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

 874

 877

 885

 889

 886

 880

 881

 895

 873

 901

 921

 920

 902

 929

 917

 943

 917

 922

 917

 915

 919

 925

 915

 934

 933

 963

 977

 979

 982

 970

 940

 770

 868

 870

 863

 871

 831

 840

 789

 851

 861

 893

 896

 873

 895

 865

 896

 868

 908

 890

 869

 905

 904

 900

 893

 901

 919

 927

 921

 920

 927

 895

 842

 873

 876

 881

 877

 864

 873

 866

 863

 878

 903

 904

 892

 905

 904

 903

 905

 913

 908

 901

 912

 914

 906

 904

 918

 931

 945

 954

 966

 945

 926

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

DECEMBER 2013 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 21, 2014

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

UNION ISLAND ON OLD RIVER AT MIDDLE RIVER
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsNational Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)/American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Summer Faculty Fellowship Program, 1989, volume 2The 1989 Johnson Space Center (JSC) National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)/American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Summer Faculty Fellowship Program was conducted by Texas A and M University and JSC. The  10-week program was operated under the auspices of the ASEE. The program at JSC, as well as the programs at other NASA Centers, was funded by the Office of University Affairs, NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C. The objectives of the program, which began nationally in 1964 and at JSC in 1965,  are: (1) to further the professional knowledge of  qualified engineering and science faculty members; (2) to stimulate an exchange of ideas between participants and NASA; (3) to enrich and refresh the research and teaching activities of participants' institutions; and (4) to contribute to the research objective of the NASA Centers.Document ID19900015669Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference ProceedingsAuthorsJones, William B., Jr.*(Texas A&M Univ. College Station., United States)*Goldstein, Stanley H.*(NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, TX., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1989Subject CategorySocial Sciences (General)Report/Patent NumberNASA-CR-185601-VOL-2NAS 1.26:185601-VOL-2Accession Number90N24985Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NGT-44-001-800Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900015669.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsIDRelationTitleN90-24986 through N90-24999Workvisibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 3261.21 How do I get approval to change an approved drilling operation? ( a ) Send BLM a Sundry Notice, form 3260-3, describing the proposed changes. Do not proceed with the changes until we have approved them in writing, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section. If your operations such as redrilling, deepening, drilling a new directional leg, or plugging back a well would significantly change your approved permit, BLM may require you to send us a new drilling permit (see 43 CFR 3261.13). A significant change would be, for example, redrilling the well to a completely different target, especially a target in an unknown area.
( b ) If your changed drilling operation would cause additional surface disturbance, we may also require you to submit an amended operations plan.
( c ) If immediate action is required to properly continue drilling operations, or to protect public health, safety, property or the environment, BLM may provide oral approval to change an approved drilling operation. However, you must submit a written Sundry Notice within 48 hours after we orally approve your change.
### §458aaa–12. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 458aaa–12 was editorially reclassified as section 5393 of this title.
#### § 3507.16 Is there a fee or payment required with my application?

Yes. You must submit the first year's rental with your application according to the provisions in § 3504.15 of this part. BLM will also charge a processing fee on a case-by-case basis as described in § 3000.11 of this chapter.

[70 FR 58877, Oct. 7, 2005]
#### Roger F. Williams, an Infant, by Roger O. Williams, His Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. City of Poughkeepsie, Appellant. Roger O. Williams, Respondent, v. City of Poughkeepsie, Appellant.

No opinion. Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur; Lewis, J., dissents in each action and votes to reverse the judgment and to dismiss the complaint, with the following memorandum: The city exercised ordinary care in closing Memorial Road. Furthermore, the infant plaintiff accepted the dangers incident to tobogganing. *(Murphy*v. *Steeplechase Amusement Co.,*250 N. Y. 479; *Curcio*v. *City of New York,*275 N. Y. 20.)
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

 2,317.02

 2,317.21

 2,317.31

 2,317.46

 2,317.47

 2,317.38

 2,317.14

 2,316.84

 2,316.52

 2,316.19

 2,315.87

 2,315.49

 2,315.11

 2,315.03

 2,315.28

 2,315.72

 2,316.34

 2,316.84

 2,317.18

 2,317.35

 2,317.27

 2,316.96

 2,316.79

 2,316.75

 2,316.61

 2,316.50

 2,316.44

 2,316.46

 2,316.45

 2,316.44

 2,316.38

 1,672.6

 1,675.1

 1,676.4

 1,678.3

 1,678.5

 1,677.3

 1,674.2

 1,670.3

 1,666.2

 1,661.9

 1,657.8

 1,653.0

 1,648.1

 1,647.1

 1,650.3

 1,655.9

 1,663.9

 1,670.3

 1,674.7

 1,676.9

 1,675.9

 1,671.9

 1,669.7

 1,669.2

 1,667.3

 1,665.9

 1,665.2

 1,665.4

 1,665.3

 1,665.2

 1,664.4

STORAGE

+2.8

+2.5

+1.3

+1.9

+0.1

-1.2

-3.1

-3.9

-4.1

-4.3

-4.1

-4.9

-4.9

-1.0

+3.2

+5.6

+8.0

+6.4

+4.4

+2.2

-1.0

-4.0

-2.2

-0.5

-1.8

-1.4

-0.8

+0.3

-0.1

-0.1

-0.8

CHANGE

2,759

2,728

3,105

3,504

3,901

4,630

4,926

4,403

4,215

4,052

4,138

3,664

3,530

5,107

6,719

7,939

7,988

7,056

6,158

5,084

3,624

2,827

2,670

3,221

2,563

2,585

2,760

3,252

2,747

2,845

2,532

INFLOW

 1,248

 1,412

 2,387

 2,445

 3,736

 3,794

 3,937

 3,923

 3,841

 3,822

 3,822

 3,824

 3,842

 3,845

 3,852

 3,831

 3,726

 3,669

 3,812

 3,852

 3,852

 3,830

 3,653

 3,481

 3,469

 3,272

 3,142

 3,092

 2,740

 2,853

 2,842

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

 6

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1,333

 2,441

 2,346

 2,361

 2,286

 2,296

 2,186

 2,049

 1,696

 1,124

 1,140

 169

 0

 18

 0

 176

 916

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 76

 76

 65

 80

 99

 91

 114

 87

 91

 87

 94

 109

 94

 83

 128

 125

 76

 140

 114

 122

 118

 103

 121

 0

 4

 27

 8

 30

 72

 57

 80

C.F.S.

 .20

 .20

 .17

 .21

 .26

 .24

 .30

 .23

 .24

 .23

 .25

 .29

 .25

 .22

 .34

 .33

 .20

 .37

 .30

 .32

 .31

 .27

 .32

 .00

 .01

 .07

 .02

 .08

 .19

 .15

 .21

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .02

 .15

 .02

 .10

 .40

 .08

 .08

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MAY 2008 TRINITY LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: August 8, 2008

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -5.5 127,232 104,846 0 22,543 2,571 6.78 .85

ACRE-FEET -5,500 252,365 207,962 0 44,714 5,100

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 207,962

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 44,714

 252,676

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .85

JULY 1, 2007 26.81

 1,669.8

Table 4

(1) (1)
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Baker, Willis and Overton Argued at Norfolk, Virginia

DAVID LAMONT MACK MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY v. Record No. 0983-95-1 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON JUNE 11, 1996 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF CHESAPEAKE Russell I. Townsend, Jr., Judge Erik P. Gordon (Law Offices of Allen J. Gordon, on brief), for appellant. Monica S. McElyea, Assistant Attorney General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

* Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication. David Lamont Mack was convicted by a jury of armed robbery in violation of Code § 18.2-58 and use of a firearm in the commission of a robbery in violation of Code § 18.2-53.1. He argues on appeal that the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of another robbery charge against Mack and its accompanying confession. Evidence of other crimes need not bear such an exact resemblance to the crime on trial as to constitute a "signature"; it need only bear "a singular strong resemblance to the pattern of the offense charged." Spencer v. Commonwealth , 240 Va. 78, 90, 393 S.E.2d 609, 616 (1990) (quoting United States v. Hudson , 884 F.2d 1016, 1021 (7th Cir. 1989)). The evidence will be- 2 - admitted "where the other incidents are 'sufficiently idiosyncratic to permit an inference of pattern for purposes of proof,' thus tending to establish the probability of a common perpetrator." Id. Upon review of the record, construing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth and granting to it all reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom, we cannot say that the decision below was plainly wrong or unsupported by the evidence. Accordingly, the convictions are affirmed. Affirmed.
## RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 17 HSWA Codification Rule 50 FR 28702 -28755 July 15, 1985 (HSWA Cluster I) Note: This codification rule incorporated numerous HSWA amendments to RCRA into the existing RCRA regulations. Since HSWA provides that states may seek authorization for selected provisions (instead of having to adopt all provisions simultaneously), this checklist has been subdivided into logical groupings of the HSWA early enactment provisions. There are 19 subsections to this checklist. Checklist 17 A – Small Quantity Generators (superseded by Checklist 23) Checklist 17 B – Delisting Checklist 17 C – Household Waste Checklist 17 D – Waste Minimization Checklist 17 E – Location Standards for Salt Domes, Salt Beds, Underground Mines and Caves Checkl ist 17 F – Liquids in Landfills Checklist 17 G – Dust Suppression Checklist 17 H – Double Liners Checklist 17 I – Ground-Water Monitoring Checklist 17 J – Cement Kilns Checklist 17 K – Fuel Labeling superseded by Checklist 19) Checklist 17 L – Corrective Action Checklist 17 M – Pre - construction Ban Checklist 17 N – Permit Life Checklist 17 O – Omnibus Provision Checklist 17 P – Interim Status Checklist 17 Q – Research and Development Permits Checklist 17 R - Hazardous Waste Exports (supers eded by Checklist 31) Checklist 17 S – Exposure InformationName of State: Washington

State Statutory Authority: Chapter 70.105 RCW Title of Regulations: Chapter 173 - 303 WAC Effective Date: July 31, 2009 Date Checklist Completed: May 10, 2010 

### RCRA REVI SI ON CHECKLIST 17S Exposure Information FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FEDERAL RCRA CITATION ANALOGOUS STATE CITATION STATE ANALOG IS:

EQUI V ALEN T LES S STRI N GEN T MORE STRIN

- GENT BROAD

ER IN SCOPE PART 270 – EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT PROGRAM SUBPART B – PERMIT APPLICATION GENERAL APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS † completeness 270.10(c) 800(8) X † exposure information 270.10(j) 806 (12) X
§ 3809.203 What are the limitations on BLM deferral to State regulation of operations? Any agreement between BLM and a State in which BLM defers to State regulation of some or all operations on public lands is subject to the following limitations: ( a ) *Plans of Operations.* BLM must concur with each State decision approving a plan of operations to assure compliance with this subpart, and BLM retains responsibility for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The State and BLM may decide who will be the lead agency in the plan review process, including preparation of NEPA documents.
( b ) *Federal land-use planning and other Federal laws.* BLM will continue to be responsible for all land-use planning on public lands and for implementing other Federal laws relating to the public lands for which BLM is responsible.
( c ) *Federal enforcement.* BLM may take any authorized action to enforce the requirements of this subpart or any term, condition, or limitation of a notice or an approved plan of operations. BLM may take this action regardless of the nature of its agreement with a State, or actions taken by a State.
( d ) *Financial guarantee.* The amount of the financial guarantee must be calculated based on the completion of both Federal and State reclamation requirements, but may be held as one instrument. If the financial guarantee is held as one instrument, it must be redeemable by both the Secretary and the State. BLM must concur in the approval, release, or forfeiture of a financial guarantee for public lands.
( e ) *State performance.* If BLM determines that a State is not in compliance with all or part of its Federal/State agreement, BLM will notify the State and provide a reasonable time for the State to comply.
( f ) *Termination.* ( 1 ) If a State does not comply after being notified under paragraph (e) of this section, BLM will take appropriate action, which may include termination of all or part of the agreement.
( 2 ) A State may terminate its agreement by notifying BLM 60 calendar days in advance.
### **CHAPTER 79—DEFINITIONS**

Sec.
7701.
Definitions.
7702.
Life insurance contract defined.
7702A.
Modified endowment contract defined.
7702B.
Treatment of qualified long-term care insurance.
7703.
Determination of marital status.
7704.
Certain publicly traded partnerships treated as corporations.
7705.
Certified professional employer organizations.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2014**—Pub. L. 113–295, div. B, title II, §206(d)(2), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 4071, added item 7705.

**1996**—Pub. L. 104–191, title III, §321(e), Aug. 21, 1996, 110 Stat. 2059, added item 7702B.

**1988**—Pub. L. 100–647, title V, §5012(c)(2), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3664, added item 7702A.

**1987**—Pub. L. 100–203, title X, §10211(b), Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–405, added item 7704.

**1986**—Pub. L. 99–514, title XIII, §1301(j)(2)(B), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2657, added item 7703.

**1984**—Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title II, §221(c), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 772, added item 7702.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 6, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 59980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22473]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 4853]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Robert Bechtle: A Retrospective''

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 
of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of 
April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Robert Bechtle: A Retrospective,'' 
imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, 
are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan 
agreements with the foreign owners. I also determine that the 
exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the San Francisco 
Museum of Modern Art, from on or about February 12, 2005, until on or 
about June 5, 2005, at the Modern Art Museum of Forth Worth from on or 
about June 26, 2005 until on or about August 28, 2005, and at possible 
additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. 
Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the 
Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact the Office of the Legal Adviser, 
U.S. Department of State, (telephone: (202) 619-6982). The address is 
U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, 
Washington, DC 20547-0001.

    Dated: September 28, 2004.
C. Miller Crouch,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural 
Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 04-22473 Filed 10-5-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-P
EXHIBIT 2.2





ARTICLES
OF MERGER


OF


BLAST
ENERGY SERVICES, INC.


A
California Company


INTO


BLAST
ENERGY SERVICES, INC.


A
TEXAS CORPORATION


(Pursuant
to Section 10.152 of the Texas Business Organizations Code)





These
Articles of Merger made this 13th day of March 2008 by Blast Energy
Services, Inc., a California corporation herein after called the “California
Company” and its wholly owned subsidiary, Blast Energy Services, Inc. a Texas
corporation, herein after called the “Texas Company”, the two corporations being
herein after sometimes called the Constituent Companies.





The Texas
Company has one (1) outstanding share of common stock, $0.001 par value per
share, which one (1) share is owned by the California Company.





A Plan of
Merger in the form of Exhibit A, attached
hereto, was adopted by Board of Directors and creditors of the California
Company pursuant to a Second Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan of
Reorganization”) submitted to the United State Bankruptcy Court for the Southern
District of Texas, and the Plan of Reorganization provides that no further
action by the stockholders of the California Company is required.  The
Plan of Merger was adopted by the Board of Directors and pursuant to the Plan of
Reorganization on February 27, 2008.   The Plan of Merger and the
performance of its terms were duly authorized by all action required by the laws
under which each foreign corporation or other entity that is a party to the
merger was incorporated or organized and by its constituent
documents.





No
changes to the Texas Company’s Certificate of Formation will be required in
connection with the Merger.





The
Articles of Incorporation of the Texas Company as presently exist shall be the
Articles of Incorporation of the surviving company at the effective time of the
filing of this Certificate of Merger.





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the corporate parties hereto pursuant to authority duly
granted by its Board of Directors, has caused this Plan of Merger to be executed
by its respective officers.




BLAST
      ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
              BLAST
      ENERGY SERVICES, INC.A
      Texas Corporation
              A
      California corporationBy:
      /s/ John MacDonald
              By:
      /s/ John MacDonaldJohn
      MacDonald
              John
      MacDonaldChief
      Financial Officer
              Chief
      Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 10.16
 FORM OF
2006 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
PERFORMANCE BASED CASH AWARD AGREEMENT
 Company Grant Date Award Agreement
 1. Definitions
 Earning Period
 Performance Period
 Performance Period Cash Flow/EBITDA Performance Period Cash Flow/EBITDA
  2. Award Amount Award Amount
 (a)Performance Period
    
    (b)Achievement Level
    
    Cash Flow/EBITDA
    
    AwardMaximum
    
    $ []
    
    $ []Target
    
    $ []
    
    $ []Threshold
    
    $ []
    
    $ []




---



##### 



Forfeiture Death or Disability Change in Control
 3. Death or Disability Award Amount
 4. Forfeiture Death or Disability Change in Control
 5. Change in Control Change in Control Agreement Change in Control
 6. 409A Compliance




---



##### 



7. Withholding Taxes
 8. Successors and Assigns
 9. No Employment or Service Contract
 10. Employment and Service
 11. Unfunded Award
 12. Governing Plan Document
 13. Employee Data Privacy
 14. Governing Law




---



##### 



15. Counterparts
 Additional Terms/Acknowledgement
 PENFORD CORPORATION
    
    [Executive Name]By:Title:
 Attachment:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsThe full-scale process and design changes for elimination of insulation edge separations and voids in tang flap areaQualification of the full-scale process and design changes for elimination of redesigned solid rocket motor tang nitrile butadiene rubber insulation edge separations and voids was performed from 24 March to 3 December 1990. The objectives of this test were: to qualify design and process changes on flight hardware using a tie ply between the redesigned solid rocket motor steel case and the nitrile butadiene rubber insulation over the tang capture features; to qualify the use of methyl ethyl ketone in the tang flap region to reduce voids; and to determine if holes in the separator film reduce voids in the tang flap region. The tie ply is intended to aid insulation flow during the insulation cure process, and thus reduce or eliminate edge unbonds. Methyl ethyl ketone is intended to reduce voids in the tang flap area by providing better tacking characteristics. The perforated film was intended to provide possible vertical breathe paths to reduce voids in the tang area. Tang tie ply testing consisted of 270 deg of the tang circumference using a new layup method and 90 deg of the tang circumference using the current layup methods. Tie ply process success was defined as a reduction of insulation unbonds. Lack of any insulation edge unbonds on the tang area where the new process was used, and the presence of 17 unbonds with the current process, proves the test to be a success. Successful completion of this test has qualified the new processes.Document ID19910009859Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsDanforth, Richard A.*(Thiokol Corp. Brigham City, UT, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1991Subject CategorySpacecraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:184110NASA-CR-184110TWR-50143-2PUBL-911032Accession Number91N19172Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-30490Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910009859.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024