alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsLiquid Nitrogen Zero Boiloff TestingCryogenic propellants such as liquid hydrogen (LH2) and liquid oxygen (LO2) are a part of NASAs future space exploration due to their high specific impulse for rocket motors of upper stages suitable for transporting 10s to 100s of metric tons of payload mass to destinations outside of low earth orbit and for their return. However, the low storage temperatures of LH2 and LO2 cause substantial boil-off losses for missions with durations greater than several months. These losses can be eliminated by incorporating high performance cryocooler technology to intercept heat load to the propellant tanks and modulating the cryocooler to control tank pressure. The active thermal control technology being developed by NASA is the reverse turbo-Brayton cycle cryocooler and its integration to the propellant tank through a distributed cooling tubing network coupled to the tank wall. This configuration was recently tested at NASA Glenn Research Center, in a vacuum chamber and cryo-shroud that simulated the essential thermal aspects of low Earth orbit, its vacuum and temperature. Testing consisted of three passive tests with the active cryo-cooler system off, and 7 active tests, with the cryocooler powered up. The test matrix included zero boil-off tests performed at 90 full and 25 full, and several demonstrations at excess cooling capacity and reduced cooling capacity. From this, the tank pressure response with varied cryocooler power inputs was determined. This test series established that the active cooling system integrated with the propellant tank eliminated boil-off and robustly controlled tank pressure.Document ID20170001537Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsPlachta, David*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Feller, Jeffrey*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA United States)*Johnson, Wesley*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Robinson, Craig*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredFebruary 10, 2017Publication DateFebruary 1, 2017Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And ThermodynamicsPropellants And FuelsReport/Patent NumberNASA/TP-2017-219389E-19295GRC-E-DAA-TN35381Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 448887.01.03Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.KeywordsCryogenic fluid managementZero boil-offReverse turbo-Brayton cycle cryocoolerAvailable DownloadsNameType20170001537.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
### Docket No. FAA-2012-1038
DISMISS; Opinion issued March 28, 2013 

# S

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 12

- 00425

- CV

WILSON AND JANICE JO NES AND ALL OCCUPANT S OF 610 N. SILVER CREEK DALLAS, TEXAS , Appellants V. VRM (VENDOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT), DULY AU THORIZED

AGENT FOR THE SECRET ARY OF VETERANS AFFA IRS , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 11

- 08796

- C

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, FitzGerald, and Myers

The Court has before it appellee’s March 1, 2013 motion to dismiss appeal as moot,

which is unopposed. We GRANT the motion and DISMISS the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P.

42.1(a)(2).

PER CURIAM

120425F.P05– 2

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

WILSON AND JANICE JONES, AND ALL OCCUPANTS OF 610 N. SILVER CREEK DALLAS, TEXAS, Appellants

No. 05

- 12

- 00425

- CV V.

VRM (VENDOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT), DULY AUTHO RIZED AGENT FOR THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 11

- 08796

- C. Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices Bridges, FitzGerald and Myers.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee VRM (VENDOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT), DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS recover its costs of this appeal from appellants WILSON AND JANICE JONES, AND ALL OCCUPANTS OF 610 N. SILVER CREEK DALLAS, TEXAS.

Judgment entered March 28, 2013.

/David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE
Ozone NAAQS Teleconference 8/19/2010 Andrea Drinkard/DC/USEPA/US@EPA , Anna Wood/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, awood@hunton.com, clangworthy@hunton.com, dkaplan@enrd.usdoj.gov, Don Zinger/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Gautam Srinivasan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, hpizz@ago.state.ms.us, jclark@kirkla nd.com, Jenny Noonan/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, John Hannon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kevin McLean/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Location: ARN 5400 EXTERNAL ATTENDEES Allison D. Wood – Hunton and Williams Lucinda Minton Langworthy – Hunton and Williams David Kaplan – US DOJ Harold Edward Pizzetta, III – Mississippi AG office Jeffrey Bossert Clark – Kirkland and Ellis LLP
#### § 56.11008 Restricted clearance.

Where restricted clearance creates a hazard to persons, the restricted clearance shall be conspicuously marked.

[53 FR 32521, Aug. 25, 1988]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-KSB
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          66,657
<SECURITIES>                                 1,107,715
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,094
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                97,751
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,205,466
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,841
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,211
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,173,414
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,205,466
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,411
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,411)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,411)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,411)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-1289EM

_____________ Verna Martin, * * Appellant, *

* v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern St. Louis University, doing business as * District of Missouri. St. Louis University Health Sciences * Center, doing business as St. Louis * [UNPUBLISHED] University Medical Center, * * Appellee. *

_____________ Submitted: October 6, 1998

Filed: October 8, 1998

_____________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Verna Martin appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in Martin's employment discrimination lawsuit. Having caref ully reviewed the record and th e parties' briefs, we conclude the district court's judgment was correct and affirm without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**AD Economic Evaluation**



### Docket No . FAA - 20 13 - 0477 Directorate ID : 20 11 - SW - 015 - AD Helicopter Model: Eurocopter Model AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350C, AS350D, AS350D1 Helicopters and Model AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2, and AS355N Helicopters 

### Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 791 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to prevent failure of the TGB control lever, loss of tail rotor control, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 2,103 Labor per Helicopter ( 3 work-hour x 

### $ 8 5 /work hour to replace a control lever) $ 255 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 2,358 Total US Fleet Cost $2,358 for replacing a control lever Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory Flexibility Act : Will the AD have a signi ficant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Bob Grant
### §734a. Extension of industrial alcohol and internal revenue laws to Puerto Rico

Title III of the National Prohibition Act, as amended, and all provisions of the internal revenue laws relating to the enforcement thereof, are extended to and made applicable to Puerto Rico from and after August 27, 1935. The Insular Government shall advance to the Treasury of the United States such funds as may be required from time to time by the Secretary of the Treasury for the purpose of defraying all expenses incurred by the Treasury Department in connection with the enforcement in Puerto Rico of the said Title III and regulations promulgated thereunder. The funds so advanced shall be deposited in a separate trust fund in the Treasury of the United States and shall be available to the Treasury Department for the purposes of this section.

(June 26, 1936, ch. 830, title III, §329(c), 49 Stat. 1957.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The National Prohibition Act, as amended, referred to in text, is act Oct. 28, 1919, ch. 85, 41 Stat. 305. Title III of such Act was classified principally to chapter 3 (§71 et seq.) of Title 27, Intoxicating Liquors, and was omitted from the Code in view of the incorporation of such provisions in the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, and subsequently into the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

#### Codification

Provisions similar to those comprising this section relating to the Virgin Islands are classified to section 1402 of this title.

Section was not enacted as part of the Puerto Rican Federal Relations Act which comprises this chapter.
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.520 How often do I have to monitor for casing pressure?

You must monitor for casing pressure in your well according to the following table:

| If you have . . . | you must monitor . . . | with a minimum one pressure data point recorded per . . . |
| --- | --- | --- |
| (a) fixed platform wells, | monthly, | month for each casing. |
| (b) subsea wells, | continuously, | day for the production casing. |
| (c) hybrid wells, | continuously, | day for each riser and/or the production casing. |
| (d) wells operating under a casing pressure request on a manned fixed platform, | daily, | day for each casing. |
| (e) wells operating under a casing pressure request on an unmanned fixed platform, | weekly, | week for each casing. |

[76 FR 64462, Oct. 18, 2011. Redesignated at 77 FR 50894, Aug. 22, 2012]
#### § 550.162 May I continue my right-of-use and easement after the termination of any lease on which it is situated?

If your right-of-use and easement is on a lease, you may continue to exercise the right-of-use and easement after the lease on which it is situated terminates. You must only use the right-of-use and easement for the purpose that the grant specifies. All future lessees of that portion of the OCS on which your right-of-use and easement is situated must continue to recognize the right-of-use and easement for the purpose that the grant specifies.
#### NESTLER v. GERMANIA FIRE INS. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 24, 1905.)

Action by Jacob Nestler against the Germania Fire Insurance Company. No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs.
#### Richard B. Mapes, an Infant, by De Vora I. Mapes, His Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, v. Town of Wales, Respondent.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. (Appeal from judgment of Erie Trial Term for defendant for no cause of action. The order denied plaintiff’s motion for a new trial.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
### §44102. Registration requirements

(a) Eligibility.—An aircraft may be registered under section 44103 of this title only when the aircraft is—

(1) not registered under the laws of a foreign country and is owned by—

(A) a citizen of the United States;

(B) an individual citizen of a foreign country lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States; or

(C) a corporation not a citizen of the United States when the corporation is organized and doing business under the laws of the United States or a State, and the aircraft is based and primarily used in the United States; or

(2) an aircraft of—

(A) the United States Government; or

(B) a State, the District of Columbia, a territory or possession of the United States, or a political subdivision of a State, territory, or possession.

(b) Duty To Define Certain Term.—In carrying out subsection (a)(1)(C) of this section, the Secretary of Transportation shall define "based and primarily used in the United States".

(Pub. L. 103–272, §1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1161.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 44102(a)(1) | 49 App.:1401(b) (1st sentence cl. (1)). | Aug. 23, 1958, Pub. L. 85–726, §501(b), 72 Stat. 772; restated Nov. 9, 1977, Pub. L. 95–163, §14, 91 Stat. 1283; Mar. 8, 1978, Pub. L. 95–241, 92 Stat. 119. |
| 44102(a)(2) | 49 App.:1401(b) (1st sentence cl. (2)). | |
| 44102(b) | 49 App.:1401(b) (last sentence). | |

Section

In subsection (a), before clause (1), the words "may be registered" are substituted for "shall be eligible for registration", and the words "under section 44103 of this title" are added, for clarity. The words "only when" are substituted for "if, but only if" for consistency. In subclause (C), the words "not a citizen of the United States" are substituted for "(other than a corporation which is a citizen of the United States)" to eliminate unnecessary words. The word "lawfully" is omitted as surplus.

In subsection (b), the words "In carrying out subsection (a)(1)(C) of this section" are added because of the restatement. The words "by regulation" are omitted as unnecessary because of 49:322(a).
#### § 285.1017 [Reserved]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         326,225
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  415,749
<ALLOWANCES>                                    54,766
<INVENTORY>                                     45,454
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               788,850
<PP&E>                                       4,696,176
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,785,728
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,832,490
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,548,037
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         61
<COMMON>                                       105,079
<OTHER-SE>                                   (829,386)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,832,490
<SALES>                                      6,685,913
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,685,913
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,646,920
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             217,515
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                824,716
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            823,916
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   823,916
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15


</TABLE>
### §40901. License requirement

(a) In General.—A person in the United States may not advertise, hold oneself out, or act as an ocean transportation intermediary unless the person holds an ocean transportation intermediary's license issued by the Federal Maritime Commission. The Commission shall issue a license to a person that the Commission determines to be qualified by experience and character to act as an ocean transportation intermediary.

(b) Exception.—A person whose primary business is the sale of merchandise may forward shipments of the merchandise for its own account without an ocean transportation intermediary's license.

(c) Applicability.—Subsection (a) and section 40902 do not apply to a person that performs ocean transportation intermediary services on behalf of an ocean transportation intermediary for which it is a disclosed agent.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §7, Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1538; Pub. L. 115–282, title VII, §707(a), (b), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4295.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 40901(a) | 46 App.:1718(a). | Pub. L. 98–237, §19(a), (d), Mar. 20, 1984, 98 Stat. 87, 88; Pub. L. 105–258, title I, §116, Oct. 14, 1998, 112 Stat. 1912. |
| 40901(b) | 46 App.:1718(d). | |

Section

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 115–282, §707(a), inserted "advertise, hold oneself out, or" after "may not".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 115–282, §707(b), added subsec. (c).
### §20147. Warning of civil liability

The Secretary of Transportation shall encourage railroad carriers to warn the public about potential liability for violation of regulations related to vandalism of railroad signs, devices, and equipment and to trespassing on railroad property.

(Added Pub. L. 103–440, title II, §211(a), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4622.)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7598
WINSTON LLOYD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BISHOP L. ROBINSON, Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services; RICHARD A. LANHAM, SR., Commissioner of Corrections, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA95-943-PJM) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: April 23, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Winston Lloyd, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Lloyd v. Robinson , No. CA-95-943-PJM (D. Md. Aug. 18, 1995).We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
§ 36.48 Tests of surface temperature of engine and components of the cooling system. ( a ) The surface temperatures of the engine, exhaust cooling system, and other components subject to heating by engine operation shall be determined with the engine operated as prescribed by MSHA. All parts of the engine, cooling system, and other components shall have reached their respective equilibrium temperatures. The exhaust cooling system shall be operated, but air shall not be circulated over the engine or components. Surface temperatures shall be measured at various places prescribed by MSHA to determine where maximum temperatures develop.
( b ) The temperature of any surface shall not exceed 400 °F.
Note to § 36.48 :
The engine may be operated under test conditions prescribed by MSHA while completely surrounded by a flammable mixture. MSHA reserves the right to apply combustible materials to any surface for test. Operation under such conditions shall not ignite the flammable mixture.
[Sched. 31, 26 FR 645, Jan. 24, 1961, as amended at 61 FR 55526, Oct. 25, 1996]