alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Conservation Practice Effects**

**Commonly Associated Practices:**Critical Area Planting, Irrigation System-Microirrigation, Irrigation System, Sprinkler, Irrigation System-Surface & Subsurface, Irrigation System-Tailwater Recovery, Irrigation Water Management, Nutrient Management, Pumping Plant.

**Note:**This worksheet contains general talking points for the conservation planner to discuss with the land user.  It is the first step towards an economic or financial analysis.  The second step would include identifying a specific site for analysis at the farm or field level, editing the template for local conditions, adding units and quantities of farm inputs and outputs.  The third step in the economic analysis is to place a dollar value on as many variables as possible, put all units in the same time frame, using amortization ($/Acres/Year) or net present value ($/Acre), so benefits and costs can be compared.  The fourth and final step would be to combine several conservation practices into a conservation system, which is how most conservation practices are applied at the field level. Data for the worksheet comes from the land user, conservation planner, technical specialist and local agricultural supply vendors and contractors.  See Economics Technical Note: TN 200-ECN-1, Basic Economic Analysis Using T-Charts (August 2013) for more information.
Exhibit 32.1
                                  ------------


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         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 ATSI Communications, Inc. on
         Form 10-K for the period ending July 31, 2003, as filed with the
         Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur L.
         Smith, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
         U.S.C, ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
         Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
         belief:

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

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

Date: November 13, 2003



By /s/ Arthur L. Smith
----------------------
Arthur L. Smith, Chief Executive Officer
Principal Executive Officer
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

22 June 2015 

58006(19 Sep 65)PAbM 

Policy: Space :aw 

SS 

G 

SP' 

AY 

ARA 

F,UR 

. r 

o: 

• w 

RDC JAG71 (24 ) 

j CAL. L. `...) 3 :3 7 

• 

ACT:ON, USUN NEW YORK ' 

SUDJECT.; OUTER SPACE—ASSISTANCE E RE'iURM 

Lc.,;a1 Subcemite sessio beginning Sept 2O US DEL 911ould -

took SOV response to April 1 Assistxhoo wad Return (ACR) iilitiaTivo on basis of which Morozov had at that time commented that 

WI; prospects.. .very bright UNE .,ICY (1.i3014"J 3042). We raoogai:za 

p0Gui 1)i 1 ity that SOVs Allay not now bo willing reach mutually 

boof.i.eiai resolution of Zcw 

A5 to substanec AZR, US DU, should await indicatiow wilim.) 

SOVJ Co re,I.ch agrc.ement Ar,2 making public April 1 

iiL+tiativo. DEL may wish make statement along lines that US 

INOICATEL 0 coma 

Cf1AH6i: TO 

. . 

v:Lc ws A',;:R 'adequately known th -

oLher5 before making fartho'o 

Yilay cours.r1, 

• ; • 

wu would prefer await .'proposals 

cc4',ilient. If asked privately,. 

I ur to , USSR and Aaek cit mspo1,40 

DEL c:i3 t,.1 on c% i;,It posIzIons anc. 0,. 

2S2, DEPTvr.; CA.,.O.J.42. and instrUetionn 

. UyyV X14 insti.ucti611 

.F.:UR 2 :4 Li:.c.t / • 

— 11:o, Meeicer CdraZt). ".0 \! M Norbuny 

(71 - „ Gal-noff• 

. •• I I..kat-Pi-.1r to rti,,ro • and 

,• • .- by, 

" • 

k.) ,t2s Joseph.J. SiO Q0 

SC-440 577n517 GER . Mr. Ford. 

SaYicler FE - Misc. McNutt 

MASA — Pro' Arldc,31:.... RMRODUCI1ON FROM THIS COPY IS 

,..• . 't vos rer ly gh.),—, A 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

" 22 June 2015 

f Icleg ram to USUN NET

corIDNTIAL 

301,1po:oil4 4= .-"4 ,fi0JP4t-to4t14.wa ewia 0114410,1 

. • 

. • to virJws other members, DEL should indicate that Subcomite might best 

conccintrate on Liability (position pap or being pouched), and should. 

• 

importance of continuing attention this subject which of 1 

:1.1.Ccevt to all UN Members° Accordingly would be desirable for 

Sul:.6mvAittco•to meet as such, rather • than constituting two separate• 

work5_ng groups on AR andLiability as in past,; FYI May be that othe) 

mcJes SubcoMmittec will want to. rinif; session to an early conclus.io f 

in order not e -acerbate existing differences as to ACR and Liability 

.i.exso Me would be prepared go along if this the case° END FYI. 

If SOVs repeat line that general principles should be codified, 

hEL may wish point out that Subcommittee currently engaged in oodii: 

general principles of Ai' and LiabililT and that we in no way 

cLudo ft,othor, effo'r,i:s at co641.i.czktion at appropriate time, END 

RUSK 

,
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy ActRecent FOIA Requests2023

# Recent FOIA Requests - July 2023

This page presents a chronological listing of the subject and reference number of each Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) Request submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) during July 2023. For additional detail, see the Index of Closed FOIA/PA Requests by Subject.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 8, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - January
          - February
          - March
          - April
          - May
          - June
          - July
          - August
          - September
          - October
          - November
          - December

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, August 8, 2023
# C_2005006EN.01002202.xml

| 8.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/22

---

ORDER OF THE COURT

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 1 October 2004

in Case C-480/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'arbitrage): Hugo Clemens, b.v.b.a. Valkaniersgilde against the Walloon region, Council of Ministers (1)

1

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Directive 79/409/EEC - Conservation of wild birds - Species born and reared in captivity)

(2005/C 6/43)

Languages of the case: French and Dutch

In Case C-480/03: Hugo Clemens, b.v.b.a. Valkaniersgilde v Walloon region, Council of Ministers – reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC by the Cour d'arbitrage (Belgium), by judgment of 29 October 2003, received at the Court on 18 November 2003 – the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, R. Silva de Lapuerta (Rapporteur) and J. Makarczyk, Judges; Advocate General: J. Kokott, Registrar: R. Grass, has given an order on 1 October 2004 in which it:

Declares that Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April on the conservation of wild birds is to be interpreted as not being applicable to species born and reared in captivity and, accordingly, Member States remain competent, as Community law now stands, to regulate the matter, subject to Articles 28 to 30 EC.

---

(1)  OJ C 35 of 7.2.2004.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 02-4314

MICHAEL FREEMAN,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

Benson E. Legg, District Judge.

(CR-00-391-ALL)

Submitted: October 10, 2002

Decided: October 18, 2002

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Harry D. McKnett, Columbia, Maryland, for Appellant. Thomas M.

DiBiagio, United States Attorney, James G. Pyne, Assistant United

States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Michael Freeman appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm

by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2000). In his

brief, he claims that no rational finder of fact could have found him

guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The parties stipulated that Freeman

was a convicted felon, and that the relevant weapon met the definition

of an operable firearm having traveled in interstate commerce.

Accordingly, the only issue for the jury was whether Freeman actually possessed the firearm. 

Freeman claims that inconsistencies between the testimony of Government witnesses precluded any rational juror from concluding that

he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This claim is essentially one

of witness credibility. The credibility of witnesses is best left to the

finder of fact, who has the best opportunity to observe them. United

States v. Beidler, 110 F.3d 1064, 1070 (4th Cir. 1997). Likewise, resolution of conflicts in the testimony is the province of the jury, not

the reviewing court. See United States v. Murphy, 35 F.3d 143, 148

(4th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, this claim is not cognizable. 

We affirm Freeman’s conviction and sentence. 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. 

AFFIRMED

2 UNITED STATES v. FREEMAN
# C_2004300EN.01000702.xml

| 4.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/7

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(sitting as a full Court)

of 19 October 2004

in Case C-200/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Immigration Appellate Authority): Kunqian Catherine Zhu, Man Lavette Chen v Secretary of State for the Home Department (1)

1

(Right of residence - Child with the nationality of one Member State but residing in another Member State - Parents nationals of a non-member country - Mother's right to reside in the other Member State)

(2004/C 300/13)

Language of the case: English

In Case C-200/02: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Immigration Appellate Authority (United Kingdom), made by decision of 27 May 2002, received at the Court on 30 May 2002, in the proceedings between Kunqian Catherine Zhu, Man Lavette Chen and Secretary of State for the Home Department — the Court (sitting as a full Court), composed of: V. Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas, R. Silva de Lapuerta and K. Lenaerts, Presidents of Chambers, C. Gulmann, R. Schintgen, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 19 October 2004, in which it has ruled:

In circumstances like those of the main proceedings, Article 18 EC and Council Directive 90/364/EEC of 28 June 1990 on the right of residence confer on a young minor who is a national of a Member State, is covered by appropriate sickness insurance and is in the care of a parent who is a third-country national having sufficient resources for that minor not to become a burden on the public finances of the host Member State, a right to reside for an indefinite period in that State. In such circumstances, those same provisions allow a parent who is that minor's primary carer to reside with the child in the host Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 180 du 27.7.2002.

1

---
#### Clark, Respondent, vs. Kellett, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Weed & Hollister*of Oshkosh.

For the respondent: *Bouck, Hilton, Kluwin & Dempsey*of Oshkosh.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                        11220283
<SECURITIES>                                  68802062
<RECEIVABLES>                                162267248
<ALLOWANCES>                                   2076437
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3617799
<PP&E>                                         5780923
<DEPRECIATION>                                  119862
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               279825336
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        227765518
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       3240000
<OTHER-SE>                                    47344899
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 279825336
<SALES>                                        3263760
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4645448
<CGS>                                          1433084
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3212364
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1441663
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               3170284
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1972016
<INCOME-TAX>                                    675889
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1296127
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .40


</TABLE>
**Exhibit
      23.1**








*Letterhead*








**CONSENT
      OF BEARD MILLER COMPANY LLP**





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-3 (No. 333-114355) and Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-116359, 333-116363 and 333-116380)
      of CN Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated January 20, 2006 relating to the
      consolidated financial statements of CN Bancorp, Inc., which appears in the
      2005
      Annual Report, which is incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on
      Form
      10-KSB.








/s/
      Beard
      Miller Company LLP





Baltimore,
      Maryland


February
      24,  2006
August 2023

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

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

Conservation Practice Overview

Lined Waterway or Outlet (Code 468) 

A lined waterway or outlet is a structure having an erosion

resistant lining of concrete, stone, or other permanent

material. 

Practice Information 

The purpose of the practice is to provide protection to the

structure when grass cover would not be sufficient or

sustainable. Properly designed linings also control

seepage, piping, and sloughing or slides. 

This practice applies to waterways or outlets that need a lining of nonreinforced, cast-in-place

concrete, rock riprap, or similar permanent linings. This practice often becomes necessary when the

location is such that people or animals make vegetative protection impractical, or when high value

property or adjacent facilities warrant the extra cost of this relatively expensive method of protecting a

waterway that is ordinarily protected with grass. 

The lining material will cover the entire wetted perimeter of the structure. Extra freeboard will be

designed into the lining if a protective grass cover cannot be established and maintained immediately

above the design high water line. 

Additional information including design criteria and specifications are available in the local NRCS Field

Office Technical Guide. 

Common Associated Practices 

NRCS Conservation Practice Standard (CPS) Lined Waterway orConveyance Channel(Code 468) is

commonly applied with other conservation practices, such as NRCS CPSs Terrace (Code 600),

Diversion (Code 362), Critical Area Planting (Code 342), and other erosion control practices. 

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

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


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, (the "Report"), each of
the undersigned officers of Impax Laboratories, Inc. does hereby certify that:

1.       The Report fully complies with the requirements of the Section 13(a) or
         15(d), as applicable, 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/ Barry R. Edwards     Chief Executive Officer     Date:  November 15, 2004
------------------------
     Barry R. Edwards



 /s/ Cornel C. Spiegler   Chief Financial Officer     Date:   November 15, 2004
------------------------
     Cornel C. Spiegler



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the
U.S. Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.
# C_2005082EN.01002602.xml

| 2.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/26

---

Action brought on 21 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-92/05)

(2005/C 82/53)

Language of the case: French

An action against the French Republic was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 21 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by Bruno Stromsky and Bernhard Schima, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2003/32/EC of 23 April 2003 introducing detailed specifications as regards the requirements laid down in Council Directive 93/42/EEC with respect to medical devices manufactured utilising tissues of animal origin, (1) the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2003/32/EC of 23 April 2003 introducing detailed specifications as regards the requirements laid down in Council Directive 93/42/EEC with respect to medical devices manufactured utilising tissues of animal origin, (1) the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| 2. | in the alternative, declare that by failing to notify the Commission of those provisions, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2003/32/EC; |
| --- | --- |

2.

in the alternative, declare that by failing to notify the Commission of those provisions, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2003/32/EC;

| 3. | order the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of the directive into national law expired on 1 January 2004.

---

(1)  OJ No L 105, 26.04.2003, p. 18.

1

---
# C_2005045EN.01000801.xml

| 19.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/8

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 15 December 2004

in Case C-272/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof): Hauptzollamt Neubrandenburg v Jens Christian Siig (1)

1

(Community Customs Code - Incurrence of a customs debt - Temporary admission procedure - Change of the tractor of a semi-trailer)

(2005/C 45/15)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-272/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany), made by decision of 13 May 2003, received at the Court on 24 June 2003, in the proceedings between Hauptzollamt Neubrandenburg and Jens Christian Siig, trading as ‘Internationale Transport’ Export-Import – the Court: (Fifth Chamber) composed of R. Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann and R. Schintgen, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 15 December 2004, in which it rules:

Articles 718(3)(d) and 670(p) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that those provisions prohibit the use of a road tractor registered outside the customs territory of the Community to transport a semi-trailer from a place within the customs territory of the Community, where the semi-trailer is loaded with goods, to another place within the customs territory of the Community, where the semi-trailer is merely parked with a view to being transported subsequently by another road tractor to the consignee of the goods, who is established outside the customs territory of the Community.

---

(1)  OJ C 213 of 06.09.2003

1

---
# C_2004228EN.01004407.xml

| 11.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/44

---

Removal from the Register of Case T-380/03 (1)

1

(2004/C 228/107)

(Language of the case: German)

(Language of the case: German)

By order of 6 July 2004, the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-380/03, Korn-og Foderstof Kompagniet v Commission of the European Communities.

---

(1)  OJ C 21 of 24.1.2004.

1

---