alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 72207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23060]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #18244 and #18245; MONTANA Disaster Number MT-
00174]


Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public 
Assistance Only for the State of Montana

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major 
disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Montana (FEMA-
4745-DR), dated 10/11/2023.
    Incident: Flooding.
    Incident Period: 06/01/2023 through 06/08/2023.

DATES: Issued on 10/11/2023.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/11/2023.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/11/2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd 
Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 10/11/2023, Private Non-
Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental 
nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above 
or other locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties:
    Carbon, Daniels, Fergus, Garfield, Golden Valley, Musselshell, 
Petroleum, Phillips, Stillwater, Treasure.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere...      2.375
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.375
For Economic Injury:
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.375
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 18244 6 
and for economic injury is 18245 0.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Francisco S[aacute]nchez, Jr.,
Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience.
[FR Doc. 2023-23060 Filed 10-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
IV

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 430

Calling for the immediate release of all political prisoners in Cuba, including

Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 19, 2000

Mr. ANDREWS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Calling for the immediate release of all political prisoners

in Cuba, including Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet, and for other

purposes.

Whereas the Cuban Government found Dr. Oscar Elias

Biscet, a 39-year-old Afro-Cuban physician and human

rights activist, guilty of ‘‘dishonoring the symbols of the

fatherland’’ and sentenced him to 3 years in a Cuban

prison merely because he placed the Cuban flag upside

down as an international symbol of distress;

Whereas Dr. Oscar Biscet has joined the ranks of thousands

of political prisoners being held in Cuba’s abysmal prisons;

Whereas some of these prisoners are being held merely for

expressing their frustration with the Cuban Government’s
2

•HCON 430 IH

refusal to provide better health care and improve prison

conditions;

Whereas in 1999, the Cuban Government adopted the Law

for the Protection of National Independence and the

Economy of Cuba, also known as ‘‘Law Number 88’’ or

the ‘‘Gag Law’’;

Whereas under this law Cubans face up to 5 years in prison

for the harmless act of writing a letter complaining about

food shortages and up to 20 years in prison for supporting the United States embargo of Cuba;

Whereas the Cuban Government uses its food rationing system to promote tyranny and control the Cuban populace;

Whereas in cases in which the Cuban Government is unable

to establish grounds for long prison terms for political

dissidents, these dissidents are continually harassed, are

detained for short periods of time, are subject to their

phones being tapped, and are otherwise under constant

surveillance;

Whereas foreign dignitaries are seldom allowed by the Cuban

Government to meet with Cuban political dissidents; and

Whereas Cuban dictator Fidel Castro continues to deny that

the Cuban Government holds any political prisoners:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That—

3 (1) it is the sense of the Congress that the em4 bargo of Cuba should not be lifted until the Cuban

5 Government agrees to decriminalize free speech, as6 sociation, and movement, and other elements crucial
3

•HCON 430 IH

1 to the development of democracy and the protection

2 of fundamental human rights; and

3 (2) the Congress calls on the Cuban

4 Government—

5 (A) to immediately release all political pris6 oners in Cuba, including Dr. Oscar Elias

7 Biscet;

8 (B) to eliminate all of Cuba’s criminal laws

9 that unnecessarily restrict the fundamental

10 human rights to freedom of speech, association,

11 and movement; and

12 (C) to respect fundamental human rights

13 and free multiparty and internationally super14 vised elections in Cuba.

Æ
Before the Third Division,

October 10, 1960

No. 64681.

#### Wm. A. Hausman Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 294235-K, etc. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of prepared or preserved pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 36, C.D. 2100), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Exhibit 99.9

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors of Penn
West Petroleum Ltd.

We consent to the use of our audit report dated March 15, 2012, on the financial statements of Penn West Petroleum
Ltd., which comprise the consolidated balance sheets as at December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010, the consolidated statements of income, cash flows and changes in shareholders equity for the years ended
December 31, 2011 and 2010, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information, and our audit report dated March 15, 2012 on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
which are included herein.

We also consent to incorporation by reference of the above mentioned audit reports in Penn West Petroleum
Ltd.s Registration Statement (No. 333-171675) on Form F-3.



|                     
|---------------------
|/s/ KPMG LLP         
|Chartered Accountants

Calgary, Canada

March 15, 2012
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

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

Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, I, Leonhard Dreimann, hereby certify that,
to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Salton, Inc. on Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended December 27, 2003 (the Report) fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in that Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Salton, Inc.

                                       By:  /s/ Leonhard Dreimann
                                           ------------------------------
                                           Leonhard Dreimann
                                           Chief Executive Officer

February 10, 2004

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required
by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. (the Exchange Act). Such
certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the
extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

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

                                       33
B O A R D OF G O V E R N O R S 

OF THE

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

WASHINGTON, D .C. 2 0 5 5 1

September 25, 2018

AD DR ESS O FFIC IA L C O R RESPO ND EN CE 

TO THE BOARD

Ms. Jill M. Jensen 

PO Box 220254 

65 North 100 West 

Centerfield, Utah 84622 - 0254

Dear Ms. Jensen:

The General Counsel, acting pursuant to delegated authority, and after 

consultation with the Director of the Division of Supervision and Regulation, has 

approved your request pursuant to section 19 of the Federal Deposit Insurance A ct1 to 

become an institution-affiliated party of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 

Company ("State Farm"), Bloomington, Illinois, a savings and loan holding company 

("SLHC"). This approval is limited to your being an institution-affiliated party of State 

Farm, including by working for State Farm or working for an independently owned 

agency that sells State Farm insurance products and products for State Farm’s wholly 

owned subsidiary, State Farm Bank, f.s.b. ("State Farm Bank”), Bloomington, Illinois. If 

you seek to work for another SLHC or bank holding company ("BHC”), or to work for an 

independently owned agency that sells products for another SLHC or BHC, you must 

obtain the Board’s approval prior to working for such SLHC, BHC, or agency.

This action is based on all the facts of record and the representations made 

by you to the Board in connection with your request. Any change in the facts presented 

could result in a different conclusion and should be reported immediately to Board staff. 

This action is also based on all commitments provided by you in support of your request. 

These commitments are conditions imposed in writing in connection with the Board’s 

decision and, as such, may be enforced in proceedings under applicable law. This action 

is also conditioned specifically on your receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals 

related to your proposal and compliance with any terms and conditions that may be 

imposed in connection with such approvals. Additionally, if you are convicted of, or 

enter into a pretrial diversion program for, a crime involving dishonesty, breach of trust,

12 U.S.C. § 1829. 1
or money laundering in the future, you must again seek approval to work for any SLHC 

or BHC, or to work for any independently owned agency that sells products for an SLHC 

or a BHC, including any agency that sells State Farm and State Farm Bank products.

Sincerely yours,

( s i g n e d )

Ann E. Misback 

Secretary of the Board
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SHOPKO STORES INC. AT AND FOR THE THIRD
QUARTER ENDED OCTOBER 30, 1999.  AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS RESTATED FOR DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-30-1999
<CASH>                                          19,891
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,201
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,747
<INVENTORY>                                    778,192
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               970,142
<PP&E>                                       1,399,798
<DEPRECIATION>                                 558,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,028,142
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          872,650
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           304
<OTHER-SE>                                     662,169
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,028,142
<SALES>                                      2,020,978
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,030,740
<CGS>                                        1,512,705
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,971,065
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              34,875
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,800
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,290
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,510
<DISCONTINUED>                                  41,006
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (3,776)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    52,740
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.87


</TABLE>
October 4, 1960

No. 64659.

#### National Lock Company *v.*United States,

protest 312183-K.

Abstract 64441. Plaintiff’s application for rehearing denied.
Case No. 14,922.

#### UNITED STATES v. DAVIDSON et al.

[4 Cranch, C. C. 576.]1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

March Term, 1835.

Criminal Law—Joint Indictment—Trial— Witness.

Upon a joint indictment against two, for assault and battery, it is not a matter, of right that they should be tried separately, at their request; and neither can be examined as a witness for the other unless there be no evidence against one; in which ease the jury may acquit him, and then he may be examined for the other defendant.

Indictment [against Lewis G. Davidson, and I. W. Stratton] for assault and battery on a negro, a servant at Fuller’s Hotel.

Mr. Brent, for defendants,

asked that they might be tried separately, as he wished to examine each as a witness for the other.

1

 [Reported by Hon. William Craneh, Chief Judge.]

THE COURT

said that it was perhaps in the discretion. of the court to allow it, but that the defendants could not claim it as a matter of right; and that neither can be examined as a witness for the other unless it should appear that there was no evidence against one; in which case the jury may acquit him, and then he may be examined for the other; but if there be any evidence against him he cannot be examined. 1 Chit Cr. Law, 626, 627.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Robert J. Hanks,certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K of Harbor Acquisition Corporation

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 Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)          Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport 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 this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

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

(b)         Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: March 27,2007
|        |     | /s/ ROBERT J. HANKS              |
|--------|----------|----------------------------------|
|        |     | Robert J. Hanks                  |
|   | * * | *Chief  Executive and Treasurer* |
|   | * * | *(Principal  Executive Officer)* |

 

----
**MEMORANDUM**

**DATE:** 09 / 10/2014 **FROM:** Laura Farris/EPA Region 8 **TO:** Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR– 2013 - 0602 **SUBJECT:** National Park Service Call on 111d on 09/10/2014 **SUMMARY :**  EPA p articipated in a conference call with representatives from the National Park Service , the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Forest Service on 09/10/2014 to discuss their question s about the Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants , which was proposed on June 2, 2014. **ATTENDEES: EPA Headquarters**  Jan Cortelyou David Solomon Tom Powers Brian Fisher Gabrielle Stevens **EPA Region 8**  Laura Farris **External Stakeholders** Pat Brewer and Don Shepard , National Park Service Meredith Bond , F ish and W ildlife S ervice Chuck Sams, N ational F orest S ervice **National Park Service 111d Discussion Questions**   Concerns about 111d triggering PSD if the states re
- dispatch to NGCC units  Concerns that carbon offset s were not allowed in the proposed rule  Concerns about NSR and criteria air pollutants
No. 63905.

protest 58/15916 (Seattle).

#### C. F. Liebert *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of diamond grinding wheels the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Swiss Manufactures Association, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 227, C.D. 1933), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on June 20, 2013 at 9:00 

AM, or as soon thereafter as may be heard, at 1990 East Gettysburg Ave., Fresno, 

California. The following actions will be considered at the hearing: 

Quantification of Contingency Reductions for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan 

These actions will affect sources in the counties of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, 

Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare. The public hearing may also be attended 

through video teleconferencing at San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District’s (District) regional offices at 34946 Flyover Court, Bakersfield, California and at 

4800 Enterprise Way, Modesto, California. The public hearing will be presented live via 

webcast at http://www.valleyair.org/webstreaming/webcast-meetings.htm 

NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the adopted contingency quantification document 

will be submitted through the California Air Resources Board to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency for incorporation as part of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The proposed actions would constitute a SIP revision. 

NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that all interested persons desiring to be heard or to 

present evidence on said matters may appear at said hearing. Interested persons may 

view the proposed rules at the District offices and on-line at: 

www.valleyair.org/workshops/public_workshops_idx.htm 

Copies of the proposed documents will be made available on and after May 21, 2013. 

To obtain copies of the documents, please call (559) 230-6100, or FAX your request to 

Mrs. Noemi Calderon at (559) 230-6064. You can receive news for rules and plans via 

email by subscribing to the District’s email notification list at: 

www.valleyair.org/lists/list.htm. 

Para solicitar servicios de interpretación en Español, por favor póngase en contacto con 

Ana Reyes al (559) 230-6000 por lo menos 7 días antes de le fecha de la reunión. 

Written comments should be addressed to Ms. Jessica Fierro, 1990 East Gettysburg 

Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726 or via email at Jessica.fierro@valleyair.org, or 

airqualityplans@valleyair.org. Written comments received by 5:00 PM on June 4, 2013 

will be ensured consideration ahead of the June 20, 2013 Governing Board public 

hearing. For additional information, please contact staff at (559) 230-6100.
No. 58793.

protest 233405-K (New York).

#### John Wolfe, Ltd., and The J. P. Fleisig Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

It was stipulated that for duty purposes the clean content of the wool in question was determined in accordance with the instructions contained in T. D. 53159, which was issued following *United States*v. *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 19, C. A. D. 492). In that case, it was *294held that the statutory language, clean content of wool, as used in paragraph 1102 (b), was construed to mean the product commercially usable as wool and from which all the weight of grease and foreign material has been removed, including the wool fibers which are unavoidably and irrevocably lost as a result of commercially applied cleaning processes. Accordingly, the wool in question was held dutiable at the rate applied by the collector on the basis of the percentages of clean content as set forth in the column headed “Clean Content T. D. 53159” in the schedule attached to and made a part of the decision in this ease.