alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Studies of geology and hydrology in the Basin and Range province, southwestern United States, for isolation of high-level radioactive waste: Characterization of the Sonoran region, California

By: Marion S. BedingerK. A. SargentWilliam H. Langer

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1370E

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf) 
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Superseded Publications:
                                        Studies of geology and hydrology in the Basin and Range Province, Southwestern United States, for isolation of high-level radioactive waste; characterization of the Sonoran region, California(1984)                                    

- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
### [§2522. Renumbered §4845]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2522, added Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title VIII, §823(a)(1), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1435, §2518; renumbered §2522 and amended Pub. L. 102–484, div. D, title XLII, §4232(a), (b), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2687, related to defense advanced manufacturing technology partnerships, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title X, §1081(f), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 454.

Another prior section 2522, added Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §841(b)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1512, §2508; amended Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title VIII, §821(a), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1597; Pub. L. 102–25, title VII, §701(g)(3), Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 115; renumbered §2522, Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title VIII, §821(b)(1), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1431, required an annual defense critical technologies plan, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 102–484, §4202(a).
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.114 Why is there a separate subpart in these regulations for construction contracts and grants?

There is a separate subpart because the Act differentiates between construction contracts and the model agreement in section 108 of the Act which is required for contracting other activities. Construction contracts are separately defined in the Act and are subject to a separate proposal and review process.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of VOS International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis LaVorgna, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting 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 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\ Dennis LaVorgna
|-------------------

Dennis LaVorgna

Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

|February 17, 2006
|-----------------

---
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.25 What if only a portion of a proposal raises one of the five declination criteria?

The Secretary must approve any severable portion of a proposal that does not support a declination finding described in § 900.20, subject to any alteration in the scope of the proposal that the Secretary and the Indian tribe or tribal organization approve.
#### § 43.11 Informal proceedings.

Educational institutions may attempt to resolve differences with the parent of a student or the eligible student regarding the content of the student's records through informal meetings and discussions with the parent or eligible student.
#### Morningside Fuel Corp. et al., Respondents, v Associated Fuel Oil, Inc., et al., Defendants, and Emil Friedman, Appellant.

[824 NYS2d 86]

*300Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth L. Thompson, J.), entered July 18, 2005, which, in an action arising out of the corporate defendant’s (Associated) alleged breach of contract to purchase plaintiff corporation’s assets, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against him, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Assuming, arguendo, that Associated’s corporate veil could be pierced to reach a nonshareholder *(cf Matter of Morris v New York State Dept. of Taxation & Fin.,*82 NY2d 135, 142 [1993]; *see M&A Oasis v MTM Assoc.,*307 AD2d 872, 874 [2003]), we reject that theory of liability because it is not alleged in the complaint and, moreover, is not supported by evidence tending to show the requisite wrongful conduct *(see Morris,*82 NY2d at 141, 142; *Daily v Catskill Airways,*198 AD2d 643, 644-645 [1993]). Nevertheless, we sustain plaintiffs’ claim against appellant based on the theory that appellant and Associated were joint venturers, on the ground that appellant, whose papers in support of the motion focused on his nonshareholder status and vaguely claimed no “interest” in Associated, failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Andrias, Saxe, Marlow and Nardelli, JJ.
H. Res. 574

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

September 14, 2000.

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall

be in order to consider the conference report to accompany

the bill (H.R. 1654) to authorize appropriations for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for fiscal years

2000, 2001, and 2002, and for other purposes. All points of

order against the conference report and against its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered

as read.

Attest:

Clerk.
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.116 Are negotiated fixed-price contracts treated the same as cost-reimbursable contracts?

Yes, except that in negotiated fixed-price construction contracts, appropriate clauses shall be negotiated to allocate properly the contract risks between the government and the contractor.
Exhibit 32

                    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 Atlantica, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), We, Thomas J. Howells, President and Travis Jenson, Secretary 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 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.


Date: 6/24/2005                          /s/Thomas J. Howells
     ----------                          ---------------------
                                         Thomas J. Howells
                                         President and director


Date: 6/24/2005                          /s/Travis Jenson
     ----------                          ---------------------
                                         Travis Jenson
                                         Secretary and director
§ 158.203 Positions in the DHS-CS. ( a ) *Qualified positions.* The Secretary or designee designates and establishes qualified positions in the excepted service as the Secretary or designee determines necessary for the most effective execution of the DHS cybersecurity mission.
( b ) *Designating qualified positions.* The Secretary or designee designates qualified positions under the deployment program, described in § 158.701, as part of determining when the Department uses CTMS to recruit and retain individuals possessing CTMS qualifications.
( c ) *Establishing qualified positions.* The Secretary or designee establishes a qualified position under the talent acquisition system, described in § 158.501 of this part, by the appointment of an individual to a qualified position previously designated.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 10 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101-3140

OFFICE OF AIR, WASTE AND TOXICS

March 21, 2012

Subject: Q/d Analysis of BART Sources in Id aho, Oregon and Washi ngton to Establish A Threshold for Estimating Visibility Impacts from non-BART Sources

From: Keith Rose, Environmental Scientist

To: File

Using information in EPA’s National Emission Inve ntory Database, specifi cally the total annual emission rates (Q), and distance in kilometers (d) to the nearest Class I area, I compared the visibility impairment in d eciviews (dv) determined by CALPUFF modeling for 19 BART sources in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington to the Q/d values for these sources. The results, shown in the attached spreadsheet, show that al l BART sources with a Q/d values of less than 26.2 dv had a visibility impact of less than 0.5 dv , with an average impact of 0.32 dv. EPA has conservatively interpreted these results as indi cating that non-BART sour ces in the region with Q/d values of less than 20, would likely have vi sibility impacts less than 0.5 dv in the nearest

Class I area.
§ 602.4 Information available without a FOIA Request. ( a ) The NCPC shall maintain an electronic library at *www.ncpc.gov* that makes Reading Room Materials capable of production in electronic form available for public inspection and downloading. The NCPC shall also maintain an actual public reading room containing Reading Room Materials incapable of production in electronic form at NCPC's offices. The actual reading room shall be available for use on Workdays during the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Requests for appointments to review Reading Room Materials in the actual public reading room should be directed to the NCPC's Information Resources Specialist identified on the NCPC Web site (*www.ncpc.gov*).
( b ) The following types of Records shall be available routinely without resort to formal FOIA Request procedures unless such Records fall within one of the exemptions listed at 5 U.S.C. 552(b) of the Act: ( 1 ) Commission agendas;
( 2 ) Plans and supporting documentation submitted by applicants to the Commission to include environmental and historic preservation reports prepared for a plan or project;
( 3 ) Executive Director's Recommendations;
( 4 ) Commission Memoranda of Action;
( 5 ) Transcripts of Commission proceedings;
( 6 ) The Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital: Federal Elements and other plans prepared by the NCPC;
( 7 ) Federal Capital Improvements Plan for the National Capital Region following release of the President's Budget;
( 8 ) Policies adopted by the Commission;
( 9 ) Correspondence between the Commission and the Congress, other federal and local government agencies, and the public; and
( 10 ) Frequently Requested Documents.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

76-36 

March 10, 1976 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4062(a) Liability of Employer in Single Employer Plans. Applicability

4064 Liability of Employers in Multiple Employer & Multiemployer Plans 

OPINION: 

 The Department of Labor has referred to this Corporation your request for a response to the letter (enclosed

herewith) of your constituent, * * * 

* * * objecting to the imposition of employer liability under § 4062 and 4064 of the Employee Retirement Income

Security Act of 1974 (hereinafter the "Act") upon termination of a * * * union-negotiated pension plan. 

Congress was aware of the existence of union-negotiated pension plans. S. Rep. No. 383, 93d Cong., 1st Sess. 81

(1973). Section 4021(c)(1) of the Act specifically provides coverage of a plan under which a fixed benefit is promised

if the employer or his representative participated in the determination of that benefit, e.g., a collectively bargained plan

that pursuant to § 302(c)(5)(B) of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C. § 186(c)(5)(B), requires

joint administration of the plan and its funds by the employers and employees. S. Rep. No. 383, 93d Cong., 1st Sess.

81 (1973). 

The legislative histories of the Act and predecessor bills to the Act indicate that Congress [*2] carefully considered

the question of imposing liability on employers upon termination of a pension plan with insufficient funds to pay insured

benefits. H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 1280, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 375-376(1974). Employer liability was imposed, in part, to

deter the employer from being "more generous in promising pension benefits to meet labor demands than would be the

case if it knew that the benefits would have to be paid for entirely out of the assets of the employer." S. Rep. No. 383,

93d Cong., 1st Sess. 87 * * * (1973). Sections 4062 and 4064 of the Act further this aim by imposing employer liability

for terminating insufficient plans without regard to whether the employer has made all required contributions to the plan.

See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 1280, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 376, 380 (1974). 

Your constituent also refers to § § 413 and 4971 of ERISA. We believe that he meant § § 413 and 4971 of the

Internal Revenue Code which is not administered by this Corporation. We have, therefore, taken the liberty of

forwarding your constituent's letter to the Internal Revenue Service for reply. 

* * * has forwarded for responses an identical letter from * * * We have provided to both [*3] of you the

explanation contained herein and have advised the * * * that you also have forwarded * * * letter. 

We trust that this letter answers your inquiry. Should you wish any additional information, we would be most happy

to provide it. 

Kenneth L. Houck 

Executive Director
EXHIBIT 31.1


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


     I, Eyal Bigon, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report of InkSure Technologies Inc.;

     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

     4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

     5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Date: May 5, 2005


/S/ Eyal Bigon
--------------
Eyal Bigon
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
§ 276.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) The purpose of the regulations in this part is to give the uniform administrative requirements for grants awarded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
( b ) The regulations in this part shall apply to all grants awarded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs unless the part which gives the application process and special requirements for the specific type of grant states otherwise.
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 1 , 2024.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 23

- 00651

- CV

WALTER YOUNG , Appellant

V.
YEN HONG THI LE , Appellee
On Appeal from the Co Civil Ct at Law No 3

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca use No. 1207187

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a judgment signed Au gust 28, 2023 . The clerk’s record was filed Sept ember 28, 20 23

. The reporter’s record was not filed. No brief was filed.
On No vember 21 , 2023 , this court issued an order stating that unless appellant filed a brief on or before December 21, 2023 , the court would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P . 42.3(b). Appellant filed no brief or other response. Accordingly, the appeal is orde red dismissed.
PER CURI AM
Panel consists of Justices Bourliot, Zimmerer, and Hassan

.
Filed 6/3/03 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2003 ND 80

Rebecca Weninger, Petitioner and Appellee

v.

Peter John Grzeskowiak, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20030009

Appeal from the District Court of Walsh County, Northeast Judicial District, the Honorable M. Richard Geiger, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Peter John Grzeskowiak (submitted on brief), pro se, 15750 Co. Rd. 15, Minto, N.D. 58261, respondent and appellant.

Rebecca Weninger (no appearance), petitioner and appellee.

Weninger v. Grzeskowiak

No. 20030009

Per Curiam. 

[¶1]Peter Grzeskowiak appeals from the November 14, 2002, disorderly conduct restraining order issued against him, alleging that there was insufficient evidence to support issuance of the restraining order. 

[¶2]It is within the sound discretion of the trial court whether to grant a restraining order, and its decision will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of discretion.  See Wishnatsky v. Huey, 1997 ND 35, ¶ 8, 560 N.W.2d 878.  Grzeskowiak has not filed a transcript on appeal.  “Failure to provide a transcript may prevent a party from being successful on appeal.”  Owan v. Kindel, 347 N.W.2d 577, 579 (N.D. 1984).  The partial record we have been provided is not adequate to establish a clear abuse of discretion.  See State v. Clark, 2001 ND 194, ¶ 8, 636 N.W.2d 660 (“[T]he record on appeal does not allow us to properly determine whether the trial court abused its discretion . . . .”); In re C.J.C., 2000 ND 27, ¶ 8, 606 N.W.2d 117 (“The available record contains only fragmentary, incomplete information . . . . [and] does not reveal an abuse of discretion.”).  By not demonstrating an abuse of discretion, Grzeskowiak fails to carry his burden.  See Clark, at ¶ 8. 

[¶3]We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).  

[¶4]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Mary Muehlen Maring

William A. Neumann

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner
### [§2393. Renumbered §4654]
###### Editorial Note on Part 224

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 224 appear at 84 FR 69611, Dec. 18, 2019.

#### § 224.66 How may a Tribe reduce the scope of the TERA?

A Tribe may reduce the scope of the TERA by negotiating with the Secretary an amendment to the existing TERA to eliminate an activity assumed under the TERA or a type of energy resource development managed under the TERA. Any such reduction in scope must include the return of all relevant Departmental resources transferred under the TERA and any relevant records and documents.
§ 126.17 Procedures for classified information, Sensitive Security Information (SSI), and other protected information. ( a ) *Notice of protected information.* Within 30 calendar days of filing or being served with a notice of appeal, TSA must file a notice of protected information indicating whether the record of proceedings before the ALJ contains classified information, SSI, or other protected information. The notice of protected information must be filed with the TSOB Docket Clerk in accordance with § 126.13(b). If the TSA presented classified information, SSI, or other protected information to the ALJ at an ex parte proceeding or provided such information for in camera review during the ALJ proceedings, then the TSOB Review Panel will also consider that information at an ex parte proceeding or in camera.
( b ) *Access to protected information.* A TSOB Review Panel may not disclose Classified Information or other protected information to any non-government party or counsel. A TSOB Review Panel may not disclose SSI to any non-government party or counsel unless the TSA has determined that the party had a preexisting need to know specific SSI as a covered person pursuant to 49 CFR 1520.7 and 1520.11.