alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 233 (Monday, December 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 75689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30728]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-367-013]


Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Correction Filing

November 28, 2000.
    Take notice that on November 21, 2000, Northwest Pipeline 
Corporation (Northwest) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet to 
become effective December 1, 2000:

    Substitute Tenth Revised Sheet No. 8.1

    Northwest states that the purpose of this filing is to correct the 
Rate Schedule LS-2I rates filed on October 30, 2000 in Docket No. RP96-
367-012.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed in 
accordance with 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 proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in 
lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on 
the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-30728 Filed 12-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                          $         0
<SECURITIES>                            121
<RECEIVABLES>                         8,158
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          0
<PP&E>                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        8,279
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   121
<BONDS>                               8,158
<COMMON>                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          8,279
<SALES>                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          0
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           0
<INCOME-TAX>                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                              0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0.00
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                Exhibit 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

TAVA Technologies, Inc.
Englewood, Colorado

         We hereby consent to the  incorporation  by reference in the Prospectus
constituting  a part of the  Form  S-8  Registration  Statement  (SEC  File  No.
333-38165) of our report dated September 21, 1998,  relating to the consolidated
financial  statements of TAVA Technologies,  Inc. and subsidiaries  appearing in
the  Company's  Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB for its fiscal year ended June 30,
1998.

                                                    /s/ BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

                                                    BDO SEIDMAN, LLP




Denver, Colorado
October 1, 1998
*Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 96-40329

Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HANK ERWIN RICHARDSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:95-CR-90-1

_________________________________________________________________

January 7, 1997

Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Hank Erwin Richardson appeals his convictions of conspiracy to

distribute and possession with intent to distribute cocaine and

failure to file an income tax return. He contends that the

district court abused its discretion in failing to suppress

evidence of a search because the warrant was based on “stale”

information, erred in its determination of the amount of drugs

involved in the offense, erred in rejecting an accountant/client
-2-

privilege, and erred in denying his motion for acquittal. Our

review of the record and the arguments and authorities convince us

that no reversible error was committed. The information contained

in the application for the warrant was not stale. United States v.

Freeman, 685 F.2d 942, 951-52 (5th Cir. 1982). The district court

did not clearly err in its determination of the amount of drugs

attributable to Richardson. Maseratti, 1 F.3d 330, 340 (5th Cir.

1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1129, 114 S.Ct. 1096, and 115 S.Ct.

282 (1994). This court does not recognize an accountant/client

privilege. United States v. El Paso, Co., 682 F.2d 530, 540 (5th

Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 944 (1984). The evidence was

sufficient to support the conspiracy conviction. United States v.

Casel, 995 F.2d 1299, 1306 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 978

(1993).

A F F I R M E D.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           5,041
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,839
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,077
<PP&E>                                         256,105
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 733,219
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,014
<BONDS>                                        602,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      82,090
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   733,219
<SALES>                                         98,365
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                98,365
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   53,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                43,079
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,525
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (25,077)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (25,077)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (6,264)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (31,341)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### EVANS v. STATE.

No. 19479.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 23, 1938.

Rehearing Denied June 15, 1938.

H. G. Woodruff and H. E. Lobdell, both of Decatur, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

Conviction is for robbery by assault; punishment is assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of five years.

By bill of exception No. 1, appellant complains of the action of the court in granting the state’s motion for leave to substitute a substantial copy of the original indictment which had either been lost or misplaced and could not be found after diligent search. Appellant contends that it was not a substantial copy, in that the original indictment charged him with robbery by assault and the purported copy charged him with robbery by assault and robbery by the use of violence and bodily injury. The trial court heard the evidence in support of the motion and found it to be a substantial copy of the original indictment. This court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court’s finding, of facts unless there was no testimony as a basis therefor. All the proceedings with reference to this matter seem to have been in keeping with article 418, C.C.P. See, also, Farrell v. State, 125 Tex.Cr.R. 96, 66 S.W.2d 694.

It appears that the order of substitution was duly made and entered upon the minutes of the court. The statute does not require that an exact or literal copy of the original indictment be substituted; all that is required is a substantial copy. The substituted indictment charges the offense of robbery by assault, and the court, in his charge, instructed the jury with reference .only to robbery by assault. Hence, we see no error in the matter complained of. Appellant makes some contention to the effect that there was a resubstitution of a second copy of the indictment, but we see no merit in his contention.

Appellant, in due time, addressed a number of objections to the court’s main charge. We have examined the charge *463in the light of the objection and-reachecl the conclusion that the court’s charge adequately and pertinently applied the law to the facts and that the charge is not subject to the criticisms addressed thereto.

All other matters complained of have received our most careful consideration and found to be without merit.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has-been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

HAWKINS, Judge.

After a careful re-examination of the record in the light of 'appellant’s motion for rehearing, we are constrained to adhere to the conclusions expressed in the original opinion.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Post Properties, Inc.
("Post") and Post Apartment Homes, L.P. ("PAH", and together with Post, the
"Registrants") for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Post and Post GP
Holdings, Inc., PAH's general partner, certifies 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 Registrants.

/s/ Christopher J. Papa
----------------------------
Christopher J. Papa
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer

August 9, 2004

                                      -58-
Exhibit 32.2



The  following statement is being furnished to the Securities and
Exchange  Commission solely for purposes of Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350).



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549



Re: BayCorp Holdings, Ltd.



Ladies and Gentlemen:

In  connection  with  the report of BayCorp Holdings,  Ltd.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,  2005
as  filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrycia T. Barnard, Vice President  of
Finance  and  Treasurer 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 BayCorp Holdings, Ltd.



Date: November 14, 2005  /s/ Patrycia T. Barnard
                         ______________________________
                         Patrycia T. Barnard
                         Vice President of Finance and Treasurer
                         (chief accounting officer)




A  signed original of this written statement required by  Section
906,   or   other  document  authenticating,  acknowledging,   or
otherwise  adopting  the signature that  appears  in  typed  form
within  the electronic version of this written statement required
by  Section 906, has been provided to BayCorp Holdings, Ltd.  and
will  be retained by BayCorp Holdings, Ltd. and furnished to  the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-8113

JAMES PALMER PARKER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

MICHAEL T. BELL,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief

District Judge. (CA-01-176-BO)

Submitted: March 14, 2002 Decided: March 25, 2002

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Palmer Parker, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* To the extent that Parker raises claims in his informal

brief that were not properly presented to the district court, we

note that he cannot raise them for the first time on appeal. See

Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993).

2

PER CURIAM:

James Palmer Parker appeals the district court’s order

granting the Respondent’s motion for summary judgment and denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See Parker v. Bell, No. CA-01-176-BO

(E.D.N.C. Nov. 13, 2001).* We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2273 

AN ACT 

To extend the period during which vessels that are shorter 

than 79 feet in length and fishing vessels are not required to have a permit for discharges incidental to the 

normal operation of the vessel. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 2273 ES

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF MORATORIUM. 

2 Section 2(a) of Public Law 110–299 (33 U.S.C. 1342 

3 note) is amended by striking ‘‘December 18, 2017’’ and 

4 inserting ‘‘January 19, 2018’’. 

Passed the Senate December 21, 2017. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2273 

AN ACT 

To extend the period during which vessels that are 

incidental to the normal operation of the vessel. are not required to have a permit for discharges shorter than 79 feet in length and fishing vessels
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          51,332
<SECURITIES>                                     9,485
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,192
<ALLOWANCES>                                       931
<INVENTORY>                                      6,127
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                86,208
<PP&E>                                          14,433
<DEPRECIATION>                                (11,368)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 131,843
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,690
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            17
<OTHER-SE>                                     114,618
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   131,843
<SALES>                                         21,796
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,796
<CGS>                                           11,003
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,003
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,760
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (892)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,075)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,075)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,075)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.25)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32
                            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 AFG Enterprises, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the  Securities
and  Exchange   Commission  on  the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),   we,  Erich
Spangenberg,  Chief  Executive  Officer and William P.  Stelt,  Chief  Financial
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

Dated: April 15, 2005                                By: /s/Erich Spangenberg
                                                         --------------------
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

                                                     By: /s/William P. Stelt
                                                         --------------------
                                                         Chief Financial Officer

                                       23
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with theAnnual Report of Cephalon, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year endedDecember 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Kevin Buchi, Executive Vice President andChief 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, based on myknowledge, that:

(1)          The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)          The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.
| /s/ J. Kevin Buchi                                   |   |
|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| J. Kevin Buchi                                       |   |
| Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

February 28, 2007

----
Exhibit 31.2



I, Ronald A. Ballschmiede, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2015 of Sterling Construction Company, Inc.; and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2.Based on my knowledge, this 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 report.





|Dated April 4, 2016 | /s/ Ronald A. Ballschmiede                         | 
|------------------- | -------------------------------------------------- | 
|                    | Ronald A. Ballschmiede                             | 
|                    | Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer