alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.b

I, Marc N. Teal, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BCTC IV Assignor Corp. (the "Assignor");
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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)) for the registrant and have:



1. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused 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 report is being prepared;
2. 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
3. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



1. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



1. 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
2. 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.



|August 12, 2005 | /s/ Marc N. Teal                                     
|--------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|                | Marc N. Teal                                         
|                | (Principal Financial Officer), BCTC IV Assignor Corp.
|                |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8947-8948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03474]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects 
Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special 
Projects Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is 
soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving 
customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Thursday, March 5, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Vinci at 1-888-912-1227 or 916-
974-5086.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects 
Committee will be held Thursday, March 5, 2015, at 2 p.m. Eastern Time 
via teleconference. The public is invited to make oral comments or 
submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference 
lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Kim 
Vinci. For more information please contact: Kim Vinci at 1-888-912-1227 
or 916-974-5086, TAP

[[Page 8948]]

Office, 4330 Watt Ave, Sacramento, CA 95821, or contact us at the Web 
site: http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include a discussion on various special topics with 
IRS processes.

    February 12, 2015.
Otis Simpson,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2015-03474 Filed 2-17-15; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Procedural and Submittal Guidance for the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) for Severe Accident Vulnerabilities (NUREG-1407)

On this page:
        - Publication Information 
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1407 (PDF - 6.30 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**April 1991**Date Published:**June 1991

J.T. Chen, N.C. Chokshi, R.M. Kenneally, G.B. Kelly, W.D. Beckner, C. McCracken, A.J. Murphy, L. Reiter, D. Jeng

Division of Safety Issue Resolution Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission  Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Based on a Policy Statement on Severe Accidents, the licensee of each nuclear power plant is requested to perform an individual plant examination. The plant examination systematically looks for vulnerabilities to severe accidents and cost-effective safety improvements that reduce or eliminate the important vulnerabilities. This document presents guidance for performing and reporting the results of the individual plant examination of external events (IPEEE). The guidance for reporting the results of the individual plant examination of internal events (IPE) is presented in NUREG-1335.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
#### Alft, Appellant, vs. Young and another, Respondents.

For the appellant: *Eberlein & Larson*of Shawano.

For the respondents: *Fisher, Cashin & Reinholdt*of Stevens Point.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.

A motion for a rehearing was denied, with $25 costs, on February 7, 1933.
AMO BALLIONIO MINNILES CEOITER,
: as
Post
Los Angeles 45, California
Mn on LEBJ/2T12 ; UW January 1960

wus, WEEKIY DIARY - 8 thru 14 January 1960

tm Le
Satellite Systems

1. BIBOOVERER Vehicle Asceptence #1058: (amenm}

‘DISCOVERER Vehicle -No. 17 was acceptea by the Air Force Acceptance
Team on 6. January 60. It 1s noted that this vehicle is the last of
the single tank, Thor boosted, vehicles. Follow-on DISCOVERER will

tankage

2. Solar Cell Manufacturing: gnerery

Members of WDZN and TEZIR, in conjunction with AMO Aeronautical

Systems Center Personnel, recently completed a survey of solar cell
requirements in support of Liite Systems programs. Total
requirements for the next two (Betton were estimated to be 1.4 million
solar cells plus an approxima} 15% spares requirements. It was
evident, after coordination with the two suppliers, Hoffman Semt-

‘ Conductor and International Rectifier, that the combined manufacturing
capebility of these two companies far exceeded the existing requirement.
Since the Satellite Systems programs appear to represent the majority of
the total Air Farce requirement, it has been decided to investigate

3- Overtime Utilization on Satellite tems. : (omen)

we

4, Presentations: -(eanr}—

Bi OBAF SWX APDAT 61415 dated 8 January 60 to EMD established the
following tentative schedule for presenting the SAMO8/MIDAS Development
Program:

February - to the Air Steff
Fel

bruary < Weapons Board .
February ~ Air Force Ballistic Missile Commd:

DOWNGrANED ar 1 }
INTESVALS; NOT 31 Qua ony” —
DECLASSir1EL. DOD Dit S2poIg

1
3
10



ba

The pregentation will include a re¥iied plen on maintaining the program
under FY-60 and FY-61 tima ceilings and planning estimates for FY-62
and FY-63.- The "x further established 15 February for submittal of
these plans and users relationship to the Secretary of Defense. Ho

instructions have been given in regard to the Logistic Plen in support
of the program.

hecgi te

Copies to: LBP, IBL,. Laz
Colonel, USAF
Director, Space and Satellites
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

MA RK SPANAKOS

, Appellant,

v.

HAWK SYSTEMS, INC., et al.,

Appellee s

.

No. 4D 22

- 1650

[ May 25, 2023 ]

Appeal from the C ircuit Court for the Fif teenth Judicial Circuit, Palm

Beach County; Bradley G. Harper

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502012CA002252

.

Manuel Arthur Mesa of Mesa LLP, Miami

, for appellant.

Stuart H. Singer and Sashi C. Bach of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, Fort

Lauderdale, for appellees Greenberg Traurig, Bruce Rosetto and Amy

Quintana.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

L EVINE

, F ORST a nd A RTAU

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 50748 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**
Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus
**Jose Menchaca,**
Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:21

- CR

- 78

- 2

Before **Wiener, Dennis,** and **Haynes,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** * Jose Menchaca challenges his sentence for conspiring to transport illegal aliens and transporting illegal aliens for financial gain. The district court applied a sentencing enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(6) after it determined that Menchaca c reated a substantial risk of death or

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  4 7.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 21, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-50748 Document: 00516246020 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/21/2022No. 21

- 50748

2 serious bodily injury to the aliens he transported . Menchaca contends that the circumstances of his offense do not warrant the enhancement.

We review a district court’s interpretation and application of the Guideline s de novo and its factual findings for clear error. See United States v. Torres

- Hernandez , 843 F.3d 203, 207 (5th Cir. 2016) ; United States v. Rodriguez , 630 F.3d 377, 380 (5th Cir. 2011)

. The vehicle at issue was overcrowded with 15 aliens (one driver and 14 passengers) , with multiple individuals lying on top of each other , and was visibly carrying a lot of weight

. 1 As the commentary to § 2L1.1 provides “carrying substantially more passengers than the rated capacity of a motor vehicle , ” § 2L1.1, comment. (n.3) , as an example of reckless conduct that would support such an enhancement , the district court did not clearly err when it applied the § 2L1.1(b)(6) enhancement on these facts , s ee Torres

- Hernandez , 843 F.3d at 207; Rodriguez , 630 F.3d at 380.

**AFFIRMED.**

1 In his brief to this court, Menchaca claims he was unaware of the number of passengers who would be in the suburban. This argument was not raised in the district court, and he failed to properly brief before this court any claim of plain error, so we do not consider this argument. See United States v. Charles , 469 F.3d 402, 408 (5th Cir. 2006) (noting that inadequately briefed arguments are deemed abandoned). Case: 21-50748 Document: 00516246020 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/21/2022
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1008/2006

of 30 June 2006         

fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 July 2006         

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 of 28 June 1996 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 as regards import duties in the cereals sector (2), and in particular Article 2(1) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The import duties in the cereals sector referred to in Article 10(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 shall be those fixed in Annex I to this Regulation on the basis of the information given in Annex II.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 June 2006.

For the Commission

J. L. DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

(2)OJ L 161, 29.6.1996, p. 125. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1110/2003 (OJ L 158, 27.6.2003, p. 12).

----

ANNEX I

Import duties for the products covered by Article 10(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 applicable from 1 July 2006

----

(1)  For goods arriving in the Community via the Atlantic Ocean or via the Suez Canal (Article 2(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96), the importer may benefit from a reduction in the duty of:

(2)  The importer may benefit from a flat-rate reduction of EUR 24/t, where the conditions laid down in Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 are met.

----

ANNEX II

Factors for calculating duties

(16.6.2006-29.6.2006)

1.   
Averages over the reference period referred to in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96:

2.   
Averages over the reference period referred to in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96:
Freight/cost: Gulf of Mexico–Rotterdam: 19,55 EUR/t; Great Lakes–Rotterdam: 24,56 EUR/t.

3.   

----

(*1)  A discount of 10 EUR/t (Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96).

(*2)  A discount of 30 EUR/t (Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96).

(*3)  Premium of 14 EUR/t incorporated (Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96).

----
EXHIBIT 32.2

                                  CERTIFICATION
                          REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR
                    RULE 15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
           AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I, Richard W. Lucas,  as Chief  Financial  Officer of KSW,  Inc.,  (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. [SEC] 1350 (as adopted by Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), that to my knowledge:

         (1) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2008 (the  "Report")  filed with the U.S.  Securities and Exchange
Commission,  fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Dated:  November 5, 2008

                                                     /s/Richard W. Lucas
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     Richard W. Lucas
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-2000
<CASH>                                         84,839
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  198,344
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    29,566
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               336,540
<PP&E>                                         4,548,601
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,339,617
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,777,042
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          350,491
<BONDS>                                        1,257,268
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    50
<COMMON>                                       16,864
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,013,686
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,777,042
<SALES>                                        482,497
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               482,497
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  267,742
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2,441
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             38,094
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                159,148
<INCOME-TAX>                                   70,677
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            88,471
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   88,471
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.50



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6402 MATTHEW EUGENE MCNEILL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JEROME MORTON, Detective, Defendant - Appellee.

No. 96-6403 MATTHEW EUGENE MCNEILL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICKEY BIGGS, Detective, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-96-18-5-CT-BR, CA-96-19-5-CT-BR) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: August 5, 19962 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew Eugene McNeill, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaints. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. McNeill v. Morton, No. CA-96-18-5-CT-BR; McNeill v. Biggs , No. CA-96-19-5-CT-BR (E.D.N.C. Mar. 4, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-01-2000
<CASH>                                         3715000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1891000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                   25549000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              32908000
<PP&E>                                        42152000
<DEPRECIATION>                                25083000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                51633000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         16962000
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         91000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    33115000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  51633000
<SALES>                                       84738000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              84738000
<CGS>                                         55410000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 54410000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              27362000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (83000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2049000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    748000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1301000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1301000
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


DYNAMEX INC.
CALCULATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE
(in thousands except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                          Years ending July 31,
                                                          ---------------------
                                                    1999           1998           1997
                                                 ---------      ---------      ---------
<S>                                              <C>            <C>            <C>
Net Income (loss)                                $  (6,676)     $  (1,618)     $   1,354
                                                 =========      =========      =========
Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding
                                                    10,099          7,937          6,670
Common Share Equivalents Related to Options
  and Warrants                                                                       169
                                                 ---------      ---------      ---------
Common Shares and Common Share Equivalents
                                                    10,099          7,937          6,839
                                                 =========      =========      =========
Common Stock Price used under Treasury Stock
  Method                                         $      --      $      --      $    8.89
                                                 =========      =========      =========
Net Income per Common Share:
  Basic                                          $   (0.66)     $   (0.20)     $    0.20
                                                 =========      =========      =========
  Diluted                                        $   (0.66)     $   (0.20)     $    0.20
                                                 =========      =========      =========
</TABLE>