alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Bauxite and kaolin deposits of Mississippi, exclusive of the Tippah-Benton district

By: Louis C. Conant

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1199B

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf) 
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- 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.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsConcepts for conformal and body-axis attitude information for spatial awareness presented in a helmet-mounted displayA piloted simulation study has been conducted to evaluate two methods of presenting attitude information in a helmet-mounted display (HMD) for spatial awareness in a fighter airplane. One method, the body-axis concept, displayed the information relative to the body axis of the airplane. The quantitative results of this study favored the body-axis concept. Although no statistically significant differences were noted for either the pilots' understanding of roll attitude or target position, the pilots made pitch judgment errors three times more often with the conformal display. The subjective results showed the body-axis display did not cause attitude confusion, a prior concern with this display. In the posttest comments, the pilots overwhelmingly selected the body-axis display as the display of choice.Document ID19930014219Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsJones, Denise R.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Abbott, Terence S.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Burley, James R., II*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1993Subject CategoryAircraft InstrumentationReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-4438L-17125NAS 1.15:4438Accession Number93N23408Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-68-30-09Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930014219.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
Editorial Note on Part 792
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 792 appear at 64 FR 26640, May 14, 1999.

§ 792.102 Applicability. ( a ) This part applies to a PHA acting as a contract administrator under an annual contributions contract with HUD in any section 8 housing assistance payments program. To be eligible to retain section 8 tenant or owner fraud recoveries, the PHA must be the principal party initiating or sustaining an action to recover amounts from families.
( b ) This part applies only to those instances when a tenant or owner committed fraud, and the fraud recoveries are obtained through litigation brought by the PHA (including settlement of the lawsuit), a court-ordered restitution pursuant to a criminal proceeding, or an administrative repayment agreement with the family or owner as a result of a PHA administrative grievance procedure pursuant to, or incorporating the requirements of, § 982.555 of this title. This part does not apply to cases of owner fraud in PHA-owned or controlled units, or where incorrect payments were made or benefits received because of calculation errors instead of willful fraudulent activities.
( c ) This part applies to all tenant and owner fraud recoveries resulting from litigation brought by the PHA (including settlement of the lawsuit), or a court-ordered restitution pursuant to a criminal proceeding obtained on or after October 8, 1986, and to all tenant and owner fraud recoveries obtained through administrative repayment agreements signed on or after October 28, 1992.
[59 FR 9409, Feb. 28, 1994, as amended at 64 FR 26640, May 14, 1999]
§ 19.12 Wording, purpose, and use of approval plate. ( a ) *Approval plate.* The manufacturer shall attach, stamp, or mold an approval plate on the battery container of each permissible lamp. The plate shall bear the emblem of the Mine Safety and Health Administration and be inscribed as follows: “Permissible Electric Cap Lamp. Approval No. ________ issued to the ________ Company.” When deemed necessary, an appropriate caution statement shall be added. The size and position of the approval plate shall be satisfactory to MSHA.
( b ) *Purpose of approval plate.* The approval plate is a label which identifies the lamp so that anyone can tell at a glance whether or not the lamp is of the permissible type. By it, the manufacturer can point out that his lamp complies with specifications of MSHA and that it has been judged as suitable for use in gassy mines.
( c ) *Use of approval plate.* Permission to place MSHA's approval plate on his lamp obligates the manufacturer to maintain the quality of his product and to see that each lamp is constructed according to the drawings which have been accepted by MSHA for this lamp and which are in MSHA's files. Lamps exhibiting changes in design which have not been approved are not permissible lamps and must not bear MSHA's approval plate.
( d ) *Withdrawal of approval.* MSHA reserves the right to rescind, for cause, at any time any approval granted under this part.
[Sched. 6D, 4 FR 4003, Sept. 21, 1939, as amended at 43 FR 12314, Mar. 24, 1978]
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-95,378-01

EX PARTE FELIX DELACRUZ, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. DCR-5914-19A IN THE 154TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM LAMB COUNTY

Per curiam. KEEL, J. filed a dissenting opinion in which KELLER, P.J., YEARY, and

SLAUGHTER, JJ. joined.

O P I N I O N

Applicant pleaded guilty and was convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child and

sentenced to forty years’ imprisonment. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus

in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM.

PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends that plea was involuntary because counsel gave him erroneous

information regarding his parole eligibility. Applicant contends, and counsel admits, that Applicant

was told that he would be eligible for parole after serving twenty years, but in fact, this sentence is

without parole. Applicant contends that he would not have pleaded guilty but for counsel’s bad
2

information. We find that there is a reasonable probability that Applicant would have rejected the

plea and gone to trial had he known that the sentence was without parole. Ex parte Morrow, 952

S.W.2d 530 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 

Relief is granted. Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970). The judgment in cause

number DCR-5914-19 in the 154th District Court of Lamb County is set aside, and Applicant is

remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Lamb County to answer the charges as set out in the

indictment. The trial court shall issue any necessary bench warrant within ten days from the date of

this Court’s mandate.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminalJustice–Correctional

Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Delivered: April 17, 2024

Do not publish
#### § 18.5 Equipment for which certification will be issued.

Certification will be issued for a component or subassembly suitable to incorporate in an approved machine. Certification may be issued for such components as explosion-proof enclosures, battery trays, and connectors.
Exhibit 99.2

                         Independent Accountant's Report


      Synthetic Fixed-Income Securities, Inc. (as Depositor)
      One Wachovia Center
      301 South College Street, DC-7
      Charlotte, NC 28288

      U.S. Bank Trust National Association (as Trustee)
      Corporate Trust Department
      100 Wall Street
      New York, NY 10005


      Re:   STRATS Trust For Goldman Sachs Group Securities, Series 2004-8 (the
            "Trust")
            -------------------------------------------------------------------

      Ladies and Gentlemen:

      We have examined assertions of Synthetic Fixed-Income Securities, Inc.
      (the "Depositor") and U.S. Bank National Association, (the "Trustee" and
      Together with the Depositor, the "Management") that the Depositor and the
      Trustee have complied, in all material respects, with the provisions of
      the Base Trust Agreement dated as of September 26, 2003, as supplemented
      by a series supplement dated as of June 29, 2004 (together, the "Trust
      Agreement"), in respect of the STRATS Trust For Goldman Sachs Group
      Securities, Series 2004-8 (the "Trust"), during the period covered by the
      annual report on Form 10-K filed by the Depositor on behalf of the Trust
      for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the "Annual Report"). Management is
      responsible for compliance with the Trust Agreement. Our responsibility is
      to express an opinion on Management's assertions based on our examination.

      Our examination was made in accordance with attestation standards
      established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,
      accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the
      Depositor's and the Trustee's compliance with the Trust Agreement and
      performing such other procedures as considered necessary in the
      circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis
      for our opinion.

      In our opinion, the Depositor and the Trustee have complied, in all
      material respects, with the Trust Agreement during the period covered by
      the Annual Report and Management's assertions with respect to such
      compliance are fairly stated, in all material respects, for the year ended
      December 31, 2007.


      /s/ Aston Bell, CPA

      New York, New York
      March 14, 2008
§ 203.3 Do I have to pay a fee to request royalty relief? When you submit an application or ask for a preview assessment, you must include a fee to reimburse us for our costs of processing your application or assessment. Federal policy and law require us to recover the cost of services that confer special benefits to identifiable non-Federal recipients. The Independent Offices Appropriation Act (31 U.S.C. 9701), Office of Management and Budget Circular A-25, and the Omnibus Appropriations Bill (Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, April 26, 1996) authorize us to collect these fees. ( a ) We will specify the necessary fees for each of the types of royalty relief applications and possible BSEE audits in a Notice to Lessees. We will periodically update the fees to reflect changes in costs, as well as provide other information necessary to administer royalty relief.
( b ) You must file all payments electronically through the *Fees for Services* page on the BSEE Web site at *http://www.bsee.gov ,* and you must include a copy of the *Pay.gov* confirmation receipt page with your application or assessment.
[76 FR 64462, Oct. 18, 2011, as amended at 81 FR 36148, June 6, 2016]
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Advanced Optics  Electronics,  Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended September 30, 2006 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  I, Leslie Robins,  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:

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

2.       The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.


                                                        /s/ Leslie Robins
                                                        ----------------------
                                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                                        November 16, 2006


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, an other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section 906,  has been  provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.
### **CHAPTER 551—COASTWISE TRADE**

Sec.
55101.
Application of coastwise laws.
55102.
Transportation of merchandise.
55103.
Transportation of passengers.
55104.
Transportation of passengers between Puerto Rico and other ports in the United States.
55105.
Transportation of hazardous waste.
55106.
Merchandise transferred between barges.
55107.
Empty cargo containers and barges.
55108.
Platform jackets.
55109.
Dredging.
55110.
Transportation of valueless material or dredged material.
55111.
Towing.
55112.
Vessel escort operations and towing assistance.
55113.
Use of foreign documented oil spill response vessels.
55114.
Unloading fish from foreign vessels.
55115.
Supplies on fish processing vessels.
55116.
Canadian rail lines.
55117.
Great Lakes rail route.
55118.
Foreign railroads whose road enters by ferry, tugboat, or towboat.
55119.
Yukon River.
55120.
Transshipment of imported merchandise intended for immediate exportation.
55121.
Transportation of merchandise and passengers on Canadian vessels.
55122.
Floating dry docks.
55123.
Priority loading for coal.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2021**—Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title X, §1024(b)(1)(B)(ii), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 3842, added item 55123.

**2014**—Pub. L. 113–291, div. C, title XXXV, §3502(b), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3904, added item 55122.

**2008**—Pub. L. 110–181, div. C, title XXXV, §3527(b)(2), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 602, inserted "valueless material or" before "dredged material" in item 55110.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Keri Singleton, Appellant.

[833 NYS2d 421]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J.), rendered on or *378about March 22, 2005, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Order filed. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Saxe, Nardelli, Williams and Catterson, JJ.
#### § 14.3 Observers at tests and evaluations.

Representatives of the applicant and other persons agreed upon by MSHA and the applicant may be present during tests and evaluations conducted under this Part. However, if MSHA receives a request from others to observe tests, the Agency will consider it.
**Exhibit      4.50**

**FIRST      SUPPLEMENT TO INDENTURE**

----

**Exhibit      4.50 (Continued)**

----

**Exhibit      4.50 (Continued)**

----

**Exhibit      4.50 (Continued)**

|         |                                                                    |                                   |
|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|         | **NAVISTAR              INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION**                     |
|    |                                                               |                              |
|              | By:                                                           | /s/ Terry              M. Endsley |
|         | Name: Terry              M. Endsley                           |
|         | Title:   Vice              President and Treasurer  |

|         |                                                                    |                                   |
|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|         | **INTERNATIONAL              TRUCK AND ENGINE CORPORATION**             |
|    |                                                               |                              |
|              | By:                                                           | /s/ Terry              M. Endsley |
|         | Name:              Terry M. Endsley                                     |
|         | Title:   Vice              President and Treasurer  |

|         |                                                           |                               |
|--------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
|         | **BNY              MIDWEST TRUST COMPANY**                     |
|    |                                                      |                          |
|              | By:                                                  | /s/ Linda              Garcia |
|         | Name:  Linda              Garcia                     |
|         | Title:                Assistant Vice President  |
#### In the Matter of Michael F. Waters, an Attorney, Respondent. Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Petitioner.

First Department,

January 30,1978

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*James D. Porter, Jr.,*of counsel *(Irving Gertel*with him on the brief), for petitioner.

*Michael F. Waters,*respondent *pro se.*

OPINION OF THE COURT

*Per Curiam.*

This motion, brought by petitioner Committee on Griev*72anees, seeks to confirm in part and to disaffirm in part the report of the Referee, Honorable Jacob W. Abraham, which adjudged respondent guilty of professional misconduct and to impose disciplinary measures.

Respondent was admitted to the Bar on June 23, 1959 in the First Judicial Department. He was charged with (1) having neglected to effectuate a release of a $1,500 escrow fund deposited with him in the course of representation of parties to a real estate transaction which was consummated by sale of the property on October 10, 1972; (2) having falsely advised and having failed to reply to inquiries from a client who had retained respondent to obtain a charter for an elementary school; (3) having failed to take any steps in the prosecution of a petition for a change of legal name on behalf of a client and, thereafter, ignoring repeated requests for the return of personal documents; and (4) having failed to co-operate with the investigation of the Committee on Grievances.

Respondent failed to comply with a subpoena duces tecum issued during the course of the petitioner committee’s preliminary investigation, failed to respond in any manner to 11 communications from the petitioner requesting statements of explanation to various complaints made against him and, although granted three adjournments, failed to attend either personally, or by counsel, the hearing conducted by the Referee on May 4, 1977.

The Referee properly sustained charges 1, 2 and 4 based on competent evidence presented to him. He made no finding as to charge 3 after ruling that the evidence offered on the charge—prior testimony of a witness who did not appear at the hearing after an unsuccessful attempt to serve the witness at his last known residence had been made—was inadmissible under CPLR 4517. The petitioner moves to disaffirm this ruling. However, it is unnecessary to pass on this point. We confirm the Referee’s report in its findings sustaining charges 1, 2 and 4.

The record clearly demonstrates respondent’s indifference to and neglect of his professional responsibility. His failure to appear at the hearing and defend himself against the charges is practically an admission of the truth of the charges. *(Matter of Cihak,*49 AD2d 412 [1st Dept, 1975].) Indeed, this motion is unopposed. Respondent was previously admonished in November, 1973, by the Committee on Grievances for his failure to co-operate with a previous investigation of a complaint of *73professional misconduct. In light of the repeated indications of neglect, respondent should be disbarred.

Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Silverman, Evans and Markewich, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law of the State of New York.