alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CENTRAL VALLEY OPERATIONS OFFICE

DELTA SMELT AND SPLITTAIL

January-06

Note: Bold numbers are not verified by DFG.

Delta Smelt Splittail Pumping

Daily Total Daily Total

Daily Combined Daily Combined In CFS In Acre Feet

DATE Total Daily 14-Day Total Daily 14-Day

SWP CVP Total Average SWP CVP Total Average

1-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 1 6,074 3,696 9,770 12,048 7,331 19,37

2-Jan-06 12 12 24 2 6 0 6 1 7,015 3,693 10,708 13,914 7,325 21,23

3-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 4,038 3,800 7,838 8,009 7,537 15,54

4-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 5,092 3,889 8,980 10,099 7,713 17,81

5-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 3,158 3,879 7,037 6,264 7,694 13,95

6-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 725 3,882 4,607 1,439 7,699 9,137-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 3,923 3,874 7,797 7,782 7,684 15,46

8-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 6 0 6 2 5,481 3,876 9,357 10,871 7,688 18,55

9-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 2,524 3,863 6,388 5,007 7,663 12,67

10-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 3 12 15 3 3,433 4,329 7,762 6,809 8,586 15,39

11-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 24 24 4 2,801 4,089 6,890 5,555 8,111 13,66

12-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 2,634 3,874 6,508 5,225 7,684 12,90

13-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 2,540 3,875 6,415 5,038 7,686 12,72

14-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 0 12 12 5 3,440 3,890 7,330 6,823 7,716 14,53

15-Jan-06 0 0 0 2 6 0 6 5 3,260 3,882 7,142 6,466 7,700 14,16

16-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2,900 3,861 6,762 5,753 7,659 13,41

17-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 8 12 20 6 2,446 3,854 6,300 4,851 7,645 12,49

18-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3,205 3,859 7,065 6,358 7,655 14,01

19-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2,580 3,848 6,428 5,117 7,633 12,75

20-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3,371 3,864 7,236 6,687 7,665 14,35

21-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 6 3,607 3,858 7,465 7,154 7,653 14,80

22-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4,008 3,841 7,849 7,950 7,619 15,56

23-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 6 3,299 3,873 7,172 6,543 7,683 14,22

24-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 5 3,069 3,849 6,918 6,088 7,634 13,72

25-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1,704 4,213 5,917 3,379 8,357 11,73

26-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1,860 3,875 5,736 3,690 7,687 11,37

27-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 4 2,474 3,867 6,341 4,907 7,671 12,57

28-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2,611 3,864 6,475 5,179 7,665 12,84

29-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2,259 3,874 6,133 4,480 7,685 12,16

30-Jan-06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1,784 4,206 5,990 3,539 8,342 11,88

31-Jan-06 0 12 12 1 0 0 0 1 1,996 4,235 6,232 3,960 8,401 12,36

Total 12 24 36 XXXX 54 60 114 XXXX 99,311 121,236 220,547 196,984 240,471 437,45

Delta Smelt Incidental Take LevelsBelow Normal Water Year TypeDelta smelt risk assessment matrix (DSRM) Adult level of concern = 892Re-consultation level for January = 1,900

Banks Tracy Combined Banks 

Tracy Combine
#### Cauldwell-Wingate Company v. City of New York.

Present — Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
#### Jones v. Commonwealth.

Oct. 27, 1942.

L. O. Siler for appellant.

Hubert Meredith, Attorney General, and Frank A. Logan, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Cammack

— Reversing.

Apparently without objection, O. C. Jones was tried under an indictment' charging him with grand larceny and knowingly receiving stolen property. He was found guilty and his punishment fixed at three years in the pen*720itentiary. It is conceded that the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction on either count. Jones is urging that the judgment be reversed because the court erroneously instructed the jury.

The instruction to which complaint is first directed follows:

> “III. If you shall believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant, O. C. Jones, unlawfully, wilfully, feloniously and knowingly received the bicycle mentioned in the evidence from Lloyd Hall, knowing’ at the time that said bicycle had been stolen, you will find the defendant, 0. C. Jones, guilty of the offense of receiving stolen property as charged in the indictment.”

Before one charged with knowingly receiving stolen property may be convicted of a felony, the property stolen and received must be of the value of $20 or more. KRS 433.290, 433.220 (KS 1199, 2739g-58). While the first instruction which had to do with the charge of grand larceny properly referred to the value of the stolen article, this would not cure the defect in Instruction No. 3, because the jury may have concluded that Jones was not guilty under the first count, but was under the second, which also charged the commission of a felony. It was held expressly in Botnick v. Commonwealth, 266 Ky. 419, 99 S. W. (2d) 188, that an instruction authorizing a conviction of a felony, without regard to the value of the property received, was erroneous.

The last sentence of KRS 433.290 (KS 1199) provides :

> “The possession by any person of any stolen property shall be prima facie evidence of Ms guilt under this section.”

Instruction No. 7 follows:

> “The possession of any stolen goods, under the law, shall be prima facie evidence of the guilt of the one accused.”

Jones insists that this instruction virtually told the jury that he was guilty, because he admitted receiving the bicycle and disposing of it. Such an instruction was condemned in the BotMck case, supra. The opinion in that case amply sets forth the reasons for not instruct*721ing the jury on the weight of the evidence. See also Mabe v. Commonwealth, 279 Ky. 432, 130 S. W. (2d) 805. We might add also that KBS 433.290 (KS 1199) does not direct that the jury be instructed that the possession of stolen property shall be prima facie evidence of guilt. The provision is more in the nature of a guide to be followed by the trial judge in determining whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant the submission of a case to the jury.

It follows that the judgment should be and it is reversed, with directions to set it aside and for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
(No. 6883

#### A. B. Dick Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of General Services, Respondent.

*Opinion filed November 14, 1972.*

A. B. Dick Company, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
### §4436. Application to new and existing preclearance operations

Except for sections 814(d) [19 U.S.C. 4433(d)], 815, 817 [19 U.S.C. 4435], and 818, this subchapter shall only apply to the establishment of preclearance operations in a foreign country in which no preclearance operations have been established as of February 24, 2016.

(Pub. L. 114–125, title VIII, §819, Feb. 24, 2016, 130 Stat. 222.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Sections 815 and 818, referred to in text, are sections 815 and 818 of Pub. L. 114–125. Section 815 amended section 44901 of Title 49, Transportation. Section 818 amended section 8311 of Title 7, Agriculture, and section 1356 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

This subchapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this subtitle", meaning subtitle B (§§811–819) of title VIII of Pub. L. 114–125, which is classified principally to this subchapter. For complete classification of subtitle B to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4301 of this title and Tables.
**EXHIBIT 10.2**

 

**TRADEMARK LICENSE EXTENSION AGREEMENT**

 

ThisExtension Agreement dated as of April 10, 2006 is by and between HallmarkLicensing, Inc. (“Hallmark Licensing”) and Crown Media United States, LLC(“Crown US”).

 

WHEREAS,Crown US and Hallmark Licensing have previously entered into that certain MovieChannel Trademark License Agreement between the parties dated as of January 1,2004, as extended as of August 1, 2004, and as of August 1, 2005 (the“License Agreement”); and

 

WHEREAS,the parties desire to further extend the term of the License Agreement;

 

NOW,THEREFORE, Crown US and Hallmark Licensing hereby agree as follows:

 

The term of the License Agreement shall be extendedfor an additional period terminating on September 1, 2007, subject to any earliertermination pursuant to the terms of the License Agreement.

 

All other terms and conditions of the LicenseAgreement will remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Extension Agreement asof the date set forth above.

 

 
| HALLMARK  LICENSING, INC.  |
|---------------------------------|
|                            |
|                            |
| By:                             | /s/ Deanne  Stedem |   |
|                            |   |   |
| Title:                          | /s/ Vice  President |   |
|                            |   |   |
|                            |   |   |
| CROWN MEDIA  UNITED STATES, LLC |
|                            |   |   |
| By:                             | /s/ Charles  Stanford |   |
|                            |   |   |
| Title:                          | /s/ Vice  President |   |
|                                 |  |  |  |  |

 

----
#### § 19.267 Adjustments for credited tax.

When a proprietor receives a notice of allowance of credit from TTB, including notification of credit for tax on spirits exported with benefit of drawback as provided in part 28 of this chapter, the proprietor will make an adjusting entry and an explanatory statement on its next excise tax return. The proprietor will identify the notification of allowance of credit that authorizes the adjusting entry in the explanatory statement. If the allowable tax credit is greater than the tax due on the excise tax return, the proprietor will apply the balance of the tax credit to one or more following tax returns until the tax credit is exhausted.

(26 U.S.C. 5008, 5062)
No. 12,123.

#### Kahnt *v.*Caldwell, et al.

Decided September 17, 1928.

Mr. Harry Behm, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. George B. Campbell, for defendants in error.

*Department Two.*

Mr. Justice Adams

delivered the opinion of the court.

Kahptt was plaintiff and Caldwell and his wife defendants in the court below. We refer to them as there *375aligned. Kahnt brings the case here and asks for a supersedeas.

Kahnt is the owner of a quarter section of land, and the defendants are his tenants. The issue involves the date of expiration of tenancy.

After the trial, which was to the court, the court announced in an informal and somewhat indefinite way, his opinion on the merits. In part, it appears to be satisfactory to plaintiff, and in another part it seems to be unsatisfactory to him. It is entitled, “Opinion of the Court,” and concludes with the remark: “These find-

ings will be made in favor of the plaintiff, and judgment ordered in accordance therewith, and the attorney for the plaintiff is directed to draw a written judgment or decree so as to state definitely the findings and judgment of the court.” Counsel for plaintiff did not follow these directions, but later filed a paper entitled, “Motion to Amend the Findings.”

There is no record before us that this motion was determined by the court, or that there were any findings to amend, but afterwards it was ordered that judgment be entered upon the findings. What the findings were, if any, on which the order for judgment was predicated, ■whether the findings were, if any, amended or unamended, or what the judgment or decree held, if there was one, are pertinent questions that we have no way of determining from the record before us. It is wholly silent in this respect.

The trial court expressly recognized the indefinite character of its opinion, but indicated its general views, partly in plaintiff’s favor, as an aid to counsel in drawing definite findings and decree. This opinion of the trial court is now treated by counsel for plaintiff as the findings and final decree, but it is not such. *Aetna Ins. Co. v. Rico,*80 Colo. 536, 537, 252 Pac. 815.

Perhaps if counsel had drawn the instrument, as directed, it could have been made satisfactory to him. If not, he could have taken his exceptions to the unsatis*376factory part, and offered ns something tangible for onr determination.' It is not customary for us to tell the trial court in advance what findings and decree to make, but to pass upon them after they have been made. This not having been done, there is no judgment to affirm or reverse. The writ of error will accordingly be dismissed.

Me. Chiee Justice Denison, Me. Justice Butlbe and Me. Justice Campbell concur.
<PAGE>

                               MATERIAL CONTRACTS



Exhibit 10 is:

(1) Employment Agreement between James S. Marlen and the Company.

(2) Amendment to Employment Agreement between James S. Marlen and the Company.

(3) Change of Control Agreement between Javier Solis and the Company.

(4) Change of Control Agreement between Gary Wagner and the Company.


Exhibit 10, Item 1 is incorporated by reference to Annual Report on Form 10-K
filed with the Commission for Registrant's fiscal year ended November 30, 1997.

Exhibit 10, Items 2, 3 and 4 are incorporated by reference to Annual Report on
Form 10-K filed with the Commission for Registrant's fiscal year ended November
30, 1998.


                                   EXHIBIT 10
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5307 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5307

                     One Hundred Sixteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and twenty

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  115 Nicol Avenue in Thomasville, Alabama, as the ``Postmaster Robert 
                          Ingram Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. POSTMASTER ROBERT INGRAM POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 115 Nicol Avenue in Thomasville, Alabama, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Postmaster Robert Ingram Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Postmaster 
Robert Ingram Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
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

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 230

 210

 218

 212

 209

 204

 195

 206

 195

 184

 187

 194

 218

 202

 204

 203

 201

 192

 194

 194

 187

 182

 170

 175

 175

 173

 186

 182

 188

 176

 184

 191

 177

 155

 154

 146

 140

 149

 128

 127

 139

 128

 156

 149

 165

 159

 159

 151

 148

 126

 114

 144

 114

 128

 117

 139

 138

 131

 139

 147

 203

 200

 199

 193

 191

 180

 175

 187

 179

 164

 174

 175

 192

 187

 188

 185

 183

 175

 175

 172

 168

 168

 156

 156

 153

 161

 168

 165

 165

 165

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2003 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 8, 2003

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

FARRAR PARK AT DUTCH SLOUGH
###### Editorial Note on Part 25

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear by T.D. ATF-437, 66 FR 5478, 5479, Jan. 19, 2001.

#### § 25.114 Dealer records.

Every dealer is required to maintain records of transactions. Beer transactions that appear in the records required by subpart U of this part will meet the brewer's recordkeeping requirements as a dealer. For other transactions not covered in the brewery records, such as retail sales of wine or distilled spirits in a restaurant at the brewery, or operations as a wholesale dealer in wine or distilled spirits, the brewer must keep the records specified for dealers in part 31 of this chapter.

(26 U.S.C. 5121, 5122)
###### Editorial Note on Part 13

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 13 appear by T.D. ATF-449, 66 FR 19085, Apr. 13, 2001.

#### § 13.51 Revocation by operation of law or regulation.

TTB will not individually notify all holders of certificates of label approval, certificates of exemption from label approval, or distinctive liquor bottle approvals that their approvals have been revoked if the revocation occurs by operation of either TTB-administered law or regulation or applicable law or regulation of other agencies. If changes in labeling or other requirements are made as a result of amendments or revisions to the law or regulations, the certificate holder must voluntarily surrender all certificates that are no longer in compliance. The holder must submit applications for new certificates in compliance with the new requirements, unless TTB determines that new applications are not necessary. If a new application is unnecessary, it is the responsibility of the certificate holder to ensure that labels are in compliance with their requirements of the new regulations or law.

[T.D. ATF-406, 64 FR 2129, Jan. 13, 1999, as amended by T.D. ATF-483, 67 FR 62858, Oct. 8, 2002]
484 P.2d 1272

#### STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jessie GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 9258.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

May 12, 1971.

Original Proceeding in Certiorari.

Ordered that application for writ of certiorari be and the same is hereby denied.

Further ordered that the record in Court of Appeals Cause No. 608, 82 N.M. 578, 484 P.2d 1288 be and the same is hereby returned to the Clerk of the Court of Appeals.
### §469. Dealing in or using empty stamped imported liquor containers

If any person shall purchase or sell, with the imported-liquor stamp herein required remaining thereon, or any of the marks or brands which shall have been placed thereon in accordance with the laws or regulations concerning imported liquors remaining thereon, any cask or other package, after the same has been once used to contain imported liquors and has been emptied; or if any person shall use or have in possession such cask or package, with any imitation of such marks or brands, for the purpose of placing domestic distilled spirits therein for sale; every such cask or package, with its contents, if any, shall be forfeited to the United States. And every such person who shall violate any of the provisions of this section shall be liable to a penalty of $200 for every such cask or package so purchased, sold, used, or had in possession.

(Mar. 1, 1879, ch. 125, §13, 20 Stat. 343; May 28, 1880, ch. 108, §13, 21 Stat. 148.)
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

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 3,471.19

 3,471.19

 3,471.19

 3,471.19

 3,471.13

 3,471.06

 3,471.06

 3,471.02

 3,470.95

 3,470.89

 3,470.83

 3,470.77

 3,470.64

 3,470.58

 3,470.46

 3,470.40

 3,470.27

 3,470.15

 3,470.02

 3,469.86

 3,469.78

 3,469.60

 3,469.48

 3,469.34

 3,469.16

 3,469.04

 3,468.86

 3,468.73

 3,468.55

 3,468.31

 41,156

 41,156

 41,156

 41,156

 41,117

 41,072

 41,072

 41,046

 41,001

 40,962

 40,924

 40,885

 40,802

 40,763

 40,686

 40,647

 40,564

 40,486

 40,403

 40,301

 40,250

 40,135

 40,058

 39,969

 39,854

 39,778

 39,663

 39,581

 39,467

 39,315

STORAGE

-33

+0

+0

+0

-39

-45

+0

-26

-45

-39

-38

-39

-83

-39

-77

-39

-83

-78

-83

-102

-51

-115

-77

-89

-115

-76

-115

-82

-114

-152

CHANGE

73.2

94.8

100.1

102.6

65.5

50.9

70.0

51.5

44.1

52.3

51.3

44.4

23.2

44.9

27.5

47.7

25.6

36.8

36.5

23.1

46.8

10.7

31.9

28.2

16.7

39.8

22.9

42.2

27.8

13.3

INFLOW

 51

 56

 61

 64

 63

 67

 63

 60

 62

 67

 66

 60

 61

 60

 62

 63

 63

 71

 74

 70

 68

 64

 66

 69

 70

 73

 75

 78

 79

 84

CONDUIT

 34.1

 34.1

 34.1

 34.1

 16.5

 2.3

 2.3

 .1

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

SPILL

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

PK CR

 3.8

 3.8

 4.1

 3.6

 4.2

 3.6

 4.0

 3.6

 3.8

 4.0

 3.5

 3.1

 3.0

 3.6

 3.3

 3.4

 3.4

 4.1

 3.3

 3.5

 3.5

 3.7

 3.7

 3.1

 3.7

 4.1

 4.9

 4.5

 5.3

 4.9

C.F.S.

 .182

 .180

 .196

 .172

 .200

 .172

 .190

 .170

 .183

 .190

 .165

 .150

 .145

 .170

 .160

 .163

 .165

 .198

 .159

 .170

 .170

 .178

 .178

 .148

 .180

 .200

 .240

 .220

 .259

 .241

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JUNE 2003 JENKINSON LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 07/22/2003

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -1,874 1,346.3 1,990 30.0 157.6 114.1 5.494 .00

ACRE-FEET -1,874 2,670.4 3,947 59.5 312.6 226.3

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

CAMINO-CONDUIT 3,947.2

SLY PARK CREEK

SPILL

 59.5

 312.6

 190.4

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

JULY 1, 2002 TO DATE = 43.50

 41,189

 3,756.7 0.00

CAMINO SLY

CAMP

CREEK

C.F.S.

 66

 62

 74

 70

 60

 56

 51

 45

 40

 35

 32

 30

 0

 24

 22

 20

 19

 18

 16

 15

 15

 14

 13

 13

 12

 11

 10

 10

 9

 9

 871

 1,728

E.I.D. PROJECT

E.I.D. WATER RIGHTS
#### Frank D. Miller and Others, as Trustees, Respondents, v. Bird M. Robinson and Richard W. Jones, Jr., Appellants.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Editorial Note on Part 20
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 20 appear by T.D. ATF-235, 66 FR 5473, Jan. 19, 2001, and T.D. ATF-463 and T.D. ATF-462, 66 FR 42733, 42736, Aug. 15, 2001.

§ 20.211 General. ( a ) Upon filing the appropriate qualifying documents under the applicable provisions of subparts D and F of this part and receiving approval, a manufacturer using denatured alcohol, specially denatured rum, or articles in an approved process may recover the denatured alcohol, specially denatured rum, or articles. However, a person who recovers ( 1 ) completely denatured alcohol with all its original ingredients,
( 2 ) an article made with specially denatured spirits with all its original ingredients (or practically so, to the extent that the presence of the original denaturants and other ingredients in the recovered article make it as nonpotable as the original article), or
( 3 ) an article made with completely denatured alcohol with all the denaturants of the completely denatured alcohol, shall not be required to obtain a permit under this part.
( b ) For a determination as to whether obtaining a permit under this part is necessary, each person who intends to conduct the recovery operations outlined in paragraph (a) of this section shall forward Form 5150.19 with a sample of the recovered article, to the appropriate TTB officer, in accordance with subpart F of this part.
( c ) Restoration and redenaturation may be done by a permittee or by the proprietor of a distilled spirits plant.