alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

:

MICHAEL ANDREWS, :

Plaintiff :

:

v. : CIVIL NO.4:CV-04-551

:

: (Judge McClure) 

LIEUTENANT VANCE, ET AL., :

Defendants :

ORDER

April 25, 2005

Background

This pro se civil rights action was filed by Michael Andrews, an inmate

presently confined at the State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania. 

Presently pending is the Plaintiff’s motion (Record document no. 36) seeking

appointment of counsel.

Although prisoners have no constitutional or statutory rights to appointment

of counsel in a civil case, the court does have broad discretionary power to

appoint counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 153

(3d Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1196 (1994); Ray v. Robinson, 640 F.2d

474, 477 (3d Cir. 1981). The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has stated

that appointment of counsel for an indigent litigant should be made when

Case 4:04-cv-00551-JFM-JVW Document 37 Filed 04/25/05 Page 1 of 3
2

circumstances indicate "the likelihood of substantial prejudice to him resulting, for

example, from his probable inability without such assistance to present the facts

and legal issues to the court in a complex but arguably meritorious case." 

Smith-Bey v. Petsock, 741 F.2d 22, 26 (3d Cir. 1984). 

Recently, the United States Court of Appeals again recognized that

“[i]ndigent civil litigants possess neither a constitutional nor a statutory right to

appointed counsel.” Montgomery v. Pinchak, 294 F.3d 492, 498 (3d Cir. 2002)

(citation omitted). It also reiterated that the criteria developed in Tabron should be

employed in addressing the appointment of counsel issue.

Andrews’ motion fails to set forth sufficient special circumstances or

factors that would warrant appointment of counsel. Tabron, supra, at 155-56. In

the pleadings submitted by Plaintiff to date, he has demonstrated that he is capable

of presenting comprehensible arguments. Furthermore, this court's liberal

construction of pro se pleadings, Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972), coupled

with Plaintiff's apparent ability to litigate this action pro se, mitigate against the

appointment of counsel. Moreover, the legal issues are relatively uncomplicated,

and the court cannot say, at least at this point, that Andrews will suffer substantial

prejudice if he is forced to prosecute this case on his own. 

Therefore, Andrews’ motion for appointment of counsel will be denied. In

Case 4:04-cv-00551-JFM-JVW Document 37 Filed 04/25/05 Page 2 of 3
the event, however, that future proceedings demonstrate the need for counsel, the

matter may be reconsidered either sua sponte or upon a motion properly filed by

the Plaintiff.

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

Plaintiff's motion for appointment of 

counsel (Record document no. 36) is denied.

 s/ James F. McClure, Jr. 

JAMES F. McCLURE, JR.

United States District Judge

 

Case 4:04-cv-00551-JFM-JVW Document 37 Filed 04/25/05 Page 3 of 3
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549





FORM 40-F





ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13(a) OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002





ALGOMA STEEL INC.

(Registrant's name)





Incorporated in the Province of Ontario, Canada





3312

(Primary Standard Industrial

Classification Code Number)





Not Applicable

(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)





105 West Street

Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario

Canada P6A 7B4

Telephone (705) 945-2700

(Address and telephone number of Registrant's

principal executive office)





CT Corporation System

1633 Broadway

New York, New York 10019

Telephone (212) 664-1666

(Name, address and telephone number of agent for services

in the United States)





Title of Securities                                                      Exchange on which Registered

11% Notes due 2009

1% Notes due 2030

Common Shares                                                                             TSE





_ _ Annual Information Form                              _X_  Audited Annual Financial Statements



SIGNATURES



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 40-F and has duly caused this Annual Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.



Date: May 5, 2003



ALGOMA STEEL INC.

(Registrant)



By:  Glen Manchester

Glen Manchester

Vice President Finance and

Chief Financial Officer
ACCEPTED03-15-00227-CR6378141THIRD COURT OF APPEALSAUSTIN, TEXAS8/6/2015 8:37:45 AMJEFFREY D. KYLECLERKNo.03-15-00227-CRPEDROP.MORALES,Appellant)))))))COURTOFAPPEALS,THIRDvs.SUPREMEJUDICIALDISTRICTSTATEOFTEXAS,AppelleeAUSTIN,TEXASAPPELLANT'SSECONDMOTIONFOREXTENSIONOFTIMETOFILEBRIEFTOTHEHONORABLEJUDGEOFSAIDCOURT:COMESNOW,Appellant,byandthroughhisattorneyofrecord,andrespectfullyfilesthishisSecondMotionforExtensionofTimetoFileBriefandrequeststhisextensionoftimetofilehisappellatebriefinthiscause herein,andfor·causewouldshowtheCourtthefollowing:I.TheAppellant,PEDROP.MORALES,wasfoundguiltybyajuryinCausenumberC-14-1091-SA,inthe340thDistrictCourtofTomGreenCounty,Texas,andthejuryimposedasentenceonMarch24,2015offive(5)yearsconfinementintheTexasDepartmentofCriminalJustice-InstitutionalDivision.II.TheStatementofFactshasbeenfiledwiththeCourt.III.

The deadline for filing the Appellant ' s brief is August 10, 2015. The

undersigned attorney would show the Court that he has insufficient time within which

to file the briefby the deadline of August 10,2015. Of the thirty (30) working days

between June 25, 2015 and August 10, 2015, the undersigned attorney is in hearings,

trials, and mediations on twenty-two (22) of those days.

IV.

The undersigned counsel would respectfully request that the Court grant an

extension of an additional twenty-one (21) days' time to file the appellate brief.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant respectfully prays

the Court grant this motion for extension of time to file the appellate brief.

Respectfully submitted,



### I

s / Kirk Hawkins

KIRK HAWKINS

P.O. BOX 3645

SAN ANGELO, TEXAS 76902

325/658-5585

STATE BAR NO. 09250400

E-Mail: kirkhawkinslaw@gmail.comCERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I hereby certify that I communicated with Mr. Jason Ferguson, Assistant

District Attorney, via email on August 

### 5, 2015, who has no objection to this Motion for

Extension of Time to File Brief.

Is/ Kirk Hawkins

Kirk Hawkins

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has this the



### 5th day of August, 

### 2015, been delivered to Mr. Jason Ferguson, Assistant District

Attorney, 

### 124 West Beauregard, San Angelo, Texas 76903.

Is/ Kirk Hawkins

Kirk Hawkins
(Reap. Dec. 9714)

#### Mayer Textile Machine Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 959419, etc.

(Decided May 24, 1960)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Oochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

The records indicate that there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff when the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated on the schedule attached to and made part of this decision were called for hearing, and the cases were consequently ordered submitted by the court.

Rule 5 (a) of the rules of the court provides that—

> *735The submission for decision of any case shall be made in open court by the parties thereto or their attorneys, or by stipulation, or by written request to the court, or by the court on its own motion. Where the plaintiff, petitioner, or appellant, or his attorney, in a case does not appear when the same is called, and after the opposite party has had opportunity to present evidence on the issues, it may be deemed submitted and may be decided by the court on the record as it appears therein.

Accordingly, I have examined the record in the appeals before the court and find nothing therein which tends in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the decision of the appraiser. I find and hold, therefore, that the proper values of the merchandise are the values returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-Y
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PLATE 3

Well 6

San casing

Well 3
6-in. casing

WATER-LEVEL RECOVERY, IN FEET
N

x x
bag
10
EXPLANATION
x
1, time, in days since discharge stopped in well 1
r, distance, in feet from well 1
a 10°, arbitrary multiplier to avoid decimals
x
12 *
13
x
|
4
1 2 4 10 20 40 100 200 400 1000 2000 4000 10,000 20,000 40,000

7 x 10°
WATER-LEVEL RECOVERY IN WELLS 2,3,AND 6 AFTER A 72-HOUR DISCHARGE PERIOD OF WELL 1

10)
- 2a
a nm
a A. YN,
ca rN
au = Well 9
4] , a
Da
q
x 2
4 Well 8 :
6-in. casing PS
r" 2
2-in.casing © ES / Well 9
Bd 2-in. casing
°}
3
= =
i
ra
=
S
a
Ww
>
o
g 5
a
rr]
=>
=]
fea
i
&
= 6
& EXPLANATION 5 .
nN x
1, time, in days since pumping stopped »
x
r, distance, in feet from well 7 aN
10°, arbitrary multiplier to avoid decimals ‘N
8
5 =
10
x 10°
WATER-LEVEL RECOVERY IN WELLS 8 AND 9 AFTER ABOUT 90 HOURS OF PUMPING OF WELL 7
10)
xO eT i
q Onda; SS Well 5
ye | Se aw 2-in. casing
Bac Btaica!
Well 6 Su
6-in. casing > a Well 2
RE 6-in. casing
coy
u ioe
Well
\gin-cosine
2 \
Well 3 —_\
2-in. casing
3
4
is
ii
irs
=
Z 5
Oo
a
z
i
a
6
% EXPLANATION
1, time, in days since pumping started
r, distance, in feet from well 1
10%, arbitrary multiplier to avoid decimals
8
+4
te
+o
£) +
10
i Zz 4 10 20 40 100 200 400 1000 2000 4000

+ 8
r? X10
WATER-LEVEL DRAWDOWN IN WELLS 2,3,5,AND 6 WITH RESPECT TO ELAPSED TIME OF DISCHARGE OF WELL 1

GRAPHIC PLOT OF WATER-LEVEL RECOVERY AND DRAWDOWN IN WELLS IN
VALLE GRANDE, AND VALLE TOLEDO SANDOVAL COUNTY, NEW MEXICO hy eee
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Michael FERRAND.

No. 60649.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 15, 1978.

Patrick D. McArdle, Orleans Indigent Defender Program, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Con-nick, Dist. Atty., Louise Korns, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The issue of whether the defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel is more properly raised by application for writ of habeas corpus. *State v. Anthony,*347 So.2d 483 (La.1977); *State v. Ross,*343 So.2d 722 (La.1977); *State v. Mouton,*327 So.2d 413 (La.1976).

Finding no reversible error based on the record before us, defendant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed.
# Installation active shooter exercise tests crisis response

/ Published June 28, 2017
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pennsylvania, To test the installation’s emergency and crisis response capabilities, Defense Logistics Agency Installation Support at Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, hosted an active shooter exercise June 8.
According to Wayne Rhodes, Installation Emergency manager, the goal of the exercise was to assess the Installation’s readiness to respond to and recover from an active shooter incident.

The scenario involved an employee actor, mimicking the role of active shooter, opening mock fire in an office environment.  Several employees acted as victims, live and dead.

Once ‘shots fired’ was reported to Police Dispatch, a message was generated using the AtHoc Mass Notification System informing installation employees of an installation-wide lockdown.  The system pushed pop-up alerts to networked computers, and supplied registered phone numbers with text and voice messages regarding the event.  Additionally, messages were broadcast via the installation’s external and internal sound system to notify employees and visitors of the status of the exercise.  

Upon police arrival at the scene, officers pursued the suspect through the building, resulting in the suspect barricading himself in an office.  

The lockdown ended with an announcement that the suspect was deceased, for the purposes of the exercise, and the area was then cleared for mock medical and emergency response.

Upon cancellation of the lockdown, members of the Emergency Operations Center were activated to a local meeting area to conduct emergency management and execute decisions related to personnel accountability and release, security, public affairs, mission continuity and victim tracking and assistance.  Together, the group simulated the management of the first four to six hours of an emergency event.  

Additionally, a Simulation Cell was formed to test EOC capabilities and response, with members of the SIMCELL calling as family members of installation employees, members of the media, the parents of children in the Child Development Center, and commanders of tenant activities.   

“The entire installation- employees, responders, and EOC members- continues to make progress in its readiness for large scale emergency.  With each exercise, we become more prepared for a catastrophic event,” said Rhodes.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 20, 2010

1213 

# Order

December 20, 2010

141669

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141669 COA: 290834 Eaton CC: 08-020234-FC WILLIE RICH CHAPPELL, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 1, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 32.1
 
  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 21, 2009
(the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act); and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for
the periods referred to in the Form 10-Q.
 /s/ Eric J. FossEric J. FossChairman of the Board and
Chief Executive OfficerApril 27, 2009
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1830 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 166 ) IV-C-13

3 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 11/13/2008 7:21:00 AM Sheet 166 of 232^ - *• • w P. 2

* \ ^^ISK ? UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y * \ tPROlt < /

WASHINGTON . D.C . 20460 

### SE P 3 0 I98 8

TH E ADMINISTRATO R

Mr . Rober t C . Stempel , Presiden t Genera l Motor s Corporatio n Genera l Motor s Building 304 4 Wes t Gran

d Boulevar d Detroit , M I 4820 2 Dea r Mr . Stempel : Thi s i s i n respons e t o you r lette r o f Augus t 26 , 198 8 concernin g EPA' s proposa l fo r onboar d refueling an d gasolin e volatilit ycontrols . I agre e tha t ther e i s a pressing nee d t o reduc e th e emission s o f volatil e organi c compound s (VOC ) . A s a t result , EP Ai s working ver yhar d t o resolv e the issue s yo u mentione d an

d implemen t appropriat e control s a s quickl ya s possible . You r comment s will , o f course , be considere d i n ou r deliberations . I n you r lette r yo u expresse d some concern s abou t th e simplifie d onboar d systemEPAha s designed . W e believ e tha t th e approac h use d i n ou r hardwar e ha s show n tha t successfu l onboar d design s ca n be simpl e i n nature . Our testing t o dat e ha s show

n thi s hardwar e t o performa s wel l a s or bette r tha n th e stoc k fue l tan k configuration . Sinc e EPA' s developmen t effor t wasn' t substantial , we full yanticipat e tha t improvement s coul d be mad e t o furthe r optimiz e th e performanc e o f suc h a system . Anothe r concer n yo u mentione d i n you r lette r wa s you r belie f tha t EPAstaf f had apparentl yjoine d wit h th e America n Petroleu

mInstitut e (API) , t o promot e onboar d system s i n a meetin g wit h th e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n (NHTSA) . Thi s belie f i s incorrect . Th e meeting betwee n AP I an d NHTS Awa s schedule d withou t EPAinvolvement . A n EPAstaf f perso n di d atten

d th e meetin g wit h NHTSA' s approval . Join t EPA/NHTS Aattendanc e a t meeting s ha s prove n t o be a usefu l communicatio n too l an d NHTS Aha s sen t a representativ e t o severa l meeting s a t EPA .

E N V»PON.^V^
- ; , "{-.-yeG^o

N 

### X; 8P. 3 

# M V 

# ^ -2 -

I nclosing , I woul dlik e t o than

k yo ufo r expressin

g you r concer no nthes e subjects . W e fully

recogniz e th

e urgenc

y o f th e nee dfo r VOC contro l an dare committe

dto implementin

g appropriat e control s a s quickl y a s possible . Also , b e assure

d tha t I hav

e been , an

dwil l continue to be , personall y involve

d i nthes e matters .

Lee M . Thoma s

cc i Publi cDoctta tA-87-1 1 ' Publi cDocfca tA-85-2 1 SDSB:MUELLER:Bragq:256 5 Plymout h Rd.:X275:9/12/88JIP#:6358 W Contro l No . AX88157 4 Reviewe d by : D2IIIGERisbh:X27647:9/23/88:AR-45StWan o No . 4309 T
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 172 (Friday, September 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 46958]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23622]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-4258-000]


Commonwealth Electric Company, Cambridge Electric Light Company; 
Notice of Filing

August 29, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 8, 1997, Commonwealth Electric Company and 
Cambridge Electric Light Company tendered for filing their first 
quarterly report of transactions under their market-based power sales 
tariffs for the period of April 1, 1997 to June 30, 1997.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
or protests should be filed on or before September 5, 1997. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make any protestants parties 
to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23622 Filed 9-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
# EUR-Lex - 51997IP0054 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 51997IP0054

**Recommendation on the Report of the Commmittee of Inquiry into the Community Transit System **

*
Official Journal C 115 , 14/04/1997 P. 0157 *

A4-0054/97

Recommendation on the Report of the Commmittee of Inquiry into the Community Transit System

The European Parliament,

- having regard to Article 138c of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to the Decision of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 19 April 1995 on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry ((OJ L 113, 19.5.1995, p. 2.)),

- having regard to Rule 136 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Community Transit System (A4-0053/97),

- having regard to the draft recommendation of the Committee of Inquiry into the Community Transit System (A4-0054/97),

1. Instructs its President to take the necessary measures to make public the report of the committee of inquiry, in accordance with Article 4(2) of the abovementioned Decision of 19 April 1995;

2. Calls upon the Commission, the Council and the Member States to ensure that the conclusions of the inquiry are acted upon, in accordance with the obligations arising from the Decision of 19 April 1995;

3. Calls on its President to instruct the Committee on Budgetary Control, in cooperation with all other competent committees, to monitor the action taken on the results of the work of the committee of inquiry and, if appropriate, to report thereon, in accordance with Rule 136(11), notably in the context of the annual discharge procedure.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 176 (Thursday, September 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24082]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-509-000]


El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes In FERC 
Gas Tariff

September 5, 1997.
    Take notice that on September 2, 1997, El Paso Natural Gas Company 
(El Paso) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second 
Revised Volume No. 1-A, Third Revised Sheet No. 290, pursuant to 
Subpart C of Part 154 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's 
Regulations under the Natural Gas Act and Order No. 636-C issued 
February 27, 1997 at Docket Nos. RM91-11-006 and RM87-34-072. The 
tariff sheet is proposed to become effective October 2, 1997.
    El Paso states that this tariff sheet revises the Right-of-First 
Refusal provision to provide for a five year maximum term for bid 
evaluations.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-24082 Filed 9-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCommunications network design and costing model programmers manualOtpimization algorithms and techniques used in the communications network design and costing model for least cost route and least cost network problems are examined from the programmer's point of view. All system program modules, the data structures within the model, and the files which make up the data base are described.Document ID19840006309Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsLogan, K. P.*(Sonalysts, Inc. Waterford, CT, United States)*Somes, S. S.*(Sonalysts, Inc. Waterford, CT, United States)*Clark, C. A.*(Sonalysts, Inc. Waterford, CT, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateSeptember 30, 1983Subject CategoryCommunications And RadarReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-168237NAS 1.26:168237Accession Number84N14377Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-23348Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840006309.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