alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Swift & Company, Appellant, vs. Geraghty and another, Respondents.

*June 4*

June *24, 1929.*

*330For the appellant there was a brief by *Simmons, Walker & Wratten,*and oral argument by *Harold J. Sporer,*all of Racine.

For the respondents the cause was submitted on the brief of *Foley, Brach & Colbert*of Racine.

Rosenberry, C. J.

In the briefs and on the oral argument the plaintiff waives any right of recovery on account of the 1926 consignment and seeks recovery only for the *3311925 account amounting to $115.35. The negotiations out of which it is claimed accord and satisfaction arose were had by the representative of the plaintiff- with the attorneys of the defendants. We have read the testimony of the attorneys for the administratrix and find nothing therein to support a finding that the transaction amounted to an accord and satisfaction. .What the representative of the plaintiff sought and what the representative of the estate consented to was that the plaintiff be put in possession of the goods and accounts which under the contract belonged to it, the title to which was then in the plaintiff. There is testimony to the effect that the representatives of the administratrix supposed that the matter was to be settled, but no testimony showing that an agreement to that effect was entered into, and if such an agreement had been shown it was wholly without consideration and therefore of no effect. It is equally apparent that the contract entered into by the defendants made them primarily liable. They guaranteed performance of the contract and payment of any amount due to the plaintiff. Within the rule of a long line of cases the contract in question created a primary liability. *Hubbard v. Haley,*96 Wis. 578, 71 N. W. 1036; *Estate of Menzner,*189 Wis. 340, 207 N. W. 703.

The liability of the defendants being that of principals, it was not affected by the failure of the plaintiff to file a claim against the estate of J. J. Goebel. This question does not seem to have been passed upon directly by this court. It is ruled in principle, however, by *Loverin & Browne Co. v. Travis,*135 Wis. 322, 115 N. W. 829, where it is held that no efforts to collect from the debtor are necessary before enforcing the liability of the guarantor where the guaranty is one of payment and not of mere collection. The question is ruled directly, however, by the following cases in other courts: *Minter v. Branch Bank of Mobile,*23 Ala. 762, 58 Am. Dec. 315; *Bull v. Coe,*77 Cal. 54, 18 Pac. 808; *Hall**332*v. Ochs,*34 App. Div. 103, 54 N. Y. Supp. *4; Villars v. Palmer,*67 Ill. 204; *Willis v. Chowning,*90 Tex. 617, 40 S. W. 395. See, also, 28 Corp. Jur. p. 974; 12 Ruling Case Law, p. 1089.

*By the Court.*— Judgment reversed, and cause remanded with directions to the trial court to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants in the sum of $115.35 with interest and costs.
IIB 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1679 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 3, 2017 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To ensure that the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s current efforts to modernize its grant management 

system includes applicant accessibility and transparency, 

and for other purposes. 

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


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1679 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘FEMA Accountability, 

3 Modernization and Transparency Act of 2017’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENTS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the Federal 

6 Emergency Management Agency shall ensure the ongoing 

7 modernization of the grant systems for the administration 

8 of assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

9 and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) 

10 includes the following: 

11 (1) An online interface, including online assist12 ance, for applicants to complete application forms, 

13 submit materials, and access the status of applica14 tions. 

15 (2) Mechanisms to eliminate duplication of ben16 efits. 

17 (3) If appropriate, enable the sharing of infor18 mation among agencies and with State, local, and 

19 tribal governments, to eliminate the need to file mul20 tiple applications and speed disaster recovery. 

21 (4) Any additional tools the Administrator de22 termines will improve the implementation of this sec23 tion. 

24 (b) IMPLEMENTATION.—To the extent practicable, 

25 the Administrator shall deliver the system capabilities deVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:54 May 03, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1679.RFS H1679

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 1679 RFS 

1 scribed in subsection (a) in increments or iterations as 

2 working components for applicant use. 

3 SEC. 3. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED. 

4 No additional funds are authorized to carry out the 

5 requirements of this Act. Such requirements shall be car6 ried out using amounts otherwise authorized. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 2, 2017. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
To: Project Files From: Nick Swanson

Date: May 9, 2011

Re: Notes from Marsh Furniture Site Visit

Regulatory Compliance Manager: Bruce Braswell

Plant Manager: Edwin Underwood

Finishing Room Supervisor: Greg Lee

Cabinet manufacturer for low- to mid-grade kitchen cabinets

Uses only HVLP guns with some touch-up work with aerosol spray cans

o Use approximately 36 aerosol cans per day

o Transfer efficiency of guns much less than 50%

Utilize low formaldehyde spray coatings

o Marsh noted that as formaldehyde concentrations have decreased over time, the 

amount of phenol has increased

o Coatings provided through Akzo (previously through Valspar)

o For Marsh “low formaldehyde” is just as economical as higher concentrations of 

formaldehyde

 Have not used higher concentrations in many years

o “No formaldehyde” coatings are not realistic for Marsh because they do not have 

the ability for “cross linking nucleation”

Considered small business for approximately 2.5 years

o Reduced employees from 750 to 300 in that time

Marsh does not mix different products with the exception of catalytic coatings which 

need to be mixed for activation

“Reg Met” is software utilized for emission monitoring

Bake ovens are fueled by natural gas and steam

o Natural gas

 Direct flame

 UV

o Steam

 Creates down drafts of hot dry air to bake/cure wood

o Hanging line ovens are 110-150°F

No use of saw mills anymore

o Everything is touch up wood working and gluing in addition to the finish 

coatings

Facility also subject to Boiler MACT

o 400 horse power boiler

o Biomass fed only

 Fuel all scrap/residuals from cabinet making process

o Built in 1963
o Horizontal Return Tube (Fire tube)

Only add-on control devices are for PM of boiler

o Multicyclones

o Baghouse

Regularly change filters for spray booths (daily or multiple times daily)

o Maintain minimum face velocity of 100 ft/min

o Mostly used fiber paper filters

o With high solid concentration spray (SiO2) used fabric filter due to plugging
Alicia Dankesreiter 

212 Airport Drive 

Lewis Run, P A 16738 

Mr. Kevin D. Schlemmer 

ORR FORD 

REiiiDfiRL 

IRPDR"J: 

Chief, EAS & Domestic Analysis Division 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave. , S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

(814)'368-5928 x\0 

Alicia£ Bradfordairport.net 

www.bradfordairport.net 

February 2, 2015 

I 

RE: OST-2002-11446 (AOO EAS); OST-2003-14528 (BFD EAS); OST-2003-14950 (JHW 

EAS); OST-1997-~523 (FKL EAS) ' 

Dear Mr. Schlemmer, 

In discussions with our current EAS carrier, Sun Air Express, the option of having 

service provided by Cessna Grand Caravan aircraft was proposed, and after careful evaluation, 

we have concluded that we would support such service as a replacement or in addition to the 

existing Piper Chieftain PA31-350 aircraft. 

We understand that the Caravan is a single engine turbo-prop, and as such does not 

meet the Department's twin-engine minimum service requirement. We believe there is sufficient 

value in use of that aircraft to our community that we are prepared to waive our right to twinengine service. We understand that use of single engine aircraft for Essential Air Service could 

eliminate the twin-engine minimum standard in future EAS bids. No change to the existing 

subsidy levels would be requested or required. 

Accordingly, we request that the Department allow Sun Air to operate either Cessna 

Caravan or Piper Chieftain aircraft for the remainder of the current EAS Order. 

Sincerely, 

Alicia Dankesreiter 

Interim Airport Manager 

--
**Exhibit99.1**

 

 

December 31, 2002

 

 

To the Addresses listed on Schedule I hereto.

 

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

This Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered toyou pursuant to Section 4.10 (a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated asof January 25, 2001 (the “Agreement”), executed in connection with theformation of AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2001-A (the “Trust”), theissuance of the Notes by the Trust and the closing of the transactions and theexecution and delivery of the various documents by AmeriCredit FinancialServices, Inc. (the “Servicer”) and AFS Funding Corp. in connectiontherewith.  The capitalized terms usedherein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.

 

The undersigned certifies that I am the ChiefFinancial Officer and Treasurer of the Servicer.  I further certify as follows:

 

1.               I have conducted,or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer duringthe preceding period from January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002, and itsperformance under the Agreement.

 

2.               To the best of myknowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all itsobligations under the Agreement throughout such period, and , to the best of myknowledge, there has been no default in the fulfillment of any such obligation.

 

 

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.

 

 
| By:    | /s/    | Preston A. Miller                                        |   | Dated:  April  21, 2004 |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------|
|   |   | Preston A. Miller  Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |   |

 

 

 

----

 

Schedule I

 

 

Trustee, Trust Collateral Agent

and Backup Servicer:

 

JPMorgan Chase BankGlobal Debt/Asset Backed Securities4 New York Plaza, 6th FloorNew York, NY  10004

Owner Trustee:

 

Bankers Trust (Delaware)E. A. Delle DonneCorporate CenterMontgomery Building, Suite 200Wilmington, DE 19805

 

Insurer:

 

Financial Security Assurance, Inc.350 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10022

 

Rating Agencies:

 

Moody’s Investors Service, Inc.99 Church StreetNew York, NY 10007Standard & Poor’s Rating Services55 Water Street40th FloorNew York, NY 10041

----
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# A Radioactive Waste Disposal Classification System (NUREG/CR-1005)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNews Releases1999

# NRC Finds Performance 'Acceptable' at Surry in Latest Review

----

----

No: II-99-24 April 5, 1999

 

**NRC FINDS PERFORMANCE 'ACCEPTABLE' AT SURRY IN LATEST REVIEW**

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has found that safety performance remains acceptable in the NRC's latest plant performance review at the Surry nuclear power plant, operated by Virginia Power Company near Surry, Virginia.

In a letter to the company, NRC Region II official Robert C. Haag said that during a review period from March 1998 through January, 1999, "overall performance at Surry was acceptable." He said that performance in the areas of operations, maintenance, engineering and plant support was "consistent" during this period of review. He added that, in addition to the normal inspection program, the NRC will perform inspections related to modifications and engineering resolution of degraded equipment and compliance with fire protection requirements during Surry's next period of review.

The text of the plant performance review letter is available from the NRC Region II Office of Public Affairs and on the NRC web site.

NRC reviews safety performance twice a year at every licensed nuclear power plant in the nation. These reviews give the agency staff an integrated assessment of plant performance and provide a basis for planning inspection activities.

Plant performance reviews are being used by the NRC as an interim measure to monitor nuclear power plant safety. The agency began using it for this purpose after suspending the Systematic Assessment of License Performance (SALP) process until a new assessment program is developed. Previously, SALP reports were issued every 12 to 24 months.

The new reactor oversight and assessment program being developed will provide quarterly performance reports, based on a number of performance indicators and on inspection findings. This program will be tested at eight sites beginning in June and will be extended to all plants next January. A full description of the new program is available on the NRC web site.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
----

----

| 1.   | Conveyance and Representation.  Gamma represents that it is the owner of a 52% undivided mineral interest in K1 and K2.  By the DFA, Gamma conveyed a 47% interest in K1 and K2 to Spectral, leaving Gamma with a 5% interest.  Gamma now hereby conveys this 5% interest to Spectral in exchange for the additional consideration contained in this section.  Spectral agrees, in consideration for the conveyance of the 5% interest made herein, to amend  Section 4 of the DFA to increase Spectral's total financing commitment to from $35,000,000 to $40,000,000 over a twenty four month period.  This additional $5,000,000 shall be added to the twenty four month milestone contained in Section 4(c) of the DFA. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | Misc.  This Amendment shall be governed by the laws of the State of Nevada and the federal laws of the United States applicable therein, and the parties hereby irrevocably submit themselves  to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of such state.  This Amendment may be executed (by original or facsimile transmission) in several counterparts, each of which so executed shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts together shall constitute but one and the same instrument.  In the case of a conflict between the DFA and this Amendment, this Amendment shall govern. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
Exhibit 99.1

STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ENACTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 (the "Annual Report") of
Midwest Generation, LLC (the "Company"), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned certifies,
based on his or her knowledge, that:



|Date: May 6, 2003 |  | By: |  | /s/GEORGIA R. NELSONGeorgia R. Nelson Chief Executive Officer
Midwest Generation, LLC
|----------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 6, 2003 |  | By: |  | /s/KEVIN M. SMITHKevin M. Smith Chief Financial Officer
Midwest Generation, LLC      

This
statement accompanies the Annual Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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

---

QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 99.6





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 amended annual report of International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 40-F/A for the period ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jeffrey Pontius, Interim Chief Executive 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

















Date:           July 19, 2012
/s/ Jeffrey PontiusName: Jeffrey PontiusTitle:   Interim Chief Executive Officer











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

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JULY 12, 2010

JOHN LEY

 CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 ________________________

 No. 10-10087 

Non-Argument Calendar

 ________________________

 D.C. Docket No. 1:09-cr-20369-AJ-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JAMES WALKER,

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.

________________________

 Appeal from the United States District Court

 for the Southern District of Florida

 ________________________

(July 12, 2010)

Before TJOFLAT, BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
James Walker appeals his sentence of 36 months’ imprisonment, imposed

after he pled guilty to 1 count of conspiracy to distribute oxycodone, in violation

of 21 U.S.C. § 846. On appeal, he argues that the district court improperly

enhanced his sentence for possession of a weapon, pursuant to U.S.S.G.

§ 2D1.1(b)(1), and denied him safety-valve relief, pursuant to U.S.S.G.

§ 5C1.2(a)(2), but concedes that any alleged error is insufficient for reversal

because the court stated that it would still impose the same sentence regardless of

its resolution of those guideline issues. Walker further argues that his sentence is

substantively unreasonable. We review a defendant’s sentence for reasonableness. 

United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 264, 125 S.Ct. 738, 767, 160 L.Ed.2d 621

(2005); United States v. Crawford, 407 F.3d 1174, 1179 (11th Cir. 2005). 

Walker has not satisfied his burden of establishing that his sentence was

unreasonable. First, he concedes that the district court stated that it would have

imposed a 36-month sentence regardless of the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement and

§ 5C1.2 safety-valve relief. Even if Walker’s objections had been granted, his

guideline range would have been 37 to 46 months’ imprisonment, so his 36-month

sentence was still below the applicable guideline range. Thus, any alleged

2
guideline errors did not affect his sentence. Furthermore, he failed to show that 1

his sentence was substantively unreasonable, as the district court stated that it had

considered the § 3553(a) factors and imposed a sentence that was sufficient, but

not greater than necessary, to satisfy the requirements of § 3553(a). The court also

reviewed Walker’s criminal history, discussed the need for deterrence, considered

the advisory guideline range, and stated that it wanted to take into account

Walker’s age, health, family obligations, and lack of recidivism, all of which are

proper considerations under § 3553(a). Accordingly, we hold that Walker’s

sentence was reasonable and we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

 Walker’s claims also fail on the merits, as the district court properly applied the 1

weapons enhancement and denied safety-valve relief.

3
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1956 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the amounts of educational 

assistance payable under Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 5, 2017 

Mr. ROE of Tennessee introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the 

amounts of educational assistance payable under Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance Program 

of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Caring for the Families 

5 of our Wounded and Fallen Heroes Act’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1956 IH

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN AMOUNTS OF EDUCATIONAL ASSIST2 ANCE PAYABLE UNDER SURVIVORS’ AND DE3 PENDENTS’ EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PRO4 GRAM OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AF5 FAIRS. 

6 (a) INCREASE.—Section 3532 of title 38, United 

7 States Code, is amended— 

8 (1) in subsection (a)— 

9 (A) in paragraph (1)— 

10 (i) by striking ‘‘$788’’ and inserting 

11 ‘‘$1,224’’; 

12 (ii) by striking ‘‘$592’’ and inserting 

13 ‘‘$967’’; and 

14 (iii) by striking ‘‘$394’’ and inserting 

15 ‘‘$710’’; and 

16 (B) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking 

17 ‘‘$788’’ and inserting ‘‘$1,224’’; and 

18 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘$788’’ and 

19 inserting ‘‘$1,224’’. 

20 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

21 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to a month that 

22 begins after the date that is 18 months after the date of 

23 the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS