alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### **CHAPTER 705—EXPLORATION INITIATIVES**

Sec.
70501.
Space shuttle follow-on.
70502.
Exploration plan and programs.
70503.
Ground-based analog capabilities.
70504.
Stepping stone approach to exploration.
70505.
Lunar outpost.
70506.
Exploration technology research.
70507.
Technology development.
70508.
Robotic or human servicing of spacecraft.
#### Donald Solano, an Infant, by His Guardian ad Litem, Anna I. Iberger, et al., Respondents, v. James Reilly et al., Defendants, and Hubert Andrel, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Andrei appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 3, 1959, denying his motion, pursuant to rule 112 of the Rules of Civil Practice, for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint against him on the ground that, as to him, it fails to state a cause of action. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. We do not agree with the conclusion reached at the Special Term that the affidavit of an employee of the attorney for the plaintiff and an attached excerpt from the examination ' before trial of a defendant, could properly be considered for the purpose of showing the existence of an issue of fact as to the ownership of an automobile involved in the accident which resulted in the infant plaintiff’s injuries. The only question presented was whether the complaint sufficiently pleaded a cause of action against the defendant Andrei. It was asserted that the complaint did not because the allegation that he owned the automobile stated a conclusion of law and was not an allegation of fact. In our opinion, the allegation of ownership is sufficient (cf. *Trembath*v. *Berner,*240 N. Y. 618), and the complaint adequately states a cause of action against the defendant Andrei. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
##

# #

#

# ## #

## # # ## # # #

# ## ##

# ##

## ## ###

# ####

#

#

#

# # #

#

#

#

###

## #

# # #

#

### # # # #

##

# # #

# #

###

###

# # # # ##

## # # ## # ## # ####### ## # # # #

### # #

##

# # # ### ##

#

#####

#

#####

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

# # #

####

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

###

###

##

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

####

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

# Recreation Sites

Recreation Areas

BLM and USFS Surface Lands

Counties

Interstate

State / US Hwy

Cities

Water

Map 3-14: Developed Recreation Sites

## ##
### §302302. Program evaluation

(a) When Evaluation Should Occcur 1.—Periodically, but not less than every 4 years after the approval of any State program under section 302301 of this title, the Secretary, in consultation with the Council on the appropriate provisions of this division, and in cooperation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, shall evaluate the program to determine whether it is consistent with this division.

(b) Disapproval of Program.—If, at any time, the Secretary determines that a major aspect of a State program is not consistent with this division, the Secretary shall disapprove the program and suspend in whole or in part any contracts or cooperative agreements with the State and the State Historic Preservation Officer under this division, until the program is consistent with this division, unless the Secretary determines that the program will be made consistent with this division within a reasonable period of time.

(c) Oversight.—The Secretary, in consultation with State Historic Preservation Officers, shall establish oversight methods to ensure State program consistency and quality without imposing undue review burdens on State Historic Preservation Officers.

(d) State Fiscal Audit and Management System.—

(1) Substitution for comparable federal systems.—At the discretion of the Secretary, a State system of fiscal audit and management may be substituted for comparable Federal systems so long as the State system—

(A) establishes and maintains substantially similar accountability standards; and

(B) provides for independent professional peer review.

(2) Fiscal audits and review by secretary.—The Secretary—

(A) may conduct periodic fiscal audits of State programs approved under this subdivision as needed; and

(B) shall ensure that the programs meet applicable accountability standards.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3195.)

| *Revised* Section | *Source (U.S. Code)* | *Source (Statutes at Large)* |
| ----------------- | --------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 302302 | 16 U.S.C. 470a(b)(2). | Pub. L. 89–665, title I, §101(b)(2), Oct. 15, 1966, 80 Stat. 915; Pub. L. 91–383, §11, as added Pub. L. 94–458, §2, Oct. 7, 1976, 90 Stat. 1942; Pub. L. 93–54, §1(d), July 1, 1973, 87 Stat. 139; Pub. L. 96–205, title VI, §608(a)(1), (2), Mar. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 92; Pub. L. 96–515, title II, §201(a), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2990; Pub. L. 102–575, title XL, §4004(1), Oct. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 4753. |

1  So in original. Probably should be " Occur ".
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 1, 2013

h0626 

# Order

Clerk July 1, 2013

147284 & (35)

HANI & RAMIZ, INC., d/b/a MO RE

FOOD 4 LESS, and HANI & RAMIZ

PROPERTIES, LLC,

Plaintiffs

- Appellees,

v SC: 147284

COA: 316453

Oakland CC: 2011

- 121029

- CK

NORTH POINTE INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Defendant

- Appellant,

and

BLACKMORE

- ROWE SWARTZ

CREEK, INC.,

Defendant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED.

The application for leave to appeal the June 12, 2013 order of the Court of Appeals is

considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1 ), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we

REVERSE that part of the order of the Court of Appeals denying the motion for stay

pending appeal, and we REMAND this case to the Oakland Circuit Court for entry of an

order staying the execution of the judgment p ending completion of this appeal. MCR

7.209(H)(1).

C AVANAGH

, J. , would deny leave to appeal.
###### Editorial Note on Part 783

#### Editorial Note:

At 82 FR 54956, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 783 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93330, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 783.11 General requirements.

Each permit application shall include a description of the existing, premining environmental resources within the proposed permit area and adjacent areas that may be affected or impacted by the proposed underground mining activities.

[44 FR 15363, Mar. 13, 1979, as amended at 45 FR 51550, Aug. 4, 1980; 81 FR 93330, Dec. 20, 2016; 82 FR 54956, Nov. 17, 2017]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsImaging Fluorescent Combustion Species in Gas Turbine Flame Tubes: On Complexities in Real SystemsPlanar laser-induced fluorescence (PLIF) is used to visualize the flame structure via OH, NO, and fuel imaging in kerosene- burning gas turbine combustor flame tubes. When compared to simple gaseous hydrocarbon flames and hydrogen flames, flame tube testing complexities include spectral interferences from large fuel fragments, unknown turbulence interactions, high pressure operation, and the concomitant need for windows and remote operation. Complications of these and other factors as they apply to image analysis are considered. Because both OH and gas turbine engine fuels (commercial and military) can be excited and detected using OH transition lines, a narrowband and a broadband detection scheme are compared and the benefits and drawbacks of each method are examined.Document ID19970026602Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsHicks, Y. R.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Locke, R. J.*(NYMA, Inc. Brook Park, OH United States)*Anderson, R. C.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Zaller, M.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Schock, H. J.*(Michigan State Univ. East Lansing, MI United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1997Subject CategoryAircraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-107491AIAA Paper 97-2837NAS 1.15:107491E-10788Meeting InformationMeeting: Joint PropulsionLocation: Seattle, WACountry: United StatesStart Date: July 6, 1997End Date: July 9, 1997Sponsors:American Society of Mechanical Engineers,American Inst. of Aeronautics and Astronautics,Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.,American Society for Electrical EngineersAccession Number97N25851Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 537-05-20CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-27186Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970026602.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
Map 3-17: USFS Special Designation Areas

0 20 40 60 80

Kilometers

0 20 40 60 80

Miles

1

LUP Amendments Planning Area

BLM Field Office Boundaries

Forest Service Planning Unit Boundaries

Designated Wild & Scenic Rivers

Designated Wilderness

Wilderness Study Areas

Sheep Mountain National Game Refuge

Wyoming Range Withdrawal Area

Research Natural Areas

Special Interest Areas

Inventoried Roadless Areas

BLM & USFS Surface Management

County Boundaries

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

Wyoming Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendments

Final Environmental Impact Statement - May 2015

W Y O M I N G

M T

I D

M A P A R E A

Crook

Weston

Sundance

Rock Springs

Field Office

§ ̈¦80

U T

C O

N E

S D

Newcastle

Lusk

Douglas

Casper

Cheyenne

Wheatland Torrington

Laramie

Rawlins

Rock Springs

Green River

Evanston

Kemmerer

Pinedale

Rawlins Field Offi ce

Casper Field Offi ce

Newcastle

Field Office

Pinedale

Field Office

Kemmerer

Field Office

Bridger -

Teton

N.F.

Thunder

Basin

N.G.

Thunder

Basin

N.G.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine Bow

N.F.

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

Platte

G

o

s

h

e

n

Alb

a

n

y

L

a

r

a

mie

C

o

n

v

e

r

s

e

Nio

b

r

a

r

a

Nat rona

Carbon

S

w

e

etw

ate

r

C

a

r

b

o

n

Sublette

Lincoln

T

eto

n

Fr

e

m

o

nt

Wyoming Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendments
131 STAT. 2268 PUBLIC LAW 115–109—JAN. 10, 2018 

Public Law 115–109 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To designate a mountain in the John Muir Wilderness of the Sierra National 

Forest as ‘‘Sky Point’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds the following: 

(1) Staff Sergeant Sky Mote, USMC, grew up in El Dorado, 

California. 

(2) Staff Sergeant Mote graduated from Union Mine High 

School. 

(3) Upon graduation, Staff Sergeant Mote promptly enlisted 

in the Marine Corps. 

(4) Staff Sergeant Mote spent 9 years serving his country 

in the United States Marine Corps, including a deployment 

to Iraq and two deployments to Afghanistan. 

(5) By his decisive actions, heroic initiative, and resolute 

dedication to duty, Staff Sergeant Mote gave his life to protect 

fellow Marines on August 10, 2012, by gallantly rushing into 

action during an attack by a rogue Afghan policeman inside 

the base perimeter in Helmand province. 

(6) Staff Sergeant Mote was awarded the Navy Cross, 

a Purple Heart, the Navy-Marine Corps Commendation Medal, 

a Navy-Marine Corps Achievement Medal, two Combat Action 

Ribbons and three Good Conduct Medals. 

(7) The Congress of the United States, in acknowledgment 

of this debt that cannot be repaid, honors Staff Sergeant Mote 

for his ultimate sacrifice and recognizes his service to his 

country, faithfully executed to his last, full measure of devotion. 

(8) A presently unnamed peak in the center of Humphrey 

Basin holds special meaning to the friends and family of Sky 

Mote, as their annual hunting trips set up camp beneath this 

point; under the stars, the memories made beneath this rounded 

peak will be cherished forever. 

SEC. 2. SKY POINT. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The mountain in the John Muir Wilderness 

of the Sierra National Forest in California, located at 

37°15′16.10091′′N 118°43′39.54102′′W, shall be known and designated as ‘‘Sky Point’’. 

California. 

16 USC 1132 

note. 

Sky Mote. 

Jan. 10, 2018 

[H.R. 381] 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
PUBLIC LAW 115–109—JAN. 10, 2018 131 STAT. 2269 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 381: 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 115–111 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 163 (2017): 

Jan. 30, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, record, or other paper of the United States to the mountain described in subsection (a) shall be considered to be a reference 

to ‘‘Sky Point’’. 

Approved January 10, 2018. 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
### §200401. Definitions

In this chapter:

(1) Asset.—The term "asset" means any real property, including any physical structure or grouping of structures, landscape, trail, or other tangible property, that—

(A) has a specific service or function; and

(B) is tracked and managed as a distinct, identifiable entity by the applicable covered agency.

(2) Covered agency.—The term "covered agency" means—

(A) the Service;

(B) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service;

(C) the Forest Service;

(D) the Bureau of Land Management; and

(E) the Bureau of Indian Education.

(3) Fund.—The term "Fund" means the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund established by section 200402(a).

(4) Project.—The term "project" means any activity to reduce or eliminate deferred maintenance of an asset, which may include resolving directly related infrastructure deficiencies of the asset that would not by itself be classified as deferred maintenance.

(Added Pub. L. 116–152, §2(a), Aug. 4, 2020, 134 Stat. 682.)
#### § 77.501 Electric distribution circuits and equipment; repair.

No electrical work shall be performed on electric distribution circuits or equipment, except by a qualified person or by a person trained to perform electrical work and to maintain electrical equipment under the direct supervision of a qualified person. Disconnecting devices shall be locked out and suitably tagged by the persons who perform such work, except that in cases where locking out is not possible, such devices shall be opened and suitably tagged by such persons. Locks or tags shall be removed only by the persons who installed them or, if such persons are unavailable, by persons authorized by the operator or his agent.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50540 Summary Calendar

STEVEN L. SONDLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus BEXAR COUNTY JAIL EMPLOYEES; FNU SANTANA, Officer; CESAR A. GARCIA, Physician who treated broken rib; PATTY SMITH, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-97-CV-845

- - - - - - - - - - March 15, 1999 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Steven L. Sondley, now a Texas prisoner (# 342397), appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his civil rights complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, concerning an alleged beating and denial of medical treatment while he was a pretrial detainee at Bexar County Jail. Sondley contends that: (1) the district court erred by granting defendant Dr. Cesar Garcia’s motion to dismiss pursuant to F ED . R. C IV . P. 12(b)(6),No. 98-50540 -2- and (2) that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to permit him to conduct discovery and by refusing to appoint counsel for him. We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties, and we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal for essentially the same reasons set forth by the magistrate judge and adopted by the district court. See Sondley v. Santana , No. SA-97-CA-0845-FB (W.D. Tex. Jan. 28, 1998). Sondley’s motion to strike the appellate brief of Dr. Garcia is DENIED. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; MOTION TO STRIKE DENIED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. William E. French, Appellant.

In a *coram nobis*proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the County Court, Nassau County, entered December 4, 1962, which denied without a hearing his application to vacate a judgment of said court rendered January 30, 1934 after a jury trial, convicting him of murder in the second degree, and imposing sentence. [For prior appeal by codefendant, *641see *People*v. *Brengard,*265 N. Y. 100.] Order affirmed. Defendant contends there was a fatal defect in his conviction and he seeks to vacate it on the ground that at the time of his initial arraignment — when he was without counsel — a plea of not guilty was entered by the court on his behalf. For the reasons stated at length in the case decided herewith *(People*v. *Combs,*19 A D 2d 639), the order here must be affirmed. Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

APR 13 2012

OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

The Honorable Jon Tester

United States Senate

Washington, D.C, 20510

. Dear Senator Tester:

Thank you for your letter of February 17,2012, to Administrator Jackson, co-signed by Senator

Baucus, concerning the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's upcoming actions on the

Montana Regional Haze Federallrnplementation Plan (FIP). The Administrator asked that I

respond on her behalf.

In your letter, you express concern about the possible economic impact from our FIP. You also

urge that our decisions on cost effectiveness of controls for Best Available Retrofit Technology

(BART) be consistent with the costs required to comply with health-based standards, and you

cite the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule costs as an example.

We understand your concerns and note that the Regional Haze Rule requires that a number of

factors be weighed in decisions on BART controls, including cost, available technology, energy

and non-air impacts, remaining useful life of equipment and visibility improvement. As EPA

Regional Administrator Jim Martin and his staff discussed in a briefing with your staff on March

20, the day the proposal was signed, we have endeavored to assess each of these factors to

support our preliminary decisions for BART controls included in the proposed Montana

Regional Haze FIP. I

In the FIP we are proposing nitrogen oxides (NOx) BART controls for two cement plants (Ash

Grove Cement and Holcim) and NOx and sulfur dioxide (S02) BART controls for two power

plant units (PPL Montana Colstrip Power Plant - Units I and 2). We are proposing reasonable

progress controls for NOx for two engines at the Devon Energy - Blaine County Compressor

Station. We estimate that our proposed FIP would reduce NOx emissions by about 6,600 tons

per year and S02 emissions by about 8,600 tons per year. The emission reductions will result in

perceptible visibility improvements at the Theodore Roosevelt National Park and at Gates ofthe

Mountains Wilderness Area.

Per our consent decree with WildEarth Guardians, the EPA is obligated to finalize the Montana

FIP by August 15,2012. The proposed FIP will be open for public comment for 60 days

following publication ofthis rule and EPA will also hold two public hearings during this time.

1 The FIP can be accessed online at http:www.epa.gov/region8/air

Internet Address (URL)' http./lwwwepa.gov

Recycled/Recyclable' Pnnted with vegetable 0,1 Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer. Process Chlonne Free Recycled Paper
We will put your letter in the docket for the proposed rule, and we welcome any additional

information or comments you may have on the proposaL

If you have further questions on the proposal, please contact me or your staffmay call Josh

Lewis in the EPA's Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations at (202) 564-2095.

Sincerely,

('

ina McCarthy

Assistant Administrator
### §300313. Native Hawaiian

In this division, the term "Native Hawaiian" means any individual who is a descendant of the aboriginal people who, prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now constitutes Hawaii.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3190.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 300313 | 16 U.S.C. 470w(17). | Pub. L. 89–665, title III, §301(17), as added Pub. L. 102–575, title XL, §4019(a)(12), Oct. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 4764. |

Section