alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 202 (Friday, October 18, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83932-83933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24177]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #20753 and #20754; GEORGIA Disaster Number GA-
20014]


Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for Public 
Assistance Only for the State of Georgia

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

[[Page 83933]]


ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Georgia 
(FEMA-4830-DR), dated 10/09/2024.
    Incident: Hurricane Helene.
    Incident Period: 09/24/2024 and continuing.

DATES: Issued on 10/11/2024.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/09/2024.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/09/2025.

ADDRESSES: Visit the MySBA Loan Portal at https://lending.sba.gov to 
apply for a disaster assistance loan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd 
Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of 
Georgia, dated 10/09/2024, is hereby amended to include the following 
areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

Primary Counties: Berrien, Brooks, Bryan, Bulloch, Camden, Candler, 
Charlton, Chatham, Colquitt, Cook, Emanuel, Evans, Glynn, Laurens, 
Liberty, Long, Lowndes, Pulaski, Tattnall, Tift, Toombs, Twiggs, 
Wilcox, Wilkinson.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Rafaela Monchek,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & 
Resilience.
[FR Doc. 2024-24177 Filed 10-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
AFS-10-266-E 

 Exemption No. 9912B 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2008-1265 

Mr. Mark Simmons 

Heritage Flight Foundation 

353 Greenhaven Road 

Pawcatuck, CT 06379 

Dear Mr. Simmons: 

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition to amend Exemption No. 9912. 

It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated March 26, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Heritage Flight Foundation (HFF) for an amendment to Exemption No. 9912. That 

exemption from §§ 91.315, 119.5(g), and 119.21(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations 

allows HFF to conduct living history flight experiences (LHFE) operations in the Grumman 

TBM. The amendment you request would add the SE3130-Aloutte II (Aloutte II). 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested amendment to the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to HFF. 

Our Decision 

HFF requested to amend its exemption by adding the Aloutte II to the list of aircraft permitted 

to conduct the LHFE. However, the Aloutte II does not meet the requirements for an 

exemption. 
 2

HFF provided limited supportive information along with attachments that describe the 

Alouette II and its history as justification that it is a historic aircraft. HFF states that the 

Alouette II is available as a type-certificated helicopter in the United States, thereby, negating 

the justification for using an uncertified helicopter. The Alouette II was type certificated in 

the United States in 1958 (type certificate number 7H1). 

The FAA has determined that it is not in the public interest to grant an exemption when an 

aircraft’s certification prohibits compliance with the applicable parts of the regulations and 

when the proposed operation can be conducted in a standard category aircraft. The Aloutte II 

is an example of a foreign military helicopter. There are numerous helicopters available, 

including the Aloutte II, most of which hold standard airworthiness certificates, and therefore, 

no exemption would be required for their operation. Since the proposed operation could be 

conducted in a standard category aircraft, the request to amend Exemption No. 9912 is 

denied. 

The Effect of Our Decision 

The termination date of Exemption No. 9912 remains July 31, 2011, unless sooner superseded 

or rescinded. 

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 9912 remain the same. This letter must be 

attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 9912. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Bradley D. Pearson 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service
Executiv e Orde r 1286 6 an d Congressiona l Revie w Requirement s Rulemakin g Documen t

Title : OH'-^j^f^lQin ^ Q T GomrTtcA ^ p&rfQc L

Wit h respec t t o th e attache drulemakin g document(s) : 1 . E.0.12866 : Th e requirement s o f sectio n 6(a)(3)(E ) o f

E.O . 1286 6 hav e bee n me t i n accordanc e wit

h th e [sjf \followin g [initial appropriate line] : Th e rulemakin g document(s ) wa s no t reviewe db y th e Offic e o f Informatio n and Regulator y Affair s (OIRA) . N o substantiv e change s were mad e t o th e document(s ) alte r i t wa s submitte dt o OIRA . Th e require dinformatio n i s attached . 2 . Congressiona l Review : Th e requirement s o f th e Smal l Busines s Regulatory Enforcement Fairnes s Ac t fo r th e submissio n o f

final rule s to Congres s an dGA O ( § 801 ) hav e bee n me t i n accordanc e wit

h th e followin g [initial appropriat e line] :

X Thi s documen t

i s no t afinal rule . Thi s document

i s no t arul e under

( § 804) . Th e document

ha s bee n submitte dt o C-5 0 fo r transmissio n t o Congres s andGAO . Signature / 7 Nam e I 

# Snr.Tno J AUi i Title/Offic e 

# "?l9^^li Q Date
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 on Form 10-Q of Sunrise Global, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended October 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer, President, Treasurer, and the principal financial officer of the Company, hereby 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 results of operations of Sunrise Global, Inc.





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





Date: November 19, 2010
/s/ Shaojun SunShaojun Sun, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial Officer
EX-10.2(d)



 EXHIBIT 10.2(d) 
 August 8, 2014 
 Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC 

522 Fifth Avenue, 13th Floor 
 New York, New York
10036 
  

	Re:	Ceres Managed Futures LLC: Amended Schedules 1 and 2 to the Alternative Investment Selling Agent Agreement 


Ladies and Gentlemen: 
 Pursuant
to paragraph 13(c) of the Alternative Investment Selling Agent Agreement dated November 12, 2013, as amended on March 1, 2014; April 7, 2014 and as further amended from time to time (the “Agreement”), between, among
others, Ceres Managed Futures LLC (“CMF”), the general partner of each of the limited partnerships listed on Schedule 1 thereto (each, a “Partnership,” and together, the “Partnerships”), and Morgan Stanley Smith
Barney LLC (“MSSB”), CMF is hereby confirming that Schedules 1 and 2 to the Agreement are hereby deleted in their entirety and replaced with Schedules 1 and 2 attached hereto effective as of October 1, 2014. 

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Agreement, by signing below MSSB hereby agrees to, acknowledges and accepts the amendment
of the Agreement, effective as of October 1, 2014. 







 Page 2 
 If the foregoing is in accordance with your understanding of our discussions, kindly sign and return to us a counterpart hereof (by mail, facsimile or email) as soon as possible. 

Sincerely, 
  

			
	CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC
		
	By:	 	/s/ Alper Daglioglu
		 	 Alper Daglioglu
 President
and Director



  

			
	 EACH PARTNERSHIP LISTED ON
 SCHEDULE 1 HERETO

		
	By:	 	 Ceres Managed Futures LLC, the
 general partner of each Partnership

		
	By:	 	/s/ Alper Daglioglu
		 	 Alper Daglioglu
 President
and Director



 Confirmed, accepted and agreed to: 

 

			
	MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC
		
	By:	 	/s/ Jeremy Beal
	Name:	 	Jeremy Beal
	Title:	 	Executive Director








 Page 3 
 SCHEDULE 1 
  

					
	 PARTNERSHIP
	 	 STATE AND DATE OF ORGANIZATION
	 	 EFFECTIVE DATE

	 AAA Capital Energy Fund L.P.
	 	New York; January 5, 1998	 	March 1, 2014








 Page 4 
 SCHEDULE 2 
  

			
	 PARTNERSHIP
	 	 ONGOING SELLING AGENT FEE

	 AAA Capital Energy Fund L.P.
	 	An amount which will be calculated by multiplying the fund’s round turn futures transactions by $15.00 each, swaps by up to an equivalent amount and options transactions by
$7.50 each per side. In each case, the amount will be reduced by applicable floor brokerage.
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 Annual Report of Sterling Oil and Gas Company (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2009as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date here of (the "report"), I, Richard G. Stifel, Chief 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated this 5th day of January 2010.





RICHARD G. STIFELRichard G. StifelChief Financial Officer
#### State, Plaintiff, vs. Nowicki, Defendant.

*December 2*

December *30, 1949.*

*Harlan B. Rogers,*special counsel for the Board of State Bar Commissioners, for the plaintiff.

*Douglas J. Mangan*of Milwaukee, for the defendant.

Per Curiam.

After the trial of the issues the referee made findings of fact which fully warranted his conclusions:

*280That defendant violated “his oath of office as an attorney and the canons of ethics, in that:

> “1. The defendant violated sec. 256.29 of the revised statutes, in failing to preserve inviolate the secrets of his client, Szperka;

> “2. The defendant wholly failed to perform his duties to his client when he effectively refused to draft a will in accordance with the wishes of his client, but, rather, drafted one in accordance with his own wishes, and in exercising improper influence and erroneously advising the testator of the law pertaining to the validity of the will;

> “3. The defendant prepared a will when he had grave doubts as to the competency of the testator, and the belief that the testator had come under undue influence exercised by some member of his family;

> “4. The defendant attested to the competency of the testator when he did not believe he-was competent;

> “5. The defendant signed what he should have known was the usual and customary written form adopted in support of the admission of the will to probate, and then later, on the trial, contesting the validity of the will, testifying, that at the time of the execution of the will, he did not think the testator was competent and did believe that he was acting under undue influence from some source.”

Upon the referee’s findings arid conclusions he recommended :

> “That the defendant be required to pay the costs of this proceeding, and that his license to practice law before the courts of the state of Wisconsin be suspended, pending full payment thereof.”

Upon due consideration of defendant’s misconduct and violations in the respects stated above, it is evident that he is unqualified arid unfit to continue as a member of the bar, and that judgment of absoluterevocation of defendant’s license to practice law before all courts of this state should be entered.

Therefore it is hereby ordered and adjudged that the name of defendant. Walter J. Nowicki, ,be and the same is hereby stricken from the roll of attorneys of this court, *281and the license to practice law heretofore granted to him be and is hereby revoked and he is forbidden to practice law or hold himself out to the public as a lawyer in this state.
Featured           OFC24 shines light on ORNL’s quantum networking expertise         

Featured           Researchers achieve quantum key distribution for cybersecurity in novel experiment         

Featured           Satellites may enable better quantum networks         

# Quantum Communications and Networking Group

The Quantum Communications and Networking Group exploits quantum phenomena for transformative capabilities in communications and quantum technology. Our work seeks to dramatically improve the cybersecurity of the nation’s critical infrastructure with the development and demonstration of quantum key distribution technologies.  In addition, we are developing the fundamental building blocks for realizing quantum sensor networks, quantum repeaters and ultimately, a future quantum internet.

### Contact

MariamKiran

kiranm@ornl.gov

## Current Research

## News

OFC24 shines light on ORNL’s quantum networking expertise

## News

Researchers achieve quantum key distribution for cybersecurity in novel experiment

## News

Satellites may enable better quantum networks

## News

New measurements quantifying qudits provide glimpse of quantum future
#### LANE v. STATE.

No. 17659.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 23, 1935.

R. E. Eubank, of Paris, for appellant.

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

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is disturbing the peace; the punishment, a fine of $1.

The prosecution originated in the county court. No complaint is brought forward in support of the information. In the absence of the complaint the prosecution cannot stand. Henry v. State, 124 Tex. Cr. R. 81, 60 S.W.(2d) 771, and authorities cited.

The judgment is reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

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.
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Quarterly Report
of North Penn Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending
March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph F. McDonald, Chief 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 results of operations of the
      Company.





Date:
            
            May
      14, 2010
            
            /s/
      Joseph F. McDonaldJoseph
      F. McDonaldChief
      Financial Officer
| (1)   | the      Annual Report on Form 10-QSB of SupportSave Solutions, Inc. for the      quarter ended February 29, 2008 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 Annual Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter      ended February 29, 2008, fairly presents in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of SupportSave Solutions,      Inc. |
|-----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/Christopher Johns                                                       |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                            |
| Name:  | Christopher      Johns                                                          |
|   |                                                                            |
| Title: | Principal      Executive Officer, Principal      Financial Officer and Director |
|   |                                                                            |
| Date:  | April      9, 2008                                                              |
#### State of Iowa, Appellee, v. Harry Shaw, Appellant.

WITNESSES: Impeachment — Permissible Cross-examination. An accused in a criminal prosecution who, for the manifest purpose of placing himself in the light of an honorable and trusted character, testifies to his former membership on the police force may, on cross-examination, be shown to have secured his said position by falsely representing that he had never been convicted of a felony.

Headnote 1: 40 Cyc. p. 2617.

Headnote 1: 28 K. C. L. 621.

*Appeal from Polk District Court.*— O. S. Franklin, Judge.

November 16, 1926.

Defendant appeals from a judgment-of conviction of the crime of entering a bank with intent to *rob.*

Affirmed.

*633
      *Charles P. Howard,*for appellant.

*Ben J. Gibson,*Attorney-general, and *Neill Garrett,*Assistant Attorney-general, for appellee.

Morling, J.

The only assignment of error argued is to the ruling permitting the State to show, on cross-examination of the defendant, that defendant, in a civil-service application for appointment as a police officer, stated that he had never been convicted of a felony. Defendant admits that he had, prior to that time, been convicted of a felony. It is argued that proof that he had lied about his conviction added greatly to the stigma of it, and was inflammatory and prejudicial.

Defendant took the stand in his own behalf. On direct examination, he testified that he served on the police department for four years; that he was not discharged; that he resigned. The only possible purpose of this testimony was to give the defendant, as a man and a witness, the prestige and character of one who is ¿rusted, and has the confidence and respect of the community. If the position attained and put forward by him as entitling him to respect and credence was acquired by falsehood and deceit, he was posing before the court and the jury in a false character, and it was manifestly proper for the State, on cross-examination, to show that fact. The cross-examination was proper. There are a number of other assignments of error, but none of them are argued. The evidence amply sustains the verdict.

The judgment *is*— Affirmed.

De GRApp, C. J., and Evans, Stevens, and Albert, JJ., concur.
1 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-11563

Summary Calendar

 

CLARENCE R. HAYES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

WESTERN WEIGHING AND INSPECTION BUREAU,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:85-CV-904-T

- - - - - - - - - -

September 24, 1997

Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

Clarence R. Hayes appeals from the district court’s decision

affirming the judgment of the National Railway Adjustment Board

(NRAB). Hayes argues that he was entitled to relief on his

allegations of fraud, that the defendant violated its collective

bargaining agreement with the union, that Hayes was entitled to a

jury trial, and that the district court improperly failed to inform

him that his attorney was under investigation by a state bar. We
No. 96-11563

-2-

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is 

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 99.11

CONSENT OF EXPERT

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The undersigned company hereby consents to (1) the references to the undersigned companys name included or incorporated by reference in the
registration statement in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp. in connection with the report entitled Technical Report on the Midwest A Uranium Deposit of Saskatchewan, Canada dated January 31, 2008 and (2) all
other references to the undersigned company included or incorporated by reference in the registration statement in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of Denison Mines Corp.

Dated: March 30, 2017



|                                                              |  |                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|SGS CANADA INC. (formerly Geostat
Systems International Inc.)
|                                                              | 
|By:                                                           |  | /s/ Guy Desharnais                                         
|Name:                                                         |  | Guy Desharnais                                             
|Title:                                                        |  | Technical Manager SGS Geological Services (SGS Canada Inc.)