alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CONSENT OF WATTS, GRIFFIS AND MCOUAT LIMITED








Alderon Iron Ore Corp.


United States Securities and Exchange Commission





Dear Sirs:





RE: ALDERON IRON ORE CORP.





I, Michael Kociumbas, P.Geo., Senior Geologist and Vice-President of Watts, Griffis and McOuat Limited, do hereby consent to filing of the following report.





Reference is made to the technical report entitled “Feasibility Study of the Rose Deposit and Resource Estimate for the Mills Lake Deposit of the Kamistiatusset (Kami) Iron Ore Property, Labrador for Alderon Iron Ore Corp.”dated effective December 17, 2012, which the undersigned has co-authored on behalf of Watts, Griffis and McOuat Limited for Alderon Iron Ore Corp. (the “Technical Report”).





I, on behalf of myself and on behalf of Watts, Griffis and McOuat, hereby consent to the inclusion of references to my name and the name of Watts, Griffis and McOuat and references to, and information derived from, the Technical Report, in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Alderon Iron Ore Corp., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.





Dated this 27thday of March, 2015.

















“Michael Kociumbas"Michael Kociumbas, P.Geo.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. James E. WILLIAMS v. C. Paul PHELPS, Secretary, Department of Corrections.

No. 62596.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1978.

In re: James E. Williams, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Granted. Parole revocation hearing ordered with right to applicant to be confronted with the witnesses against him.
Memo

Financing Marketable All Other Change in End-Of-Quarter SOMA

Need Borrowing Sources Total Cash Balance Cash Balance Redemptions

Quarter Announcement Date (1) (2) (3) (4) = (2) + (3) (5) = (4) - (1) (6) (7)

Oct - Dec

2017 Actual 204 282 (8) 274 70 229 (12)

Jan - Mar

2018 Actual 374 488 (54) 435 61 290 (30)

Apr - Jun

2018 Actual (43) 72 (72) 0 43 333 (48)

Jul - Sep

2018 Actual 212 353 (89) 264 52 385 (66)

Oct - Dec

2018 Actual 291 426 (117) 309 17 402 (91)

Jan - Mar

2019 Actual 375 374 (67) 306 (68) 334 (46)

Apr - Jun

2019 Actual 13 40 (97) (57) (70) 264 (67)

Jul - Sep

2019 Actual 281 440 (40) 400 119 382 (30)

Oct - Dec

2019 Actual 313 330 7 337 24 404 0

Jan - Mar

2020 Actual 365 477 (1) 476 111 515 0

Apr - Jun

2020 Actual 1,526 2,753 (20) 2,733 1207 1722 0

Jul - Sep

2020 Actual 401 454 7 461 60 1782 0

Oct - Dec

2020 Actual 648 597 (3) 595 (53) 1729 0

Jan - Mar

2021 Actual 1008 401 1 402 607 1122 0

Apr - Jun

2021 Actual 591 319 2 321 (270) 852 0

Jul - Sep

2021 Actual 751 103 11 115 (637) 215 0

Oct - Dec

2021 Actual 480 689 (18) 670 191 406 0

Jan - Mar

2022 Actual 423 668 1 669 245 652 0

Apr - Jun

2022 Actual (180) 7 (55) (49) 131 782 (30)

Jul - Sep August 1, 2022 430 444 (147) 298 (132) 650 (120)

2022 Actual 453 457 (151) 307 (146) 636 (120)

Forecast Revisions 23 13 (4) 9 (14) (14) 0

Oct - Dec August 1, 2022 185 400 (164) 235 50 700 (139)

2022 October 31, 2022 288 550 (197) 352 64 700 (139)

Forecast Revisions 103 150 (33) 117 14 0 0

Jan - Mar

2023 October 31, 2022 515 578 (263) 315 (200) 500 (221)

Sources and Uses Reconciliation Table

Financing
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-18-00259-CR

George Andrew Day

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

156th District Court of Bee County, Texas

Trial Cause No. B-17-2176-0-CR-B

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 30, 2020
Memo

Financing Marketable All Other Change in End-Of-Quarter

Need Borrowing Sources Total Cash Balance Cash Balance

Quarter Announcement Date (1) (2) (3) (4) = (2) + (3) (5) = (4) - (1) (6)

Oct - Dec

2005 Actual 97 93 6 98 1 37

Jan - Mar

2006 Actual 173 158 (14) 144 (28) 8

Apr - Jun

2006 Actual (137) (92) (7) (99) 38 46

Jul - Sep

2006 Actual 19 45 (19) 26 6 52

Oct - Dec

2006 Actual 70 42 6 48 (21) 31

Jan - Mar

2007 Actual 159 126 9 134 (25) 6

Apr - Jun

2007 Actual (153) (139) 5 (133) 19 25

Jul - Sep

2007 Actual 35 116 (31) 85 50 75

Oct - Dec

2007 Actual 91 126 (53) 73 (18) 57

Jan - Mar January 28, 2008 169 156 (18) 137 (32) 25

2008 Actual 187 244 (68) 176 (11) 46

Memo: Forecast Revision 18 89 (50) 39 21 21

Apr - Jun January 28, 2008 (155) (122) (13) (135) 20 45

2008 April 28, 2008 (83) (35) (49) (84) (1) 45

Memo: Forecast Revision 72 87 (37) 51 (21) 0

Jul - Sep

2008 April 28, 2008 103 112 (10) 103 0 45

Sources and Uses Reconciliation Table

Financing
February 19th 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and

Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the 

“Reform Act”) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Terra Imaging LLC (“Terra Imaging”), operators 

of Unmanned Aircraft System (“UAS”), seeks an exemption from the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (“FARs”) listed below.

*In addition to the Exception to Rulemaking document provided, please accept this 

amendment document, specifically addressing the need for a certified pilot to be included

in the current document folder: FAA-2015-0386-0002

14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b): Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in 

Command. Pursuant to 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b), no person who holds a private 

pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying 

passengers or property for compensation or hire. 

Answer: Given the current state of approval for the current 333 exceptions, Terra 

Imaging acknowledges that the Pilot in Command (PIC) must hold either an airline 

transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC must also 

hold a current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a 

state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal 

government. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 14 CFR 

§ 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

Please feel free to contact me directly with any questions pertaining to this exception.

Sincerely, 

Karl Engstrom - CEO

Terra Imaging Inc.

M: 858.205.4349

E: engstrom@terraimaging.com

www.terraimaging.com

www.3dgolfcourse.com
Table 2 Net Interest and Valuation Changes Related to U.S. Participatio

 -- SDR Department --

U.S. Fiscal Year, Quarterly

($M U.S. Dollars)

Net SDR Holdings Interest Calculations Va

Fiscal Year Ended 

9/30

Dollar Value of 

SDR Holdings

Dollar Value of 

Cumulative SDR 

Allocation

Net SDR Holdings 

(Col. 1 - Col. 2)

Interest Income 

on Net SDR 

Holdings

Interest Expense 

Associated with 

Financing 

Cumulative U.S. 

SDR Transactions

Net Interest 

Income 

(Col. 4 + Col. 5)

V

C

Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3 Col. 4 Col. 5 Col. 6 

2002

Q1: Oct - Dec 01 $10,783 $6,157 $4,626 $26 -$25 $0 Q2: Jan - Mar 02 10,809 6,109 4,700 27 -24 4 Q3: Apr - June 02 11,645 6,519 5,127 30 -26 3 Q4: July - Sept 02 11,710 6,481 5,229 29 -24 4 

Total $112 -$100 $12 2003

Q1: Oct - Dec 02 $12,166 $6,661 $5,505 $26 -$21 $5 Q2: Jan - Mar 03 11,392 6,731 4,662 20 -16 5 Q3: Apr - June 03 11,720 6,864 4,857 18 -15 3 Q4: July - Sept 03 12,062 7,005 5,057 20 -16 4 

$84 -$68 $17 

2004

Q1: Oct - Dec 03 $12,638 $7,281 $5,357 $21 -$17 $4 

Note:Detail may not add to total due to rounding.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T OR L AN DO ME J I A- AC OS T A, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 70309 A ge nc yN o. A 097- 740- 793 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d F e bruary15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , F E RN A N D E Z , an dM . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. O rl an d o M ej i a-A co st a, a n at i v e an dci t i zen o f E l S al v ad o r, p et i t i o n s p ro se f o rr e v ie w o f

th e B o ar do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ’ ( “B I A ” ) o r d e rd is m is s in g h is appe a l f r om a n i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s ( “ I J ” ) de c i s i on de ny i ng hi s appl i c a t i on f or a s y lu m an dw ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l. W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 .



# FI LED MA R 07 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 70309 2 W e r e v ie w f

o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e th e a g e n c y ’s f a c tu a l f in d in g s , Chebcho ub v. I NS , 2 5 7 F . 3 d1 0 3 8 , 1 0 4 2 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 1 ), an drev i ew d e n o v o du e p ro cess cl ai m s, V a s q u ez - Za v a la v . A s h c r o ft , 324 F . 3d 1105, 1107 ( 9th C i r . 2003) . W e de nythe p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. S ubs t ant i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the a ge nc y ’ s a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyde t e rm i na t i on ba s e d on di s c r e panc i e s be tw e e n M e j i a - A c os t a ’ s t e s t i m onya nd hi s a s y l um ap p lic a tio n r e g ar d in g th e n a tu r e a n dc ir c u m s tan c e s o f th e th r e a ts m a d e a g a in s t h im an dh is f a th e r . Se e Che bc houb , 257 F . 3d a t1043 ( i nc ons i s t e nc i e s tha tr e l a t e t o the ba s i s f orthe pe t i t i one r ’ s f

e arof pe r s e c ut i on go t o the he artof the c l a i m ) . I n the abse nce of cr edi bl e t es t i m on y, M ej i a- A cost a’ s a sy l um and w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al c la im s f a il. Se e Fa ra h v . A s h c r o ft , 34 8 F . 3d 11 53 , 11 56 (9th C i r. 20 03 ). W e r e je c t M e jia - A c o s ta ’s c o n te n tio n th a t th e I Jd e n ie dh im a d e q u a te tim e to p r e p ar e an dp r e s e n t h is c la im s . Se e La r i ta -M a r t i n ezv . I

NS , 220 F . 3d 1092, 1095 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ( r e q u ir in g e rr o ra n dp r e ju d ic e to p r e v a il o n adu e p r o c e s s c la im ) . W e a l so re

j ec thi s c on t ent i on thatthe B IA fa i l ed t o adequ at el y r evi ew the evi dence in h is c a s e . Se e id . at10 95 -96 (re qu i ri ng al i en t o o verc om e pre sum pt i on thatB IA consi dere d al l the re l evantevi dence). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
Supplement to the currently effective Statements of Additional Information for
the listed fund:

DWS LifeCompass Protect 2017 Fund

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

The following information supplements disclosure in the Management of the Fund -
Investment Advisor section in the fund's Statements of Additional Information as
follows:


The Fund has adopted a subadviser approval policy (the "Subadviser Approval
Policy"). The Subadviser Approval Policy permits the Advisor, subject to the
approval of the Board, including a majority of the Independent Board Members, to
terminate an existing subadvisor or sub-subadvisor and hire another sub-advisor
or sub-subadvisor, as applicable, and materially amend an existing subadvisory
agreement or sub-subadvisory agreement without obtaining shareholder approval.
The Fund could not implement the Subadviser Approval Policy without the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") granting the Fund exemptive
relief. A number of other mutual fund complexes have obtained exemptive relief
with respect to an advisor's ability to appoint, replace or amend the
subadvisory agreement with unaffiliated subadvisors and subadvisors that are
wholly owned subsidiaries of the advisor. However, exemptive relief with regard
to an advisor's ability to appoint, replace or amend the subadvisory agreement
with a subadvisor, who is affiliated with, but not wholly owned subsidiary of
the advisor, without shareholder approval, would be more expansive relief than
previously granted by the SEC. In addition, exemptive relief with regard to an
advisor's ability to appoint, replace or amend a sub-subadvisory agreement with
a sub-advisor, without shareholder approval, would be more expansive relief than
previously obtained by other mutual fund complexes. Accordingly, there can be no
assurance that the Fund's exemptive application will be granted by the SEC or
that it will be sufficiently broad to allow the Fund to implement the Subadviser
Approval Policy as described above. The SEC also has proposed Rule 15a-5 under
the 1940 Act in October 2003 to permit the appointment and termination of
subadvisors and amendment to subadvisory agreements without shareholder
approval. No action has been taken on proposed Rule 15a-5 under the 1940 Act
since its proposal and there are no assurances that the rule will be adopted as
proposed. The Fund and the Advisor will be subject to the conditions imposed by
the SEC (either by an exemptive order or as part of the final rule) whenever the
Advisor acts under the Subadviser Approval Policy, including any shareholder
notice requirements.




               Please Retain This Supplement for Future Reference.









September 30, 2009
FILED

July 30, 1998

Cecil W. Crowson

Appellate Court Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

JULIUS GOODMAN, )

) C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9712-CR-00562

Appellant, )

) DAVIDSON COUNTY

VS. ) (No. 2509 Below)

)

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) The Hon. Seth Norman

)

Appellee. ) (Habeas Corpus)

) DISMISSED

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court upon the state’s motion to affirm the judgment

pursuant to Rule 20, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals Rules. After reviewing the record, the

state’s motion, and the appellant’s brief, we find that the above-styled appeal should be dismissed.

The appellant filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus on October 1, 1996.

Subsequently, counsel was appointed, and an amended petition was filed on January 15, 1997.

A hearing was held on November 10, 1997, and through counsel, the appellant withdrew his

petition. Thereafter, the appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.

In his brief, the appellant indicates that his attorney misrepresented to the trial court

that he wished to withdraw the petition. Regardless, it appears that the appellant subsequently filed

a petition in the criminal court of Johnson County, Tennessee, and is seeking to appeal as of right

from the adverse decision in Johnson County.

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 4(a), the notice of appeal shall be filed with and received by

the clerk of the trial court within 30 days after the date of entry of the judgment from which is being

appealed. The notice of appeal cannot be filed with the trial court clerk of one county in order to

appeal from the judgment of a court from another county. In the present case, the petition for

habeas corpus relief was withdrawn in Davidson County before the trial court acted upon it.

Moreover, from the appellant’s brief, it is clear that he is attempting to appeal from proceedings in

Johnson County, and those proceedings are not properly before us to review. 

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the above-styled appeal is dismissed. It

appearing that the appellant is indigent, costs are taxed to the state.

________________________________

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE

CONCUR:

________________________________

JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE
-2-

________________________________

THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 64817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32134]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-66-000]


Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

December 3, 1997.
    Take notice that on November 26, 1997, Colorado Interstate Gas 
Company (CIG) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, Twenty-Fourth Revised Sheet No. 11, with an 
effective date of January 1, 1998.
    CIG states that the filing is being made pursuant to CIG's First 
Revised Volume No. 1, General Terms and Conditions, Article 21.5--
Account No. 858 Stranded Costs.
    CIG states that copies of its filing were served upon the company's 
jurisdictional firm customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or 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 214 and 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 and 385.211). All such motions or 
protests should be filed as provided in Section 154.210 of the 
Commission's Regulations. 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 
in the Public Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-32134 Filed 12-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 4TH QUARTER 2011

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

ANNOUNCEMENT AUCTION SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE DATE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT MONEY

4-WK 3-MO 6-MO 12-MO

4-WEEK AND 9/29 10/4 10/6 36.00 30.00 24.00 104.00 -14.00

3&6&12 MO BILLS 10/6 10/11 10/13 36.00 30.00 24.00 99.00 -9.00

10/13 10/17 10/20 36.00 30.00 24.00 24.00 116.00 -2.00

10/20 10/24 10/27 36.00 30.00 24.00 88.00 2.00

10/27 10/31 11/3 36.00 30.00 24.00 88.00 2.00

11/3 11/7 11/10 38.00 31.00 24.00 90.00 3.00

11/10 11/14 11/17 40.00 32.00 24.00 24.00 116.00 4.00

11/17 11/21 11/25 42.00 33.00 24.00 95.00 4.00

11/23 11/28 12/1 42.00 33.00 24.00 97.00 2.00

12/1 12/5 12/8 40.00 32.00 24.00 100.00 -4.00

12/8 12/12 12/15 38.00 31.00 24.00 24.00 122.00 -5.00

12/15 12/19 12/22 36.00 31.00 24.00 100.00 -9.00

12/22 12/27 12/29 35.00 31.00 24.00 99.00 -9.00

1189.00 1210.00 -21.00

CASH MANAGEMENT BILLS

CMB Funds: 0.00

COUPONS

CHANGE

IN SIZE

3-year Note 10/6 10/11 10/17 32.00 0.00

10-year Note ® 10/6 10/12 10/17 21.00 0.00

30-year Bond ® 10/6 10/13 10/17 13.00 0.00 0.00 66.00

30-year TIPS ® 10/13 10/20 10/31 7.00 0.00 0.00 7.00

2-year Note 10/20 10/25 10/31 35.00 0.00

5-year Note 10/20 10/26 10/31 35.00 0.00

7-year Note 10/20 10/27 10/31 29.00 0.00 57.24 41.76

3-year Note 11/2 11/8 11/15 32.00 0.00

10-year Note 11/2 11/9 11/15 24.00 0.00

30-year Bond 11/2 11/10 11/15 16.00 0.00 23.93 48.07

10-year TIPS ® 11/10 11/17 11/30 11.00 0.00 0.00 11.00

2-year Note 11/17 11/21 11/30 35.00 0.00

5-year Note 11/17 11/22 11/30 35.00 0.00

7-year Note 11/17 11/23 11/30 29.00 0.00 57.37 41.63

3-year Note 12/1 12/6 12/15 32.00 0.00

10-year Note ® 12/1 12/7 12/15 21.00 0.00

30-year Note ® 12/1 12/8 12/15 13.00 0.00 26.43 39.58

5-year TIPS ® 12/15 12/22 12/30 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.00

2-year Note 12/22 12/27 1/3 35.00 0.00

5-year Note 12/22 12/28 1/3 35.00 0.00

7-year Note 12/22 12/29 1/3 29.00 0.00 58.23 40.77

529.00 223.20 305.80

Estimates are italicized. R = Reopening

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 284.80
Exhibit 32.2.1

Certification Required Under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I,
Eugene R. McGrath, the Chief Executive Officer of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (the "Company") certify that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003, which this statement accompanies, (the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                        | /s/EUGENE R. MCGRATHEugene R. McGrath
|----------------------- | -------------------------------------
|Dated: November 7, 2003 |                                      

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

---

QuickLinks
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC.
                       Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                               Twelve Months Ended
                             (Thousands of Dollars)


                                                   MARCH                MARCH
                                                    1998                 1997
                                               ----------           ---------


Earnings
 Net Income                                      $724,759             $686,158
 Federal Income Tax                               351,474              362,900
 Federal Income Tax Deferred                       39,400               28,870
 Investment Tax Credits Deferred                   (8,800)              (8,850)
                                               ----------           ----------

    Total Earnings Before Federal Income Tax    1,106,833            1,069,078

Fixed Charges*                                    350,899              347,154
                                               ----------           ----------


    Total Earnings Before Federal Income Tax
      and Fixed Charges                        $1,457,732           $1,416,232
                                               ==========           ==========



* Fixed Charges

 Interest on Long-Term Debt                      $306,016             $300,782
 Amort. of Debt Discount, Premium & Expense        12,448               11,421
 Interest on Component of Rentals                  18,519               18,058
 Other Interest                                    13,916               16,893
                                               ----------           ----------

    Total Fixed Charges                          $350,899             $347,154
                                               ==========           ==========



    Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges               4.15                 4.08
Exhibit 32.2

                            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 CompuDyne Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 accompanying this
certification and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Geoffrey F. Feidelberg, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. ss. 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: May 7, 2004

                                            /s/ Geoffrey F. Feidelberg
                                            --------------------------
                                            Geoffrey F. Feidelberg
                                            Chief Financial Officer