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

----

III Teatised

Nõukogu

----

TEADE VABADE AMETIKOHTADE KOHTA

KORRAPIDAJATE-VAHENDAJATE ÜLEM

KORRAPIDAJA-VAHENDAJA

Viited: nõukogu/B/023 ja nõukogu/B/024

(2005/C 254 A/01)

Euroopa Liidu Nõukogu peasekretariaat otsib ajutisi töötajaid:

Euroopa Liidu ühendatud kriisivaatluskeskuses (SITCEN) asukohaga Brüsselis. Kriisivaatluskeskus jälgib ja hindab rahvusvahelisi sündmusi 24 tundi ööpäevas, pöörates erilist tähelepanu tundlikele aladele, terrorismile ja massihävitusrelvade leviku tõkestamisele, ning on toeks peasekretärile/ELi kõrgele esindajale, eriesindajatele ja teistele ELi kõrgetele ametnikele, samuti ELi sõjalistele ja tsiviilkriisiohjamise operatsioonidele.

Lisateavet on võimalik saada personalivaliku ja töölevõtu osakonnast e-posti aadressil:

service.recrutement@consilium.eu.int

või veebilehelt:

http://ue.eu.int/concours.

Tähtaeg: 10.11.2005, postitamise kuupäeva tõendab postitempel.

----
Checklist for Maintaining 

a Safe Water Supply 

Having good quality water at your site is a crucial part of biosecurity. Your poultry need clean, 

safe water to drink, and you need it to cool your birds and clean your facilities and equipment 

without contaminating them. Water can carry disease agents, so the choices you make in how 

you source or treat your water are vital to protect your birds’ health. 

Check the list on the back for tips 

to help keep your flocks healthy. √

If you see signs of illness, take action right away! Phone Number

Veterinarian 

Cooperative Extension Office 

State Veterinarian/Animal or Poultry Diagnostic Lab 

USDA 866.536.7593

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Report Sick Birds
Checklist: Maintaining 

a Safe Water Supply 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Program Aid No. 2235-13 | Issued February 2020

This checklist is a general guide to practicing good biosecurity, but if you have a site-specific 

biosecurity plan, please follow it. Commercial growers should be sure their site-specific plans 

follow the National Poultry Improvement Plan biosecurity principles.

√

Use water from a contained water supply

(well or municipal system) for drinking, evaporative 

cooling, and cleaning whenever possible. This is 

the most biosecure water source for poultry.

If you must use surface water, sanitize it first! 

Ponds, streams, and other surface water can carry 

disease-causing germs. Sanitizing the water will kill 

these germs. 

Test any water used within your poultry 

buildings for bacteria. Regular testing will 

give you a general idea of how clean your water 

system is. If bacteria numbers are too high (above 

maximum acceptable levels), you’ll know you need 

to sanitize the water. 

For more information about how to keep your flocks healthy, follow Defend the Flock on 

Facebook and Twitter and visit www.aphis.usda.gov/animalhealth/defendtheflock.

Consult with experts when choosing water 

treatment methods. The right methods vary based on 

many factors. For example, if your poultry’s water supply 

contains certain vaccines, you need to use a water 

treatment that won’t inactivate the vaccine. Experts can 

help you pick water treatments that are effective and 

won’t harm your flock or water system.

Write it down. Include in your biosecurity plan the steps 

taken to provide uncontaminated water to your birds. 

This may include written water sanitation procedures, 

water treatment log sheets, and guidance for caretakers.

If water treatment is not possible, include

alternatives in your biosecurity plan. Explain how

you considered the risks of an untreated system and 

the steps you’re taking to mitigate those risks.
#### Jacob Rubin et al., Copartners Doing Business as Max Rubin & Sons, v. 8008 Realty Corp. et al.

Motion for resettlement of order entered March 23, 1948, denie'd, with $10 costs. Present — Peck, P. J., Grlennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 881.]
### §677f. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Aug. 27, 1954, ch. 1009, §7, 68 Stat. 869, which related to the employment of legal counsel for mixed-blood members, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
----

----

I Tagħrif

Kummissjoni

----

KOMUNIKAZZJONI TAL-KUMMISSJONI FIL-QAFAS TA’ L-IMPLIMENTAZZJONI TAD-DIRETTIVA 89/336/KEE TAL-KUNSILL TAT-3 TA’ MEJJU 1989 DWAR L-APPROSSIMAZZJONI TAL-LIĠIJIET TA’ L-ISTATI MEMBRI LI GĦANDHOM X’JAQSMU MAL-KOMPATIBBILTÀ ELETTROMANJETIKA (89/336/KEE)

2005/C 246/01

(Test b'rilevanza għall-EEA)

(Pubblikazzjoni ta' titoli u referenzi ta' standards armonizzati taħt id-direttiva)

Rimarka ġenerali: meta jkun hemm żbarra (/) fir-raba' kolonna (referenza ta' l-istandard sostitwit) din tfisser li l-istandard li għalih saret referenza ma jistax jintuża bla emenda jew parti partikolari għall-finijiet ta' EMC.

Eżempju: Għal EN 61037: 1992 japplika dan li ġej :

Din il-lista tieħu post il-listi ta' qabel kollha ppubblikati fil-Gazzetta Uffiċjali ta' l-Unjoni Ewropea.

----

(1)  CEN: rue de Stassart/De Stassartstraat 36, B - 1050 Brussels, tel: (32-2) 550 08 11, fax: (32-2) 550 08 19 (http://www.cenorm.be)

Cenelec: rue de Stassart/De Stassartstraat 35, B - 1050 Brussels, tel: (32-2) 519 68 71, fax: (32-2) 519 69 19 (http://www.Cenelec.org)

ETSI: 650, route des Lucioles, F-06921 Sophia Antipolis, tel: (33) 492 94 42 12, fax: (33) 493 65 47 16 (http://www.etsi.org)

----

----

KOMUNIKAZZJONI TAL-KUMMISSJONI FIL-QAFAS TA' L-IMPLIMENTAZZJONI TAD-DIRETTIVA 1999/5/KE TAL-PARLAMENT EWROPEW U TAL-KUNSILL

(2005/C 246/02)

(Test b'rilevanza għall-EEA)

(Pubblikazzjoni ta' titoli u referenzi ta' standards armonizzati taħt id-direttiva)

Eżempju: Għal EN 60215: 1989, japplika dan li ġej :

Nota:

----

(1)  CEN: rue de Stassart/De Stassartstraat 36, B - 1050 Brussels, tel: (32-2) 550 08 11, fax: (32-2) 550 08 19 (http://www.cenorm.be)

CENELEC: rue de Stassart/De Stassartstraat 35, B - 1050 Brussels, tel: (32-2) 519 68 71, fax: (32-2) 519 69 19 (http://www.cenelec.org)

ETSI: 650, route des Lucioles, F-06921 Sophia Antipolis, tel: (33) 492 94 42 12, fax: (33) 493 65 47 16 (http://www.etsi.org)

----
### §5065. Territorial extent of law

The provisions of this part imposing taxes on distilled spirits, wines, and beer shall be held to extend to such articles produced anywhere within the exterior boundaries of the United States, whether the same be within an internal revenue district or not.

(Added Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1337.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5065, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 615, made a cross reference to general administrative provisions applicable to assessment, collection, refund, etc., of taxes, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.

Provisions similar to those comprising this section were contained in former section 5064, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 615, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to the footer section




National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


At-Risk Species





Contact Us
  About
 The At-Risk Species Program includes staff from the park, regional, and national levels of the National Park Service (NPS). The Program, together with partners, seeks to conserve, protect, and restore at-risk species and their habitat in the NPS. We lead, coordinate, and collaborate on actions to sustain biodiversity and ecological systems that align with the NPS mission. Through those efforts, the Program improves at-risk species conservation, preserves park resources, and enhances the experience of park visitors.
 Defining At-Risk Species
At-risk species include those species listed under the Endangered Species Act; state-, locally-, and tribal-listed species; and other native species that are of special management concern (e.g., rare, declining, sensitive, or unique species).
 A baby loggerhead turtle swims in shallow waterLearn
Laws & Policies
Learn more about the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and more.
A woman points to a green plant while a boy looks at what she's pointing atHelp
What You Can Do
Did you know you can help at-risk species at home and when you visit parks? Learn what you can do.
 Last updated: August 30, 2023
 Tools Site Index


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 159 (Friday, October 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 60455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22614]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


RTCA Government/Industry Air Traffic Management Advisory 
Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA/Industry Air Traffic Management Advisory 
Committee.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of the RTCA Government/Industry Air Traffic Management Advisory 
Committee.

DATES: The meeting will be held October 7, 2004, 12-5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Round Conference Room (10th 
Floor) Washington, DC, 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, 
NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; telephone (202) 833-9339; fax 
(202) 833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice 
is hereby given for the Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee 
meeting.

    Note: Non-Government attendees to the meeting must go through 
security and be escorted to and from the conference room.


    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 28, 2004.
Robert Zoldos,
FAA System Engineer, RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 04-22614 Filed 10-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
### §5412. Removal of beer in containers or by pipeline

Beer may be removed from the brewery for consumption or sale only in hogsheads, packages, and similar containers, marked, branded, or labeled in such manner as the Secretary may by regulation require, except that beer may be removed from the brewery pursuant to section 5414 or by pipeline to contiguous distilled spirits plants under section 5222.

(Added Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1389; amended Pub. L. 91–673, §3(d), Jan. 12, 1971, 84 Stat. 2057; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834; Pub. L. 115–97, title I, §13803(b), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2173.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5412, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 675, consisted of provisions similar to those comprising this section, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.

#### Amendments

2017—Pub. L. 115–97 inserted "pursuant to section 5414 or" before "by pipeline".

1976—Pub. L. 94–455 struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary".

1971—Pub. L. 91–673 substituted "packages," for "barrels, kegs, bottles,".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2017 Amendment

Pub. L. 115–97, title I, §13803(c), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2173, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [amending this section and section 5414 of this title] shall apply to any calendar quarters beginning after December 31, 2017."

#### Effective Date of 1971 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 91–673 effective on first day of first calendar month which begins more than 90 days after Jan. 12, 1971, see section 5 of Pub. L. 91–673, set out as a note under section 5056 of this title.
Exhibit 32(i)

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Regarding Periodic Report Containing Financial Statements

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned hereby certifies
that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-K filed by Crescent Financial Corporation (the Issuer) for the year ended December 31, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.



|                     |  |     |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: March 28, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ Michael G. Carlton               
|                     |  |     |  | Michael G. Carlton                   
|                     |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
#### Ethel McSherry, as Administratrix of the Estate of Thomas McSherry, Deceased, Respondent, v. Alfred B. Wilson et al., Individually and as Copartners under the Name of A. Wilson *&*Company, Appellants.

*872No opinion. Present — Close, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with Quarterly Report of Neoware Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
Kantrowitz, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
         the Company.

/S/ Michael Kantrowitz
----------------------
Michael Kantrowitz
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
February 14, 2003






























                                       52
#### Irving R. Carknard, as Administrator of the Estate of Harold J. Carknard, Deceased, Respondent, v. Charles King, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Appeal by the defendant-appellant from an order setting aside a verdict of $1,650 in a death action as inadequate. Order unanimously affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements. Present — Hill, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Poster and Deyo, JJ.
### §5343. Use of Government property by States and Territories

The Secretary of the Interior, in making any contract authorized by sections 5342 to 5348 of this title, may permit such contracting party to utilize, for the purposes of said sections, existing school buildings, hospitals, and other facilities, and all equipment therein or appertaining thereto, including livestock and other personal property owned by the Government, under such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon for their use and maintenance.

(Apr. 16, 1934, ch. 147, §2, 48 Stat. 596; June 4, 1936, ch. 490, §2, 49 Stat. 1459.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 453 of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Amendments

1936—Act June 4, 1936, substituted ", may permit such contracting party" for "with any State or Territory, may permit such State or Territory".
No. 12,443.

#### William E. Russell Coal Company *v.*Vesta Mines, Inc.

(1 P. [2d] 104)

Decided June 15, 1931.

*220Messrs. Ponseoed, Pender & Larwill, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. C. Cooper Young, for defendant in error.

*In Department.*

Mr. Justice Moore

delivered the opinion of the court.

The William E. Russell Coal Company sued the Vesta Mines, Incorporated, in the Denver district court, to recover damages for breach of warranty arising out of the sale of a second hand box car coal loading* machine purchased by plaintiff from defendant. Plaintiff here seeks to review a judgment of nonsuit, contending that the admission of a certain exhibit, erroneously excluded, would have proven its case.

Prior to the sale and delivery of the machine and on the 26th day of July, 1926, plaintiff was given a 15-day option to purchase the machinery here involved. Thereafter and on the 3rd day of August, and within said 15-day period, the plaintiff mailed to defendant the following letter:

“Denver, Colorado,

“August 3rd, 1926.

“Vesta Mines, Inc.,

*11*Cooper Building,

“Denver, Colorado.

“Attention: Mr. E. F. McG-owan.

“Grentlemen:

“This is to advise that we hereby exercise the right of option granted by you July 6,1926, and will purchase one conveyor belt type Ottumwa Box Car Loader, with one thirty horse power Westinghouse motor, all complete, *221and guaranteed by you to be in first class running* order, also box of parts.

“Please ship immediately aud bill to The William E. Russell Coal Company, Russell Mine, Frederick, Weld County, Colorado, on the Union Pacific Railroad.

“Tours truly,

‘ ‘ The William E. Russell Coal Co.

By W. E. Russell, President.”

“WER :ER”

The court held this exhibit was inadmissible because it was a self-serving- declaration.

 The option contained no form of guarantee. Thereunder within the 15-day period, plaintiff could accept or reject the offer or submit a counter proposition. Plaintiff chose the latter, which amounted to a conditional acceptance. After defendant had received said letter, it delivered to plaintiff the machinery here involved. Its act of delivery constituted an acceptance of plaintiff’s counter proposition. *Davis v. Thomas,*28 Colo. 303, 64 Pac. 187; *Michigan Co. v. Pueblo Co.,*51 Colo. 160, 116 Pac. 340; *Baum v. Concord Land & Improvement Co.,*24 Colo. App. 397, 133 Pac. 760; Page on Contracts (2d Ed.) vol. 1, p. 251, §169.

The rule of evidence urged by defendant, resulting* in the rejection of plaintiff’s letter, was not applicable. Under the circumstances, the letter was admissible to show that the original offer was not accepted unqualifiedly, but that its acceptance was conditioned upon defendant’s guaranteeing the machinery would be in first class running order.

Judgment reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings in harmony herewith.

Me. Chief Justice Adams, Me. Justice Butlee and Me. Justice Bueke concur.
EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT

         We hereby  consent to the use in the annual  report on Form  10-KSB for
Atlantic Wine Agencies,  Inc. f/k/a New England Acquisitions,  Inc. ("Company"),
dated on or about June 24, 2004,  relating to the  financial  statements  of the
Company for the period  ending  March 31, 2004 and to the  reference to our Firm
under the Item  entitled  "Changes  In and  Disagreements  with  Accountants  on
Accounting and Financial Disclosure" in the report.


                                                     /s/ Meyler & Company, LLC
                                                     ---------------------
                                                     MEYLER & COMPANY, LLC

Middletown, New Jersey
June 24, 2004
### §815. Repealed. June 25, 1948, ch. 645, §21, 62 Stat. 862, eff. Sept. 1, 1948

Section, act June 10, 1933, ch. 57, 48 Stat. 122, related to protection of diplomatic codes. See section 952 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure.
#### Southern Railway Company *v.*Hixon, and *vice versa.*

Atkinson, J.

l. A motion for new trial was presented to the judge in due time during the term at which the trial was had, and an order was passed declaring that: “The foregoing motion for a new trial is read and approved. Let it be filed, and let respondent show cause before me at............, on the..........day of........... 1908, why the verdict and judgment should not be set aside and a new .trial granted as prayed. As there is not sufficient time during the present term to file a brief of the evidence introduced on the trial of the case, it is further ordered that the movant have until the hearing of this motion, whenever had, to present and have approved the brief of the evidence, and that he have five days thereafter in which to file the same in the office of the clerk of the superior court. If for any reason this motion should not be heard at the time and place named, it is ordered that it be heard at such time and place as may be convenient to court and counsel, either party having the right to call up the same for a hearing upon 10 days’ notice to the opposite party.” *Held,*that the failure to specify in the order with greater particularity the time and place at which the motion for new trial should be heard was irregular, but not sufficient to defeat the jurisdiction of the court at the next term to approve the brief of evidence and render judgment on the merits of the motion for new trial. In this connection see *Clements*v. *Ledden,*132 *Ga.*430 (64 S. E. 460); *Eady*v. *Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.,*129 *Ga.*363 (58 S. E. 895). There was no error in refusing to dismiss the motion.

2. Where an amendment to a motion for new trial excepted to certain parts of the judge’s charge to the jury, quoted from the approved charge, thus making the exceptions separate grounds of the motion for new trial, such amended grounds were sufficiently approved by the *151order which recited: “The foregoing amendment is examined, and the recitals of fact therein are true. The same is allowed and ordered filed as an addition to the original motion for new trial in this ease.” *Stephens*v. *State,*118 *Ga.*762 (45 S. E. 619) ; *Tifton, Thomasville & Gulf Ry. Co.*v. *Chastain,*122 *Ga.*250 (50 S. E. 105).

September 23, 1910.

Action for damages. Before Judge Fite. Whitfield superior court. April 8, 1909.

*Maddox, McOamy & Shumate,*for the railroad company. .

IF. *E. Mann*and IF. *O. Martin,*contra.

3. The evidence was not of such character as to demand a finding that the plaintiff was not entitled' to recover in any amount whatever.

4. While the portions of the charge complained of were not in all respects accurate, they did not furnish grounds for a new trial in behalf of the plaintiff in error.

5. Under the evidence on the subject of the value of the life of the deceased child, the verdict was excessive in amount.

*Judgment reversed on the main bill of exceptions, and affirmed on the cross-bill.*

*All the Justices concur.*
Exhibit 99.2


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Internet Commerce Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Walter
M. Psztur, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

      (1)   The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of section
            13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.




/s/ Walter M. Psztur
----------------------------
Walter M. Psztur
Chief Financial Officer
June 18, 2003