alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Certification Pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002








Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Canal Capital Corporation and Subsidiaries, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that:





The Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q for the six months ended July 31, 2010 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date: September 13, 2010
/S/ Michael E. SchultzChief Executive OfficerDate: September 13, 2010
/S/ Reginald SchauderChief Financial Officer
City Hall 

501 Laurel Street 

Brainerd, Minnesota 56401 

www.ci.brainerd.mn.us 

Mayor 

(218) 828-2308 

Fax (218) 828·2316 

City Administrator 

(218) 828-2307 

Fax (218) 828-2316 

admin@ci.brainerd.mn.us 

Civil Attorney 

411 Front Street 

P.O. Box.367 

(218) 828-2775 

Fax(218)829-9768 

Crll'ninal Attorney 

51 0 Norwood Street 

(218) 828-2311 

Fax (218) 825·8922 

City Engineer 

(218) 828-2309 

Fax (218) 828-2316 

engineer@ci.brainerd.mn.us 

Chief of Pollee 

225 East River Road 

(218) 829-2805 

Fax(218)825-3489 

FlreChiet 

23 Laurel Street 

(218) 828-2312 

Fax(218)828·2331 

fire@cl.brainerd.mn.us 

August 16, 2012 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Mr. Brian Swanson 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

Gentlemen: 

On behalf of the Brainerd City Council, please accept this letter as full support of 

SkyWest Airlines serving the Brainerd Lakes Regional Airport. 

The Brainerd Lakes Regional Airport, which is jointly owned by the City of 

Brainerd and Crow Wing County, has been in operation since 1946 and is our 

"jewel" in the Brainerd Lakes Area. As a public facility all citizens are 

stakeholders of the facility and the use of the facility is provided both to the flying 

and non-flying public. 

As I'm sure you are aware, the Brainerd lakes area is a premiere vacation and 

sports designation. When I read about SkyWest's use of 50-passenger jets that 

have the cargo space not only for luggage but also the ability to carry cargo for 

hockey camps and golfing passengers, I was excited and I knew this was the 

airline to best serve our area. 

The City of Brainerd and its surrounding area is also a business destination with 

many area residents traveling into and out of the airport for business purposes. 

It is essential we have reliable service in order to accommodate our business 

community. 

If I can provide additional information to facilitate your decision of SkyWest 

Airlines being Brainerd's air service provider, please don't hesitate to contact me. 

cuy Planner Thank you for allowing me this opportunity. 

(218) 828-2310 

Fax {218) 828-2316 

planning@ci.brainerd.mn.us s· cerely, 

Director of Parka & Recreation : , 

(218) 828-2320 ; / 

Fax (218) 828·2791 ' . · 

parks@cl.brainerd.mn.us · · 

Public Utilities a ~Oe . P.O. Box 373 Council P s1dent 

(218) 829·8726 ~ • fax (218) 829-4703 

(218) 829-2193 ~ • fax (218) 829·2308 

email@bpu.org 

Equal Opportunity Employer 

() Printed on Recycled Paper 

Paper and Printing Produced Locally
No. 53782.

protests 907396-G, etc. (New York).

#### International Clearing House of N. Y. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Union
Carbide Corporation's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2000, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000100790
<NAME> UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                              63
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1113
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        687
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2166
<PP&E>                                            9247
<DEPRECIATION>                                    4603
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    8211
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             2064
<BONDS>                                           1759
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           158
<OTHER-SE>                                        2538
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      8211
<SALES>                                           1617
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1617
<CGS>                                             1314
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1314
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   141<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  37
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     79
<INCOME-TAX>                                        20
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 97
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        97
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.71
<FN>
<F1>Other expenses are equal to research and development of $39 and depreciation
and amortization of $102.
</FN>


</TABLE>
FLM

- EPA Dialog on the CSAPR Better

- than

- BART Rule and Reasonably Attributable

Visibility Impairment (RAVI)

Conference Call

March 13, 2012

FLM Attendees

Rachel Jacobson, DOI, Acting Assistant Secretary

Stephen Nofield, DOI

Bert Frost, NPS, Associate Director for Natural Resources Stewardship and Science

Carol McCoy, NPS, Chief, Air Resources Division (ARD)

Sandra Silva, FWS, Chief of Air Quality Branch

Ann Acheson, USFS, Chief Air Resources

John Vimont, NPS ARD

Susan Johns on, NPS ARD

Pat Brewer, NPS ARD

Don Shepherd, NPS ARD

Julie Thomas

- McNamee, NPS ARD

Tim Allen, FWS

Bret Anderson, USFS

Trent Wickman, USFS

Patty Hirami, USFS

Scott Copeland, USFS

EPA Attendees

Janet McCabe, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air an d Radiation

George Czerniak, Acting Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 5

Bruce Sypniewski, Deputy Division Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 5

Mike Koerber, OAQPS

Phil Lorang, OAQPS

Todd Hawes, OAQPS

Martha Keating, OAQPS

Lea Anderson, OGC

Kevin McLean, OGC

Julie Matthews, Region 10

Colleen McKaughan , Region 9

John Summerhays, Region 5

Pam Blakley, Region 5

Doug Aburano, Region 5

Josh Tapp, Region 7

Lynorae Benjamin, Region 4
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 276 

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding Jordanian institutions. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 19, 2007 

Mr. ANDREWS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding Jordanian 

institutions. 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that— 

3 (1) the Secretary of Education should use any 

4 available resources of the Department of Education 

5 and other agencies of the Executive Branch to sup6 port and encourage the formation of a consortia be7 tween one or more prominent United States institu8 tions of higher education and a Jordanian institu9 tion for the establishment of joint undergraduate 

10 and graduate programs of education; and 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HCON 276 IH 

1 (2) the Secretary of Education should assist 

2 any such consortium in overcoming any legal, diplo3 matic, or administrative obstacles to the establish4 ment of such programs. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
EPA Listening Sessions Pittsburgh July 2014 

My name is Pat Lupo and I am here today representing the Benedictine Sisters of Erie PA. I believe that 

Faith Communities all over the world are called to demonstrate their commitment to environmental action 

and to do it in partnership with environmental organizations, their local communities, and civic and 

governmental entities. 

Speaking from this faith perspective, our call to stewardship and the moral imperative of doing no harm 

to Creation, I urge you to enforce Emission Guidelines that will finally limit carbon pollution. The time to 

act is now; we cannot continue to take a step backward each time there is pressure to do so. Our best 

evidence indicates that power plants are the largest stationary source of carbon emissions in the United 

States, and a major contributor to climate change. I do not speak as an expert on carbon pollution or 

climate change but I do speak as an advocate for people present and future and our wonderful planet. In 

the words of Pope Francis I remind you, "Creation is a gift, it is a wonderful gift that God has given us, so 

we care for it and we use it for the benefit of all, always with respect and gratitude." 

The tradition of Catholic social teaching offers a developing and distinctive perspective on environmental 

issues. I believe that the following themes drawn from the tradition are integral dimensions of ecological 

responsibility: 

• A God-centered and sacramental view of the universe, which grounds human accountability for 

the fate of the earth; 

• A consistent respect for human life which extends to respect for all creation; 

• A world view affirming the ethical significance of global interdependence and the common good; 

• An ethic of solidarity promoting cooperation and a just structure of sharing in the world 

community; 

• An understanding of the universal purpose of created things, which requires equitable use of the 

earth's resources; 

• An option for the poor, which gives passion to the quest for an equitable and sustainable world; 

• A conception of authentic development, which offers a direction for progress that respects human 

dignity and the limits of material growth; 

As Benedictines we are taught to "listen with the ear of the heart", when we all do this, then our view of 

the earth will bring us to openness and compassion for the earth. Our religious traditions call us to 

stewardship- a call tied to environmental responsibility and civic engagement. 

As you consider Emission Guidelines to provide carbon limits on fossil fuel power plants I urge you to set 

limits that actually do the job of reducing pollution and global climate change. EPA's proposed rule will 

help limit carbon pollution, uphold human life and demonstrate a greater respect for the planet. It needs 

to be done and it needs to be done now and not in some future decade! Thank you. 

Pat Lupo, OSB 

Environmental Education and Advocacy 

Benedictine Sisters of Erie Pa 

pi u po@neig hborhooda rthouse. org 

St. Scholastica's Priory 355 East gth St. Erie PA 16503
No. 46347.

#### Protest 793093-G of Wm. Goodacre & Sons, Ltd. (Portland, Oreg.).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

At the hearing it was conceded that the mats in question are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Penn*(27 C. C. P. A. 242, C. A. D. 93) and they were found to be dutiable as claimed, but as a liquidation of duty had never in fact taken place and as there was no appraisement of the merchandise, the protest was dismissed upon motion of counsel, in view of section 514.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         292,892
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,386,984
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,337,912
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,386,984
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,118
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                90,588
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                864,997
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   864,997
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
(Reap. Dec. 8858)

#### Marks & Rosenfeld, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 718426

(Decided June 20, 1957)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiffs.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated in the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof, consists of chinaware imported from Germany.

> *706IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appraised values of the merchandise covered by the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the Appraiser in similar cases, is equal to the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States and that there was no higher foreign value for such or similar merchandise.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the cases may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed, facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Before the Second Division,

September 8, 1943

No. 48735.

#### Protest 958245-G of W. X. Huber Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

At the trial, on motion by the plaintiff, the record in a former case was admitted in evidence and another witness was called by the plaintiff, whose testimony was substantially the same as that of the previous witness except as to the period of time covered. This case is similar to *Huber*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 140, C. D. 448), in which there was an absence of proof that the material of which the merchandise was composed in chief value was not generally known as material for knitting, weaving, or sewing. It was found that in the case at bar this proof was also lacking. Following the cited decision the protest was overruled in all respects.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNIFAB
INTERNATIONAL, INC.'S SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      20,941,201
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,878,482
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    111,602
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            36,160,507
<PP&E>                                       9,623,293
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,265,750
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              42,518,050
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,680,318
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        50,223
<OTHER-SE>                                  29,534,698
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                42,518,050
<SALES>                                     17,947,922
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,947,922
<CGS>                                       15,561,574
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,008,588
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,537
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,994,912
<INCOME-TAX>                                   697,371
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,297,541
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,297,541
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.36
        

</TABLE>
**
Certification of the Chief Executive OfficerPursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Glenn F. Tilton, the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officerof United Air Lines, Inc. (the "Company") certify that to the best of myknowledge, based upon a review of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q forthe period ended September 30, 2004 of the Company (the "Report"):  (1)    The Report fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities         Exchange Act of 1934,as amended; and
(2)    The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial         condition and resultsof operations of the Company.      /s/ Glenn F. TiltonGlenn F. TiltonUnited Air Lines, Inc.Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
November 8, 2004    

**
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of United Refining Company, a Pennsylvania corporation (the Company), does
hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2010 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                          |  |                                            
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  | 
|Dated: July 15, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ John A. Catsimatidis
|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                          |  | John A. Catsimatidis                       
|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                          |  | Principal Executive Officer                
|                     |  |  | 
|Dated: July 15, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ James E. Murphy     
|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                          |  | James E. Murphy
Principal Financial Officer
(Reap. Dec. 9816)

#### Ben Shulman Associates, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 713491.

*522(Decided October 20, 1960)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

LawRence, Judge:

There was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff when the above-enumerated appeal for a reappraisement was called for hearing. The court thereupon ordered the case submitted.

It is provided by the rules of the court that, in such an instance, after the opposite party has had an opportunity to present evidence on the issues, the case may be decided by the court on the record before it.

Accordingly, I have examined the record in the present appeal for a reappraisement and find nothing therein which tends in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the decision of the appraiser. I find and hold, therefore, that the proper value of the merchandise is the value returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.