alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Mapping methane reduction potential of tidal wetland restoration in the United States      

      October 6, 2023    

Coastal wetlands can emit excess methane in cases where they are impounded and artificially freshened by structures that impede tidal exchange. We provide a new assessment of coastal methane reduction opportunities for the contiguous United States by combining multiple publicly available map layers, reassessing greenhouse gas emissions datasets, and applying scenarios informed by geospatial information system and by surveys of coastal managers. Independent accuracy assessment indicates that coastal impoundments are under-mapped at the national level by a factor of one-half. Restorations of freshwater-impounded wetlands to brackish or saline conditions have the greatest potential climate benefit of all mapped conversion opportunities, but were rarer than other potential conversion events. At the national scale we estimate potential emissions reduction for coastal wetlands to be 0.91 Teragrams of carbon dioxide equivalents year−1, a more conservative assessment compared to previous estimates. We provide a map of 1,796 parcels with the potential for tidal re-connection.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Meagan J. Eagle , PhD

##### Research Physical Scientist

Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center

meagle@usgs.gov

508-457-2280

#### Sydney K Nick

##### Geographer/Geologist

St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

snick@usgs.gov

727-310-5577

#### Kevin D Kroeger, PhD

##### Research Chemist

Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center

kkroeger@usgs.gov

508-457-2270

## Related Content

#### Meagan J. Eagle , PhD

##### Research Physical Scientist

Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center

meagle@usgs.gov

508-457-2280

#### Sydney K Nick

##### Geographer/Geologist

St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

snick@usgs.gov

727-310-5577

#### Kevin D Kroeger, PhD

##### Research Chemist

Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center

kkroeger@usgs.gov

508-457-2270

### Study Area

### Contact

#### Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center

384 Woods Hole Rd.Woods Hole, MA02543United States

508-548-8700

508-457-2310

### Explore Search

                  - Climate
                  - Coasts
                  - Ecosystems
                  - Natural Hazards
                  - methane
                  - tidal wetlands
                  - blue carbon
                  - greenhouse gas emissions
                  - United States

View All **
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Regional landslide-hazard evaluation using landslide slopes, Western Wasatch County, Utah      

      January 1, 1997    

Landsliding has historically been one of the most damaging geologic hazards in western Wasatch County, Utah. Accordingly, we mapped and analyzed landslides (slumps and debris slides) in the area to provide an empirical basis for regional landslide-hazard evaluation. The 336 landslides in the 250-sq-mi (650-km2) area involve 20 geologic units, including Mississippian- to Quaternary-aged rock and unconsolidated deposits. Landsliding in western Wasatch County is characterized by a strong correlation between geologic material and landslide-slope inclination. From a simple statistical analysis of overall slope inclinations of late Holocene landslides, we determined “critical” slope inclinations above which late Holocene landsliding has typically occurred and used these as the primary basis for defining relative landslide hazard. The critical slopes vary for individual geologic units and range from 15 to 50 percent (9°–27°). The critical slope values and landslide locations were used in conjunction with geologic and slope maps to construct qualitative landslide-susceptibility maps for use by county planners. The maps delineate areas of low, moderate, and high relative hazard and indicate where studies should be completed prior to development to evaluate site-specific slope-stability conditions. Critical slopes as determined in this study provide a consistent empirical reference that is useful for evaluating relative landslide hazard and guiding land-use-planning decisions in large, geologically complex areas.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Explore Search

                  - Natural Hazards
                  - United States
                  - Utah

View All **
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           National map of focus areas for potential critical mineral resources in the United States      

      February 22, 2023    

View Report

Introduction 

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) launched the Earth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth MRI) to modernize the surface and subsurface geologic mapping of the United States, with a focus on identifying areas that may have the potential to contain critical mineral resources. EarthMRI can inform strategies to ensure secure and reliable domestic critical mineral supplies for the United States as mandated by Executive Order 13817 and the Infrastructure and Jobs Act of 2021 (Public Law 117–58, 135 Stat. 529). Earth MRI is a collaborative effort between the USGS and the State geological surveys as represented by the Association of American State Geologists to identify, prioritize, and acquire new geoscience data for geographic areas, or focus areas, across the Nation that have potential to host critical mineral resources. Mapping of focus areas was based on a framework of mineral systems and their associated mineral deposit types that could possibly host critical minerals. Using readily available geologic, geophysical, geochemical, and mineral deposit data, teams of USGS scientists worked with representatives of State geological surveys in a series of workshops to outline focus areas that contain evidence of key features for one or more mineral systems. These areas can be used to guide future efforts to collect new geologic, geophysical, geochemical, and topographic data that focus on critical minerals through Earth MRI.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Jane M. Hammarstrom

##### Geologist

Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center

jhammars@usgs.gov

703-648-6165

#### Douglas C Kreiner

##### Research Economic Geologist

Alaska Science Center

dkreiner@usgs.gov

907-786-7190

#### Connie L. Dicken

##### Geologist

Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center

cdicken@usgs.gov

703-648-6482

#### Laurel G. Woodruff

##### Research Geologist

Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center

woodruff@usgs.gov

763-783-3291

## Related Content

#### Jane M. Hammarstrom

##### Geologist

Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center

jhammars@usgs.gov

703-648-6165

#### Douglas C Kreiner

##### Research Economic Geologist

Alaska Science Center

dkreiner@usgs.gov

907-786-7190

#### Connie L. Dicken

##### Geologist

Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center

cdicken@usgs.gov

703-648-6482

#### Laurel G. Woodruff

##### Research Geologist

Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center

woodruff@usgs.gov

763-783-3291

### Contact

####               Alaska Science Center          

4210 University DriveAnchorage, AK99508United States

(907) 786-7000

(907) 786-7020

####               Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center          

12201 Sunrise Valley Drive Mail Stop 954Reston, VA20192United States

### Explore Search

                  - Critical Minerals
                  - Critical Mineral Resources
                  - Minerals
                  - United States

View All **
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Reprocessing of multi-channel seismic-reflection data collected in the Beaufort Sea      

      January 1, 2000    

View Disc 1

View Disc 2

Contained on this set of two CD-ROMs are stacked and migrated multi-channel seismic-reflection data for 65 lines recorded in the Beaufort Sea by the United States Geological Survey in 1977. All data were reprocessed by the USGS using updated processing methods resulting in improved interpretability. Each of the two CD-ROMs contains the following files: 1) 65 files containing the digital seismic data in standard, SEG-Y format; 2) 1 file containing navigation data for the 65 lines in standard SEG-P1 format; 3) an ASCII text file with cross-reference information for relating the sequential trace numbers on each line to cdp numbers and shotpoint numbers; 4) 2 small scale graphic images (stacked and migrated) of a segment of line 722 in Adobe Acrobat (R) PDF format; 5) a graphic image of the location map, generated from the navigation file; 6) PlotSeis, an  MS-DOS Application that allows PC users to interactively view the  SEG-Y files; 7) a PlotSeis documentation file; and 8) an explanation of the processing used to create the final seismic sections (this document).

## Citation Information
# L_2004233EN.01001101.xml

| 2.7.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 233/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 233/11

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1227/2004

of 1 July 2004

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar to certain third countries for the 33rd partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1) and in particular the second indent of Article 27(5) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003 of 18 July 2003 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2003/2004 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003 of 18 July 2003 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2003/2004 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 33rd partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003 the maximum amount of the export refund shall be 48,144 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 2 July 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 July 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture

---

(1)  
  OJ L 178, 30.6.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 39/2004 (OJ L 6, 10.1.2004, p. 16).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 181, 19.7.2003, p. 7. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2126/2003 (OJ L 319, 4.12.2003, p. 4).

2

---
Exhibit
32.1











CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. Section 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Annual Report of
Big Cat Energy
Corporation(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period end of April 30, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I,
Timothy Barritt, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and





(2)
            The
      information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Dated this 10th day of August,
2010.





/s/
      Timothy BarrittTimothy
      BarrittPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
Gary W. BOWMAN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-2187

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
July 30, 2015

Mr. Adam S. Andrews

Director of Operations

Aeroworks Productions, LLC

7740 29th Avenue

Kenosha, WI 53143

Dear Mr. Andrews:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

part 21; §§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a),

91.203(a) and (b), 91.205(b), 91.215, and 91.401–91.417 of Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot process your request and what you should 

do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We received your May 19, 2015, exemption request on behalf of Aeroworks Productions, 

LLC filed into the public docket (No. FAA−2015−1765), but we are unable to process your 

request any further. Your petition does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy 

enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
3
# L_2004374EN.01005301.xml

| 22.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 374/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 374/53

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2211/2004

of 21 December 2004

determining the extent to which applications lodged in December 2004 for import licences for certain poultrymeat sector products pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2497/96 can be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2497/96 of 18 December 1996 laying down rules for the application in the poultrymeat sector of the system provided for by the Association Agreement and the Interim Agreement between the European Community and the State of Israel (1), and in particular Article 4(5) thereof,

Whereas:

| | |
| --- | --- |

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   Applications for import licences for the period 1 January to 31 March 2005 submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2497/96 shall be met as referred to in the Annex.

2.   Application for import licences for the period 1 April to 30 June 2005 may be lodged pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2497/96 for the total quantity as referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 December 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 338, 28.12.1996, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 361/2004 (OJ L 63, 28.2.2004, p. 15).

1

---

ANNEX

| Group No | Percentage of acceptance of import licences submitted for the period of 1 January to 31 March 2005 | Total quantity available for the period of 1 April to 30 June 2005
  (t) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| I1 | 100,00 | 371,00 |
| I2 | 100,00 | 132,50 |

Group No

Percentage of acceptance of import licences submitted for the period of 1 January to 31 March 2005

Total quantity available for the period of 1 April to 30 June 2005

(t)

I1

100,00

371,00

I2

100,00

132,50

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Scientific Framework for resilience research on the Upper Mississippi River System      

      December 31, 2019    

View Document

The goal of this research framework is to outline research that would continue to improve our understanding of ecological resilience of the Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS) and inform management of the system for health and resilience. We provide a broad overview of recently completed and ongoing work that has been funded as a part of the UMRS Ecological Resilience Assessment and related efforts to provide context for how proposed research questions build upon our current knowledge and may inform restoration planning and design. We describe two primary objectives within this research framework - the first objective is to investigate hypothesized drivers and feedbacks related to specified resilience, and the second is to expand our utility of general resilience indicators through further development and evaluation. The intended audience for this framework is the Upper Mississippi River Restoration Program (UMRR). The UMRR partnership is made up of natural resource agencies from five states (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and Wisconsin) and five federal agencies (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service). 

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Kristen L Bouska, PhD

##### Ecologist

Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center

kbouska@usgs.gov

608-781-6344

## Related Content

#### Kristen L Bouska, PhD

##### Ecologist

Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center

kbouska@usgs.gov

608-781-6344

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center          

2630 Fanta Reed RoadLa Crosse, WI54603United States

(608) 783-6451

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - upper mississippi river system
                  - Illinois
                  -  Iowa
                  -  Minnesota
                  -  Missouri
                  -  Wisconsin

View All **
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. CITY OF CORAL GABLES, etc., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D15-1371

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

FEBRUARY 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4779 

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to prevent Federal prosecutions 

for certain conduct, relating to CBD oil, that is lawful under State 

law, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2016 

Mr. CHAFFETZ (for himself, Mr. LABRADOR, Mr. COHEN, Mr. CLAY, Mr. 

SENSENBRENNER, and Mr. GROTHMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition 

to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 

provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to prevent Federal 

prosecutions for certain conduct, relating to CBD oil, 

that is lawful under State law, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘CBD Oil Act of 2016’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4779 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FROM CERTAIN CRIMINAL PENALTIES 

2 OF CONDUCT RELATING TO CBD OIL. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part D of the Controlled Sub4 stances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) is amended by adding 

5 at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘BAR TO PROSECUTION OF CERTAIN CONDUCT, RELATING

7 TO CBD OIL, THAT IS LAWFUL UNDER STATE LAW

8 ‘‘SEC. 424. (a) It is a bar to prosecution under this 

9 title that the conduct alleged to constitute the offense— 

10 ‘‘(1) consists of or is incident to qualified activ11 ity relating to CBD oil; and 

12 ‘‘(2) is lawful under State law in the place it 

13 occurs. 

14 ‘‘(b) In this section the following definitions apply: 

15 ‘‘(1) The term ‘qualified activity relating to 

16 CBD oil’ means— 

17 ‘‘(A) the production or distribution of 

18 CBD oil for medical research; or 

19 ‘‘(B) the use of CBD oil for medical pur20 poses. 

21 ‘‘(2) The term ‘CBD oil’ means a substance, 

22 not containing any other psychoactive substance, 

23 that is an extract from a cannabis plant composed 

24 of tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol in a propor25 tion that is considered nonpsychoactive under appli26 cable State law.’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4779 IH

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents 

2 for the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Con3 trol Act of 1970 is amended by inserting after the item 

4 relating to section 423 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 424. Bar to prosecution of certain conduct, relating to CBD oil, that is 

lawful under State law.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Regional regression equations to estimate peak-flow frequency at sites in North Dakota using data through 2009      

      August 6, 2015    

View Report

Annual peak-flow frequency data from 231 U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations in North Dakota and parts of Montana, South Dakota, and Minnesota, with 10 or more years of unregulated peak-flow record, were used to develop regional regression equations for exceedance probabilities of 0.5, 0.20, 0.10, 0.04, 0.02, 0.01, and 0.002 using generalized least-squares techniques. Updated peak-flow frequency estimates for 262 streamflow-gaging stations were developed using data through 2009 and log-Pearson Type III procedures outlined by the Hydrology Subcommittee of the Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data. An average generalized skew coefficient was determined for three hydrologic zones in North Dakota. A StreamStats web application was developed to estimate basin characteristics for the regional regression equation analysis. Methods for estimating a weighted peak-flow frequency for gaged sites and ungaged sites are presented.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Contact

#### Dakota Water Science Center- Rapid City

1608 Mountain ViewRapid City, SD57702United States

(605) 394-3200

(605) 355-4523

### Explore Search

                  - Water
                  - United States
                  - North Dakota

View All **