alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.3



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 Texas-New Mexico Power Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jack V. Chambers, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:



(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/ Jack V. Chambers                    
|                                        
|Jack V. Chambers Chief Executive Officer



July
24, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
balance sheet, statement of income, statement of retained earnings and
statement of cash flows contained in Form 10-Q of Commonwealth Gas Company for
the nine months ended September 30, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000022620
<NAME> COMMONWEALTH GAS COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                            <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                   SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        9-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                      PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>          269,146
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>              0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>              71,490
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>            26,088
<OTHER-ASSETS>                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     366,724
<COMMON>                            71,425
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>           27,739
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                 11,874
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>     111,038
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>               105,800
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                  20,300
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>           0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>        3,650
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>              0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                         0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>     125,936
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>      366,724
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>          205,438
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                 3,842
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>         187,011
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>         190,853
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>             14,585
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                     946
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>      15,531
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>             8,385
<NET-INCOME>                         7,146
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>              0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>        7,146
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                 0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>            6,558
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>              42,019
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0
        


</TABLE>
255 La. 275

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Charles E. BAZZELL, Jr. and William B. Irving.

No. 50351.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 27, 1970.

In re: State of Louisiana applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.

Writ refused. The result is correct. See State v. Wells, 253 La. 925, 221 So.2d 50. Article 162 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

McCaleb and Summers, JJ., are of the opinion the writ should be granted.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                                 [LETTERHEAD]




                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement 
dated February 25, 1993 (Form S-8, No. 33-58726) pertaining to The Coleman 
Company, Inc.'s 1992 Stock Option Plan and in the Registration Statement 
dated January 18, 1994 (Form S-8, No. 33-74144) pertaining to The Coleman 
Company, Inc.'s 1993 Stock Option Plan, of our report dated November 21, 
1995, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Seatt 
Corporation included in the Current Report on Form 8-K of The Coleman 
Company, Inc. filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 
17, 1996.


             /s/  Friedman Eisenstein Raemer and Schwartz, LLP



January 16, 1996
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Columbia Energy Group (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis
McFarland, Principal Financial 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 result of operations of the Company.




        /s/ Dennis McFarland
-------------------------------------
          Dennis McFarland
     Principal Financial Officer

Date:     November 14, 2002
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1708 

To provide additional appropriations to the Indian Health Service, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 9, 2021 

Mr. RUIZ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Appropriations 

A BILL 

To provide additional appropriations to the Indian Health 

Service, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tribal Health Care 

5 Protection Fund Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FUNDING FOR INDIAN HEALTH. 

7 (a) In addition to amounts otherwise available, there 

8 is appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal year 2021, out 

9 of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 

10 $2,000,000,000, to remain available until expended, for 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1708 IH

1 lost reimbursements in accordance with section 207 of the 

2 Indian Health Care Improvement Act (25 U.S.C. 1621f). 

3 (b) Funds appropriated by subsection (a) shall be 

4 made available to restore amounts, either directly or 

5 through reimbursement, for obligations for the purposes 

6 specified in this section that were incurred to prevent, pre7 pare for, and respond to COVID–19 during the period be8 ginning on the date on which the public health emergency 

9 was declared by the Secretary on January 31, 2020, pur10 suant to section 319 of the Public Health Service Act (42 

11 U.S.C. 247d) with respect to COVID–19 and ending on 

12 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (c) Funds made available under subsection (a) to 

14 Tribes and Tribal organizations under the Indian Self-De15 termination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 

16 5301 et seq.) shall be available on a one-time basis. Such 

17 non-recurring funds shall not be part of the amount re18 quired by section 106 of the Indian Self-Determination 

19 and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5325), and such 

20 funds shall only be used for the purposes identified in this 

21 section. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### In re Chrissell HAMILTON v. STATE of Alabama. Ex parte Chrissell Hamilton.

77-124.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 5, 1978.

*773Bob E. Allen, Montgomery, for petitioner.

William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Elizabeth N. Petree, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

PER CURIAM.

Chrissell Hamilton was convicted in Montgomery County Circuit Court of murder in the first degree of Aaron Davenport and sentenced to life imprisonment. Cer-tiorari was granted by this court to review the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals upholding the conviction. We quash the writ as improvidently granted.

In quashing the writ, we make the following observations.

We cannot agree with all the reasons advanced by the Court of Criminal Appeals for affirming the conviction.

We do agree that the question as to where Hamilton was living at the time of the offense was a proper subject of inquiry by the State since the issue of self-defense on the part of Hamilton was clearly raised at trial. Since the threats which precipitated the shooting occurred inside Mrs. Porter’s house, the prosecutor’s question, as to Hamilton’s place of residence on April 25, 1976, was relevant to the issue of self-defense in order to raise the application of the duty to retreat rule.

Hamilton’s second allegation of error is that his mother’s comments that she was paying close attention to her son because she knew “that he was already in trouble” were prejudicial and informed the jury of his previous arrests. We agree that such comment did not constitute reversible error because of the context in which it arose. The question put was: “Why did you pay strict attention to him and know he only drank one beer?” The answer, if unresponsive, should have been the subject of a motion to exclude. *Brown v. State,*21 Ala.App. 371, 108 So. 625 (1926). We note there was no specific reference to any prior arrest or conviction of Hamilton and that the answers given by Mrs. Porter were not statements made to show Hamilton’s bad character, but were merely incidental remarks made during her detailed account of the events of April 25, 1976. Moreover, the objection by defendant’s counsel was made after the prosecuting attorney began to repeat the mother’s answer. The objection was not made to the original question, nor the answer itself. Furthermore, the court sustained this objection and did not permit any further inquiry into this matter.

WRIT QUASHED.

TORBERT, C. J., and BLOODWORTH, MADDOX, FAULKNER, JONES, ALMON, SHORES, EMBRY and BEATTY, JJ., concur.
#### Samuel MULL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-61.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 7, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 29, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1






Certification of Principal Executive and 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 Annual Report of Pathmark Charter Corp. a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), James B. Wootton, President, Secretary and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, 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.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Pathmark Charter Corp. and will be retained by Pathmark Charter Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.







/s/ James B. WoottonJames B. Wootton

President, Secretary and Chief Financial Officer

December 10, 2010
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Justin Eugene Clark, Appellant

No. 06-13-00155-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 204th District Court of 

Dallas County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. F1261948-Q). Opinion delivered by Chief 

Justice Morriss, Justice Carter and Justice 

Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Justin Eugene Clark, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED MAY 21, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit
32(a)








This
Certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise
subject to the liability of that section.  This Certification shall
not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other
document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, except as otherwise stated in
such filing.








Certification
Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63


of Title
18 of the United States Code








In
connection with the Annual Report of Columbus Southern Power Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Michael
G. Morris, the 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, based on my knowledge (i) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.








/s/ Michael G.
Morris________


Michael
G. Morris


Chief
Executive Officer








May 1,
2008








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
American Electric Power Company, Inc. and will be retained by American Electric
Power Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
Exhibit 8: Page 1 of 2

WESTERN STATES OFFICE AND 

PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND

SECOND SUSPENSION APPLICATION 

Exhibit 8
Western States Office and Professional Employees Pension Fun

Exhibit 8: Page 2 of 2

Exhibit 8 

Rev. Proc. 2016-27, Section 6.03 

Ten-Year Experience 

For Certain Critical Assumptions 

Contributions 

Year 

Ending 

12/31 

Base 

Contributions 

Supplemental 

and Surcharge 

Contributions 

Withdrawal 

Liability 

Payments 

Base 

Units(Hours) 

Base Average 

Hourly Rate 

Supplem

Surcharg

Hourl

2007 $7,678,247 N/A N/A 4,282,490 $1.79 N2008 $8,277,807 N/A N/A 4,203,802 $1.97 N2009 $7,842,903 $161,882 N/A 4,063,879 $1.93 $02010 $7,676,687 $812,322 N/A 3,671,591 $2.09 $02011 $7,297,989 $1,318,385 $6,012 3,555,598 $2.05 $02012 $6,980,563 $1,879,073 $937,412 3,358,483 $2.08 $02013 $6,485,023 $2,884,983 $1,674,335 3,231,057 $2.01 $02014 $5,064,945 $3,776,471 $1,570,022 1,776,431 $2.85 $22015 $4,883,040 $3,591,720 $3,337,192 1,575,730 $3.10 $22016 $4,318,217 $3,060,448 $3,872,245 1,358,925 $3.18 $2
No. 9731.

#### Ransom *v.*Taylor et al., Exrs.

(Decided November 20, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Erie County.

*Mr. George E: Reiter*and *Mr. H. L. Peeke,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Mackey & Hoxsey,*and *Andrews Brothers,*for defendants' in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Sliauck, C. J.,- Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.:: •
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 221 (Monday, November 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 61316]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30072]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. MG98-4-000]


Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Filing

November 10, 1997.
    Take notice that on November 6, 1997, Tennessee Gas Pipeline 
Company (Tennessee) filed updated standards of conduct under Standard 
I, 18 CFR 161.3(i), and to reflect changes resulting from the corporate 
merger with El Paso Natural Gas Company and sale of Kern River Gas 
Transmission Company.
    Tennessee states that it served a copy of the filing on all of its 
customers and affected state regulatory commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 or 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.211 or 385.214. All such motions to 
intervene or protest should be filed on or before November 25, 2997. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-30072 Filed 11-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Monroe MORROW, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. T-247.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Sept. 27, 1973.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

RAWLS, C. J. and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD, K., JJ„ concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 223 (Wednesday, November 19, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 61721]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30288]



[[Page 61721]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-228; RM-9163]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Pima, AZ

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition for rule making 
filed on behalf of R.A. Montierth Enterprises, L.L.C., seeking the 
allotment of Channel 296A to Pima, Arizona, as that community's first 
local aural transmission service. Coordinates used for this proposal 
are 32-53-36 and 109-49-42. Pima, Arizona, is located within 320 
kilometers (199 miles) of the Mexico border, and therefore, the 
Commission must obtain the concurrence of the Mexican government in 
this proposal.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before December 29, 1997, and reply 
comments on or before January 13, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 
20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties 
should serve the petitioner's counsel, as follows: Gregory L. Masters, 
Esq., Fisher, Wayland, Cooper, Leader & Zaragoza, L.L.P., 2001 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 97-228, adopted October 
29, 1997, and released November 7, 1997. The full text of this 
Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during 
normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M 
Street, NW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may 
also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20036, (202) 857-3800.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.

    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
See 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-30288 Filed 11-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 212 (Monday, November 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59371-59372]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29010]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Clean Water Act

    Under 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby give that on October 21, 1997 a 
proposed consent decree (``the decree'') in United States, Commonwealth 
of Virginia, and District of Columbia v. Colonial Pipeline Company, 
Civil Action No. 97-1680-A, was lodged with the United States District 
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
    In this action brought pursuant to the Clean Water Act, as amended 
by the Oil

[[Page 59372]]

Pollution Act of 1990, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et. seq., the United States, 
Commonwealth of Virginia and District of Columbia sought civil 
penalties and natural resource damages regarding a March 1993 oil 
discharge to Sugarland Run, a tributary of the Potomac River. The 
proposed decree requires Colonial Pipeline Company to perform 
comprehensive projects to restore natural resources that were damaged 
as a result of the oil discharge, reimbursing all assessment costs of 
the natural resource trustees, and monitoring and oversight costs 
associated with the projects. In addition, the decree requires Colonial 
Pipeline Company to pay $253,314 toward the notching of Little Falls 
Dam on the Potomac River, a joint project of the District of Columbia, 
State of Maryland and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and to pay a $1.5 
million civil penalty, $750,000 to the United States, and $750,000 to 
the Commonwealth of Virginia.
    The Department of Justice will receive written comments relating to 
the decree for thirty (30) days from the date of publication of this 
notice. Please address comments to the Assistant Attorney General, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, Department of Justice, P.O. 
Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C. 20044 and refer to 
United States, Commonwealth of Virginia, and District of Columbia v. 
Colonial Pipeline Company, D.J. Ref. #90-5-1-1-4055.
    The decree may be examined at the Office of the United States 
Attorney, Eastern District of Virginia, 2100 Jamieson Avenue, 
Alexandria, VA 22314; the Region III Office of the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, 
PA 19107; and at the Consent Decree Library 1120 G Street, N.W., 4th 
Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 624-0892. A copy of the decree may 
be obtained in person or by mail at the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G 
Street, N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005 (202-624-0892). When 
requesting a copy, please enclose a check in the amount of $16.75 
(twenty-five cents per page reproduction costs) payable to the 
``Consent Decree Library.''
Joel M. Gross,
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 97-29010 Filed 10-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M