alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension Partners 1994-D, Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of operations
contained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         1,892
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  27,031
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               28,923
<PP&E>                                         3,096,788
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,349,501)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 776,210
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          14,059
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     762,151
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   776,210
<SALES>                                        164,876
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               164,959
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  48,193<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                46,301
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            46,301
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   46,301
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0

<FN>
<F1>Includes lease operating expenses, production taxes and depreciation and
amortization expense.  Excludes general and administrative and interest expense.
</FN>


</TABLE>
# L_2008352EN.01006301.xml

| 31.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 352/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 352/63

---

Corrigendum to Decision 2007/792/EC of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council of 26 November 2007 amending Decision 2005/446/EC setting the deadline for the commitment of the funds of the Ninth European Development Fund (EDF)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 320 of 6 December 2007
  )

The corrigendum published on page 40 of Official Journal L 43 of 19 February 2008 is cancelled and replaced by the following text:

on page 32, Sole Article (concerning Article 2(1) of Decision 2005/446/EC):

for:

‘1.   The date beyond which the interest rate subsidies managed by the European Investment Bank (EIB) to provide resources of the Investment Facility on concessional terms will not be committed, shall be set at 31 December 2007 or the date of entry into force of the Tenth EDF, whichever is the later. This date could be reviewed if need be.’,

read:

‘1.   The date beyond which the interest rate subsidies managed by the European Investment Bank (EIB) will not be committed, shall be set at 31 December 2007 or the date of entry into force of the Tenth EDF, whichever is the later. This date could be reviewed if need be.’.

---
Aircraft don’t run on hopes and dreams
 
  By Senior Airman Omari Bernard
                           Editor's note: The original story can be viewed on the Kadena Air Base website.
No. 99-903.

#### Florida *v.*Almeida.

Sup. Ct. Fla. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed *informa pauperis*granted. Cer-tiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1588 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1588

To amend title XVI of the Social Security Act to clarify that the value 
  of certain funeral and burial arrangements are not to be considered 
  available resources under the supplemental security income program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 29, 2005

 Mrs. Lincoln introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XVI of the Social Security Act to clarify that the value 
  of certain funeral and burial arrangements are not to be considered 
  available resources under the supplemental security income program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CERTAIN FUNERAL AND BURIAL ARRANGEMENTS NOT CONSIDERED 
              RESOURCES.

    (a) In General.--Section 1613(e)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1382b(e)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(C) If--
            ``(i) an individual or the individual's spouse enters into 
        an irrevocable contract with a provider of funeral goods and 
        services for a funeral;
            ``(ii) the individual or the individual's spouse funds the 
        contract by paying for the goods and services; and
            ``(iii)(I) the funeral provider subsequently places the 
        funds in a trust or in escrow; or
            ``(II) the individual or the individual's spouse 
        establishes an irrevocable trust, and the funeral provider is 
        the named beneficiary of the trust,
then the trust or escrow shall not be considered a resource available 
to the individual.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to payments for supplemental security income benefits under title 
XVI of the Social Security Act for months beginning on or after the 
date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Roy Lee NIX v. Reiko WELLS.

SC 2510.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Jan. 27, 1978.

George B. Azar, Montgomery, for appellant.

Robert C. Black for Hill, Hill, Carter, Franco, Cole & Black, Montgomery, for ap-pellee.

SHORES, Justice.

Nix was injured when his motorcycle collided with Mrs. Wells’ automobile. He filed suit claiming damages and charging Mrs. Wells with negligence and wantonness in the operation of the automobile. The case was tried to a jury which returned a verdict in favor of Mrs. Wells. The trial court denied Nix’ motion for new trial. He appealed. We affirm.

Nix was traveling east on a four-lane highway, and Mrs. Wells was traveling west. Mrs. Wells made a left turn, crossing the eastbound lane; and Nix’ motorcycle struck the right rear fender of the Wells’ automobile. According to Nix, Mrs. Wells made a left turn right in front of him. Mrs. Wells and other witnesses testified that Nix was not within Mrs. Wells’ view when she made the turn; that she had completed the turn into a parking lot and had stopped to permit a pedestrian to pass in front of her; and that only a very small *338part of the rear of her automobile was still in the highway. Mrs. Wells testified she did not see Nix until after his motorcycle struck her car. Others testified that Nix veered to the right and into the Wells’ automobile.

The evidence was in sharp conflict. Therefore, the trial judge properly submitted the issues to the jury. On appeal, Nix argues that the trial court erred in refusing to grant a new trial. We cannot agree. Having read the record, we agree with the trial court that there is evidence to support the jury’s verdict. The issues were clearly drawn and the jury was appropriately charged. It resolved the issues in favor of the defendant. There was evidence to support the verdict. Therefore, we should not reverse the trial court in refusing to grant a new trial. To do that, we must be convinced by the preponderance of the evidence that the verdict is wrong and unjust. § 12-13-11, 1975 Code; *Edmondson v. Blakey,*341 So.2d 481 (Ala. 1976); *Myers v. Evans,*287 Ala. 710, 255 So.2d 581 (Ala.1971).

Nix’ only other argument is based upon his assertion that counsel for Wells made various remarks throughout the trial which he contends tended to prejudice the jury against him. We need note only that, inasmuch as no objection was made by Nix to any remarks during the course of the trial, the record presents nothing for our review. *Daughtry v. Western Ry. of Alabama,*341 So.2d 702 (Ala.1977).

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

TORBERT, C. J., and MADDOX, JONES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.
#### Emma Lee STEPNEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-930.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 19, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 24, 1977.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Arthur Joel Berger, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Paul Mendelson, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: *Morey*v. *State,*72 Fla. 45, 72 So. 490 (1916); *Johns v. Ford Motor Credit Company,*226 So.2d 403 (Fla.1st D.C.A. 1969); *Hale v. State,*238 So.2d 471 (Fla.lst D.C.A. 1970); *State v. Alvarez,*258 So.2d 24 (Fla.3rd D.C.A. 1972); *Breedlove v. State,*295 So.2d 654 (Fla.3rd D.C.A. 1974); *Mitchell*v. *State,*321 So.2d 108 (Fla.lst D.C.A. 1975); *Sykes v. State,*329 So.2d 356 (Fla.1st D.C.A. 1976).
**-  Beltsville  \ BARC 
-  Animal & Natural Resources 
-  Hydrology and Remote Sensing Laboratory 
Printable VersionE-mail this pageThis site onlyAll ARS Advanced Search UBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">	You are here: 						Research / 								**Research Project:**REMOTE SENSING CROP RESIDUE COVER
**Location: Hydrology and Remote Sensing Laboratory**
												Project Number: 1265-12660-006-08Project Type:																				Reimbursable

Start Date: Jun 01, 2006End Date: Sep 30, 2009

**Objective:**Objectives are to acquire remotely sensed imagery and develop remote sensing technologies for measuring and reporting crop residue cover in the Midwest.  An additional study will examine the impact of crop residue type and soil type on the remotely sensed indices.
**Approach:**Current methods of quantifying crop residue cover are inadequate for characterizing the spatial variability of residue cover within fields or across large regions.  Multispectral and hyperspectral remotely sensed data will be acquired over agricultural fields shortly after planting in Indiana, Illinois and Iowa.  Crop residue cover will be measured in corn and soybean fields using line-point transects.  Spectral residue will be calibrated on subset of fields and tested with other fields and locations.  The tillage intensity class of each field will be identified based on crop residue cover.  Information on the previous season's crop will be merged with current residue cover to produce an inventory of soil tillage intensity by crop type for each test site.
    Project TeamDaughtry, Craig  
Project Annual Reports FY 2007 FY 2006 
Related National Programs Soil Resource Management(202) Integrated Farming Systems(207)  							Last Modified: 11/05/2008 		ARS Home |USDA.gov |Site Map |Policies and Links FOIA |Accessibility Statement |Privacy Policy |Nondiscrimination Statement |Information Quality |USA.gov |White House

**
Agency hosts industry leaders in quest to meet rising demand via closer collaboration
 
  By John R. Bell
              The pace of this increase is “more than ... forecasting tools can keep up with,” he said.
#### Christopher David COWELL, a minor by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, William Cowell, and L & M Leasing Co., Inc., a Florida corporation, d/b/a South Florida Leasing & Rental Co., Appellants, v. Mary RICKERSON and Throup H. Rickerson, individually and as husband of Mary Rickerson, et al., Appellees. Christopher David COWELL, a minor by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, William Cowell, and L & M Leasing Co., Inc., a Florida corporation, d/b/a South Florida Leasing & Rental Co., Appellants, v. Mickler G. WAGNER and her husband Thomas Wagner et al., Appellees. Christopher David COWELL, a minor by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, William Cowell, and L & M Leasing Co., Inc., a Florida corporation, d/b/a South Florida Leasing & Rental Co., Appellants, v. Roxie R. GILL and Andrew F. Gill, individually, and as husband of Roxie R. Gill, et al., Appellees (two cases).

Nos. 2365-2368.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Dec. 5, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT
      32(b)






**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 Oak Hill Financial, 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, Ron
      J.
      Copher, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.




*/s/
      Ron J. Copher*




Ron
      J.
      Copher


Chief
      Financial Officer





November
      9, 2006





-26-
----- -_.- - -

NEIL ABERCROMBIE

~Of"'W.IJI

-'. - ~:~,'.RW.E\~TOF .;'. :~bO' R-TI.T'I-O}l

-'1,,1 11'\1 NS

.::;/0 OPERfJlOI

En ;:DV\ 3 A \0: 55

lORrnAJ. ruDDY. A.C.5.W.• M.P.H.

0lRfC10Aort£Ali~ .

October 23, 2013

STATE OF HAWAII

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

P. O. BOX 4444

KALAUPAPA, HI 96742

Kevin D. Schlemmer, Chief

Essential Air Service & Domestic Analysis Division

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jerseys Ave, SE J'"

Washington, DC20590 '

Dear Mr. Schlemmer:

The Federal Aviation Administration has advertised for an Essential Air Service (EAS) provider

for service to and from Kalaupapa Settlement on the Island of Molokai in Hawaii, Order 2013-

10-3 for service beginning January 14,2013. EAS has provided the opportunity for Kalaupapa

residents and visitors to travel to and from the Settlement. The economy the EAS has brought to

the price of tickets has been essential to connect the ageing patient population and growing

support population with the outside world and to bring -guests to this very significant historical

ahd religious Hawaiian site.

Makani Kai has provided superior service to the Kalaupapa Settlement for the past 2 years.

Makani Kai worked closely \Vith the community to provide optimum service and allowed a

resident rate for travel that has allowed and encourage connection to both topside Molokai and

Honolulu. Both locations are vital links to medical services, normal government services and

other shopping and entertainment activities.

Previously, FAkhas awarded this EAS route to Pacific Wings since they said they would

provide EAS at no extra cost to the government. Their service was a disaster for Kalaupapa, and

basically was a ploy to gain access to the service that ",;thin short order raised prices by from

$30 to $503 dollars for a round trip to Honolulu. No one could afford to travel under that

tyranny and EAS service was severely degraded.

Makani Kai has provided EAS service to Kalaupapa with a subsidy, but they have maintained

and exceeded all their promises to provide affordable services and this has brought trip numbers

back to pre-Pacific Wings levels as the EAS is expected to provide.

Makani Kai has done everything they promised and done so very well for residents and visitors

to Kalaupapa.
Please give your most serious consideration to their tine record operating under the EAS and

award the new contract to them for the foreseeable future. It is imperative for the health and

welfare of this community that you do so to provide long term security to this community for

access to and from Kalaupapa Settlement.

Sincerely,

Mark Miller

Administrator Kalaupapa Settlement

And attached 27 residents (Note - during furlough, NPS employees were not here to sign under

this letter)
1

-- - ~-."'~.--..-----"

Essential Air Senice Letter of Support October 15,2013

The following people live and work/volunteer in Kalaupapa Settlement and support the

continuation of Makani Kai as the Essential Air Service carrier for Kalaupapa:

_'_-> ,:('c

)

If.- ~~ cD)lLU tAr h"CC

be,\! ~~M~{l

7, \'~1\;,---,!\.-h\.)\rJ t"--''{~

PCC;,yk ~r

(;~4._/~_r

,,;'i

~h;--:>

J

;/lief}.)
EXHIBIT 99.1

                           LETTERHEAD OF TEN STIX INC.





                            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 Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2002 of Ten Stix Inc., a Colorado
corporation (the "Company"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly Report"), we, Thomas E. Sawyer,
President, Treasurer and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Tony A.
Cranford, Vice President 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.   we, Thomas E. Sawyer and Tony A. Cranford, have read the Quarterly
          Report;

     2.   to the best of our knowledge, the Quarterly Report fully complies with
          the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and
          Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;

     3.   to the best of our knowledge, the information in the Quarterly Report
          is true in all important respects as of the nine-month period ended
          September 30, 2002;

     4.   the information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in
          all material respects, the financial condition and results of
          operation of the Company; and

     5.   the Quarterly Report contains all information about the Company of
          which we are aware that we believe is important to a reasonable
          investor as of the nine-month period ended September 30, 2002.


                                           /s/ Thomas E. Sawyer
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Thomas E. Sawyer, President/Treasurer
                                           and Chief Executive Officer

                                           /s/ Tony A. Cranford
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Tony A. Cranford, Vice President

                                           November 20, 2002
CERTIFICATION



I, Marcia Marcus, certify that:





1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of US Biodefense, Inc.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report; and



3.

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



4.

The
registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:



a)

designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b)

evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)

presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



5.

The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a)

all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b)

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls; and



6.

The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.





Date:  July 15, 2005



/s/ Marcia Marcus

Secretary

Director
# Dr. Colin Jay Williams

### Defense Logistics Agency Historian

### 

### 

### Contact

        - Colin.Williams@dla.mil    

### Education

        - PhD in Military History, University of Alabama
        - MA in Military History, University of Alabama
        - BS, United States Military Academy at West Point    

### Research Areas

        - Contemporary Military Logistics
        - Colonial, Revolutionary, and Early National New York    

### DLA Publications

        - Effectiveness and Efficiency: DLA’s 60-Year Quest to Perfect Supply Chain Management
        - “Combating the Coronavirus, DLA Efforts to Defeat COVID-19, February 1, 2020 – June 30, 2020”
        - Annual History, Fiscal Years 2019 – 2022

### Non-DLA Publications

        - “Persuasion Politics: How George Clinton Used Britain’s Evacuation from New York to Build a State and Unify a People,” New York History vol. 104, no. 2 (Winter 2023-2024): 363-82
        - Contributing author, Modern War in an Ancient Land: The U.S. Army in Operation Enduring Freedom, 2001-2014, U.S. Army Center of Military History, 59-1-1, May 2021
        - “Unity in a Time of War: New York’s First Constitution” New York History vol. 99, no. 1 (Winter 2018): 38-67.
        - “New York’s Committees in the American Revolution,” chapter in Key to the Northern Country: The Hudson River Valley in the American Revolution,” eds. James M. Johnson, Christopher Pryslopski, and Andrew Villani (Albany: SUNY Press, 2013).
        - “Saved by Artillery: How MG Lucas Lost the Initiative at Anzio and the Allied Artillery Regained It,” Field Artillery Journal (July-August 2003).    

### Prior Experience

        - Army officer
        - Assistant Professor, United States Military Academy
        - Historian, U.S. Army Center of Military History