alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors
Kaneb Services, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration  statements numbers
333-60195,  333-22109,  333-14071,  333-14069,  333-14067, 333-08727, 333-08725,
333-08723,  33-58981,  33-54027 and 33-41295 on Form S-8 of Kaneb Services, Inc.
of our report  dated  February 25, 2000,  relating to the  consolidated  balance
sheets of Kaneb  Services,  Inc.  and  subsidiaries  as of December 31, 1999 and
1998,   and  the  related   consolidated   statements  of  income,   changes  in
stockholders'  equity  and cash  flows for the years  then  ended,  and  related
schedules, which report is included on page F-1 of this Form 10-K.




KPMG LLP
Dallas, Texas
March 24, 2000



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the  incorporation by reference in Registration  Statements
on Form S-8 (No. 333-60195),  (No. 333-22109), (No. 333-14071), (No. 333-14069),
(No.  333-14067),  (No.  333-08727),  (No.  333-08725),  (No.  333-08723),  (No.
33-58981),  (No.  33-54027) and (No.  33-41295) of Kaneb  Services,  Inc. of our
report dated February 19, 1998, appearing on page F-2 of this Form 10-K.




PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Dallas, Texas
March 24, 2000
----

Action brought on 18 July 2006 — Colovea v European Parliament

(Case F-77/06)

(2006/C 237/28)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Fotini Colovea (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: J. Choucroun, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant was recruited by the European Parliament as a member of the temporary staff at Grade B5 on 1 May 1981. On 4 August 2005 she introduced a request of to work part time in preparation for retirement, as provided for by Article 55a of the Staff Regulations and Article 4 of Annex IVa of the Staff Regulations. In the calculation of the percentage of the basic salary to which the applicant was entitled, the administration did not take into account the years of pensionable service that the applicant had acquired before being recruited by the European Parliament.

In support of his action, the applicant invokes three pleas in law:

----
JAMES CLEARANCE 

McCRAY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-2993

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 8, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Jack M. Schemer, Judge.

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, OSTERHAUS, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCUS R. WILLIAMS, No. CIV S-04-1343-FCD-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

DAVID TRISTAN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

To: The Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 

1515 S Street, Sacramento, California 95814:

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, is obligated to

pay the full statutory filing fee for this action. Plaintiff will be obligated to make monthly

payments in the amount of twenty percent of the preceding month’s income credited to

plaintiff’s trust account. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is

required to send to the Clerk of the Court payments from plaintiff’s prison trust account each

time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00, until the statutory filing fee ($250.00) is paid in

full. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

/ / /

Case 2:04-cv-01343-FCD-CMK Document 17 Filed 05/19/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Director of the California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, or a designee, shall collect from plaintiff's prison trust account the filing fee by

collecting monthly payments from plaintiff's prison trust account in an amount equal to twenty

percent (20%) of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's trust account and

forwarding payments to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in the account exceeds

$10.00 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), such payments to be clearly identified by the

name and number assigned to this action;

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order and a copy

of plaintiff's signed in forma pauperis affidavit to the address shown above; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to serve a copy of this order on

the Financial Department of the court.

DATED: May 17, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01343-FCD-CMK Document 17 Filed 05/19/06 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the December
31, 1997 Financial Statements included in the Company's Form 10-K and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                            5113
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    76250
<ALLOWANCES>                                      3097
<INVENTORY>                                     141648
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                230314
<PP&E>                                          290050
<DEPRECIATION>                                  179866
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  376067
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            63917
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         69674
<OTHER-SE>                                      203306
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    376067
<SALES>                                         439787
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                439787
<CGS>                                           278769
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   278769
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  1624
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1766
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  40747
<INCOME-TAX>                                     14424
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              26323
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     26323
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .99


</TABLE>
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFREY A. PATE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1201 FCD DAD P

vs.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY

SHERIFFS DEPUTIES,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme

Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent

prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In

certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991);

Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court

does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of

counsel will therefore be denied.

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01201-FCD-DAD Document 21 Filed 11/04/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s November 1, 2005

document styled, “Request for Accommodation to Access Courts,” and construed as a request for

the appointment of counsel is denied.

DATED: November 3, 2005.

DAD:4

pate1201.31

Case 2:04-cv-01201-FCD-DAD Document 21 Filed 11/04/05 Page 2 of 2
General Fund of U.S. Government (General Fund) Governmentwide Treasury Account Symbol Adjusted Trial Balance System (GTAS) Access 

For IRC 

December 2020

1

Agenda

What is the General Fund’s current GTAS access?

Why does the General Fund need different access for GTAS?

What will be the General Fund’s GTAS access for FY 2021 and beyond?

What will the General Fund use GTAS for?

What will the General Fund not use GTAS for?

Questions

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

Typical access that any other entity would have

Run external reports

See own edit/validation failures

Certify TAS (099 0000)

Certify Material Difference Reports (MDRs)

Research intra-governmental differences with trading partners

What is the General Fund’s Current GTAS Access?

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

3

The General Fund is the only entity that truly interacts with every other entity in the federal government

The General Fund derives its Schedules of the General Fund of the U.S. Government (Schedules)

Amounts derived from the Central Accounting and Reporting System (CARS) Transactions

Entity Submission Forms

Necessitates a need for external validation mechanisms in which GTAS plays a vital role

Why Does the General Fund Need Different Access for GTAS?

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

4

READ ONLY access to all entity submitted information in GTAS

Bulk files

All entity edit/validation failures

All external reports

Edit setup details

Crosswalk setup details

What Will Be the General Fund’s GTAS Access for FY 2021 and Beyond?

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

Extract SMAF data to use TAS and USSGL attributes to determine reasonableness of accounts being used to submit data, etc 

Extract reports to reconcile Liability Fund Balance with Treasury (LFBWT) back to entity audited amounts as well as the possibility of other lines in the future.

Research edit failures to verify correct accounting 

Propose GTAS edits or updates to edits as a result of research to help ensure the Schedules are complete and accurate

What Will the General Fund Use GTAS for?

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

6

Use data from GTAS to make adjustments to the Schedules 

Entities need to provide timely data via the mechanisms described in the Treasury Financial Manual (TFM. 

Extract data and share with trading partners 

The General Fund will not act as a mediator between entities 

Requests would continue to go through Fiscal Service  and through the MDR and dispute resolution process

What will the General Fund not use GTAS for?

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

7

Questions?

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

Luke Sheppard

General Fund Manager

Luke.Sheppard@Fiscal.Treasury.gov

Joel Erb

General Fund Supervisor

Joel.Erb@fiscal.treasury.gov

Michael Boone

General Fund Supervisor

Michael.Boone@fiscal.treasury.gov

Contact Information

LEAD ∙ TRANSFORM ∙ DELIVER

Page ‹#›

# image1.png

# image3.png

# image8.jpg
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1999
<CASH>                                         20,766
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  68,523
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,532
<INVENTORY>                                    18,063
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               120,777
<PP&E>                                         470,351
<DEPRECIATION>                                 142,207
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 560,315
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          63,787
<BONDS>                                        211,251
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    5,792
<COMMON>                                       4,249
<OTHER-SE>                                     134,762
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   560,315
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               505,759
<CGS>                                          228,383
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  442,383
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             17,695
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                27,565
<INCOME-TAX>                                   31,344
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            58,909
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   58,909
<EPS-BASIC>                                  1.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.79




</TABLE>
**Exhibit31.2**

** **

CERTIFICATION OFFINANCIAL REPORTS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

 

I,William S. Johnson, certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of EARLE M. JORGENSEN COMPANY(“EMJ”);

 

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.EMJ’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

 

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

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of EMJ’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c) disclosed in this report any changes in EMJ’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during EMJ’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, EMJ’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.EMJ’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to EMJ’s auditors andthe audit committee of EMJ’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonablely likely to adversely affect EMJ’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in EMJ’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 
| Date: June 25, 2004                                    |
|--------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                   |
|                                                   |
| /s/ William S. Johnson                                 |   |
| William S. Johnson                                     |
| Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and  Secretary |

 

----
f * PD-1461-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 12/9/2015 5:20:52 PM

Accepted 12/11/2015 12:15:40 PM

NO. PD-1461-15 ABELAC?Irk

JACOB WESLEY FAUDI § IN THE COURT OF

§

VS. § CRIMINAL APPEALS

STATE OF TEXAS § OF TEXAS A^MUjSECOND MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO

FILE PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF SAID COURT:

Now comes Jacob Wesley Faudi, Appellant in the above styled and

numbered cause, and moves for an extension of time of one week to file a petition

for discretionary review, and for good cause shows the following:

1. On October 8, 2015, the Court of Appeals affirmed appellant's

conviction. Jacob Wesley Faudi v. State, 2015 WL 5965362.

2. The Court has previously granted one extension until 12/9/2015 to

submit his petition. This previous request was made because of multiple cases that

Appellate Counsel was working on including presenting oral argument in cause no.

14-51173 in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on 12/2/2015. Appellate Counsel

anticipated completing the PDR in this case over the past week, but has been

unable to do so. Appellate Counsel needs one additional week to complete it, until

December 16, 2015.

FILED IN

3. Defendant is currently incarcerated. COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS

December 11, 2015

ABELACOSTA, CLERK
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, appellant respectfully

requests an extension of one week, i.e. until December 16, 2015, to file a petition

for discretionary review.

Respectfully submitted,

Law Office ofDenton B. Lessman

100 N. 6th Street, Ste. 702

Waco, TX 76701

Tel: (254) 776-4544

Fax:(254)776-4551

By:

Denton B. Lessman

State Bar No. 24042474

DLessmanAtty@aol.com

Attorney for Jacob Wesley Faudi

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on December 10, 2015, a true and correct copy of the

above and foregoing document was served on the State Prosecutor's Office and the

McLennan County District Attorney's Office via facsimile.

Denton B. Lessman
MEMORANDUM 

To: File 

From: Marc Thomas 

Subject: Meeting with the American Forest & Paper Association 

Date: December 4, 2012 

On December 4, 2012, EPA met with representatives from the American Forest and Paper 

Association (AF&PA) to discuss the concept of “designed to burn” within the context of the 

December 2011 Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials (NHSM) proposed rule. AF&PA also 

identified and discussed three additional NHSM that it viewed as candidates for future 

categorical non-waste fuel determinations pursuant to 40 CFR 241.4. These NHSMs included: 

(1) paper recycling residuals (including old corrugated cardboard (OCC) rejects); (2) processed 

construction and demolition (C&D) wood; and (3) creosote-treated railroad ties. The Agency 

asked clarifying questions. Materials distributed during the meeting are attached. A follow up 

conversation occurred the next day with senior agency officials. A list of meeting attendees is 

below. 

List of Meeting Attendees: 

EPA Representatives: 

Mathy Stanislaus 

Lisa Feldt 

Matt Straus 

Avi Garbow 

John Michaud 

Suzanne Rudzinksi 

Jim Berlow 

George Faison 

Kenneth Dixon 

Marc Thomas 

AF&PA Representatives: 

Paul Noe 

Susan Bodine 

Jeff Shumaker (IP) 

Rich Garber (Boise) 

Vipin Varma (NCASI) 

Ben Cooper (New Page) 

Mike Curtis (GP) 

Bob Cleaves (BPA) 

Mike Rush (AAR) 

Jeff Petrich (BPA counsel) 

Rich Gold 
Tim Hunt
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk March 23, 2009

p0316 

# Order

March 23, 2009

137217 & (18)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137217 COA: 282850 Saginaw CC: 78-000549-FY EARL JONES, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion fo r miscellaneous relief is GRANTED. The application for leave to app eal the July 10, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to re lief under MCR 6.508(D).

K ELLY

, C.J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her dissenting
statement in People v Scott , 480 Mich 1019 (2008).
**FY 22 Streamlined Balance Sheet Modifications: Other Assets/Other Liabilities**

**Effective FY 22 Reporting**

**1) USSGL 199000F “Other Assets” (Federal)**

· Moving From Line 3.4 Accounts receivable, net (RC 22) 

· To New Line 6.3 Other assets – Reimbursable activities (RC 22)

**2) USSGL 219000F “Other Liabilities With Related Budgetary Obligations” (Federal)**

· Moving From Line 22.2 Accounts payable (RC 22)

· To New Line 26.6 Other liabilities - Reimbursable activities (RC 22)

**3) USSGL 299000F “Other Liabilities Without Related Budgetary Obligations” (Federal)**

· Moving From Line 22.2 Accounts payable (RC 22)

· To New Line 26.6 Other liabilities - Reimbursable activities (RC 22)

**FY 23 Streamlined Balance Sheet Modifications: Interest Receivable/Payable**

**Effective FY 23 Reporting**

**1) USSGL 134000F “Interest Receivable – Not Otherwise Classified” (Federal)**

· Moving From Line 4.1 Interest receivable, loans and not otherwise classified (RC 04) 

· To Line 3.4 Accounts receivable, net (RC 22)

**2) USSGL 214000F “Accrued Interest Payable – Not Otherwise Classified” (Federal)**

· Moving From Line 24.1 Interest payable – loans and not otherwise classified (RC 04)

· To Line 22.2 Accounts payable (RC 22)

Page 2 of 2	                                                                   IRC Handout 04/20/2022

# image3.png

# image4.png

# image5.png

# image6.png

# image7.png

# image8.png

# image1.png

# image2.png
Order filed August 12, 2014 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-14-00564-CV

____________

VINCENT ZAHORIK, Appellant

V.

METROPLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, MOHSIN NOON, AMY 

CATCHING, AND SUZANNE WYZINSKI-SMITH, Appellee

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2011-61851

O R D E R

The notice of appeal in this case was filed July 11, 2014. To date, the filing 

fee of $195.00 has not been paid. No evidence that appellant has established 

indigence has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. Therefore, the court issues the 

following order. 

Appellant is ordered to pay the filing fee in the amount of $195.00 to the 

Clerk of this court on or before August 27, 2014. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. If 
appellant fails to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal 

will be dismissed.

PER CURIAM