alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 248 (Thursday, December 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 66963]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31811]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3862]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Surrealism: Desire Unbound''

Department: United States Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
[79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459], Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 [112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.], Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999 [64 FR 56014], and Delegation of 
Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999 [64 FR 57920], as amended, I 
hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition, 
``Surrealism: Desire Unbound,'' imported from abroad for temporary 
exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. 
These objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign 
lenders. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit 
objects at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, from on 
or about February 4, 2002, to on or about May 12, 2002, and at possible 
additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. 
Public Notice of these determinations is ordered to be published in the 
Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, 202/619-5997, and the address is United 
States Department of State, SA-44, Room 700, 301 4th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20547-0001.

    Dated: December 19, 2001.
Patricia S. Harrison,
Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, United States 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 01-31811 Filed 12-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-P
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3552 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that floor plan 

financing includes the financing of certain trailers and campers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 25, 2021 

Mrs. WALORSKI (for herself and Ms. TITUS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

that floor plan financing includes the financing of certain 

trailers and campers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Travel Trailer and 

5 Camper Tax Parity Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FLOOR PLAN FINANCING APPLICABLE TO CERTAIN 

7 TRAILERS AND CAMPERS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 163(j)(9)(C) of the Inter9 nal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the 

10 end the following new flush sentence: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3552 IH

1 ‘‘Such term shall also include any trailer or 

2 camper which is designed to provide temporary 

3 living quarters for recreational, camping, or 

4 seasonal use and is designed to be towed by, or 

5 affixed to, a motor vehicle.’’. 

6 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

7 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

8 December 31, 2020. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 23.2


INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
FCNB Corp
Frederick, Maryland

We have audited the  accompanying  consolidated  balance sheets of FCNB Corp and
subsidiaries  as of  December  31, 1998 and 1997,  and the related  consolidated
statements of income and comprehensive income,  changes in shareholders' equity,
and cash flows for each of the years in the three year period ended December 31,
1998.  These  financial  statements  are  the  responsibility  of the  Company's
management.  Our  responsibility  is to express  an  opinion on these  financial
statements  based on our audits.  With respect to  information as of and for the
years  ended  December  31,  1997 and 1996,  we did not  audit the  consolidated
financial  statements of Capital Bank,  N.A. and  subsidiary,  which  statements
reflect total assets constituting 17.6% in 1997 and total revenues  constituting
17.7% and  16.7% in 1997 and 1996,  respectively,  of the  related  consolidated
totals.  Those  statements  were audited by other auditors whose report has been
furnished to us and our opinion,  insofar as it relates to the amounts  included
for Capital Bank,  N.A. and  subsidiary,  is based solely upon the report of the
other auditors.

We  conducted  our  audits  in  accordance  with  generally   accepted  auditing
standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes
assessing the  accounting  principles  used and  significant  estimates  made by
management,  as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.
We believe that our audits and the report of other auditors provide a reasonable
basis for our opinion.

In our  opinion,  based on our  audits  and the  report of other  auditors,  the
consolidated  financial  statements  referred to above  present  fairly,  in all
material  respects,  the financial  position of FCNB Corp and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 1998 and 1997,  and the results of their  operations and their cash
flows for each of the years in the three year period ended December 31, 1998, in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

KELLER BRUNER & COMPANY, LLP

Frederick, Maryland
January 28, 1999
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

BAC 6735-01

April 21, 2017

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, June 29, 2017

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004 (enter from 

F Street entrance)

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: The Commission will hear oral argument in the matter Secretary of 

Labor v. Sims Crane, Inc., Docket No. SE 2015-315. (Issues 

include whether the Judge erred in interpreting the standard 

providing that miners must stay clear of the suspended loads of a 

crane.)

Any person attending this oral argument who requires special 

accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 

interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those 

needs. Subject to 29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

Relay / 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

PHONE NUMBER

FOR LISTENING TO

ARGUMENT: 1-(866) 867-4769

Passcode: 129-339

__________________________________

Sarah L. Stewart

Deputy General Counsel
CCASE:

RAY MARSHALL (SOL) V. CONSOLIDATION COAL

DDATE:

19790321

TTEXT:
~1

 Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.)

 Office of Administrative Law Judges

RAY MARSHALL, Civil Penalty Proceeding

 SECRETARY OF LABOR,

 PETITIONER Docket No. PITT 79-86-P

 Assessment Control No.

 v. 36-06113-03004

CONSOLIDATION COAL CO. Westland No. 2 Mine

 RESPONDENT

 DECISION

 On March 9, 1979, the Mine Safety and Health Administration

(MSHA), moved the Judge to approve a settlement to which the

parties had agreed, and dismiss the above-captioned.

 The alleged violations and proposed settlements are as

follows:

Number Date 30 CFR Standard Assessment Settlement

23226 7/17/78 77.1003 $106.00 $106.00

233770 7/24/78 75.1719-4 48.00 36.00

 Total $154.00 $142.00

 As grounds to support the proposed reduction in the penalty

for citation No. 233770 MSHA avers:

 "A reduction from the original assessment is warranted

 because the negligence of the operator in citation No.

 233770 did not merit an allocation of nine points. By

 reducing this amount of five points and by applying the

 figures supplied in the penalty conversion table, an

 appropriate penalty is $36.00 rather than $48.00."

 As the above settlement is within the bounds of reason, does

not shock the conscience and will effectuate the deterrent

purpose of civil penalties under section 110(a), it is hereby

APPROVED.

 The above-captioned is DISMISSED.
~2

The hearing scheduled for Wednesday, March 14, 1979, in

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, was VACATED.

 Malcolm P. Littlefield

 Administrative Law Judge
**FEDERALMINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION**

 

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

 

BAC 6735-01

 

May 31, 2016

 

 

TIMEAND DATE:                2:00 p.m., Monday, June 13, 2016

 

PLACE:                                  TheRichard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Washington, DC 20004 (enter from    F Street entrance)

 

STATUS:                                Open

 

MATTERSTO BE 

CONSIDERED:                     TheCommission will hear oral argument in the matter *Secretary of Labor onbehalf of McGary, et al. v. The Marshall County Coal Company, et al.,*DocketNos. WEVA 2015-583-D, et al.**(Issues include whether the Judge erred inruling that certain statements by mine management constituted an interferencewith miners’ safety rights.)

 

 

Any person attending this oral argument who requiresspecial accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign languageinterpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs.  Subject to29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

 

 

CONTACTPERSON 

FOR MORE INFO:                EmogeneJohnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

                                                Relay/ 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                __________________________________

                                                SarahL. Stewart

                                                DeputyGeneral Counsel
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 248 (Thursday, December 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 66931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31789]



[[Page 66931]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Clean Water 
Act

    In accordance with Departmental policy, including 28 CFR 50.7, 
notice is hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United States 
of America and State of Louisiana v. City of Baton Rouge and Parish of 
East Baton Rouge, Civil Action No. 01-978-B-M-3, was lodged on November 
13, 2001, with the United States District Court for the Middle District 
of Louisiana.
    The proposed Consent Decree settles an action brought under Clean 
Water Act (``CWA'') Section 301, 33 U.S.C. 1311, for civil penalties 
and injunctive relief for violations related to the publically owned 
treatment works owned and operated by the City/Parish. The Consent 
Decree resolves all claims in the Complaint and provides for injunctive 
relief; a civil penalty of $729,500; a $1.125 million supplemental 
environmental project that will connect certain neighborhoods to the 
sewage treatment system; and payment of $216,000 in stipulated 
penalties which accrued under a prior Consent Decree. The injunctive 
relief will require the City/Parish to implement specified projects 
including a 13-15 year project to improve its sewage collection system, 
a Sanitary Sewer Overflow Response Plan to project the public health by 
responding to overflows, and an extensive preventive maintenance 
program.
    The Department of Justice will receive, for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication, comments relating to the 
proposed Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General for the Environmental and Natural Resources Division, 
United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530, and should 
refer to United States and Louisiana v. Baton Rouge. No. 01-978-B-M-3 
(M.D. La.) DOJ Ref. #90-5-1-1-2769/1.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the office of the 
United States Attorney, Middle District of Louisiana, 777 Florida St., 
Baton Rouge, LA 70801 and the office of the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202. A 
copy of the proposed Consent Decree may be obtained by mail from the 
Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, D.C. 20044-7611. 
When requesting a copy please refer to United States and Louisiana v. 
Baton Rouge. No. 01-978-B-M-3 (M.D. La.), DOJ Ref. # 90-5-1-1-2769/1 
and enclose a check in the amount of $67.75 (25 cents per page 
reproduction costs), payable to the ``Consent Decree Library.''

Thomas A. Mariani, Jr.,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 01-31789 Filed 12-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose Nacacio AMU, a/k/a Amu, a/k/a Sld Dft 3:97-40-11, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 10-7297.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 21, 2010.

Decided: Jan. 4, 2011.

Jose Nacacio Amu, Appellant Pro Se. Michael E. Savage, Jennifer A. Youngs, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*771PER CURIAM:

Jose Amu appeals the district court’s order treating his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion for a reduction in sentence as a successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion and dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); *Jones v. Braxton,*392 F.3d 683, 691 (4th Cir.2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Amu has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65225-65226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31150]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[NAFTA-04812]


Cemex Kosmos Cement Company, Pittsburgh Plant, Pittsburgh, PA; 
Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By letter of July 20, 2001 the International Brotherhood of Boiler 
Makers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for NAFTA 
Transitional Adjustment Assistance, applicable to petition number NAFTA 
04613. The denial notice was signed on June 26, 2001 and published in 
the Federal Register on July 11, 2001 (66 FR 36329).
    The union requested administrative reconsideration based on the 
belief that Cemex (the acquiring company of the subject plant) replaced 
the subject plants customer base with imported cement products from 
Mexico.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of 
Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted.


[[Page 65226]]


    Signed at Washington, DC this 3rd day of December 2001.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-31150 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
EXHIBIT 31


                                                  CERTIFICATIONS
I, Vincent Sammarro, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of California Service
Stations,  Inc.;

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  quarterly  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 quarterly
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  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 quarterly report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's   board  of  directors  (or  persons   performing   the  equivalent
functions):

     a) all  significant  deficiencies  in the design or  operation  of internal
controls  which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability to record,
process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and have  identified  for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;
and

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
quarterly  report  whether or not there  were  significant  changes in  internal
controls or in other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: November 30, 2004

/s/ Vincent Sammarro
President
#### STATE ex rel. SPRAGUE, Co. Atty., v. ONE PIN BALL MACHINE STYLED “MIDGET RACER” et al.

No. 34208.

Dec. 12, 1950.

225 *P.*2d *371.*

I. C. Sprague, Co. Atty., McCurtain County, of Idabel, for plaintiff in error.

Ed Shipp, of Idabel, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

The issues involved in the case at bar are controlled by State of Oklahoma ex rel. I. C. Sprague, County Attorney, v. One Pin Ball Machine, Styled “Nevada”, No. 34205, 203 Okla. 652, 225 P. 2d 369, this day decided and the opinion therein disposes of the issues herein.

The cause is reversed and remanded in accordance with the directions in said cause No. 34205.

DAVISON, C.J., ARNOLD, V.C.J., and CORN, GIBSON, LUTTRELL, HALLEY, JOHNSON, and O’NEAL, JJ., concur.
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Reports & Budget Submissions 
-                   Budget and Annual Performance Reports              

# Budget and Annual Performance Reports

FY2025 Justification

FY2024 Justification

FY2023 Justification

FY2022  Justification 

FY2021 Justification 

FY2020 Justification

FY2019 Justification

FY2018 Justification 

FY2017 Justification 

FY2016 Justification

#### Pagination

-                Current page            1 
-                Page            2 
-  Next pageNext › 
-  Last pageLast » 

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: (202)434-9900TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov