7 C.F.R. § 11.12
Effective date and implementation of final determinations of the Division
(a) On the return of a case to an agency pursuant to the final determination of the Division, the head of the agency shall implement the final determination not later than 30 days after the effective date of the notice of the final determination.
(b) A final determination will be effective as of the date of filing of an application, the date of the transaction or event in question, or the date of the original adverse decision, whichever is applicable under the applicable agency program statutes or regulations.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1963–2010 · leading case: Baker v. United States, 50 Fed. Cl. 483 (Fed. Cl. 2001).
Baker v. United States, 50 Fed. Cl. 483 (Fed. Cl. 2001). “§ 7000 (1994), and 7 C.F.R. § 11.12 (a) (1996), FmHA/FSA personnel were responsible for implementing the hearing officer’s decision within 30 days.”
Cargo & Tankship Mgmt. Corp. v. India Supply Mission, 221 F. Supp. 680 (S.D.N.Y. 1963). “This was required by the Regulations (7 CFR 11.12(a)) which state that approval will be given on “Form 106”, elsewhere defined as “Advice of Vessel Approval” and designated “106-2” for ocean carriers.”
Merchants Corp. of Am. v. Nine Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-five Long Tons, More or Less, of No. 2 Yellow Milo, 238 F. Supp. 572 (S.D. Tex. 1965). “Foreign governments operating under this program are required to utilize American flag vessels for transporting at least 50% of the purchased surplus grains. 4G U.S.C.A. § 1241(b). When an American flag vessel is used, the foreign government is not obligated to pay the…”
United States v. Am. Renaissance Lines, Inc., 494 F.2d 1059 (D.C. Cir. 1974). “A regulation more directly applicable to the CCC is 7 C.F.R. § 11.12 (a), which provides specifically for ocean transportation of goods for the CCC: The cost of ocean transportation will be financed by CCC only when specifically provided for in the purchase authorization.”
Harriman v. United States Dep't of Agric., 99 F. Supp. 2d 105 (D. Me. 2000). “§§ 1983a(c) and 7000, and 7 C.F.R. § 11.12 as the statutes and regulations on which they base their claims.”
Cargo & Tankship Mgmt. Corp. v. India Supply Mission, 336 F.2d 416 (2d Cir. 1964). “The applicable regulations also provided, in 7 C.F.R. § 11.12 (c) (2), that: “In the case of transshipment from a United States-flag vessel to a foreign-flag vessel, the cost of ocean freight from the port of transshipment to the importing country will not be financed by CCC.”
Schroeder v. United States, 683 F. Supp. 2d 1129 (D. Or. 2010). “§ 7000 and 7 C.F.R. § 11.12 (a).” Glickman, 1998 U.S.”
Aetna Ins. v. Dir. Gen. of the India Supply Mission, 289 F. Supp. 273 (S.D.N.Y. 1968). “7 C.F.R. § 11.12 (c) (5) (1968). Today, not only foreign governments, but also all United States flag vessels operating under Public Law 480, receive protection from the designation of the United States as an ultimate risk bearer.”
7 C.F.R. § 11.12(a): 2 cases
Cargo & Tankship Mgmt. Corp. v. India Supply Mission, 221 F. Supp. 680 (S.D.N.Y. 1963). “This was required by the Regulations (7 CFR 11.12(a)) which state that approval will be given on “Form 106”, elsewhere defined as “Advice of Vessel Approval” and designated “106-2” for ocean carriers.”
Schroeder v. United States, 683 F. Supp. 2d 1129 (D. Or. 2010). “§ 7000 and 7 C.F.R. § 11.12 (a).” Glickman, 1998 U.S.”
7 C.F.R. § 11.12(c): 1 case
Cargo & Tankship Mgmt. Corp. v. India Supply Mission, 221 F. Supp. 680 (S.D.N.Y. 1963). “This was required by the Regulations (7 CFR 11.12(a)) which state that approval will be given on “Form 106”, elsewhere defined as “Advice of Vessel Approval” and designated “106-2” for ocean carriers.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.