alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Ex. 99.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Peter R. Goodfellow, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Stelmar Shipping Ltd.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report; and

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report.

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the
registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or cause such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: June 04, 2004

/s/ Peter R. Goodfellow
--------------------------
Peter R. Goodfellow
Chief Executive Officer

02509.0004 #491148
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Available in Adams

# Publications Available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) – 2013

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - 2024
          - 2023
          - 2022
          - 2021
          - 2020
          - 2019
          - 2018
          - 2017
          - 2016
          - 2015
          - 2014
          - 2013
          - 2012
          - 2011
          - 2010
          - 2009
          - 2008
          - 2007
          - 2006
          - 2005
          - 2004
          - 2003
          - 2002
          - 2001
          - 2000
          - 1999
          - 1998
          - 1997
          - 1980-1996

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

#### Search NUREG Pubs

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
-82 -80 -78 -76

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/01

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 01 Aug 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.86 N 77.06 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★

■ ■

■ ■

★

●

●

●

●

★

● ●

●

●
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350)





In
connection with the Annual Report of TX Holdings, Inc., a Georgia corporation
(the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, William (Buck)
Shrewsbury, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to my
knowledge:





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





(2)
      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.








/s/ William (“Buck) Shrewsbury


William
(“Buck) Shrewsbury


Chief
Executive Officer


: January
8, 2010





[A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
TX Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by TX Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                           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 Velocity Express Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 27, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Vincent
A. Wasik, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

     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/ Vincent A. Wasik
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Vincent A. Wasik
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        May 11, 2004
Exhibit 24.1

UNITEDGLOBALCOM, INC.  POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below constitutes and appoints Michael T. Fries, Frederick G. Westerman III and/or
Valerie L. Cover his or her attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution, for him or her in any and all capacities, to sign the annual report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 of UnitedGlobalCom, Inc. (the "Company"), to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission"),
and all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and the documents in connection therewith, with the Commission; granting unto said
attorneys-in-fact full power and authority to perform any other act on behalf of the undersigned required to be done in the premises, hereby ratifying and confirming all that
said attorneys-in-fact may lawfully do or cause to be done on behalf of the Company by virtue hereof.

| |                | 
| | -------------- | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March   , 2005 | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 
| | March 3, 2005  | 

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 11

                 SCHEDULE OF COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                 (In thousands, except share and per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                      Three Months Ended July 31,    Six Months Ended July 31,
                                          1996           1997           1996           1997
                                          ----           ----           ----           ----

<S>                                    <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>      
Net income for primary income
  per common share                     $     565      $      44      $     821      $    (702)
                                       ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------

Weighted average number of
  common shares outstanding
  during the year                      2,798,490      2,824,180      2,462,818      2,819,562

Add common  equivalent  shares
  (determined  using the treasury
  stock method) representing
  shares issuable upon exercise
  of incentive stock options
  and warrants                           122,084          7,485        108,474        357,691
                                       ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------

Weighted average number of
  shares used in calculation of
  primary earnings per share           2,920,574      2,831,665      2,571,292      3,177,253
                                       =========      =========      =========      =========

Primary earnings per share                   .19            .02            .31           (.20)
                                       =========      =========      =========      =========
</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-20667

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

MISAEL RAMIREZ,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:17-CR-677-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Misael Ramirez has moved for leave 

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Ramirez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the 

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 15, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-20667 Document: 00515158924 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/15/2019
No. 18-20667

2

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 18-20667 Document: 00515158924 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/15/2019
ex101.htm


AMENDMENT NO.1 TO THE


AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER







THIS AMENDMENT NO.1 TO THE AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER (the “Amendment”) is dated as of February 1, 2011 and entered into by and among: (i) Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Parent”); (ii) TAS Acquisition Corp., a Nevada corporation (the “Acquisition Subsidiary”); and (iii) Tactical Air Support, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) (The Parent, the Acquisition Subsidiary and the Company are each a “Party” and referred to collectively herein as the “Parties”).







RECITALS







WHEREAS, on or about December 10, 2010, the Parties entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) contemplating the merger of the Acquisition Subsidiary, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent, with and into the Company (the “Merger”);







WHEREAS, Section 7.2 of the Merger Agreement provided that in the event the underlying conditions of Article V of the Merger Agreement had not been met (collectively the “Closing Conditions”) and the Merger had not closed by or before January 31, 2011 (the “Initial Closing Date”), the Merger Agreement shall terminate unless extended by written mutual consent of all Parties;







WHEREAS, as of the date of this Agreement, certain Closing Conditions remain open and unresolved;







WHEREAS, the Parties continue to work together diligently to resolve and settle all outstanding Closing Conditions and close the Merger and the Parties collectively desire to extend the Closing Date;







NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the representations, warranties and covenants herein contained and in the Merger Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt, adequacy and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto, intending legally to be bound, agree to amend Section 7.2 of the Merger Agreement as follows:







AMENDMENT TO MERGER AGREEMENT


 


ARTICLE VII


TERMINATION







7.2           Termination for Failure to Close. This Agreement shall be terminated if the Closing Date shall not have occurred by April 31, 2011, unless extended by written mutual consent of all Parties.





























  





  











  
















SIGNATURE PAGE


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Amendment No.1 1 to the Agreement and Plan of Merger to be executed as of the date first written above.








	
PARENT:


 


Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc.


 


 


/s/ Alexis C. Korybut


 


 

	  	
COMPANY:


 


Tactical Air Support, Inc.


 


 


/s/ Rolland C. Thompson


	
By: Alexis C. Korybut


Its: Chief Executive Officer

	  	
By: Rolland C. Thompson


Its: Chief Executive Officer


	  	  	  
	
ACQUISITION SUBSIDIARY:


 


TAS Acquisition Corp.


 


 


/s/ Alexis C. Korybut


 


 

	  	  
	
By: Alexis C. Korybut


Its: President
#### Bertha G. Kimball *vs.*James C. Davis, Director General of Railroads.

Cumberland County.

Decided March 20, 1922.

While approaching the Union Station in' the city of Portland for the purpose of purchasing railway tickets to be used by another person on a later train, the plaintiff slipped on an icy walk which was the regular approach to the station. This walk was on land of the railway company and was constructed and maintained by the company. There had been a heavy fall of snow and the ice was partially concealed thereby. The charge of negligence against the company on which the plaintiff relied was failure to keep the walk in a reasonably-safe condition for those who were impliedly invited to use the same when 'approaching the station on business legitimately connected with that of railroad transportation. The defendant offered no testimony but contends that the plaintiff did not main*583tain the burden of proof necessary to show defendant’s negligence, and further contends that the testimony offered by the plaintiff proved her guilty of contributory negligence.

*John T. Fagan, Benjamin L. Berman and Jacob H.- Berman,*for plaintiff.

*Charles B. Carter, of White, Carter & Skelton,*for defendant.

Upon both questions of fact, namely the negligence of the defendant and the lack of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, the jury found for the plaintiff. After a careful examination of the record, lye do not find justification in setting aside the jury verdict. Neither do we feel that the damages were excessive. The injury was severe and the probability of permanence considerable. Motion overruled.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE LCA-VISION INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 2000, AND THE RELATED CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENT.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001003130
<NAME> LCA-VISION INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           6,665
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,492
<ALLOWANCES>                                       701
<INVENTORY>                                        174
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                51,149
<PP&E>                                          22,294
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,594
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  82,477
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,832
<BONDS>                                            119
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           111
<OTHER-SE>                                      74,397
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    82,477
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,281
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,237
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,931
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  40
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (968)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (362)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (606)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)


</TABLE>
#### STATE on the relation of JOHN N. WHITFORD and wife v. WILLIAM FOY.

(Same Syllabus as in the next preceding case.)

The facts of this case are the same as those of the preceding. The defendant appealed from the same rulings against him and the decision of this Court is the same, the Chief Justice referring to his opinion in that case as his opinion in this.
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

      ( print page 94772)    

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         November 29, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 21, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 475 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-467, K2025-464.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-27934 Filed 11-27-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# U.S. Plant Experience with Alloy 600 Cracking and Boric Acid Corrosion of Light-Water Reactor Pressure Vessel Materials (NUREG-1823)

On this page: 
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1823 (PDF - 365 KB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**March 2005**Date Published:**April 2005

**Prepared by:** B. Grimmel

W.H. Cullen, Jr., NRC Project Manager

**Prepared for:** Division of Engineering Technology Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report includes a summary of foreign and domestic Alloy 600 cracking experience, an analysis of the Alloy 600 cracking susceptibility model for vessel head penetration (VHP) nozzles, and information on corrosion of pressure boundary materials in boric acid solutions. This report combines information that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has collected in response to Davis-Besse Lesson Learned Task Force Recommendations 3.1.1(1) and 3.1.4(1). The survey of Alloy 600 cracking suggests that Alloy 600 and its associated welds (Alloys 182 and 82) are susceptible to crack nucleation and growth in a wide range of applications. The intent of inspection is to identify and remediate the cracking before it can challenge safety systems. VHP nozzle inspection results indicate that the effective degradation years (EDY) model is efficacious and does not suggest a need to revise the model in the short term. However, the EDY calculation is becoming less significant as a result of reactor vessel head replacement. Both the NRC and the industry have implemented boric acid corrosion test programs. Pieces of the Davis-Besse reactor vessel head have been removed and shipped to Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, where they will be examined. The results of the NRC's boric acid corrosion test program at Argonne National Laboratory have shown that the galvanic difference between A533 Grade B Steel, Alloy 600, and 308 stainless steel (used in reactor pressure vessel cladding) is not significant enough to consider galvanic corrosion as a strong contributor to the overall boric acid corrosion process. In addition, the NRC's test program has revealed that the corrosion rate of A533 Grade B steel in humidified salts of H-B-O (a mixture of boric acid species and water) can cause wastage at rates as high as those for saturated aqueous solutions. The industry program, headed by the Electric Power Research Institute, is expected to be completed in 2006.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Final Safety Evaluation Report for the Combined License for Enrico Fermi 3, Dockett Number 52-033, DTE Electric Company (NUREG-2182)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021