perspective. 

Modeling topics include the different techniques used to estimate the probabilities of default, the 

loss-given-default, and the exposure at default. With a central focus around the specification, 

development, and use of effective retail models, important topic areas ranging from risk 

identification, management review, model implementation, validation, and performance 

monitoring are also covered. The course addresses governance topics such as internal audit 

review of retail lending and loan review practices. Additionally, the reserve practices currently 

under use and the determination of the ALLL.

The course uses presentations, case studies, questions (with class participation encouraged in 

assessing questions), review of relevant supervisory guidance, with final conclusion from the 

participants and instructors.

Course Objectives

By the end of the course, participants will:

• Understand the end-to-end key components involved in an institution’s management of 

retail credit risk.

• Know the regulatory guidance relevant to examining retail credit and how to locate the 

information.

• Know how to approach credit risk exams in the retail sector, including horizontal exams 

such as CCAR, HCR, or DFAST.

Type of Participant Targeted

Retail Credit Risk Seminar is designed for an examiner who oversees firms that have significant 

retail exposures or who wants to work with the horizontal team performing stress testing such 

as CCAR, HCR, and DFAST. Participants are typically new to supervision of Retail exposures 

and this is meant to be a one-time overview for the subject area. Examiners in other regulatory 

agencies (OCC, FDIC, State) in similar roles could also benefit from this course.
3 P a g e

Prerequisites

None

Class Size and Instructors

The course may be run with as few as 10 participants with a maximum of 25. There are usually 2-3 

instructors for this course.
No. 58742.

protest 226524-K (Los Angeles).

#### Calif-Asia Rattan Company and Williams, Clarke Company *v.*United States,

*276Opinion by

Rao,’ J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of floor coverings, composed wholly or in chief value of rush and not of grass or of rice straw, which do not have a felt base, the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstracts 57889 and 57890, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
„ . 

# OAR Box 1252 Prepped by Candice Davis



### Document

Number: 

# 47 ) ll-B- 7 Docket Number: 

# A-90-22

Printed 5/21/200811:46:01 AM Sheet 47 of 184 P. 1P. 2 

# A-90 - DO-B- 7 MEMORANDU M DATE : Septembe r 3 , 199 1 TO : HO

NProjec t Fil e FROM : Juli e Ann e Prober t SUBJECT : Cost s fo r Installi n

Transfe r Rac k Vapo r Collectio n Systemo n a Th e purpos e o f thi s memorandu mi s t o documen t th e cost s o f installing a vapo r collectio n systemo n a transfe r rack . Th e following page s identif ycost s an d reference s fo r convertin g tank truck s an

d railcar s fro

mto p loading t o bottomloading ? convertin g loading rack s fro mto p loading t o botto mloading ; annua l vehicl e vapor-tightnes s testing ; an d annua l maintenanc e fo r th e vapo r collectio n system . Afan an

d it s associate d moto r wil l b e necessaryt o overcom e th e pressur e dro p through th e piping betwee n th e transfe r rac k an d contro l device . I t i s assume d tha t th e cos t o f pipin g wil l b e accounte d fo r i n th e costing algorithm s fo r th e contro l device . Equation s fo r th e cos t o f th e fan an d moto r ar e presente d i n a separat e memo . Th e cost s fo r a nitroge n blanketing systemwil l als o b e addresse d i n a separat e memo . 

## I |7/ i E 6J 7 il , J..! ; 

# 1 li 

# r "P. 3



# IA N 

# r-s CALCULATIO N SHEET DATE . CHECKED . CALC . NO . OATE . JO B NO. . SUBJEC T IprUU-

r f CJKSL^ SHEET . OF . .SHEET S 

### 1 OX )
4vd i UJsali C i_.AX

7 v*/aj L4e_c<eci^_ ^ ^Q | vVU..lfl£Q . ^i<^.^ux.l_4^=fee---i^.-Ivs^v^klQS^c Lla^o^ r ^dice' s ,

. _:_' . . : Ij^d^v-l

l^Alcef. yiAyQi^lkJL

; nk/*\L <*U/ i o^fCtsykdZiA. p^srtKtv-SKoJ^Ovk '_

_' ! ^

_^ ^ [_

_; i

_ i L 7 _i i

_! L : L

_[ . ' U 

# , . _j£ " Gah^^

i^a4_i'fe).p_. ] i_ _ _iOb . Gciviv2^s^gb^a^!-LiU^-Jk^ K -ftv ^ 

## j=i_2k.ajk. . •rr : ~~f-- ; - -f— • I j ._^^i0i!*5C=k- ^ 

# E£Su3ilHlJIS4^^ H

^ •gt > CfyeAr k

: ! 

## _L£W^U « L<

£

° pP. 4 

## K/A\E)D/A\K ]

K \ImnSiter CALCULATIO N SHEE T HAT E &/'2Zl( C \\ CHECKED. JO B N O CALC . NO . DAT E SU B 

### gLoik^ P Gps k SHEET . OF . -SHEET S B — 

### i*)8i * ICO\ oo o ^40 0 l^SflO "

U.S . 6v\\/i^ n



### /v^a*v)i ^ A»A . 

# na^.pB ^

_ __. : . - : 

# ._ u 

# . . _ feoCQtA G_irp^K^7bova.^ > Bar b V L^>v^^ . /

CA. „ _/<p n \ ± l3 / 1 9 8 ^ ^

_Gosf

c -p o OOrv/^r-ih^v A -MpipftdXvv A ttU.LcA/S ^ WttaiM.\p_A«4?K>A. . I L__ .

C O m

UMMIHIliw IM U
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 of Artisoft, Inc. (the
Company) for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Kenneth M Clinebell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.



|                        |  |                                 |  |                     
|----------------------- |  | ------------------------------- |  | --------------------
|                        |  |                                 |  |                     
|                        |  |                                
|Date: February 21, 2006 |  | /s/ KENNETH M. CLINEBELL        |  | Kenneth M. Clinebell
|                        |  | Interim Chief Financial Officer |  |
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 of Artisoft, Inc.
(the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, William Y. Tauscher, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |                                                      
|------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------
|Date: June 3, 2005 |  | /s/ WILLIAM Y. TAUSCHER                              
|                   |  | William Y. Tauscher                                  
|                   |  | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

WALTER DAMUS, JR.,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

CHARLES M. DAMUS, et al.,

 Defendant.

 C06-264 JPD

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

UPON NOTIFICATION OF

SETTLEMENT

The Court having been notified of the settlement of the above entitled cause, and it

appearing that no issue remains for the Court’s determination,

IT IS ORDERED that this action and all claims herein are DISMISSED with prejudice

and without costs to any party.

In the event that the settlement is not perfected, any party may move to reopen the case,

provided that such motion is filed within thirty (30) days of the date of this order. Any trial date

and pretrial dates previously set are hereby vacated.

DATED this 25th of October, 2006

AJames P. Donohue

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00264-JPD Document 26 Filed 10/25/06 Page 1 of 1
Before the First Division,

March 21, 1962

No. 66591.

#### Charles C. Merzbach Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 305199-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, O.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of “Faller Houses,” etc., similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Polk’s Model Craft Hobbies, Inc., et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 137, C.A.D. 746), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 3, 2010

p0526 

# Order

June 3, 2010

140498

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 140498 COA: 277172 Saginaw CC: 05-025881-FC JERMEY JERMAINE LLOYD, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 15, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required
to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Principal
Life Income Fundings Trust 2008-070 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, do
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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information
required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is
included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;4.
    
    Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in this
report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing
agreement(s) in all material respects; and5.
    
    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of
compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included
in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
   /s/ Dwight N. Soethout

Dwight N. SoethoutVice President  Principal Life Insurance Company
November 1, 2011 

Alpena County 

Board of Commissioners 

720 Chisholm Street, Suite 7 • Alpena, Michigan 49707 · 

The Honorable Dan Benishek 

US House ofRepresentatives 

514 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515-2201 

Dear Congressman Benishek: 

r·-

·- .::.:-:: .:· ,..- .. •" '· -~ - . ..-

This letter is to infonn you that the Alpena County Board of Commissioners has voted at trs regular 

fhll board meeting on October 25, 2011 to form an Airport Committee. The Alpena County Airport 

Committee will be an independent committee of the County in charge of overseeing the operations of 

the Alpena County Regional Airport. This Committee will address the issue of seeking the best 

Essential Air Service available for our community. The Department of Transportation's September 13, 

2011 Request for Proposals has produced two (2) proposals for Alpena, neither of which provides the 

level of service or connectivity our community needs to sustain and prosper. Alpena County residents 

forced to fly to Cleveland, OH for connecting flights takes money from the Detroit Metro Airport and 

the State ofMichigan. 

I am sure you are aware that the deadline for comments fi·om the community is fast approaching. We 

have also been notified that the DOT would like to expedite the process to avoid the exorbhant cost of 

operating replacement equipment for the retired Saabs and RJ's. We understand the Department's 

position, but we are requesting an extension so that the newly formed Airport Committee would have 

an adequate period of time to fully investigate an Essential Air Service Carrier for Alpena County. 

We are requesting your assistance in obtaining the needed extension in order to fully explore all 

available options. 

The Chairman of the Airport Committee is Commissioner Thomas G. Mullaney, who is also the 

immediate past President ofthe Michigan Association of Counties. He can be contacted at 989-356-

9781 or 989-354-9500 or email tommullaney@alpenacounty.org. 

Thank you for time and cooperation in this important matter. 

Sincere~y.9 / <! A/ t~ ·· ·--'~< Cameron N. Habem1ehl ' 

Chainnan of the Board 

cc: United States Senator Carl Levin 

State Senator Jolm Moolenaar 

Representative Peter Pettalia 

Mr. Craig Andrews 

Telephone: (989) 354-9500 Fax: (989) 354-9648 www.alpenacounty. org
---

Exhibit 99.6


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the annual report of Baja Mining Corp. (the Company) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John W. Greenslade, 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: (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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. March 30, 2012
     /s/ John W. GreensladeJohn W. GreensladePresident and Chief Executive Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Baja Mining Corp. and will be retained by Baja Mining Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


---
_____________ No. 95-4049SI

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Southern v. * District of Iowa. * Randall Edward Schuster, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: April 4, 1996 Filed: April 9, 1996

_____________ Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Randall E dward Schuster made an unauthorized copy of his employer's custome r database and attempted to sell the database to a competitor . Fo llowing his arrest, Schuster pleaded guilty to mail fraud. A t sentencing, the district court assessed a two-level enhancement becaus e Schuster engaged in more than minimal planning and sentenced Schuster to four m onths imprisonment, four months home confinement, and two year s supervised release. Schuster appeals, and we affirm. The Guidelines provide for a two-level increase in fraud cases if the offens e involved more than minimal planning. U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1(b)(2)(A ) (1995). "'More than minimal planning' means mor e planning than is typical for the commission of the offense in a simple form" and is deemed present "inany case involving repeated acts over a period of time." U.S.S.G . § 1B1.1 n.1(f) (1995). Here, the record shows Schuster planned what he wa s going to do and

### -2-

took distinct affirmative steps over time in furtherance of the crime : Schuster formed the i ntent to steal his employer's database, accessed and stole the database, evaluated the database and decided it would be valuabl e to a c ompetitor, researched the competitors, contacted at least tw o potential buyers, mailed a portion of the database to a competitor, an d negotiated the final sale of the database. Acco rdingly, we cannot say the distri ct court's finding that Schuster engaged in more than minima l planning was clearly erroneous. See United Stat es v. Starr , 986 F.2d 281, 282 (8th Cir. 1993) (standard of review); United States v. Barndt , 913 F.2 d 201, 204 (5th Cir. 19 90) (district court did not clearly err in assessing mor e-than-minimal-planning enhancement where defendant formed intent t o ste al government property, stole property, sought buyers, transporte d property to buyer, and sold property). We thus affirm Schuster's sentence. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.