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


                                  EXHIBIT 10.6
                                 Lease Amendment

                            FOOTHILLS RESOURCES, INC.
                             9 Langton Close Woking
                                 Surrey, England


January 1, 2004

Mr. Herb Duerr

Dear Sir:


Re:      TC Claims, White Pine County, Nevada - Mineral Claims Lease

We hereby  confirm our agreement to amend our Lease  Agreement  dated  effective
March 1, 2001, as amended,  by replacing  paragraph 5 of the original  agreement
with the following:

"5.  Schedule of Minimum  Payments.  The Lessee shall pay to the Lessor  minimum
----------------------------------
payments,  which shall be advance  payments  of the  Royalty,  of US$2,000  upon
execution of this amended lease agreement. The Lessee may extend this lease upon
payment of the following:

1.       Pay Lessor an additional US$5,000 by July 1, 2004;

2.       Pay Lessor an additional US$10,000 by January 1, 2005; and

3.       Each  annual  payment  thereafter  shall be  US$50,000  plus an  annual
         increase or decrease equivalent to the rate of inflation  designated by
         the  Consumer's  Price Index for that year with  execution year as base
         year.  Each such payment shall be made by January 1 of each  successive
         year of the lease."

If the foregoing  accurately  sets forth your  understanding  of our  agreement,
kindly sign this Agreement where indicated below, which will then form a binding
agreement between us, subject only to the terms and conditions aforesaid.

Yours truly,

FOOTHILLS RESOURCES, INC.

PER:     /s/ J. Earl Terris                             Agreed and accepted on
                                                        January 1, 2004
J. EARL TERRIS
President
                                                        /s/ Herb Duerr
                                                        ------------------------
                                                        Herb Duerr
#### Nicholas E. Colella, Doing Business as Colella Galleries, Respondent, v Claude A. Beauchamp, Appellant.

(Ap*812peal No. 1.)

[632 NYS2d 992]

Appeal unanimously dismissed without costs *(see, Matter of Ozolins*[appeal No. 2], 65 AD2d 958). from of County, Reagan, J. — Default Judgment.) Present— Denman, P. J., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 44547

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

JACK J. COONEY, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 547

Filed: August 9, 2017

Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, State of Idaho, Nez 

Perce County. Hon. Jeff M. Brudie, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period of 

confinement of three years, for felony driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs 

and/or any other intoxicating substance, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben P. McGreevy, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Jack J. Cooney, Jr. was found guilty of felony driving under the influence of alcohol, 

drugs and/or any other intoxicating substance, Idaho Code §§ 18-8004(1)(a) and 18-8004(9). 

The district court imposed a unified ten-year sentence, with three years determinate. Cooney 

filed a timely Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, which the district court denied.1

 Cooney timely 

appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion when it declined to place him on 

probation. 

 1 Cooney does not appeal the district court’s denial of his Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion. 
2

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. That discretion includes the trial 

court’s decision regarding whether a defendant should be placed on probation. I.C. § 19-

2601(3); State v. Reber, 138 Idaho 275, 278, 61 P.3d 632, 635 (Ct. App. 2002). Both our 

standard of review and the factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the 

sentence are well established and need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 

114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 

680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 

(Ct. App. 1982). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we 

cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Cooney’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Technical Basis for Regulatory Guidance on Design-Basis Hurricane Wind Speeds for Nuclear Power Plants (NUREG/CR-7005)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7005 (PDF - 6.71 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** December 2009**Date Published:** November 2011

**Prepared by:** P. J. Vickery D. Wadhera L.A. Twisdale

Dade Moeller & Associates, Inc. 1835 Terminal Drive, Suite 200 Richland, WA 99354

Selim Sancaktar, NRC Project Manager

NRC Job Code N6332

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report is intended to provide the technical basis for a potential new regulatory guide that will provide licensees and applicants with guidance that the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission considers acceptable for use in selecting the design-basis hurricane wind speeds to which a nuclear power plant should be designed to withstand to prevent undue risk to the health and safety of the public in accordance with General Design Criterion 2, “Design Bases for Protection Against Natural Phenomena,” and General Design Criterion 4, “Environmental and Dynamic Effects Design Bases,” of Appendix A, “General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,” to Title 10, Part 50, of the *Code of Federal Regulations*, “Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities.”

This report documents the approach and results of an analysis of peak-gust hurricane wind speeds with annual exceedance probabilities of 10-6 and 10-7. The analysis used a weighted sampling method to enable the simulation of 10 million years of hurricane wind speeds in the contiguous United States. The staff initiated this study because development of new wind speeds for its guidance on design-basis tornadoes (Revision 1 to Regulatory Guide 1.76, “Design-Basis Tornado and Tornado Missiles for Nuclear Power Plants”), which was based on the new Enhanced Fujita scale, resulted in a decrease in the tornado design-basis wind speeds. The design-basis tornado wind speeds presented in Regulatory Guide 1.76 correspond to the exceedance frequency of 10-7 per year. The decrease in the design basis tornado wind speeds was large enough to prompt an investigation into whether hurricane wind gusts with an annual exceedance frequency of 10-7 would exceed tornado winds at the same annual exceedance frequency. This report considers peak-gust wind speeds for hurricanes that affect the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
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 Annual Report of Galaxy Investments, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB for the year ending November 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Carmen
Lotito, 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.



/s/ CARMEN LOTITO
-------------------------------------
Carmen Lotito
Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ashby Bennett, Appellant.

[631 NYS2d 834]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd Goodman, J.), rendered October 25, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4 to 8 years and *11⁄2*to 3 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s guilt was proven by legally sufficient evidence that he and three others formed a human wall that blocked the victim’s path as the victim attempted to pursue someone who had picked his pocket, allowing the robber to get away. The requirement that a robbery involve the use, or the threat of immediate use, of physical force (Penal Law § 160.00) does not mean that a weapon must be used or displayed or that the victim must be physically injured or touched *(People v Zagorski,*135 AD2d 594, 595).

Nor is there merit to defendant’s other claim that the court did not conduct a sufficiently probing and tactful inquiry of four jurors. Those jurors responded to questions put by the court to the panel as a whole and indicated that their *571impartiality would not be affected by having been exposed to newsreports portraying one of the People’s witnesses as a "good cop” in connection with the police officer’s testimony before a commission investigating police corruption. Under the circumstances, a more extensive, individualized, in camera inquiry of each of the four jurors was not necessary. There was no juror misconduct and the publicity in question had nothing to do with defendant or the trial. The topic of the publicity was impersonal to the jurors, and the exposure occurred after both sides had rested in a trial in which defendant had challenged only the accuracy, not the truthfulness, of the officer’s testimony *(see, People v Chapman,*202 AD2d 297, 298, *lv denied*83 NY2d 965). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Assessment of RELAP5/MOD2 Against a Load Rejection From 100% to 50% Power in the Vandellos II Nuclear Power Plant (NUREG/IA-0107, ICSP–V2–R50–R)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0107 (PDF 1.04 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** June 1993

**Prepared by:** C. Llopis/A. N. V. R. Mendizabal, J. Perez/C. S. N.

Asociacion Nuclear de Vandellós (A. N. V.) Travesera de les Corts 39–43, 08020 Madrid, Spain

Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear (C.S.N.) Justo Dorado 11–28040 Madrid, Spain

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange under the International Thermal-Hydraulic Code Assessment and Application Program (ICAP)

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

An assessment of RELAP5/MOD2 cycle 36.04 against a load rejection from 100% to 50% power in Vandellós II NPP (Spain) is presented. The work is inscribed in the framework of the spanish contribution to ICAP Project.

The model used in the simulation consists of a single loop, a steam generator and a steam line up to the steam header all of them enlarged on a scale of 3:1; and full-scaled reactor vessel and pressurizer.

The results of the calculations have been in reasonable agreement with plant measurements.

All major trends and phenomena are correctly reproduced. The discrepancies between calculated nuclear power and plant data are likely due to wrong values of the Doppler coefficient, and in less degree to rod worth uncertainty.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
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 Star Gas Partners, L.P. (the Partnership) and
Star Gas Finance Company on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard F. Ambury, Chief Financial Officer of the
Partnership and Star Gas Finance Company, certify to my knowledge, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 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 Partnership and Star Gas Finance Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                 |  |                                                  |  |                               
|---------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------
|                 |  | STAR GAS PARTNERS, L.P. STAR GAS FINANCE
COMPANY
|                 |  |                                                 
|                 |  | By:                                              |  | STAR GAS LLC (General Partner)
|                 |  |                                                 
|February 9, 2007 |  | By:                                              |  | /s/ RICHARD F. AMBURY         
|                 |  |                                                  |  | Richard F. Ambury             
|                 |  |                                                  |  | Chief Financial Officer       
|                 |  |                                                  |  | Star Gas Partners, L.P.       
|                 |  |                                                  |  | Star Gas Finance Company
No. 91-6047.

#### McClain *v.*Reid, Commissioner, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-132389, 333-129250, 333-127674, 333-120930, 333-135318, 333-135798 and 333-139923) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-105610, 333-105609 and 333-139232) of Transmeridian Exploration
Incorporated of our reports dated March 15, 2007 relating to the consolidated financial statements of Transmeridian Exploration Incorporated as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and for the years then ended, and Transmeridian Exploration
Incorporateds management assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Transmeridian Exploration Incorporated as of December 31, 2006, which
appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.



|               |  | 
|-------------- |  | 
|/s/ UHY LLP   
|              
|Houston, Texas
|March 16, 2007
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Drug Enforcement Administration

          - [Docket No. DEA-392]

# ACTION:

Notice of registration.

# SUMMARY:

Research Triangle Institute applied to be registered as an importer of a certain basic class of narcotic controlled substance. The DEA grants Research Triangle Institute registration as an importer of this controlled substance.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

                    By notice dated April 21, 2014, and published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on April 28, 2014, 79 FR 23373, Research Triangle Institute, Kenneth S. Rehder, Ph.D., Hermann Building, East Institute Drive, P.O. Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, applied to be registered as an importer of a certain basic class of narcotic controlled substance. No comments or objections were submitted for this notice.                

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 958(a) and determined that the registration of Research Triangle Institute to import the basic class of controlled substance is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the above-named company is granted registration as an importer of noroxymorphone (9668), a basic class of narcotic controlled substance listed in schedule II.

The company plans to import small quantities of the listed controlled substance for the National Institute on Drug Abuse for research activities.

Dated: January 21, 2015.

Joseph T. Rannazzisi,

Deputy Assistant Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2015-01578 Filed 1-27-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
 Permit Condition 11

– Change Emission Point Characteristics.

The Department has updated this permit condition to reflect the actual stack parameter s.

 Permit Condition 12, Footnote 5

– Compliance Demonstration(s)

. The footnotes and this section have been updated to reflect the current testing requirements and permit languag e .

 Permit Condition 1 4.D
– Operating Limits

. Pressure Drop

. The pressure drop has been changed to reflect the averaging period (5

- minute average) listed in the Administrative Consent Or der (ACO)

. Please note the pressure drop is not an hourly average, but a 5

- minute average as outlined in the ACO.

 Permit Condition 1 4.E
– Operating Limits. Combustion Chamber Temperature

. The minimum temperature (1300 o F) was established as the absolute m inimum temperature allowed during normal operations (not to be exceeded). Therefore, the language was not modified to reflect the minimum temperature as a 3

- hr average

. The permit language was updated to clarify that this temperature applies only during normal operations

.

 Permit Condition 1 4.F
– Operating Limits. Startup, Shutdown, Malfunction (SSM) Plan

. The Department understands the facility’s desire to reference 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart A; however, the permit details requirements that must be included in the SSM plan as BACT work practices for the cupola. As such, the current permit language is being retained (i.e., a new BACT analysis would be required to modify the SSM plan)

.

 Permit Condition 1 4.G
– Operating Limits. Scrap Management Plan

. The Scrap Management Plan language has been updated to mimic the language found in the ACO (Section A

- 5.H)

.

 Permit Condition 1 5.A
– Clarify fuel requirements

. The Department is assuming the facility wishes to list natural gas and propane as the allowable fuel s for the combustion chamber

. The facility is required to record the type and amount of cupola fuel used each day. The sulfur content of the cupola fuels used must be recorded as well, and this may be accomplished through sampling or based on vendor’s data provided with each shipment of material. The facility may wish to clarify what it is asking for in the comment provided on November 10, 2014.

 Permit Condition 1 5.D
– Pressure drop across the baghouse

. The Department has updated the permit language to match the requirements in the ACO (5

- minute average)

.

 Permit Condition 15.E
– Combustion Chamber Temperature

. Please see earlier discussion concerning the combustion chamber temperature

.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Velocity Express Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 2, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel R. DeFazio, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Daniel R. DeFazioDaniel R. DeFazioChief Financial OfficerJanuary 14, 2005
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsInterim Staff Guidance

# Interim Staff Guidance Associated with License Applications

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, April 03, 2024