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

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3538 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility 

of designating certain lands along the southern coast of Maui, Hawaii, 

as a unit of the National Park System. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 28, 2005 

Mr. CASE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability 

and feasibility of designating certain lands along the 

southern coast of Maui, Hawaii, as a unit of the National 

Park System. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SOUTH MAUI COASTAL STUDY. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 

5 ‘‘South Maui Coastal Preservation Act of 2005’’. 

6 (b) STUDY.— 

7 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Inte8 rior shall complete a study to determine the suit-
2 

•HR 3538 IH 

1 ability and feasibility of designating certain lands lo2 cated on the southern coast of Maui, Hawaii, as a 

3 National Seashore, National Recreation Area, Na4 tional Monument, National Preserve, or other unit 

5 of the National Park System. 

6 (2) STUDY AREA.—The study area shall extend 

7 generally from and including the Ahihi-Kinau Nat8 ural Area Reserve to Kanaloa Point. 

9 (3) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER LAW.—Para10 graphs (2) and (3) of section 8(c) of Public Law 91– 

11 383 (16 U.S.C. 1a–5(c)(2) and (3); commonly 

12 known as the National Park System General Au13 thorities Act) shall apply to the study. 

14 (4) CONSULTATION.—The study shall include 

15 an assessment of the possibility of transferring some 

16 or all of the State lands in the study area to the 

17 Federal Government based on consultations with the 

18 State of Hawaii. 

19 (c) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after funds 

20 are made available for this section, the Secretary of the 

21 Interior shall transmit to the Committee on Resources of 

22 the House of Representatives and the Committee on En23 ergy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report con-
3 

•HR 3538 IH 

1 taining the conclusions of the study required by subsection 

2 (b). 

Æ
| (1)   | the      Report 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. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                      | Lazy      Days' R.V. Center, Inc. |                         |
|---------------------------|-----------------------------------|------------------------------|
|                      |                              |                         |   |
| Date:      March 31, 2008 | By:                               | /s/ John      Horton    |   |
|                      |                              | John      Horton             |   |
|                      |                              | Chief      Executive Officer |   |
|                      |                              |                         |   |
#### In the Matter of Patsy De Feo, Petitioner, v. Arthur Levitt, as New York State Comptroller, Respondent.

This is an article 78 [Civ. Prae. Act] proceeding (transferred to this court by an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term) to review and annul a determination by the respondent Comptroller of the State of New York disapproving petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement pursuant to the provisions of section 63 of the Retirement and Social Security Law, Petitioner, employed as a patrolman in the Police Department of the Village of Larchmont since 1949 and a member of the New York State Employees’ Retirement System since June 1 of that year, sustained an injury to his right knee in the performance of his duties on October 19, 1954 as the result of which its meniscus was surgically removed in March, 1955. Upon his return to work some 13 or 14 weeks later he was assigned to desk duty to which his activities as a police officer have since been confined. On June 29, 1959 he applied for accidental disability retirement; respondent disapproved his claim. Following a timely request by petitioner (Retirement and Social Security Law, § 74) a hearing was held before a designated Deputy Comptroller at which medical evidence was adduced on the issue of causal relationship. The Deputy Comptroller rejected the claim finding that the accidental injury sustained on October 19, 1954 was not a competent producing cause of claimant’s disability and that he was not disabled for the performance of his duties as a police officer as the natural and proximate result of such accident. His conclusions of law, on the basis of which the determination was made, were to the same effect. Since the findings and conclusions of the Comptroller are supported by substantial medical evidence in the record, we have no alternative but to accept them. *(Matter of Groshier*v. *Levitt,*5 N Y 2d 259; *Matter of Lemma*v. *Levitt,*11 N Y 2d 735.) Determination unanimously confirmed, without costs. Present — Bergan, P. J., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.
### §14902. Civil penalty for accepting rebates from carrier

A person—

(1) delivering property to a carrier providing transportation or service subject to jurisdiction under chapter 135 for transportation under this part or for whom that carrier will transport the property as consignor or consignee for that person from a State or territory or possession of the United States to another State or possession, territory, or to a foreign country; and

(2) knowingly accepting or receiving by any means a rebate or offset against the rate for transportation for, or service of, that property contained in a tariff required under section 13702;

is liable to the United States for a civil penalty in an amount equal to 3 times the amount of money that person accepted or received as a rebate or offset and 3 times the value of other consideration accepted or received as a rebate or offset. In a civil action under this section, all money or other consideration received by the person during a period of 6 years before an action is brought under this section may be included in determining the amount of the penalty, and if that total amount is included, the penalty shall be 3 times that total amount.

(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, §103, Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 915.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 11902 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, §102(a).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.
#### In the Matter of Martin Shulman, Respondent, v. Elco Construction Corp., Judgment Debtor, and Lycee Francais De New York, Appellant.

Resettled order, entered October 23, 1959, adjudging the third-party appellant in contempt and imposing a fine of $3,410.51, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the matter remitted to Special Term for proceedings not inconsistent herewith, with costs to abide the event. The third-party subpoena herein, dated June 3, 1958, was served on June 4, 1958. The existence on June 4, 1958 of the construction contract between the third-party appellant and the judgment debtor and the indebtedness thereunder of the former involved factual issues resolved by the Official Referee in favor of the appellant. It appears from respondent’s affidavit in support of his motion to disaffirm the Referee’s report that minutes of the hearing were taken but the submission of a transcript thereof with the report was waived. Where, however, the findings of fact of the Referee are disputed, Special Term may not make an order on the report without having before it “ the testimony in some form or agreement by the parties as to its substance sufficient to permit the court to pass upon a challenge made to the sufficiency of the evidence.” *(Aron*v. *Aron,*280 N. Y. 328, 330; see, also, *Matter of Tillman,*232 App. Div. 575.) Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
### §431. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, acts June 6, 1900, ch. 796, 31 Stat. 658; Apr. 28, 1904, ch. 1772, §4, 33 Stat. 526, which extended coal land laws of the United States to Alaska, was omitted in view of the admission of Alaska into the Union.
### PART B—ASSISTANCE
#### Robert Porges, Appellant, v Irene Porges, Respondent.

In a proceeding to obtain permanent custody of children, petitioner appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered September 27, 1977, as directed that custody of one of the children, Justine Porges, be awarded to respondent and permitted the respondent to have unsupervised visitation with the other child, Hillary Porges, whose custody was awarded to petitioner. Action remitted to the Special Term for the making of findings of fact and conclusions of law, and appeal held in abeyance in the interim. Special Term failed to comply with the duty imposed upon it by statute to "state the facts it deems essential” to its decision (see CPLR 4213, subd [b]). This failure on the part of the court has made intelligent judicial review of its decision impossible (see *Alleyne v Alleyne,*46 AD2d 785; *Berlin v Berlin,*60 AD2d 861). Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Latham and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.512 Field well-completion rules.

When geological and engineering information available in a field enables the District Manager to determine specific operating requirements, field well-completion rules may be established on the District Manager's initiative or in response to a request from a lessee. Such rules may modify the specific requirements of this subpart. After field well-completion rules have been established, well-completion operations in the field shall be conducted in accordance with such rules and other requirements of this subpart. Field well-completion rules may be amended or canceled for cause at any time upon the initiative of the District Manager or upon the request of a lessee.
EXHIBIT 99.2
                                  ------------



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


         In connection with the quarterly report of Commodore Separation
Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March
31, 2003, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of
his knowledge:

         (1)  The quarterly report fully complies with the requirements of
              section 13 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Date: May  14, 2003                 /s/ Andrew P. Oddi
                                    -----------------------
                                    Andrew P. Oddi
                                    Chief Financial Officer
§ 990.215 Payments of operating subsidy conditioned upon reexamination of income of families in occupancy. ( a ) *General.* Each PHA is required to reexamine the income of each family in accordance with the provisions of the ACC, the 1937 Act, and HUD regulations. Income reexaminations shall be performed annually, except as provided in the 1937 Act, in HUD regulations, or in the MTW agreements. A PHA must be in compliance with all reexamination requirements in order to be eligible to receive full operating subsidy. A PHA's calculations of rent and utility allowances shall be accurate and timely.
( b ) *A PHA in compliance.* A PHA shall submit a certification that states that the PHA is in compliance with the annual income reexamination requirements and its rent and utility allowance calculations have been or will be adjusted in accordance with current HUD requirements and regulations.
( c ) *A PHA not in compliance.* Any PHA not in compliance with annual income reexamination requirements at the time of the submission of the calculation of operating subsidy shall furnish to the responsible HUD field office a copy of the procedures it is using to achieve compliance and a statement of the number of families that have undergone reexamination during the 12 months preceding the current funding cycle. If, on the basis of this submission or any other information, HUD determines that the PHA is not substantially in compliance with all of the annual income reexamination requirements, HUD shall withhold payments to which the PHA may be entitled under this part. Payment may be withheld in an amount equal to HUD's estimate of the loss of rental income to the PHA resulting from its failure to comply with the requirements.
##### 



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
  (1)
    
    the Report 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 as of and
for the periods covered in the Report.
 /s/ Robert B. Nolen, Jr.

Robert B. Nolen, Jr., Chief Executive Officer andChief Financial Officer
 May 15, 2007

(Date)
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Robert E. Sulentic, certify that:

1.                I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Trammell Crow Company;

2.                Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                The registrant’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)                Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)               Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)                Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.                The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of  theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)                All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b)               Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
| Date: August 9, 2004 |     | /s/ Robert E. Sulentic     |
|----------------------|----------|----------------------------|
|                 |     | Robert E.  Sulentic        |
| * *             | * * | *Chief Executive  Officer* |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 239 (Friday, December 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 80110]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27228]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


CDC/Mine Safety and Health Research Advisory Committee (MSHRAC); 
Notice of Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice of Charter Renewal.

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

SUMMARY: This gives notice that under the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act of October 6, 1972, that the MSHRAC, Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services, has been 
renewed for a 2-year period through November 30, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George W. Luxbacher, Designated 
Federal Officer, CDC/Mine Safety and Health Research Advisory Committee 
(MSHRAC), CDC, HHS, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-E20, Atlanta, Georgia 
30329-4027; Telephone (404) 498-2808, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#541318212c3635373c3126143730377a333b22"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="62252e171a0003010a0710220106014c050d14">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives 
Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign 
Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and 
other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
Registry.

Kalwant Smagh,
Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief 
Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2020-27228 Filed 12-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 1208.7 Determination of eligibility. ( a ) The ONRR will examine each application and may request additional information if the information in the application is inadequate. An application received after the close of the application period will be rejected. If additional information is requested by ONRR, it must be received by the time specified or the application will be rejected.
( b ) After the close of the application period and the receipt of any additional requested information, ONRR will determine which applicants may participate in the royalty oil sale and the quantity of royalty oil which each applicant is authorized to purchase.
( c ) When applications are filed by two or more eligible refiners for the same royalty oil, the oil will be allocated among such applicants on an equitable basis as determined by ONRR. Preference eligible refiners will be given priority in the allocation procedures in sales and subsequent reallocations of royalty oil.
( d ) No eligible refiner shall be awarded contracts for volumes of royalty oil that, when added to volumes of other Federal royalty oil being received, are in excess of 60 percent of the combined refinery capacity of that refiner.
( e ) The ONRR may exclude any section 6 lease from a royalty oil sale.
( f ) If two or more eligible refiners are related through common ownership or control or otherwise affiliated, only one of them shall be entitled to an allotment of royalty oil from a specific sale.
( g ) Any applicant whose refinery is not in operation during the 60-day period prior to the date of the royalty oil sale shall not be entitled to participate in the sale unless such applicant self-certifies and demonstrates to the satisfaction of ONRR that it will begin operations by the first month in which oil becomes available under a royalty oil contract. If operations do not begin by that month, ONRR will terminate the contract.
( h ) Applicants or purchasers that have delinquent balances with ONRR as of the date of a royalty oil sale or subsequent reallocation will not be allowed to participate in that sale or reallocation. If a person which is controlled by, in control of, under common control with, or otherwise affiliated with an applicant or purchaser has such delinquent balances, the applicant or purchaser will not be allowed to participate in a royalty oil sale or reallocation. To the extent a purchaser or affiliated person has appealed a billing and posted a surety instrument in accordance with the contract terms and applicable ONRR regulations or other law, the balance shall not be considered delinquent.
( i ) A purchaser must meet the eligibility criteria on the date of contract issuance. However, a change in a purchaser's eligibility status during the term of the contract will not affect the purchaser's right to continue that contract until its term expires, including any extensions thereof.
[52 FR 41913, Oct. 30, 1987, as amended at 58 FR 64901, Dec. 10, 1993]