alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
aw USGS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

science fora changing world U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1411-A
Thickness and lithology of the Belden-Molas subunit—PLATE 13

Geldon, A.L., 2002, Geology of Paleozoic rocks in the Upper Colorado River Basin in
‘Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, excluding the San Juan Basin

110°,

HORSESHOE
SOF AMSDEN HORSESHOE SHALE
FORMATION MEMBER OF AMSDEN

FORMATION

+ iSteanrthoat
Sone?

a See Ka
- \Hot hut\Spxirigs

BOUNDARY OF
107° UPPER COLORADO

. Rae RIVER BASIN

Springs g

SS ar

iy

BOUNDARY OF
107° UPPER COLORADO
RIVER BASIN

aT
a
Springs

°

ys

Navajo :
Reservoir ZF

AREA EXCLUDED FROM STUDY }

107°

NO DATA NO DATA

1:2,000,000

25 50 75 100 MILES
i | ! J

Q-Farmington|

AREA EXCLUDED FROM STUDY

T
100 KILOMETERS

o-oo
o-oo

25 50 75

STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE AND THICKNESS

108°
1:2,000,000
25 50 15 100 MILES
h | | }
T T T T
25 50 75 100KILOMETERS
LITHOLOGY

Navajo

Reservoir Pa
-

107°

EXPLANATION

A ae Area where Belden-Molas subunit is missing because of erosion or
nondeposition or thrust under Precambrian rocks

° Borehole with lithologic log used to prepare map

+ Measured surface stratigraphic section used to prepare map

Stratigraphic Nomenclature and Thickness

= Area where Belden-Molas subunit crops out (generalized)

—100— Line of equal thickness—Interval, in feet, is variable

Approximate boundary between component geologic units

N—— N' Location of stratigraphic cross section shown in figure 24

Lithology

Shale, limestone, and dolomite with less than 10 percent sandstone
interbeds

Shale, limestone, dolomite, and sandstone

—50— Line of equal percent limestone and dolomite—Interval is 25 percent

Approximate boundary between lithofacies

Base from U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. base map, 1:2,500,000

By
Arthur L. Geldon
9007

STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE, THICKNESS, AND LITHOLOGY OF THE BELDEN-MOLAS SUBUNIT OF THE FOUR CORNERS CONFINING UNIT
IN THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN AND VICINITY IN ARIZONA, COLORADO, NEW MEXICO, UTAH, AND WYOMING
In The Matter Of: 

HELOAIR INC., 

Resp~ndent 

·<SERVED AUGUST 14,2012 

U.S. DEPARTMENTOF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. FAA-2012-0472 

Case No. 2011-EA-210081 

ORDER GRANTING FAA'S MOTION 

FQRCONTINUANCE OF RULE 16 CONFERENCE 

IZ 

On August 6, 2012 an Order for Respondent to Show Cause Why the FAA's 

Motion for Postponement Should Not be Granted was filed. 

On August 10,2012 the Respondent's Response to Motion for Postponement of 

Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference was filed. In this Response, the Respondent 

agreed to the FAA's request for a one day continuance. 

It Is Hereby Ordered: 

1) The FAA's Motion for a one-day Postponement of the Rule 16 Litigat!<m 

Scheduling Conference is granted. 

2) The Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference, previously set on September 18, 

2012, is continued to Wednesday, September 19, 2012 at ll:OOam EST. 

Attachment: Service List 

ivan 

~WD~rr:suative Law Judge 
FDMS NO. FAA-2012-0472 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL and FAX 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430, 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

John G. Butler, III, Respondents' Counsel 

SANDS ANDERSON PC 

Bank of America Center 

1111 East Main Street, Suite 2400 

Richmond, VA 23219 

TEL: 804-648-1636 

FAX:. 804-783;. 7291 

Whit Baldwin, President 

Heloair, Inc., 

5721 Gulfstream Road 

Richmond, VA 23250 

TEL: 804-226-3400 

ONE COPY 

Zachery M. Berman, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AEA-7 

Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 · 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

. FAX: 718-995-5699 

The Honorable J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

· Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366.:2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

1 

For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: 

Heating Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
Editorial Note on Part 75
Editorial Note: The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

§ 75.1712-5 Application for waiver of surface facilities. Applications for waivers of the requirements of §§ 75.1712-1 through 75.1712-3 shall be filed with the Coal Mine Safety District Manager and shall contain the following information: ( a ) The name and address of the mine operator;
( b ) The name and location of the mine;
( c ) A statement explaining why, in the opinion of the operator, the installation or maintenance of the facilities is impractical or unnecessary.
(December *2,*1960)

#### In the Matter of La Belle Creole International, S. A., Appellant, v. Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent.

Order, entered on November 10, 1960, denying petitioner’s motion to vacate a subpoena duces tecum unanimously reversed, on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to petitioner-appellant, and the motion granted, without prejudice to the bringing of any other appropriate proceeding. The record made by respondent is wholly insufficient to justify the occasion for, * or the scope of, the subpoena issued. That deficiency may not be cured by the statements contained in respondent’s brief. If respondent did not have sufficient time to make an adequate record upon the return day of petitioner’s motion there are appropriate measures that could have been taken to obtain additional time. Moreover, but for the fact that petitioner did not interpose a special appearance, the subpoena must have been vacated for absence in the record of any evidence to establish that petitioner, a foreign corporation, is doing business or is present within the State of New York. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.
#### § 761.3 Authority.

The State regulatory authority or the Secretary is authorized by section 522(e) of the Act (30 U.S.C. 1272(e)) to prohibit or limit surface coal mining operations on or near certain private, Federal, and other public lands, subject to valid existing rights and except for those operations which existed on August 3, 1977.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-06-00488- CV

And r e Jo e l Ho war d, A ppe lla nt

v. Harris County Hospi tal Distric t and TWCC, App ellees

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 53RD JUDICIAL DISTRI CT NO. D-1- GN-05- 0037 05, H ONO RAB LE STEPH EN YELENO SK Y , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N
Andre J oel Howa

rd, ac ting pr o se, attempts to a ppeal from the trial court’ s denial of his mot ion

fo r summa

ry jud g me nt, g ra

nt o f a pp e lle e ’s sp e c ia l e xce pti on s, and de c laratio n th a t he is

a fr ivo lou s litig ant. I n g e ne ra l, a pp e a ls m ay

be pr os e c ute d o nly

fr om a fi na l ju dg me nt. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp. , 39 S.W .3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Howa rd does not attempt to appe al from a final jud g me nt. The district cour t declar ed appe llant a frivolous litiga nt. See Te x. Civ . Pr a c . & Re m. Cod e Ann. § 1 1. 05 1 (W est 2002 ). Th e c ourt e xpre ssl y

fo un d th a t th e re wa s n ot a re a so na ble probability that Howar d would preva il a nd that he met the test for the numbers of l aw s u i t s filed during the preceding seven- y ear period. Se e id . § 11.054(1)( A). The order set a bond in orde r for Howar d to proce ed. Se e id

. § 11.055. Neither Chapter 11 of

the civil prac tice and r emedies c odeSe c tio n 5 1. 01 4 e nume rate s v ari ou s c a te g or ie s o f i nte rl oc uto ry a pp e a ls. 1 2 nor sec tion 51.014 of that code pr ovides for a n appea l from this ty

pe of or der. See id. §§ 1.001- 1 .014; 51.014 (West Supp. 2005).

The c ourt g rante d Har

ris County

Hospital District’s specia l exceptions that it lodge d ag ainst Howar d’s pl eading s. When specia l exceptions are g rante d, a litiga nt has two options: amend the p le a d in g s o r s ta

n d o n th e p le a d in g s a s f

il e d , p r o c e e d to ju d g me n t, an d te s t th e pleading s on
a pp e a l. Te x. R. Civ . P. 90 , 9 1; Ford v. Pe rformance Aircraft Serv s., Inc. , 1 7 8 S. W. 3 d

3 3 0 , 3 3 6 ( T e x. Ap p. —F or

t Wor th 2 00 5, pe t. d e nie d) ; Butler W eldments Cor

p. v. L iberty Mut. Ins. Co. , 3 S.W .3d 65 4, 65 8 ( Te x. Ap p. —Aus tin 19 99 , no pe t.) . H ow e ve r, the sim ple g ra nt o f s pe c ia l e xce pti on s w ith an opportunity

to a mend is a n unappea lable interlocutory matter. Simi larly , the simple de nial of a motion for summary

judgme nt, as opposed to the g rant a nd denial of c ross-motions for summary judgme nt, is an interlocutory matter that is not appea lable. See City of Garland v. Dallas Morning Ne ws , 22 S.W. 3d

35 1, 35 6 ( Te x. 20 00 ); W

illiams v. Texas State Bd. of Orthotics & Prosthetics , 150 S.W .3d 563, 567 (Tex. App.—Austin 2004, no pet.).3 Ho wa rd ha s atte mpt e d to a

pp e a l on ly matte rs fo r wh ic h n o inte rl oc uto ry a pp e a l li e s. Acc ording ly , we have no jurisdiction over this attempted a ppeal a nd must dism iss the appea l for want of jurisdiction. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

W. Kenneth L aw, Chief Justice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Pury ear and Pember

ton Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: September

7, 2006
### **CHAPTER 3003—DEFINITIONS**

Sec.
300301.
Agency.
300302.
Certified local government.
300303.
Council.
300304.
Cultural park.
300305.
Historic conservation district.
300306.
Historic Preservation Fund.
300307.
Historic preservation review commission.
300308.
Historic property.
300309.
Indian tribe.
300310.
Local government.
300311.
National Register.
300312.
National Trust.
300313.
Native Hawaiian.
300314.
Native Hawaiian organization.
300315.
Preservation or historic preservation.
300316.
Secretary.
300317.
State.
300318.
State historic preservation review board.
300319.
Tribal land.
300320.
Undertaking.
300321.
World Heritage Convention.
FREMONT

CARBON

SWEETWATER

ALBANY

NATRONA

SUBLETTE

LINCOLN

CONVERSE

CROOK

UINTA

LARAMIE

WESTON

PLATTE

GOSHEN

NIOBRARA

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

Bridger-Teton

Thunder 

Basin

Medicine-Bow

Medicine-Bow

Rawlins

Casper

Rock Springs

Kemmerer

Pinedale

Yellowstone Newcastle

National Park

Lusk

Yoder

Hanna

Baggs

Afton

Hulett

Glendo

Casper

Douglas

Bairoil

Rawlins

Laramie

Superior

Sundance

Saratoga

La Barge Guernsey

Pinedale

Kemmerer

Evanston

Cheyenne

Wheatland

Wamsutter

Cokeville

Chugwater

Big Piney

Newcastle

Torrington

Rock River

Pine Bluffs

Green River

Medicine Bow

Fort Laramie

Elk Mountain

Rock Springs

Grand Encampment

0 25 50 100

Miles

0 25 50 100

Kilometers

Wyoming Sage-Grouse 

Land Use Plan Amendments

o

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF 

THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

LUP Amendments Planning Area

BLM Field Office Boundary

Forest Service Planning Unit Boundary

Withdrawn from Mineral Entry

Proposed Withdrawal from Mineral Entry

BLM and USFS Surface Lands

Sage-grouse Priority/Core Habitat Areas

Sage-grouse Connectivity Habitat Areas

Counties

Water

Interstate

State / US Hwy

Cities

Map 2-22: Alternative D

Areas Withdrawn 

from Mineral Entry
§ 761.15 Procedures for waiving the prohibition on surface coal mining operations within the buffer zone of an occupied dwelling. ( a ) This section does not apply to: ( 1 ) Lands for which a person has valid existing rights, as determined under § 761.16.
( 2 ) Lands within the scope of the exception for existing operations in § 761.12.
( 3 ) Access or haul roads that connect with an existing public road on the side of the public road opposite the dwelling, as provided in § 761.11(e)(2).
( b ) If you propose to conduct surface coal mining operations within 300 feet, measured horizontally, of any occupied dwelling, the permit application must include a written waiver by lease, deed, or other conveyance from the owner of the dwelling. The waiver must clarify that the owner and signator had the legal right to deny mining and knowingly waived that right. The waiver will act as consent to surface coal mining operations within a closer distance of the dwelling as specified.
( c ) If you obtained a valid waiver before August 3, 1977, from the owner of an occupied dwelling to conduct operations within 300 feet of the dwelling, you need not submit a new waiver.
( d ) If you obtain a valid waiver from the owner of an occupied dwelling, that waiver will remain effective against subsequent purchasers who had actual or constructive knowledge of the existing waiver at the time of purchase. A subsequent purchaser will be deemed to have constructive knowledge if the waiver has been properly filed in public property records pursuant to State laws or if surface coal mining operations have entered the 300-foot zone before the date of purchase.
[64 FR 70833, Dec. 17, 1999]
### §415a–11. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 415a–11, comprising section 506I of the National Security Act of 1947, act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, was editorially reclassified as section 3105 of this title.
#### ST. REGIS PAPER CO., Appellant, v. SANTA CLARA LUMBER CO. et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

January 4, 1905.)

Action by the St. Regis Paper Company against the Santa Clara Lumber Company and others. No opinion. Motion to put over term granted.
PUBLIC LAW 115–6—FEB. 28, 2017 131 STAT. 11 

Public Law 115–6 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To authorize the National Science Foundation to support entrepreneurial programs 

for women. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Promoting Women in 

Entrepreneurship Act’’. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

The Congress finds that— 

(1) women make up almost 50 percent of the workforce, 

but less than 25 percent of the workforce in science, technology, 

engineering, and mathematics (STEM) professions; 

(2) women are less likely to focus on the STEM disciplines 

in undergraduate and graduate study; 

(3) only 26 percent of women who do attain degrees in 

STEM fields work in STEM jobs; 

(4) there is an increasing demand for individuals with 

STEM degrees to extend their focus beyond the laboratory 

so they can be leaders in discovery commercialization; 

(5) studies have shown that technology and commercialization ventures are successful when women are in top management positions; and 

(6) the National Science Foundation’s mission includes supporting women in STEM disciplines. 

SEC. 3. SUPPORTING WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURIAL PROGRAMS. 

Section 33 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities 

Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a) is amended— 

(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (10); 

(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (11) 

and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

42 USC 1885a 

note. 

Promoting 

Women in 

Entrepreneurship Act. 

42 USC 1861 

note. 

Feb. 28, 2017 

[H.R. 255] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS
131 STAT. 12 PUBLIC LAW 115–6—FEB. 28, 2017 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 255: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 163 (2017): 

Jan. 10, considered and passed House. 

Feb. 14, considered and passed Senate. 

DAILY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS (2017): 

Feb. 28, Presidential remarks. 

Æ 

‘‘(12) encourage its entrepreneurial programs to recruit and 

support women to extend their focus beyond the laboratory 

and into the commercial world.’’. 

Approved February 28, 2017. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9915 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9915

 To permanently extend the first right of refusal for the purchase of 
                 Tribal assets, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 4, 2024

  Mr. Curtis introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To permanently extend the first right of refusal for the purchase of 
                 Tribal assets, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ASSET MANAGEMENT.

    Public Law 83-671 is amended as follows:
            (1) In section 10--
                    (A) by striking ``jointly by the Tribal Business 
                Committee and the authorized representatives of the 
                mixed-blood group'' and inserting ``by the Tribal 
                Business Committee''; and
                    (B) by striking ``in the joint management with the 
                tribe and''.
            (2) By amending section 15 to read as follows:
    ``Sec. 15. (a) Any member of the mixed-blood group may dispose of 
his interest in the tribal assets prior to termination of Federal 
supervision, subject to the approval of the Secretary. In the event a 
member of the mixed-blood group or any other individual or entity 
determines to dispose of his interest in any of said real property at 
any time by gift, sale, or any form of transfer that divests such 
individual or entity of any right, title, or interest in such real 
property, he shall first offer it to the Tribe, and no gift, sale, or 
any form of transfer that divests such individual or entity of any 
right, title, or interest in such real property shall be authorized 
without such offer to the Tribe. After termination of Federal 
supervision the requirement of such offer, in form to be approved by 
the Secretary, shall be a covenant to run with the land, and shall be 
expressly provided in any patent or deed issued.
    ``(b) The Secretary shall maintain a list of all individuals and 
entities holding an interest in tribal assets and, on an annual basis, 
notify those individuals and entities that any gift, sale, or any form 
of transfer that divests such individual or entity of any right, title, 
or interest in such real property must first be made to the Tribe.''.
            (3) In section 17, by striking ``aiding in the joint 
        management with the tribe and in''.
                                 <all>
```
### §60141. Standards for underground natural gas storage facilities

(a) Minimum Safety Standards.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of the PIPES Act of 2016, the Secretary, in consultation with the heads of other relevant Federal agencies, shall issue minimum safety standards for underground natural gas storage facilities.

(b) Considerations.—In developing the safety standards required under subsection (a), the Secretary shall, to the extent practicable—

(1) consider consensus standards for the operation, environmental protection, and integrity management of underground natural gas storage facilities;

(2) consider the economic impacts of the regulations on individual gas customers;

(3) ensure that the regulations do not have a significant economic impact on end users; and

(4) consider the recommendations of the Aliso Canyon natural gas leak task force established under section 31 of the PIPES Act of 2016.

(c) Federal-State Cooperation.—The Secretary may authorize a State authority (including a municipality) to participate in the oversight of underground natural gas storage facilities in the same manner as provided in sections 60105 and 60106.

(d) Rules of Construction.—

(1) In general.—Nothing in this section may be construed to affect any Federal regulation relating to gas pipeline facilities that is in effect on the day before the date of enactment of the PIPES Act of 2016.

(2) Limitations.—Nothing in this section may be construed to authorize the Secretary—

(A) to prescribe the location of an underground natural gas storage facility; or

(B) to require the Secretary's permission to construct a facility referred to in subparagraph (A).

(e) Preemption.—A State authority may adopt additional or more stringent safety standards for intrastate underground natural gas storage facilities if such standards are compatible with the minimum standards prescribed under this section.

(f) Statutory Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the Secretary's authority under this title to regulate the underground storage of gas that is not natural gas.

(Added Pub. L. 114–183, §12(b), June 22, 2016, 130 Stat. 522.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The date of enactment of the PIPES Act of 2016, referred to in subsecs. (a) and (d)(1), is the date of enactment of Pub. L. 114–183, which was approved June 22, 2016.

Section 31 of the PIPES Act of 2016, referred to in subsec. (b)(4), is section 31 of Pub. L. 114–183, June 22, 2016, 130 Stat. 533, which is not classified to the Code.
#### § 912.783 Underground mining permit applications—minimum requirements for information on environmental resources.

Part 783 of this chapter, *Underground Mining Permit Applications—Minimum Requirements for Information on Environmental Resources,* shall apply to any person who submits an application to conduct underground coal mining operations.
§ 921.774 Revision; renewal; and transfer, assignment, or sale of permit rights. ( a ) Part 774 of this chapter, *Revision; Renewal; and Transfer, Assignment, or Sale of Permit Rights,* shall apply to any such actions involving surface coal mining and reclamation operations permits.
( b ) Any revision to the approved permit will be subject to review and approval by OSMRE. ( 1 ) Significant revisions shall be processed as if they are new applications in accordance with the public notice and hearing provisions of §§ 773.6, 773.19(b) (1) and (2), and 778.21 and of part 775.
( 2 ) OSMRE shall make every effort to approve or disapprove an application for permit revision within 60 days of receipt or such longer time as may be reasonable under the circumstances. If additional time is needed, OSMRE shall notify the applicant that the application is being reviewed, but that more time is necessary to complete such review, setting forth the reasons and the additional time that is needed.
( c ) In addition to the requirements of part 774 of this chapter, any person having an interest which is or may be adversely affected by a decision on the transfer, assignment, or sale of permit rights, including an official of any Federal, State, or local government agency, may submit written comments on the application to the Office within thirty days of either the publication of the newspaper advertisement required by § 774.17(b)(2) of this chapter or receipt of an administratively complete application, whichever is later.
[52 FR 13809, Apr. 24, 1987, as amended at 65 FR 79672 Dec. 19, 2000]
#### In the Matter of James R. McElroy, Petitioner, v. William J. McAndrews et al., Constituting the Board of Police Commissioners of the Village of Hastings-on-Hudson, Respondents.

Motion by respondents to dismiss proceeding for lack of prosecution, granted by default, with $10 costs, and proceeding dismissed. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.