alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I-95 Plaza Bioretention Cell, Delaware DOT Welcome! The International Stormwater Best Management Practices ( BMP) Database project website features a database of over 530 BMP studies, performance analysis results, tools for use in BMP performance studies, monitoring guidance and other study-related publications. New to the site? Start Here

Contacts | Policies | Disclaimer 

# 1 of 4 3/15/2016 5:17 PMI-95 Plaza Delaware Sand Filter, Delaware DOT Owen Conservation Park Rain Garden, City of Madison Madison Water Pump House Rain Garden, City of Madison Partridgeberry Place Rain Garden, MA Department of Recreati on 

# 2 of 4 3/15/2016 5:17 PMHamilton East Ecoroof, City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services Portland Building Ecoroof, City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Se rvices Grant Ranch Orchard Pond, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Heron Bay Wet Pond, Alameda County Public Works Agency 

# 3 of 4 3/15/2016 5:17 PMDominguez Gap Wetland, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works



# 4 of 4 3/15/2016 5:17 PM
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-23-00004-CV

In the Interest of C.Y.S. aka C.Y.

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 5 of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2021-FAM-60683-5

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant, A.Y., but she is exempt from payment due to her inability to pay costs. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

February 2, 2023
#### § 280.26 When may I resume activities?

The Regional Director will advise you when you may start your permit activities again.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
ACCOMPANYING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           270
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   1704
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                       47
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                2050
<PP&E>                                           170
<DEPRECIATION>                                    36
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  8638
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           5791
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                          10
<OTHER-SE>                                      2837
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    8638
<SALES>                                       10,779
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              10,779
<CGS>                                          9,278
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (530)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6391)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (6391)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6391)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.80)



</TABLE>
§ 1204.5 What statutory requirements must I meet to obtain royalty prepayment or accounting and auditing relief? ( a ) ONRR and the State may allow royalty prepayment or accounting and auditing relief for your marginal property production if ONRR and the State jointly determine that the prepayment or accounting and auditing relief is in the best interests of the Federal Government and the State to: ( 1 ) Promote production;
( 2 ) Reduce the administrative costs of ONRR and the State; and
( 3 ) Increase net receipts to the Federal Government and the State.
( b ) At any time, if ONRR and the State determine that either prepayment or accounting and auditing relief no longer meets the criteria in paragraph (a) of this section, ONRR, with the State's concurrence, may discontinue any prepayment or accounting and auditing relief options granted for production from any marginal property. ( 1 ) ONRR will provide you written notice of the decision to discontinue relief. ( i ) If you took the cumulative reports and payments relief option under § 1204.202, your relief will terminate at the end of the calendar year in which you received the notice.
( ii ) If you were approved for prepayment relief under subpart B of this part or other relief under § 1204.203, ONRR's notice will tell you when your relief terminates.
( 2 ) ONRR's decision to discontinue relief is not subject to administrative appeal.
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1455 Does my request for a hearing on the record affect the penalties? ( a ) If you do not correct the violations identified in the Notice of Noncompliance, the penalties will continue to accrue even if you request a hearing on the record.
( b ) You may petition the Hearings Division (Departmental) of the Office of Hearings and Appeals, to stay the accrual of penalties pending the hearing on the record and a decision by the Administrative Law Judge under § 250.1472. ( 1 ) You must file your petition within 45 calendar days of receiving the Notice of Noncompliance.
( 2 ) To stay the accrual of penalties, you must post a bond or other surety instrument, or demonstrate financial solvency, using the standards and requirements as prescribed in BOEM's regulations, 30 CFR part 550, subpart N. The posted amount must cover the unpaid principal and interest due for the Notice of Noncompliance, plus the amount of any penalties accrued before the date a stay becomes effective.
( 3 ) The Hearings Division will grant or deny the petition under 43 CFR 4.21(b).
[76 FR 64462, Oct. 18, 2011, as amended at 81 FR 36150, June 6, 2016]
§ 47.51 Requirement for an MSDS. Operators must have an MSDS for each hazardous chemical which they produce or use. The MSDS may be in any medium, such as paper or electronic, that does not restrict availability. ( a ) For each hazardous chemical produced at the mine, the operator must prepare an MSDS, and update it with significant, new information about the chemical's hazards or protective measures within 3 months of becoming aware of this information.
( b ) For each hazardous chemical brought to the mine, the operator must rely on the MSDS received from the chemical manufacturer or supplier, develop their own MSDS, or obtain one from another source.
( c ) Although the operator is not responsible for an inaccurate MSDS obtained from the chemical's manufacturer, supplier, or other source, the operator must— ( 1 ) Replace an outdated MSDS upon receipt of an updated revision, and
( 2 ) Obtain an accurate MSDS as soon as possible after becoming aware of an inaccuracy.
( d ) The operator is not required to prepare an MSDS for an intermediate chemical or by-product resulting from mining or milling if its hazards are already addressed on the MSDS of the source chemical.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsThe Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite In-Flight DynamicsUpper Atmosphere Research Satellite flight data from the first 737 days after launch (September 1991) was used to investigate spacecraft disturbances and responses. The investigation included two in-flight dynamics experiments (approximately three orbits each). Orbital and configuration influences on spacecraft dynamic response were also examined. Orbital influences were due to temperature variation from crossing the Earth's terminator and variation of the solar incident energy as the orbit precessed. During the terminator crossing, the rapid ambient temperature change caused the spacecraft's two flexible appendages to experience thermal elastic bending (thermal snap). The resulting response was dependent upon the orientation of the solar array and the solar incident energy. Orbital influences were also caused by on-board and environmental disturbances and spacecraft configuration changes resulting in dynamic responses which were repeated each orbit. Configuration influences were due to solar array rotation changing spacecraft modal properties. The investigation quantified the spacecraft dynamic response produced by the solar array and high gain antenna harmonic drive disturbances. The solar array's harmonic drive output resonated two solar array modes. Friction in the solar array gear drive provided sufficient energy dissipation which prevented the solar panels from resonating catastrophically; however, the solar array vibration amplitude was excessively large. The resulting vibration had a latitude-specific pattern.Document ID19970019258Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsWoodard, Stanley E.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateApril 1, 1997Subject CategoryStructural MechanicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:110325NASA-TM-110325Accession Number97N21022Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 632-20-21-11Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970019258.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
§ 47.1 Purpose of a HazCom standard; applicability. The purpose of this part is to reduce injuries and illnesses by ensuring that each operator— ( a ) Identifies the chemicals at the mine,
( b ) Determines which chemicals are hazardous,
( c ) Establishes a HazCom program, and
( d ) Informs each miner who can be exposed, and other on-site operators whose miners can be exposed, about chemical hazards and appropriate protective measures.
( e ) As of September 23, 2002, all mines employing six or more miners are required to comply with this part.
( f ) As of March 21, 2003, all mines employing five or fewer miners are required to comply with this part.
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1919 What criteria for investigation of incidents must be in my SEMS program? To learn from incidents and help prevent similar incidents, your SEMS program must establish procedures for investigation of all incidents with serious safety or environmental consequences and require investigation of incidents that are determined by facility management or BSEE to have possessed the potential for serious safety or environmental consequences. Incident investigations must be initiated as promptly as possible, with due regard for the necessity of securing the incident scene and protecting people and the environment. Incident investigations must be conducted by personnel knowledgeable in the process involved, investigation techniques, and other specialties that are relevant or necessary. ( a ) The investigation of an incident must address the following: ( 1 ) The nature of the incident;
( 2 ) The factors (human or other) that contributed to the initiation of the incident and its escalation/control; and
( 3 ) Recommended changes identified as a result of the investigation.
( b ) A corrective action program must be established based on the findings of the investigation in order to analyze incidents for common root causes. The corrective action program must: ( 1 ) Retain the findings of investigations for use in the next hazard analysis update or audit;
( 2 ) Determine and document the response to each finding to ensure that corrective actions are completed; and
( 3 ) Implement a system whereby conclusions of investigations are distributed to similar facilities and appropriate personnel within their organization.
§ 285.714 What records relating to FDRs, FIRs, and Project Modification and Repair Reports must I keep? ( a ) Until BOEM releases your financial assurance under 30 CFR 585.534, you must compile, retain, and make available to BSEE, within the time specified by BSEE, all of the following: ( 1 ) The as-built drawings;
( 2 ) The design assumptions and analyses;
( 3 ) A summary of the fabrication and installation examination records;
( 4 ) The records of the commissioning of Critical Safety Systems and Equipment;
( 5 ) The inspection results from the inspections and assessments required by §§ 285.820 through 285.825; and
( 6 ) Records of repairs not covered in the inspection report submitted under § 285.824(b)(3).
( b ) You must record and retain the original material test results of all primary structural materials during all stages of construction until BOEM releases your financial assurance under 30 CFR 585.534. Primary material is material that, should it fail, would lead to a significant reduction in facility safety, structural reliability, or operating capabilities. Items such as steel brackets, deck stiffeners and secondary braces or beams would not generally be considered primary structural members (or materials).
( c ) You must provide BSEE with the location of these records, as required in §§ 285.701(c) and (d), 285.702(c) and (d), 285.703(b), and 285.708(a)(5) and (7).
[88 FR 6413, Jan. 31, 2023, as amended at 89 FR 42717, May 15, 2024]
§ 18.80 Approval of machines assembled with certified or explosion-proof components. ( a ) A machine may be a new assembly, or a machine rebuilt to perform a service that is different from the original function, or a machine converted from nonpermissible to permissible status, or a machine converted from direct- to alternating-current power or vice versa. Properly identified components that have been investigated and accepted for application on approved machines will be accepted in lieu of certified components.
( b ) A single layout drawing (see Figure 1 in Appendix II) or photographs will be acceptable to identify a machine that was assembled with certified or explosion-proof components. The following information shall be furnished: ( 1 ) Overall dimensions.
( 2 ) Wiring diagram.
( 3 ) List of all components (see Figure 2 in Appendix II) identifying each according to its certification number or the approval number of the machine of which the component was a part.
( 4 ) Specifications for: ( i ) Overcurrent protection of motors.
( ii ) All wiring between components, including mechanical protection such as hose conduits and clamps.
( iii ) Portable cable, including the type, length, outside diameter, and number and size of conductors.
( iv ) Insulated strain clamp for machine end of portable cable.
( v ) Short-circuit protection to be provided at outby end of portable cable.
( c ) MSHA reserves the right to inspect and to retest any component(s) that had been in previous service, as it deems appropriate.
( d ) When MSHA has determined that all applicable requirements of this part have been met, the applicant will be authorized to attach an approval plate to each machine that is built in strict accordance with the drawings and specifications filed with MSHA and listed with MSHA's formal approval. A design of the approval plate will accompany the notification of approval. (Refer to §§ 18.10 and 18.11.)
( e ) Approvals are issued only by the U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration, Approval and Certification Center, 765 Technology Drive, Triadelphia, WV 26059.
[33 FR 4660, Mar. 19, 1968, as amended at 43 FR 12314, Mar. 24, 1978; 52 FR 17514, May 8, 1987; 73 FR 52211, Sept. 9, 2008]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6156

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JEFFREY LYNN MORGAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle,

Chief District Judge. (CR-01-1, CA-02-44-BO)

Submitted: June 17, 2003 Decided: July 9, 2003

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey Lynn Morgan, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Kenneth Fitzgerald Whitted,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey Lynn Morgan seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255

proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and

that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are

also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

 , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert.

denied, 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that, although the district court’s conclusion

that Morgan’s § 2255 motion was barred by the appeal waiver

contained in his plea agreement was erroneous, Morgan has failed to

demonstrate that it is debatable whether he has stated valid claims

of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
3

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
§ 254.28 What information must I include in the “In situ burning plan” appendix? Your in situ burning plan must be consistent with any guidelines authorized by the National Contingency Plan and the appropriate Area Contingency Plan(s). Your in situ burning plan must include: ( a ) A description of the in situ burn equipment including its availability, location, and owner;
( b ) A discussion of your in situ burning procedures, including provisions for ignition of an oil spill;
( c ) A discussion of environmental effects of an in situ burn;
( d ) Your guidelines for well control and safety of personnel and property;
( e ) A discussion of the circumstances in which in situ burning may be appropriate;
( f ) Your guidelines for making the decision to ignite; and
( g ) An outline of the procedures you must follow to obtain approval for an in situ burn.
§ 553.41 What terms must I include in my OSFR evidence? ( a ) Each instrument you submit as OSFR evidence must specify: ( 1 ) The effective date, and except for a surety bond, the expiration date;
( 2 ) That termination of the instrument will not affect the liability of the instrument issuer for claims arising from an incident (*i.e.,* oil-spill discharge or substantial threat of the discharge of oil) that occurred on or before the effective date of termination;
( 3 ) That the instrument will remain in force until the termination date or until the earlier of: ( i ) Thirty calendar days after BOEM and the designated applicant receive from the instrument issuer a notification of intent to cancel; or
( ii ) BOEM receives from the designated applicant other acceptable OSFR evidence; or
( iii ) All the COFs to which the instrument applies are permanently abandoned in compliance with 30 CFR part 250 or equivalent State requirements;
( 4 ) That the instrument issuer agrees to direct action for claims made under OPA up to the guaranty amount, subject to the defenses in paragraph (a)(6) of this section and following the procedures in § 553.60 of this part;
( 5 ) An agent in the United States for service of process; and
( 6 ) That the instrument issuer will not use any defenses against a claim made under OPA except: ( i ) The rights and defenses that would be available to a designated applicant or responsible party for whom the guaranty was provided; and
( ii ) The incident (*i.e.,* oil-spill discharge or a substantial threat of the discharge of oil) leading to the claim for removal costs or damages was caused by willful misconduct of a responsible party for whom the designated applicant demonstrated OSFR.
( b ) You may not change, omit, or add limitations or exceptions to the terms and conditions in a BOEM form that you submit as part of your OSFR demonstration. If you attempt to do this, BOEM will disregard the changes, omissions, additions, limitations, or exceptions and by operation of this rule BOEM will consider the form to contain all the terms and conditions included on the original BOEM form.
### §16104. Disobedience to subpenas

Whoever does not obey a subpena or requirement of the Board to appear and testify or produce records shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.

(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, §106(a), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 931.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 11913 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, §102(a).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1740 How must I verify that the site of a permanently plugged well, removed platform, or other removed facility is clear of obstructions? Within 60 days after you permanently plug a well or remove a platform or other facility, you must verify that the site is clear of obstructions by using one of the following methods: ( a ) For a well site, you must either: ( 1 ) Drag a trawl over the site;
( 2 ) Scan across the location using sonar equipment;
( 3 ) Inspect the site using a diver;
( 4 ) Videotape the site using a camera on a remotely operated vehicle (ROV); or
( 5 ) Use another method approved by the District Manager if the particular site conditions warrant.
( b ) For a platform or other facility site in water depths less than 300 feet, you must drag a trawl over the site.
( c ) For a platform or other facility site in water depths 300 feet or more, you must either: ( 1 ) Drag a trawl over the site;
( 2 ) Scan across the site using sonar equipment; or
( 3 ) Use another method approved by the Regional Supervisor if the particular site conditions warrant.