alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Equity in Conservation Outreach Cooperative Agreements - Fiscal Year 2023

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  About NRCS 
-  Partner With Us 
-  Outreach and Partnerships 
-  Equity in Conservation Outreach Cooperative Agreements - Fiscal Year 2023 

USDA is investing up to $70 million in cooperative agreements to support outreach to underserved producers and communities about opportunities with NRCS for natural resource conservation, climate-smart agriculture and forestry.

## Overview

USDA is investing up to $70 million in cooperative agreements to support outreach to  underserved producers and communities about opportunities with NRCS for natural resource conservation, climate-smart agriculture and forestry. The Fiscal Year 2023 Equity in Conservation Outreach Cooperative Agreements will expand outreach for the delivery of conservation assistance to underserved producers and communities and provide opportunities for students to pursue careers in agriculture, natural resources, and related sciences. Agreements are for two- and three-year projects that extend outreach to farmers who are beginning, limited resource, socially disadvantaged, and veterans.  

The purpose of 2023 Equity in Conservation Outreach Cooperative Agreements is to leverage NRCS and partner resources to develop locally led conservation projects that help overcome barriers and offer opportunities for underserved producers and communities to learn about and access NRCS programs, services, and careers. 

Through a Notice of Funding Opportunity, eligible applicants were invited to propose projects that engage underserved farmers and ranchers and their communities, and offer opportunities for these producers and communities through outreach activities.

### Questions?

Email us at SM.FPAC.NRCS.DCWA2.MSOutreachandPartnership@usda.gov

##   Project List

### Equity in Conservation Outreach Projects 2023

USDA is investing up to $70 million in cooperative agreements to support outreach to underserved producers and communities about opportunities with NRCS for natural resource conservation, climate-smart agriculture and forestry.

## Orientation Webinar for Funding Recipients

##   Additional Information

### Equity in Conservation Outreach Cooperative Agreements

The Equity in Conservation Outreach Cooperative Agreements fund projects to expand the delivery of conservation assistance to producers who are new to farming, are low-income, identify as one or more marginalized race or ethnicity, and/or are military veterans.
Learn More

### Outreach and Partnerships

Outreach is an integral part of NRCS program and service delivery. Effective outreach helps to ensure that information services and programs reaches all existing and potential customers in a timely and fair manner. 
Learn More

##   Related News & Events

NewsUSDA Seeking Applications to Expand Conservation Assistance to Underserved Producers February 27, 2023

Press ReleaseUSDA Invests $70 Million to Expand Conservation Assistance to Underserved Producers    September 20, 2023

            -  View More News 
            -  View More Events
EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Schick Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald Rosner, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: 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 results of operations of the Company. /s/ Ronald Rosner  ------------------------------------------------ Ronald Rosner Director of Finance and Administration (Principal Financial Officer) May 31, 2006
National Air Carrier Association 1000 Wilson Blvd, Suite 1700 Arlington, VA 22209 Ph: (703) 358

- 8061 Fax: (703) 358

- 8070 www.naca.cc
July 8, 2011 Mr. James K. Sheppard Mr. Leo D. Hollis Air Transportation D ivision (AFS

– 200), Flight Standards Service Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S W. Wa shington, DC 20591 james.k.sheppard@faa.gov Leo.d.Hollis@faa.g ov Re: NACA Questions On Docket No. FAA

– 2008

– 0677 Dear Gentlemen: In order that we might formulate our comments to the subject document more accurately, NACA requests answers to the following questions to clarify the FAA’s intent of language at the f ollowing sections: 1. Proposed section 121.1257(b)(1) states: “(b) Initial cadre check airmen: Qualification. To be an initial cadre check airman for a part 119 certificate holder and to continue to serve in that capacity for the authorized period, a pers on must meet the following requirements: (1) Be emplo yed by the part 119 certificate holder.” Question : Does “employed by” in section (1) mean employee of the part 119 certificate holder? Note : NACA members routinely “employ” (contract with) Part 142 cer tificate holders to provide training and qualification to initial cadre crewmembers. Wh ile the check airmen are employed by the Part 119 certificate holder, they are not employees of the part 119 certificate holder. 2. Proposed section 121.1417(2) states: “(2) The person has been supervised for the minimum hours prescribed in the Aircraft Dispatcher QPS for each type of operation (domestic or flag) in which the person serves.”Question : Is the intended meaning of t he proposed language for the parenthetical entry

“(domestic or flag)” the same as the definitions of “domestic operation” and “flag operation” at 14 CFR 119.3? Note : this question is also relevant to the proposed training and qualification language in App endix T that requires training and qualification for each “Flag Area of Operation.” Supplemental carriers (also defined at 119.3) have operating specifications permitting certificate holders to operate to most of those areas of operations listed as Flag A reas of Operation in the proposal. However, operations to many areas are very infrequent. Thus, it is important for NACA to have the terms defined in order to adequately comment on the proposed rule. Thank you for your attention to these questions. Sin cerely,

A. Oakley Brooks President
Consent of Independent Accountants:

The Board of Directors and Stockholders
 Optika Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-56501 and 333-42250) on Form S-8 of Optika Inc. of our report dated January
23, 2003, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Optika Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss)
and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
2002, which report appears in the December 31, 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K,
of Optika Inc.

                                                      KPMG LLP

Denver, Colorado
March 20, 2003
# C_2005082EN.01000603.xml

| 2.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/6

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Arbeidshof te Brussel of 23 December 2004 in the case of Rijksdienst voor Sociale Zekerheid. v N.V. Herbosch-Kiere

(Case C-2/05)

(2005/C 82/14)

Language of the case: Dutch

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by judgment of 23 December 2004 of the Arbeidshof te Brussel (Brussels Higher Labour Court), which was received at the Court Registry on 5 January 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Rijksdienst voor Sociale Zekerheid. v N.V. Herbosch-Kiere on the following questions:

May a court of the host State examine and/or determine whether a direct relationship exists between the undertaking which has posted a worker and the posted worker himself, in view of the fact that the term ‘undertaking to which he is normally attached’ in Article 14(1)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) requires (pursuant to Decision No 128) that there be a direct relationship throughout the period of posting?

1

May a court of a Member State other than that which issued the abovementioned certificate (E 101 certificate) disregard and/or annul that certificate if it appears from the factual circumstances presented for its consideration that the direct relationship between the undertaking which posted the worker and the posted worker himself did not exist during the period of posting?

Is the competent institution of the State of origin bound by a decision of a court of the host State which, in circumstances such as those set out above, disregards and/or annuls the abovementioned certificate (E 101 certificate)?

---

(1)  Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1971(II), p. 416).

1

---
# C_2005082EN.01001402.xml

| 2.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/14

---

Action brought on 3 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-43/05)

(2005/C 82/30)

Language of the case: German

An action against the Federal Republic of Germany was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 3 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by Denis Martin and Horstpeter Kreppel, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that, by failing to adopt, by 2 December 2003, the/all laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2000/78 (1) of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, or to inform the Commission thereof, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 18 of that directive. This does not relate to the provisions of the directive regarding age discrimination; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that, by failing to adopt, by 2 December 2003, the/all laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2000/78 (1) of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, or to inform the Commission thereof, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 18 of that directive. This does not relate to the provisions of the directive regarding age discrimination;

1

| 2. | order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of Directive 2000/78/EC with regard to the provisions of the directive on age discrimination has not yet expired for the Federal Republic of Germany. The period for transposition of the remaining provisions of the directive expired on 2 December 2003.

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16.

1

---
# C_2005051EN.01000101.xml

| 1.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

28 February 2005

(2005/C 51/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3257 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 138,04 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,443 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,68975 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,0576 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5392 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 80,33 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,22 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5838 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 29,743 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 241,84 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6961 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4315 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9066 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 36 433 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,7 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 37,874 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7009 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,673 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,634 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,3396 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8178 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1562 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 333,79 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,6734 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3257

JPY

Japanese yen

138,04

DKK

Danish krone

7,443

GBP

Pound sterling

0,68975

SEK

Swedish krona

9,0576

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5392

ISK

Iceland króna

80,33

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,22

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5838

CZK

Czech koruna

29,743

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

241,84

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6961

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4315

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9066

ROL

Romanian leu

36 433

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,7

SKK

Slovak koruna

37,874

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7009

AUD

Australian dollar

1,673

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,634

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,3396

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8178

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1562

KRW

South Korean won

1 333,79

ZAR

South African rand

7,6734

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Annual Report of Sirona Dental Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jost Fischer,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.     The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.     The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.
| December 8, 2006 | /s/ JOST  FISCHER           |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------|
|                  | Jost Fischer                |
|                  | *Chief Executive Officer*   |
|                  | *(Chief Executive Officer)* |

 

----
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 40898 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Gregory Villanueva,**

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:21

- CR

- 319

- 1

Before **Stewart, Duncan,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Gregory
Villanueva has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in
accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States
v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Villanueva has not filed a response.

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 6, 2022
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-40898 Document: 00516383266 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/06/2022No. 21

- 40898

2 We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for app ellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s
motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See
**5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 21-40898 Document: 00516383266 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/06/2022
# C_2005115EN.01000301.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/3

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 10 March 2005

in Joined Cases C-96/03 and C-97/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven): A. Tempelman v Directeur van de Rijksdienst voor de keuring van Vee en Vlees (1)

1

(Agriculture - Control of foot-and-mouth disease - Protective measures adopted in addition to the measures provided for in Directive 85/511/EEC - Powers of the Member States)

(2005/C 115/05)

Language of the case: Dutch

In Joined Cases C-96/03 and C-97/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands), made by decision of 7 January 2003, received at the Court on 4 March 2003, in the proceedings pending before that court between A. Tempelman (C-96/03), Mr and Mrs T.H.J.M. van Schaijk (C-97/03) and Directeur van de Rijksdienst voor de keuring van Vee en Vlees — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of A. Rosas (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, A. Borg Barthet, J.-P. Puissochet, J. Malenovský and U. Lõhmus, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General, M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 10 March 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

Since foot-and-mouth disease is a disease which constitutes a serious hazard for animals, Article 10(1) of Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market confers on Member States the power to adopt measures to control the disease in addition to those provided for in Council Directive 85/511/EEC of 18 November 1985 introducing Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease, as amended by Council Directive 90/423/EEC of 26 June 1990, in particular the power to order the slaughter of animals belonging to a holding adjacent to or within a specific radius of a holding containing infected animals.

Such measures must be adopted in compliance with the objectives pursued by the Community rules in force and, more particularly, Directive 85/511, as amended by Directive 90/423, the general principles of Community law, such as the principle of proportionality, and the obligation to communicate laid down in Article 10(1) of Directive 90/425.

---

(1)  OJ C 146 of 21.06.2003.

1

---
# C_2005033EN.01001401.xml

| 8.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 33/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33/14

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3663 — RBI/Hawker Pacific/JV)

(2005/C 33/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 14 January 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/ ). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/ ). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3663. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3663. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex).

---
# C_2005106EN.01000301.xml

| 30.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/3

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 24 February 2005

in Case C-300/02: Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(EAGGF - Arable crops - Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 - Article 5(2)(c) - Discrepancies between annual declarations of expenses and eligible expenses - Time-limit of 24 months - Deduction of the amount of aid to farmers)

(2005/C 106/04)

Language of the case: Greek

In Case C-300/02: Action for annulment under Article 230 EC, brought on 21 August 2002 — Hellenic Republic (Agents: I. Chalkias and G. Kanellopoulos) v Commission of the European Communities (Agent: M. Condou-Durande and N. Korogiannakis, avocat) — Action for annulment under Article 230 EC, brought on 21 August 2002 — the Court (First Chamber Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, K. Lenaerts, N. Colneric (Rapporteur), E. Juhász and M. Ilešič, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 24 February 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Decision 2002/524/EC of 26 June 2002, excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the (European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), in so far as it excludes from Community financing expenditure incurred by the Hellenic Republic in the arable crops sector prior to 20 August 1999, to the extent that that expenditure is affect by the correction because of discrepancies between the expenses declared and the areas eligible for aid notified; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Decision 2002/524/EC of 26 June 2002, excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the (European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), in so far as it excludes from Community financing expenditure incurred by the Hellenic Republic in the arable crops sector prior to 20 August 1999, to the extent that that expenditure is affect by the correction because of discrepancies between the expenses declared and the areas eligible for aid notified;

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the application; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the application;

| 3. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 247 of 12.10. 2002.

1

---