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

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Understanding protected area resilience: a multi-scale, social-ecological approach      

      January 1, 2015    

Protected areas (PAs) remain central to the conservation of biodiversity. Classical PAs were conceived as areas that would be set aside to maintain a natural state with minimal human influence. However, global environmental change and growing cross-scale anthropogenic influences mean that PAs can no longer be thought of as ecological islands that function independently of the broader social-ecological system in which they are located. For PAs to be resilient (and to contribute to broader social-ecological resilience), they must be able to adapt to changing social and ecological conditions over time in a way that supports the long-term persistence of populations, communities, and ecosystems of conservation concern. We extend Ostrom's social-ecological systems framework to consider the long-term persistence of PAs, as a form of land use embedded in social-ecological systems, with important cross-scale feedbacks. Most notably, we highlight the cross-scale influences and feedbacks on PAs that exist from the local to the global scale, contextualizing PAs within multi-scale social-ecological functional landscapes. Such functional landscapes are integral to understand and manage individual PAs for long-term sustainability. We illustrate our conceptual contribution with three case studies that highlight cross-scale feedbacks and social-ecological interactions in the functioning of PAs and in relation to regional resilience. Our analysis suggests that while ecological, economic, and social processes are often directly relevant to PAs at finer scales, at broader scales, the dominant processes that shape and alter PA resilience are primarily social and economic.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

## Related Content

### Contact

####               Cooperative Research Units Program          

12201 Sunrise Valley DrReston, VA20192United States

(703) 648 - 4260

(703) 648 - 4269
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains editorial corrections of previously

published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule,

and Notice documents. These corrections are

prepared by the Office of the Federal

Register. Agency prepared corrections are

issued as signed documents and appear in

the appropriate document categories

elsewhere in the issue.

Corrections Federal Register

3032

Vol. 60, No. 8

Thursday, January 12, 1995

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 222

[Docket No. 940822-4334; I.D. 101194C]

Endangered and Threatened Species;

Status of Snake River Spring/Summer

Chinook Salmon and Snake River Fall

Chinook Salmon

Correction

Proposed rule document 94–31869

was inadvertently published in the

Rules and Regulations section of the

issue of Wednesday, December 28, 1994

beginning on page 66784. It should have

appeared in the Proposed Rules section.

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

5 CFR Part 630

RIN 3206–AE95

Absence and Leave; Sick Leave

Correction

In rule document 94–29820 beginning

on page 62266, in the issue of Friday,

December 2, 1994, make the following

corrections:

§ 630.403 [Corrected]

On page 62271, in the second column,

the amendatory instructions for

§ 630.403 was omitted and should read

‘‘5. Section 630.403 is revised to read as

follows:’’ and the section heading

should read:

§ 630.403 Supporting evidence.

* * * * *

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

Extension of 301 Investigation of the

People’s Republic of China’s

Protection of Intellectual Property and

Provision of Market Access to Persons

Who Rely on Intellectual Property

Protection; Proposed Determinations;

Request for Public Comment; and

Notice of Public Hearing

Correction

In notice document 95–261 beginning

on page 1829, in the issue of Thursday,

January 5, 1995, make the following

corrections:

1. On page 1830, in the second

column, under the heading ‘‘Proposed

Determination and Action’’, in the 2d

paragraph, in the 13th line, ‘‘2.5 billion’’

should read ‘‘2.8 billion’’.

2. On the same page, in the third

column, in the fourth paragraph, in the

fourth line, ‘‘January 19, 1995.’’ should

read ‘‘January 18, 1995.’’

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

IN RE:

SEVEN STARS ON THE HUDSON CASE NO: 19-17544-SMG

CORPORATION, d/b/a ROCKIN’JUMP

Debtor,

_______________________________________/

SEVEN STARS ON THE HUDSON ADVERSARY NO.: 19-01230-SMG

CORPORATION, d/b/a ROCKIN’JUMP

Plaintiff,

v.

MDG POWERLINE HOLDINGS, LLC, 

and XBK MANAGEMENT LLC, d/b/a

XTREME ACTION PARK,

Defendants.

_______________________________________/

Scott M. Grossman, Judge

_____________________________________________________________________________ United States Bankruptcy Court

ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on October 29, 2021.

Case 19-01230-SMG Doc 228 Filed 11/01/21 Page 1 of 2
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF-DEBTOR’S MOTION

FOR LEAVE TO SERVE AND FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff-Debtor Seven Stars on the Hudson Corporation (“Plaintiff”), by and through 

its undersigned attorney, filed its Motion for Leave to Serve and File a Third Amended 

Complaint on September 28, 2021 (ECF No. 222) (the “Motion”). Following a hearing held 

on October 26, 2021, and having reviewed the Motion, the Response in opposition filed by 

Defendant MDG Powerline Holdings, LLC (ECF No. 226), and Plaintiff-Debtor’s Reply to 

Defendant’s Response (ECF No. 227), it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. Plaintiff-Debtor’s Motion for Leave to Serve and File a Third Amended Complaint 

is DENIED, for the reasons stated at the hearing held on October 26, 2021.

###

Submitted By:

Jay M. Sakalo

Florida Bar No. 0156310

BILZIN SUMBERG BAENA PRICE & AXELROD LLP

1450 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2300 

Miami, Florida 33134 

Telephone: (305) 374-7580 

Facsimile: (305) 351-2253

E-mail: jsakalo@bilzin.com

Copies furnished to: 

Jay M. Sakalo, Esq. 

[Attorney Sakalo is hereby directed to serve a copy of this Order upon all parties in interest and to 

file a certificate of service of same.] 

Case 19-01230-SMG Doc 228 Filed 11/01/21 Page 2 of 2
From: Frey, Nathan J.

To: Culligan, Kevin; Hutson, Nick; Wayland, Robertj

Cc: Tsirigotis, Peter

Subject: We have concluded our review under EO 12866 and 13563

Date: Thursday, September 19, 2013 6:34:49 PM

Thanks to all for your patience throughout!

From: Culligan, Kevin [mailto:Culligan.Kevin@epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 03:14 PM

To: Frey, Nathan J.; Hutson, Nick <Hutson.Nick@epa.gov>; Wayland, Robertj

<Wayland.Robertj@epa.gov> 

Cc: Tsirigotis, Peter <Tsirigotis.Peter@epa.gov> 

Subject: Re: Talked to Peter 

E-mail me when you are ready to talk

From: Frey, Nathan J. <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 2:18:36 PM

To: Culligan, Kevin; Hutson, Nick; Wayland, Robertj

Cc: Tsirigotis, Peter

Subject: RE: Talked to Peter

Thanks Kevin. Can you or Peter give me a quick call? (202) 395 7345

From: Culligan, Kevin [mailto:Culligan.Kevin@epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 1:38 PM

To: Frey, Nathan J.; Hutson, Nick; Wayland, Robertj

Cc: Tsirigotis, Peter

Subject: Talked to Peter

We think this is clearer and represents the ideas we talked about.

While intended for plants that lie between FOAK and NOAK in the maturity spectrum, “the next

commercial offering” cost estimate shown in table 6 can in practice be either higher or lower. For

example the costs can be higher if the original cost estimates are optimistic about improvements

that occur between the FOAK and the “next commercial offering”.

On the other hand, costs can be lower if advances due to the significant research efforts

underway lead to advances not considered in developing the original cost estimates.

From: Frey, Nathan J. [mailto:Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:50 AM

To: Culligan, Kevin; Hutson, Nick; Wayland, Robertj

Cc: Tsirigotis, Peter

Subject: RE: EGU NSPS -- Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866 13563

Thanks – I have a minor suggestion if you second to give me a quick call. Almost there!

From: Culligan, Kevin [mailto:Culligan.Kevin@epa.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:26 AM

To: Frey, Nathan J.; Hutson, Nick; Wayland, Robertj

Cc: Tsirigotis, Peter

Subject: RE: EGU NSPS -- Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866 13563

Nathan,

After we spoke, I got further direction from Peter. We believe that the text starting with “despite

the application.....” should be deleted because it is conjecture and not factual (and ignores the

other side of the story, because it is often shown that projections like this are un-necessarily

pessimistic and costs

- Kevin

From: Frey, Nathan J. [mailto:Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 9:44 AM

To: Culligan, Kevin; Hutson, Nick; Wayland, Robertj

Subject: EGU NSPS -- Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866 13563

Hello all,

Attached please find a summary of interagency comments under EO 12866 and 13563 regarding

the issue(s) discussed yesterday. Please let me know ASAP if you would like to arrange a call to

discuss.

Thanks,

Nathan
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search:  Meteor Crater

Filters

              - science_science(4)
              - products_data(3)
              - (-)products_maps(1)
              - (-)products_publications(17)
              - multimedia_image(5)
              - multimedia_image-141769(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(1)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - multimedia_image-204460(1)
              - multimedia_video(5)
              - multimedia_video-149194(2)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - documents_file(2)
              - documents_file-149203(2)
              - news_news-149246(1)
              - news_other_news(1)
              - other_basic-43(1)

## By Location

              - arizona(8)
              - idaho(1)
              - montana(1)
              - oregon(1)
              - wyoming(1)

## By Year

publication        January 1, 1991        In situ 10Be-26Al exposure ages at Meteor Crater, Arizona

publication        December 8, 2016        Transformations to granular zircon revealed: Twinning, reidite, and ZrO2 in shocked zircon from Meteor Crater (Arizona, USA)

publication        August 7, 1974        Guidebook to the geology of Meteor Crater, Arizona

publication        January 1, 1959        Impact mechanics at Meteor Crater, Arizona

publication        December 1, 1980        Measurements of shock-induced luminescence at Meteor Crater, Arizona, from laboratory and airborne Fraunhofer line-discriminator systems

publication        January 1, 1991        Age and geomorphic history of Meteor Crater, Arizona, from cosmogenic 36Cl and 14C in rock varnish

publication        January 1, 1960        First natural occurrence of coesite

publication        January 1, 2005        Geochemical and C, O, Sr, and U-series isotopic evidence for the meteoric origin of calcrete at Solitario Wash, Crater Flat, Nevada, USA

publication        September 1, 1963        Hypervelocity impact of steel into Coconino Sandstone

publication        January 1, 1997        Secrets of the Wabar craters

publication        March 1, 2000        The effects of the Chesapeake Bay impact crater on the geologic framework and the correlation of hydrogeologic units of southeastern Virginia, south of the James River

publication        August 3, 2017        Oxygen and U-Th isotopes and the timescales of hydrothermal exchange and melting in granitoid wall rocks at Mount Mazama, Crater Lake, Oregon

publication        January 1, 2009        Description of Tessaracoccus profundi sp.nov., a deep-subsurface actinobacterium isolated from a Chesapeake impact crater drill core (940 m depth)

publication        December 30, 2020        Outburst floods

publication        October 1, 2014        Dynamics of the Yellowstone hydrothermal system

publication        January 1, 1998        U. S. Geolgogical Survey Flagstaff Field Center

publication        January 1, 1986        Meteoroids and impact craters

map        January 20, 2014        Geologic map of the eastern quarter of the Flagstaff 30’ x 60’ quadrangle, Coconino County, northern Arizona
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

# REcEIvED

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

### NOV 2 92012



## __________HEARING DOCKET IN THE MATTER OF MAGORIEN HONING & HYDRAULICS FAADOCKET NO. (not assigned) (Civil Penalty Action) FDMS NO. FAA-2012-0908 FAA CASE NO. 2011WP910318

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE
This is to give notice thatthe Respondent, Magorien Honing & Hydraulics, will be appearing in this matter through its counsel:

Dated: November 21, 2012Doug Griffith, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF DOUG GRIFFITH 633 W. 5th St., Ste. 2800 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Ph.: 213-223-2092 Fax: 213-814-4530 Email: doug@douggriffithlaw.com Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICE OF DOUG GRIFFITH
Doug Griffith, Esq. Counsel for RespondentCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Ihereby certify that I havethis date sent, by certified U.S. Mail, an original and one copy ofthe foregoing Notice ofAppearance addressed to: Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000

as well as one copy by certified U.S. Mail addressed to each of: Michael F. McKinley, Complainant's Counsel Senior Attorney, Office ofthe ChiefCounsel Enforcement Division, AGC-300 Federal AviationAdministration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,Administrative LawJudge U.S. Department ofTransportation Office ofHearings, M-20 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, D.C. 20590

Dated: November 21, 2012

## ~**~~­** 

# Wa I 

# Wiff/1 Doug Griffith, Esq.
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Conference Papers 

#           Use of soil leachates to define the extent of brine-contaminated soils at the USGS petroleum environmental research site "B", Osage County, northeastern Oklahoma      

      January 1, 2002    

Soils at an active oil production site with a history of surface releases of produced water were investigated to determine the chemical signature of salt contamination and the spatial distribution of soil salinity in relation to areas of obvious salt scarring. Grab samples of shallow soil (0-15 cm) and selected soil profiles to depths of 0.6 to 1.7 m were collected onsite and offsite using a 5-cm diameter stainless steel soil auger. Air dried and disaggregated soil from 15 cm intervals (100 g) was mixed with 100 ml of distilled-deionized water to dissolve readily soluble salts. After 24 hours the water was separated by centrifugation followed by filtration through a 0.45 micrometer membrane. Specific conductance was measured immediately. Dissolved chloride (Cl) and sulfate (SO4) were initially estimated with Cl titration strips and turbidimetric measurements respectively. More accurate measurements of dissolved Cl, SO4, and bromide (Br) were later performed by ion chromatography. Brine-contaminated soil was indicated by (1) unusually elevated Cl concentrations or relatively low ratios of conductance/Cl in aqueous leachates compared to leachates of uncontaminated soils, and (2) ratios of Cl/Br in leachates (250± 30) that fall within the range of Cl/Br ratios measured in local produced waters (220-320). Leachates of background soils from the area were characterized by low conductance (sandy soils) or dissolved solids dominated by sulfates (shaley soils). At the study site, the surface (0-15 cm) distribution of elevated soil salinity was largely confined to areas of obvious salt scarring. Within the area of salt scars, elevated salinity persisted to depths of refusal by manual augering. The technique will be applied to deeper samples obtained by mechanical augering or direct push techniques.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Robert Zielinski

##### Scientist Emeritus

Central Energy Resources Science Center

rzielinski@usgs.gov

303-236-4719

## Related Content

#### Robert Zielinski

##### Scientist Emeritus

Central Energy Resources Science Center

rzielinski@usgs.gov

303-236-4719

### Study Area

### Contacts

#### Robert Zielinski

##### Scientist Emeritus

Central Energy Resources Science Center

rzielinski@usgs.gov

303-236-4719

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Oklahoma

View All **
Carrington SMITH, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1644

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 8, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 117 (Monday, June 17, 1996)]
[Corrections]
[Page 30670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X96-30617]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Notice of Inventory Completion for Native American Human Remains 
and Associated Funerary Objects from the Vicinity of Victorville, CA in 
the Possession of the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, Los 
Angeles, CA

Correction

    In notice document 96-13582 appearing on page 27097 in the issue of 
Thursday, May 30, 1996, in the 2d column, in the last paragraph, 
beginning in the 12th line ``[thirty days after publication in the 
Federal Register]'' should read ``July 1, 1996''.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
#### Sidney Shapiro et al., Respondents, *v.*Prudential Theaters, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

November 10, 1972.

*753
      *William Gold*for appellant.

*Per Curiam.*

Plaintiffs seek to recover moneys allegedly owed to them as winners of a contest and defendant has raised the affirmative defense that plaintiffs participated in an illegal transaction. The opposing papers indicate the existence of mixed questions of fact and law which should be resolved at a plenary trial.

Technical defects in plaintiffs’ pleadings, if any, are unavailable to the moving defendant, for it is well settled that upon an application, summary judgment will be denied if the adversary shows facts sufficient to warrant a trial *(Curry*v. *Mackenzie,*239 N. Y. 267).

The order should be affirmed, without costs.

Concur — Hogan, P. J., G-lickman and Pittoni, JJ.

Order affirmed, etc.
Nancy SEGARRA, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-2164

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

FEBRUARY 01, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 195 /Thursday, October 8, 1998 / Presidential Documents 54035

Presidential Determination No. 98–41 of September 30, 1998

Drawdrawn Under Section 506(a)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act To Provide Counternarcotics Assistance to Bolivia,

Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala,

Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and

the Countries of the Eastern Caribbean

Memorandum for the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury,

the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, [and] the Secretary of

Transportation

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 506(a)(2) of the Foreign

Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 2318(a)(2) (the ‘‘Act’’), I

hereby determine that it is in the national interest of the United States

to draw down articles and services from the inventory and resources of

the Department of Defense, military education and training from the Department of Defense, and articles and services from the inventory and resources

of the Departments of Justice, State, Transportation, and the Treasury for

the purpose of providing international narcotics assistance to Bolivia, Brazil,

Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica,

Mexico, Peru, and Trinidad and Tobago; and to Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent

and the Grenadines (hereinafter, ‘‘the Eastern Caribbean countries’’).

Therefore, I direct the drawdown of up to $75 million of articles and

services from the inventory and resources of the Departments of Defense,

Transportation, Justice, State, and the Treasury, and military education and

training from the Department of Defense, for Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Peru,

Trinidad and Tobago, and the Eastern Caribbean countries for the purposes

and under the authorities of chapter 8 of part I of the Act.

As a matter of policy and consistent with past practice, the Administration

will seek to ensure that the assistance furnished under this drawdown

is not provided to any unit of any foreign country’s security forces if that

unit is credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of human rights

unless the government of such country is taking effective measures to bring

the responsible members of that unit to justice.

The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to report this determination

to the Congress immediately and to arrange for its publication in the Federal

Register

THE WHITE HOUSE,

Washington, September 30, 1998.

.

œ–

[FR Docs. 98–27262

Filed 10–7–98; 8:45 am]

Billing code 4710–10–M
Engine Rating [1],[4] = 1,900 kW 2,547 HP Operating Time [2] = 2 hrs/day 100 hrs/yr Fuel Type [1] = ULSD

Maximum Hourly Emissions Maximum

Daily Emissions Annual

Emissions Value Units (lb/hr) (lb/day) (tons/yr) PM AP-42 [6],[7] 0.43 g/kW-hr 1.78 3.57 0.089 PM 10 AP-42 [6],[7] 0.24 g/kW-hr 1.02 2.05 0.051 PM 2.5 AP-42 [6],[7] 0.24 g/kW-hr 0.99 1.98 0.050 NO x IMO Tier 2 [4] 7.85 g/kW-hr 32.88 65.76 1.64 SO 2 Fuel S Content [3] 1.12E-05 lb/HP-hr 2.86E-02 5.71E-02 1.43E-03 CO Maufacturer

Specification [8] 0.38 g/kW-hr 1.59 3.18 0.08 VOC AP-42 [7] 7.50 g/kW-hr 31.42 62.83 1.57 Pb EPA [5] 2.03E-07 lb/HP-hr 5.17E-04 1.03E-03 2.59E-05 H2SO4 Fuel S Content [3] 3.50E-07 lb/HP-hr 8.92E-04 1.78E-03 4.46E-05 [1] [2] [3]

[4] [5]

[6] [7] [8] As per manufacturer's specification sheet. Emission factors are based on AP-42 Chapter 3, Table 3.4-1, Emission Factors for Large Stationary Diesel and all Stationary Dual-fuel Engines (October 1996). PM 10and PM 2.5emission factors obtained by applying the ratio of PM/PM 10and PM/PM 2.5from AP-42 Chapter 3, Table 3.4-1 and Table 3.4-2. Lead emission factor obtained from EPA guidance document: Locating and Estimating Air Emissions from Sources of Lead and Lead Compounds, EPA 454/R-98-006, May 1998, Section 5.2.2. Emission factor for distillate oil-fired gas turbines was used as a surrogate for distillate oil-fired engines due to lack of emission factors. An average brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC) of 7,000 Btu/hp-hr was used to convert from lb/MMBtu to lb/hp-hr. Engine specifications sheet provided by Ms. Sara Carlson (Anadarko) to Mr. Rahul Pendse (Trinity) via email on March 11, 2013. Anadarko is proposing the use of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel for all diesel combustion sources. Therefore, emissions have been calculated based on a maximum sulfur content of 15 ppm in diesel fuel assuming that 98 percent of sulfur in the fuel is oxidized to SO 2and 2 percent of sulfur in the fuel is oxidized to H 2SO 4based on Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions from Nonroad Diesel Engines, EPA420-R-03-008, April 2003. An average brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC) of 7,000 Btu/hp-hr was used to convert from lb/MMBtu to lb/hp-hr. Operating time for this engine has been assumed to be 2 hrs/day and 100 hrs/year.

As per the specification sheet, the engine is IMO Tier 2 compliant for NOx Emissions.



## Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Emission Calculations Emergency Generator

Emission Factor Pollutant 

### Emission Factor Basis 

## DR-GE-01 Criteria Pollutants

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation EGOM Exploratory Project - Blackhawk 1 of 1 DR-GE-01 - Criteria