alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 2653.3 Lands available for selection. ( a ) Selection may be made for existing cemetery sites or historical places, Native groups, corporations formed by the Natives residing in Sitka, Kenai, Juneau, and Kodiak, and for primary places of residence, from any unappropriated and unreserved lands which the Secretary may withdraw for these purposes: *Provided,* That National Wildlife Refuge System lands and National Forest lands may be made available as provided by section 14(h)(7) of the Act and the regulations in this subpart. Selections for these purposes may also be made from any unappropriated and unreserved lands which the Secretary may withdraw from lands formerly withdrawn and not selected under section 16 of the Act and after December 18, 1975, from lands formerly withdrawn under section 11(a)(1) or 11(a)(3) and not selected under sections 12 or 19 of the Act.
( b ) After December 18, 1975, selection of the lands allocated pursuant to § 2653.1(b), shall be made from any lands previously withdrawn under sections 11 or 16 of the Act which are not otherwise appropriated.
( c ) A withdrawal made pursuant to section 17(d)(1) of the Act which is not part of the Secretary's recommendation to Congress of December 18, 1973, on the four national systems shall not preclude a withdrawal pursuant to section 14(h) of the Act.
[41 FR 14737, Apr. 7, 1976; 41 FR 17909, Apr. 29, 1976]
§ 2887.10 When must I amend my application, seek an amendment of my grant or TUP, or obtain a new grant or TUP? ( a ) You must amend your application or seek an amendment of your grant or TUP when there is a proposed substantial deviation in location or use.
( b ) The requirements to amend an application or a grant or TUP are the same as those for a new application, including paying cost recovery fees and rent according to §§ 2884.12, 2885.23, 2885.19, and 2886.11.
( c ) Any activity not authorized by your grant or TUP may subject you to prosecution under applicable law and to trespass charges under subpart 2888 of this part.
( d ) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, if you hold a pipeline grant issued before November 16, 1973, and there is a proposed substantial deviation in location or use of the right-of-way, you must apply for a new grant.
( e ) BLM may ratify or confirm a grant that was issued before November 16, 1973, if we can modify the grant to comply with the Act and these regulations. BLM and you must jointly agree to any modification of a grant made under this paragraph.
[70 FR 21078, Apr. 22, 2005, as amended at 89 FR 25976, Apr. 12, 2024]
### **CHAPTER 50—NATIVE AMERICAN BUSINESS INCUBATORS PROGRAM**

Sec.
5801.
Findings.
5802.
Definitions.
5803.
Establishment of program.
5804.
Regulations.
5805.
Schools to business incubator pipeline.
5806.
Agency partnerships.
5807.
Authorizations of appropriations.
#### **EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**LIQUIDMETAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.**

**SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. (the “company”) on Form10-K/A (Amendment #1) for the year ending December 31, 2005, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),we, Ricardo Salas, President / Chief Executive Officer, and Young J. Ham, ChiefFinancial Officer, of the company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the company.

 

 
| Date: March 31, 2006 | By:    | /s/ Ricardo Salas  |   |
|----------------------|--------|--------------------|--------|
|                 |   | Ricardo  Salas     |
|                 |   | President  and CEO |
|                 |   |               |
|                 |   |               |
| Date: March 31, 2006 | By:    | /s/ Young J. Ham   |   |
|                 |   | Young  J. Ham      |
|                 |   | CFO                |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to LiquidmetalTechnologies, Inc. and will be retained by Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10.18

                                NOTICE OF BREACH
                                       OF
                               MATERIAL CONDITION


      Pursuant to section 10.2 of the license agreement between Whistler
Investments, Inc. (name changed to Hybrid Technologies, Inc.) and RV Systems,
Inc. dated October 10, 2003;

WHISTLER INVESTMENTS, INC (name changed to HYBRID TECHNOLOGIES, INC) hereby
gives 60 days notice to RV SYSTEMS, Inc to remedy, cure and deliver fully
functioning and completed prototypes in development under the 2 & 3 wheel
license.


                                    /s/ Holly Roseberry


                                    Holly Roseberry President
                                    Hybrid Technologies, Inc.


                               DATED: July 2, 2005
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 725

 736

 722

 688

 661

 654

 655

 673

 676

 676

 670

 663

 630

 626

 637

 653

 659

 658

 630

 497

 229

 228

 200

 162

 149

 150

 165

 187

 229

 258

 678

 719

 681

 655

 650

 648

 650

 645

 673

 670

 663

 632

 613

 595

 607

 634

 647

 633

 523

 229

 215

 203

 160

 142

 128

 145

 153

 160

 183

 230

 706

 728

 697

 676

 656

 651

 653

 658

 675

 674

 666

 650

 626

 612

 625

 644

 655

 648

 587

 279

 221

 215

 172

 149

 136

 148

 159

 169

 198

 241

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

APRIL 2022 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 2, 2022

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

UNION ISLAND ON OLD RIVER AT MIDDLE RIVER
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 96

 90

 88

 86

 91

 93

 92

 89

 88

 88

 89

 92

 86

 91

 98

 111

 115

 106

 92

 93

 110

 110

 105

 99

 118

 141

 150

 168

 191

 233

 89

 82

 81

 82

 81

 81

 81

 81

 79

 79

 83

 83

 83

 85

 90

 98

 108

 93

 85

 87

 89

 105

 98

 95

 96

 120

 142

 148

 170

 191

 93

 85

 83

 84

 86

 84

 84

 82

 81

 81

 84

 86

 84

 89

 94

 104

 112

 99

 88

 89

 98

 107

 101

 97

 106

 130

 147

 154

 176

 207

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2019 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 1, 2019

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

UNION ISLAND ON OLD RIVER AT MIDDLE RIVER
#### Naim ALLMETA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-60941.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided March 13, 2006.

Joyce A. Shatteen, Dallas, TX, for Petitioner.

Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Anne M. Estrada, Alberto R. Gonzales, Eileen Frances O’Brien, U.S. Department of Justice, Caryl G. Thompson, Washington, DC, U.S. Immigration *&*Naturalization Service District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.

Before JOLLY, DAVIS and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Naim Allmeta appeals from the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

Allmeta argues that the IJ erroneously concluded that he failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution warranting asylum. He also argues that the case should be remanded because the IJ did not address his claim for relief under the CAT. Finally, he asks this court to extend his grant of voluntary departure during the pendency of appellate review.

Because Allmeta has failed to show that the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could conclude against the IJ’s determination that he is not entitled to asylum, we must affirm that finding. *See Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78*F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir.1996). Because he does not specifically challenge the IJ’s denial of his request for withholding of removal, that issue is deemed abandoned. *See Calderon-Ontiveros v. INS,*809 F.2d 1050, 1052 (5th Cir.1986).

The IJ’s consideration of Allmeta’s CAT claim was sufficient. *See Roy v. Ashcroft,*389 F.3d 132, 140 (5th Cir.2004). Accordingly, there is no need to remand the case for further consideration. Allmeta’s request for an extension of voluntary departure, assuming we have the authority to consider it, is denied. *See Tesfamichael v. Gonzales,*411 F.3d 169, 171-72 (5th Cir. 2005).

PETITION DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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. R. 47.5.4.
#### § 2886.11 Who regulates activities within my right-of-way or TUP area?

After BLM has issued the grant or TUP, the head of the agency having administrative jurisdiction over the Federal lands involved will regulate your grant or TUP activities in conformance with the Act, appropriate regulations, and the terms and conditions of the grant or TUP. BLM and the other agency head may reach another agreement under 30 U.S.C. 185(c).
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 994.13

 993.46

 992.87

 992.19

 991.29

 990.71

 990.08

 989.46

 988.89

 988.28

 987.68

 986.90

 986.32

 985.82

 985.39

 984.87

 984.42

 983.79

 983.15

 982.75

 982.40

 982.10

 981.83

 981.50

 980.96

 980.34

 979.91

 979.55

 979.32

 978.96

 978.64

 2,702.8

 2,688.7

 2,676.3

 2,662.1

 2,643.3

 2,631.3

 2,618.3

 2,605.5

 2,593.8

 2,581.3

 2,569.1

 2,553.3

 2,541.5

 2,531.4

 2,522.8

 2,512.3

 2,503.3

 2,490.7

 2,478.0

 2,470.1

 2,463.2

 2,457.2

 2,451.9

 2,445.4

 2,434.8

 2,422.7

 2,414.3

 2,407.3

 2,402.8

 2,395.8

 2,389.6

STORAGE

-13.3

-14.1

-12.4

-14.2

-18.7

-12.0

-13.0

-12.8

-11.7

-12.5

-12.2

-15.8

-11.8

-10.1

-8.6

-10.4

-9.0

-12.6

-12.7

-7.9

-6.9

-5.9

-5.3

-6.5

-10.6

-12.1

-8.4

-7.0

-4.5

-7.0

-6.2

CHANGE

 4,734

 4,502

 5,474

 3,598

 1,581

 4,318

 4,353

 4,428

 3,402

 3,980

 3,595

 2,163

 3,584

 3,672

 6,265

 3,960

 3,896

 2,047

 1,555

 3,550

 3,875

 4,179

 4,031

 3,676

 2,395

 2,410

 3,407

 3,718

 4,629

 3,808

 4,299

INFLOW

 11,223

 11,238

 11,442

 10,483

 10,842

 10,150

 10,739

 10,654

 9,034

 10,029

 9,483

 9,924

 9,350

 8,534

 10,382

 9,008

 8,169

 8,196

 7,745

 7,320

 7,190

 6,997

 6,627

 6,775

 7,575

 8,340

 7,419

 6,996

 6,716

 7,068

 7,316

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 223

 371

 277

 282

 183

 231

 182

 206

 271

 240

 264

 203

 178

 243

 243

 218

 265

 193

 228

 227

 175

 174

 87

 174

 173

 184

 224

 258

 172

 274

 108

C.F.S.

 .36

 .60

 .45

 .46

 .30

 .38

 .30

 .34

 .45

 .40

 .44

 .34

 .30

 .41

 .41

 .37

 .45

 .33

 .39

 .39

 .30

 .30

 .15

 .30

 .30

 .32

 .39

 .45

 .30

 .48

 .19

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2001 SHASTA LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: September 20, 2001

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

RIVER

TOTALS -326.2 115,084 272,964 0 0 6,731 11.35 .00

ACRE-FEET -326,200 228,269 541,424 0 0 13,351

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 541,424

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 541,424

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .00

JULY 1, 2001 .04

 2,716.1

Table 3
### §193. Repealed. July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XIII, §1313, 58 Stat. 714

Section, acts Mar. 3, 1875, ch. 156, §5, 18 Stat. 486; July 1, 1902, ch. 1370, §1, 32 Stat. 712; Aug. 14, 1912, ch. 288, §1, 37 Stat. 309; July 1, 1916, ch. 209, 39 Stat. 309; July 1, 1918, ch. 113, 40 Stat. 644; 1939 Reorg. Plan No. I, §§201, 205, eff. July 1, 1939, 4 F.R. 2728, 2729, 53 Stat. 1424, 1425; 1940 Reorg. Plan No. IV, §11(a), eff. June 30, 1940, 5 F.R. 2422, 54 Stat. 1236, provided for admission of insane patients of Public Health Service to Saint Elizabeths Hospital. See section 222 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Renumbering of Repealing Act

For renumbering of act July 1, 1944, which repealed this section, see note set out under sections 1, 2 of this title.
- USGS Home
- Contact						   USGS
- Search 
USGS

- mobile menu barsUSGS Publications Warehouse
    Contact
    Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
    FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- USGS Publications Warehouse
- Contact
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series

- USGS Publications 
  Warehouse
- Explore					    
  Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Documentation					    
  FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- Contact

### Mica deposits of the southeastern Piedmont, Part 2, Amelia 
district, Virginia

#### Professional Paper 248-B

Tweet


#### Links

- More information: **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**     
                             (html)
- Document: **Document**                                
  (pdf)
- Plates:
- **Plate 2**                                
    (pdf)
- **Plate 3**                                
    (pdf)
- **Plate 4**                                
    (pdf)
- **Plate 5**                                
    (pdf)
- **Plate 6**                                 
    (3752 pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS

#### Abstract

#### Additional publication details

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 here.

Accessibility
				    FOIA				    Privacy				    Policies and 
Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior				    | 				    
U.S. Geological 
Survey				    				   URL: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp248B 
                   				    				   Page Contact Information: Pubs 
Warehouse Contact Page				    				   Page Last Modified: February 02, 
2012 00:09:55
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 166

 162

 169

 187

 181

 162

 193

 175

 168

 185

 164

 172

 169

 167

 164

 163

 163

 168

 168

 169

 159

 176

 160

 177

 202

 180

 202

 187

 184

 191

 188

 136

 132

 130

 132

 133

 129

 135

 137

 132

 132

 133

 140

 140

 142

 142

 140

 139

 137

 137

 141

 140

 130

 143

 143

 151

 151

 152

 156

 148

 145

 159

 144

 142

 145

 153

 149

 144

 151

 149

 146

 145

 145

 149

 149

 152

 150

 145

 145

 147

 147

 148

 145

 148

 149

 155

 162

 161

 162

 166

 166

 166

 168

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JULY 2014 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: August 8, 2014

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

STATEN ISLAND ON THE SOUTH FORK MOKELUMNE RIVER
Promulgation: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

Meeting Documentation for Telephone Call on October 27, 2010 with Arkema Representatives RFluorinated Gas Production Re-Proposal RuleDates: October 27, 2010 Staff Contact Information (Name, email, phone #): Deborah Ottinger, EPA, 202-343-9149, Ottinger.deborah@epa.gov; Karen Schaffner, RTI, ksschaffner@rti.org; Carrie Ric

Name of Organization (Attach list of all attendees names and emails if possible):Rich Raiders, Greg Watson, Arkema 

Summary of Discussion (e.g., applicability, reporting requirements, etc.): The purpose of the call was to discuss their public comments regarding emission estimation techniques available to calcula

emissions along with other concerns regarding the reporting rule. Arkema representatives noted the following: 

• In general, Arkema considers the fate of the condensate as the deciding factor in making determinations regarding 

is a process condenser or a control condenser. Arkema requested that facilities have the ability in the rule to distin

condensers and process condensers. What is considered a process condenser varies between Miscellaneous OrganiPharmaceutical NESHAP. Arkema noted that use the Pharmaceutical equations be allowed for preliminary emissi

• Comprehensive Performance Testing (CPT) is conducted every five years under the Hazardous Waste Combustor N

prefers to use the same CPT to meet all compliance requirements they have, including for subpart L . Most of their processes are relatively easy to destroy, and they spike with a surrogate that is the most difficult to destroy compou

compounds that have both chlorine and fluorine in their molecular structure to be destroyed, and they can select a scompound that meets all requirements. [EPA noted that surrogates must be on the Thermal Stability Ranking list t

compound falls with respect to other compounds present in the process streams and sent to be destroyed.] 

• The automatic waste feed cutoff (AWFCO) is used when any operating parameter or setting on the hazardous wast

out of its operating range. The question typically is whether the waste in the chamber when the AWFCO occurs is 

DE, and at their facility, the unit’s residence time is < 1 second and all waste is destroyed to the correct DE. There 

destroyed. When an AWFCO occurs, the facility has the capability to immediately store material in tanks for a cerwhere it is stored until the HWC is online again. No bypass of process streams or waste occurs at the facility; the fbypass. The facility also has the capability to route process streams or waste to another thermal oxidizer onsite. T

treat this as two different operating scenarios, i.e., one operating scenario for venting to the HWC and another oper
venting to the thermal oxidizer, instead of identifying the AWFCO as uncontrolled emissions. The facility would t

periods for each operating scenario. [EPA noted that this seems reasonable.] 

Written Comments Provided? No. Did they also submit to Docket? No. Date sent to EPA- CCD None
#### § 2091.6 Opening of withdrawn lands: General.

The term of a withdrawal ends upon expiration under its own terms, or upon revocation or termination by the Secretary by publication in the Federal Register of a Public Land Order. Lands included in a withdrawal that is revoked, terminates or expires do not automatically become open, but are opened through publication in the Federal Register of an opening order. An opening order may be incorporated in a Public Land Order that revokes or terminates a withdrawal or may be published in the Federal Register as a separate document. In each case, the opening order specifies the time, date and specific conditions under which the lands are opened. (See subpart 2310.)
#### § 2524.6 Desert-land entryman may proceed independently of Government irrigation.

Special attention is called to the fact that nothing contained in the Act of June 27, 1906 (34 Stat. 520; 43 U.S.C. 448), shall be construed to mean that a desert-land entryman who owns a water right and reclaims the land embraced in his entry must accept the conditions of the reclamation law, but he may proceed independently of the Government's plan of irrigation and acquire title to the land embraced in his desert-land entry by means of his own system of irrigation.
#### § 2568.94 Can I receive an allotment of land that is valuable for minerals?

BLM can convey an allotment that is known to be or believed to be valuable for coal, oil, or gas, but the ownership of these minerals remains with the Federal government. BLM cannot convey to you land valuable for other kinds of minerals such as gold, silver, sand or gravel. If BLM conveys an allotment that is valuable for coal, oil, or gas, the allottee owns all minerals in the land except those expressly reserved to the United States in the conveyance.
§ 802.402 Dismissal by abandonment. ( a ) Upon motion by any party or representative or upon the Board's own motion, an appeal may be dismissed upon its abandonment by the party or parties who filed the appeal. Within the discretion of the Board, a party may be deemed to have abandoned an appeal if neither the party nor his representative participates significantly in the review proceedings.
( b ) An appeal may be dismissed on the death of a party only if the record affirmatively shows that there is no person who wishes to continue the action and whose rights may be prejudiced by dismissal.