alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ^V^WWJ,W„„^ 

Robert P. Hatch Snma Marin, CA 

Pmi^enr/CEO & VISITOR & CONVENTION BUREAU 93454-5}}} 

August 18,2010 

Aloha Ley 

Acting Associate Director, X-50 - , _. _' 

U.S. Department of Transportation " ^-^.T;:',V'I 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE W86-310 .-., V^'^'L^ 

Washington, DC 20590 '.'_ ,'cjc30 

RE: Air Service to Denver, Colorado ; ^^ 

Dear Ms. Ley, 

The Santa Maria Economic Development Commission is a department under the Santa 

Maria Valley Chamber of Commerce and is committed to supporting efforts that improve 

the economic vitality of the Santa Maria Valley. The Commission is in ftill support of the 

Santa Maria Public Airport District adding new air service to Denver, Colorado through 

Skywest Airlines. 

Santa Maria is an area primed for growth and future business expansion. Not only is it the 

fastest growing city on the Central Coast of California, it has large areas set aside and 

planned for industrial use. Local CEO's of existing companies have indicated that they 

would be more likely to travel for business reasons if a direct route to Denver were 

available. Therefore, Skywest Airlines stands to gain a corporate base of passengers now 

and into the future. In addition, with Vandenberg Air Force base close by, use of the 

airport by the military and its contractors would increase substantially because of the 

need to connect with associated military resources in Colorado. 

The Economic Development Commission will provide a substantial commitment in time, 

money and resources lo promote the new air service to Denver to business and industry, 

community leaders and local representatives. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me for any additional infonnation thai you may require. 

Sincereh 

)ave Cross, Director 

Snnla Maria Economic Development Commission 

Mission: To promote a fiivorablc economic climate while mailing the Sama JVlaria Xiil/eya better place to live and worft. 

(805) 925-2403 • (805) 928-7559 (Fax) • (800)331-3779 • http://tuww.sautamaria.com • ewaih smvcc@sitntamarin.coin
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7187

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KASEEM GEONTI STERLING, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-94-231, CA-97-391) Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: January 6, 1999 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kaseem Geonti Sterling, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Francis Joseph, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kaseem Geonti Sterling seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistratejudge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Sterling , Nos. CR-94-231; CA-97-391 (M.D.N.C. July 7, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
D&D' &D%&&%D%&$&D"'$&D

"$D&D%&$ D%&$&D"D($!D

"!D#D&*$DD

==/99+;@D



')D#$& $%DD 

==/99//?D

$7-6:<;.D7B7?7<;D





	

7B79D <D

-B
	
D!D

7B79D <D

-B
	D D

&67?D:+@@/>D-<:/?D,/2>/D@6/D<A>@D<;D@6/D=+>@7/?D%@7=A9+@7<;D<0D7?:7??+9D<0D==/+9D

D <D
D19/.D7;D/+-6D<0D@6/?/D+==/+9?D #A>?A+;@D@<D$A9/D
D<0D@6/D/./>+9D$A9/?D<0D

+;8>A=@-CD#><-/.A>/D+;.D$A9/D	D<0D@6/D/./>+9D$A9/?D<0D7B79D#><-/.A>/D@6/?/D+==/+9?D+>/D

6/>/,CD%%%D ..7@7<;+99CD==/99+;@?D<@7<;D@<D#/>:7@D@6/D9/>8D<0D@6/D+;8>A=@-CD

<A>@D@<D&>+;?:7@D%/+9/.D#<>@7<;?D<0D@6/D$/-<>.D2>D==/+9DD <DD+;.D<@7<;D@<D

<;?<97.+@/D==/+9?DD <DD+>/D6/>/,CD D%D""&D

&6/?/D-+?/?D+>/D"%D

/@D@6/D9/>8D19/D+D-<=CD<0D@67?D">./>D+;.D;<@73D+99D-<A;?/9D<0D>/-<>.D

@D7?D?<D"$$D

$7-6:<;.D(7>47;7+D

+@/.D A5A?@DD


D

?D

';7@/.D%@+@/?D7?@>D

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 1567 Filed 08/08/22 Entered 09/01/22 11:24:57 Desc Main Case 3:22-cv-00516-DJN Document 6 Filed 08/08/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID# 34

Document Page 1 of 1
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4853 

To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to eliminate the percentage 

cap on funding available to carry out the program to provide support 

services to older caregivers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 23, 2019 

Mrs. TRAHAN (for herself and Mr. COMER) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to eliminate 

the percentage cap on funding available to carry out 

the program to provide support services to older caregivers. 

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 ‘‘National Family Care5 giver Support Program Cap Elimination Act of 2019’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4853 IH

1 SEC. 2. NATIONAL FAMILY CAREGIVER SUPPORT PROGRAM 

2 CAP. 

3 (a) FEDERAL SHARE.—Section 373(g)(2) of the 

4 Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3030s–1(g)(2)) 

5 is amended by striking subparagraph (C). 

6 (b) MONITORING THE IMPACT OF THE ELIMINATION

7 OF THE CAP ON FUNDS FOR OLDER RELATIVE CARE8 GIVERS.— 

9 (1) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after 

10 the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually 

11 thereafter, the Assistant Secretary shall submit to 

12 the Committee on Education and Labor of the 

13 House of Representatives and the Committee on 

14 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Sen15 ate a report on the impact of the amendment made 

16 by subsection (a) to eliminate the limitation on 

17 funds that States may allocate to provide support 

18 services to older relative caregivers in the National 

19 Family Caregiver Support Program established 

20 under part E of title III of the Older Americans Act 

21 of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3030s–2). Each such report 

22 shall also be made available to the public. 

23 (2) CONTENTS.—For purposes of reports re24 quired by paragraph (1), each State that receives an 

25 allotment under such National Family Caregiver 

26 Support Program for fiscal year 2020 or a subseVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:58 Nov 05, 2019 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H4853.IH H4853

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4853 IH

1 quent fiscal year shall report to the Assistant Sec2 retary for the fiscal year involved the amount of 

3 funds of the total Federal and non-Federal share al4 lotment used by the State to provide support serv5 ices for caregiver support for older relative care6 givers and family caregivers. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
CVC Water Delivery Records

Preliminary Data - Subject to Change

Red indicates Scheduled Data Green indicates Confirmed Delivery Data Contract Water Year Allocated Supply = 100%

Blue indicates Actual Data Deliveries to or on Behalf of CVC Contractors (Includes Allocated Supply or Acquired Water)

Dec-17

CVC 

Water 

Pumped 

@ Banks 

AF

Article 55 

Water 

Pumped 

@ Banks 

AF

CVC 

Water 

Pumped 

@ Tracy 

AF

CVC Water 

Pumped @ 

O'Neill 

AF

CVC 

Water 

Pumped 

@ Dos 

Amigos for 

Delivery 

AF

3% Loss 

Between 

Banks and 

O'Neill 

Based on 

Actual 

Pumping

Exchange 

from USBR 

to DWR in 

O'Neill

Exchange 

from DWR 

to USBR in 

O'Neill

Kern-Tulare 

acquired San Luis 

WD CVP Wtr to 

Kern County 

Water Agency 

(SOD-17-509 & 

SWPAO#16307 

or 17301) 

19,250 AF

Kern-Tulare 

acquired 

Patterson ID CVP 

Wtr to Kern 

County Water 

Agency 

(SOD-17-519 & 

SWPAO#16307 or 

17301) 

15,140 AF

12/1/2017 0 AF 0 AF

12/2/2017 0 AF 0 AF

12/3/2017 0 AF 0 AF

12/4/2017 0 AF 0 AF

12/5/2017 0 AF 0 AF

12/6/2017 0 AF 0 AF

12/7/2017 500 AF 2,500 AF 500 AF

12/8/2017 500 AF 0 AF 500 AF

12/9/2017 500 AF 0 AF 500 AF

12/10/2017 500 AF 0 AF 500 AF

12/11/2017 500 AF 0 AF 500 AF

12/12/2017 529 AF 2,645 AF 529 AF

12/13/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/14/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/15/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/16/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/17/2017 529 AF 3,174 AF 529 AF

12/18/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/19/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/20/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/21/2017 529 AF 4,695 AF 529 AF

12/22/2017 529 AF 0 AF 529 AF

12/23/2017 529 AF 0 AF 154 AF 375 AF

12/24/2017 529 AF 0 AF 154 AF 375 AF

12/25/2017 529 AF 0 AF 154 AF 375 AF

12/26/2017 529 AF 0 AF 154 AF 375 AF

12/27/2017 529 AF 0 AF 154 AF 375 AF

12/28/2017 529 AF 0 AF 154 AF 375 AF

12/29/2017 507 AF 0 AF 100 AF 407 AF

12/30/2017 507 AF 0 AF 100 AF 407 AF

12/31/2017 507 AF 0 AF 236 AF 271 AF

Dec 2017 Total 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 13,014 AF 0 AF 13,014 AF 0 AF 1,360 AF 11,654 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF

Notes: 

Contract Water Year 2017 (Mar 1, 2017 to Feb 28, 2018 Deliveries to or on behalf of CVC Contractor (Includes Allocated Supply or Acquired Water)

Mar 1, 2017 to 

Dec 31, 2017 CVC Banks Art 55 at Banks

CVC at 

Tracy

CVC at 

O'Neill

CVC at Dos 

Amigos

Losses 

Banks to 

O'Neill

Exchange 

USBR to 

DWR

Exchange 

DWR to 

USBR

County of 

Fresno County of Tulare Hills Valley Tri Valley Kern-Tulare Lower Tule Pixley Total Delivered

Year to Date Contract 

Wtr Yr Total 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 0 AF 36,860 AF 0 AF 36,860 AF 0 AF 0 AF 445 AF 0 AF 300 AF 33,750 AF 1,555 AF 1,555 AF 37,605 AF

Note: A total of 745 AF of deliveries were made from Millerton.

V:\~WATER\~SMITH\Cross Valley Contractor Deliveries Info\03-2017 to 02-2018\Master 03_2017 to 02_2018 CVC Deliveries.xlsx 4/20/2018 9:16 AM
**Exhibit (32.1)**
**Certification of Periodic Financial Report Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**
For the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the *Sarbanes-Oxley Act*of 2002, the undersigned, Timothy J. Hearn, the chiefexecutive officer of Imperial Oil Limited (the Company”), hereby certifies thatto his knowledge:
(i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the*Securities Exchange Act*of 1934; and
(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
Date: March 11, 2004 /s/ T.J. Hearn Timothy J. HearnChairman of the Board, President andChief Executive Officer
g:\blm\buttermp\ams\FinalFigures\Fig2-7_94BrkBtlInf8511.mxd 

Butte 

Helena 

Bozeman 

Boulder 

Big Sky 

Townsend 

Gardiner 

Belgrade 

Anaconda 

Whitehall 

Livingston 

Three Forks 

East Helena 

West Yellowstone 

Deerlodge

County 

Silverbow

County 

Lewis and Clark 

County 

Broadwater 

County 

Gallatin

Coun ty 

Park

County 

Meagher

County Powell

County

Granite

Coun ty 

Beaverhead

County 

Madison

County 

Wheatland

County 

Sweet Grass

County 

Stillwater 

Coun ty 

Yellowstone National

Park 

Freemont

County 

Clark

County 

Jefferson

County 

§ ̈¦15 

§ ̈¦15 

§ ̈¦90 

§ ̈¦90 

£¤12 

£¤12 

WYOMING

IDAHO 

MONTANA 

IDAHO 

Cascade

County 

I Bark Beetle Infestation 1994 Bark Beetle Infestation, 

Butte Planning Area 

0 Miles 25 Butte Field Office - EIS 

No warranty is made by the Bureau of RMP Planning Area, Montana Land Management (BLM) for use of

data for purposes not intended by BLM. FIGURE 2-7
ROBERT R. MILLER , Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1D 13

- 5 503

_____________________________/ Opinion filed August 14, 2017. An appeal from the Circuit Cour t for Duval County

. Kevin A. Blazs , Judge

. Andy Thomas , Public Defender, and Pamela D. Presnell , Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee , for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate , Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

ON REMAND FROM THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
PER CURIAM. We previously affirmed appellant’s sentence s based on our en banc decision
in Walton v. State , 106 So. 3d 522 , 528 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) ( Walton I ), where this court held that “ any mandat ory minimum term required by section 775.087(2)

–2 whether the defendant fires a gun, or only carries or displays it

– shall be imposed consecutively to any other term imposed for any other felony.” However, the Florida Supreme Court quashed our decision i n this case and remanded for reconsideration in light of its decisions in Walton v. State , 208 So. 3d 60 (Fla. 2016) ( Walton II ), and Williams v. State , 186 So. 3d 989 (Fla. 2016).
In Williams , the supreme court held that the 10

- 20

- Life statute does not

r equire consecutive sentences when the sentences arise from a single criminal episode. Rather, the supreme court held that “a trial judge has discretion to order the mandatory minimum sentences to run consecutively, but may impose the sentences concurrently .” Williams , 186 So. 3d at 993. In so determining, the supreme court noted that “[g]enerally, consecutive sentencing of mandatory minimum imprisonment terms for multiple firearm offenses is impermissible if the offenses arose from the same criminal episode and a firearm was merely possessed but not discharged” ; however, “[if] . . . multiple firearm offenses are committed contemporaneously, during which time multiple victims are shot at, then consecutive sentencing is permissible but not mandatory.” Id. The supreme court did not explicitly discuss a case factually similar to this one, in which appellant committed two gun

- related offenses, attempted second

- degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, but appellant’s crimes involved only

one victim who sustained only one physical injury.3 In line with our precedent outlined in Burns v. State , 212 So. 3d 546 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) , and Wilson v. State , 42 Fla. L. Weekly D993b (Fla. 1st DCA May 2, 2017), we therefore REVERSE and REMAND appellant’s sentences for the trial court to reconsider whether, in its discretion, it wishes for appellant to serve his minimum mandatory sentences concurrently or consecutively. In so ruling, we certify conflict with Torres

- Rios v. State , 205 So. 3d 883 (Fla. 5th DC A 2016). ROBERTS, JAY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Jacob Levin et al., Plaintiffs in Error.

Gen. No. 15,162.

*Recognizances—who may take in criminal cases.*Notwithstanding it may not appear that the crime charged was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the city of Chicago, a judge of the Municipal Court of Chicago has authority under the Criminal Code to take a recognizance for the appearance of the accused in the proper court.

Error to the Criminal Court of Cook county; the Hon. George Kersten, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1909.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed January 13, 1911.

Edward H. Morris, for plaintiffs in error.

John E. W. Wayman, for defendant in error.

Mr. Presiding Justice Mack

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiffs in error are principal and surety in a recognizance taken by a Judge of the Municipal Court, after commitment to jail, conditioned on appearance' in the Criminal Court. On the call of the case aftér indictment, the recognizance was forfeited for failure to appear, and the judgment of forfeiture was subsequently made absolute after default by both defendants on a *scire facias*issued out of the Criminal Court and served by reading to one defendant *431and returned as to the other defendant, “the other within named defendant not found in my county. *’ ’*

*No*brief has been filed on behalf of defendant in error. We have carefully considered the brief of plaintiffs in error and cannot concur in the views therein expressed.

1st. Whether or not the Municipal Court in February, 1907, had jurisdiction in preliminary examinations is immaterial. Under the Criminal Code, R. S., ch. 38, div. III, sec. 6, “any judge” could take a recognizance in the case of a person committed to jail on a criminal charge. While the Municipal Court had no jurisdiction, under the Municipal Court Act, to try a criminal case unless it appeared in the record that the crime was committed in Chicago, a judge of that or any other State court could, under the Criminal Code, take a recognizance for the appearance of the accused in the proper court.

2nd. The charge need not be set out in the recognizance or in the writ with the particularity necessary in an indictment; it is sufficient if it identifies the offense. In our judgment the charge of “harboring a female under 18 years of age in a house of prostitution,” identifies the offense covered by the Act of June 3, 1889, see. 3 (Laws of 1889, p. 112; Hurd R. S., ed. of 1909, p. 763, sec. 57d), at least as fully as do the words, “stealing from the store” of X identify the charge of larceny. Young v. People, 18 Ill. 566. Or the words, “the crime of selling liquor without license,” identify the offense of selling intoxicating liquor in a less quantity than one gallon, not having a license to keep a dramshop. Compton v. People, 86 Ill. 176. Especially is this so on writ of error after default. Compton v. People, *supra.*

3rd. The return of the sheriff satisfies, in our judgment, the statutory requirement that “in case the person cannot be found by the sheriff, he shall make return of that fact to the court.”

*'Affirmed.*
g:\blm\buttermp\ams\FinalFigures\fig2-26_specialdesignations8511.mxd 

Cl ar k Fo r k 

Boulder Ri ver 

Flint Cr e ek 

Stillwa te r Riv e r 

Shie ld s Ri v e r 

River 

M issour i Riv er 

Canyo

Ferr

Res ervoir 

Hauser Lake 

Holter

Lake

Boul der Ri v er 

Miss ou ri 

Nevad a C r e ek 

Si x t e e n mi le 

Riv er 

Bla c kf o o t R iv er 

Creek 

J eff erson R iv er 

M a dison Ri v e r Gallati n Ri v er

Ye l l owston e Ri v er 

Wis e Rive r 

Big H ol e Ri ver 

Si l v er Bow Cree k 

Butte 

Helena 

Bozeman 

Boulder 

Big Sky 

Townsend 

Gardiner 

Belgrade 

Anaconda 

Whitehall 

Livingston 

Three Forks 

East Helena 

West Yellowstone 

Deerlodg

County 

Silverbo

County 

Lewis and Clark

County 

Broadwater

County 

Gallatin

Coun ty 

Par

County 

Meaghe

County Powell

County

Granite

Coun ty 

Beaverhea

County 

Madiso

County 

Wheatlan

County 

Sweet Gras

County 

Stillwater

Coun ty 

Yellowstone National

Park 

Freemont

County 

Clar

County 

Jefferso

County 

§ ̈¦15 

§ ̈¦15 

§ ̈¦90 

§ ̈¦90 

£¤12 

£¤12 

WYOMING

IDAHO 

MONTANA 

IDAHO 

Cascad

County 

Continental Divid

Trail 

Sleeping Giant

ACEC 

Sheep Cree

WSA 

Sleeping Giant

WSA 

Humbug Spires

WSA 

Black Sag

WSA 

Elkhor

WSA 

Yellowstone

River

Islan

WSA 

I Wilderness Study Area (WSA) Continental Divide National

Bureau Of Land Management Scenic Trail

(BLM) Lands Lewis and Clark

Sleeping Giant Area of Critical National Historic Trail

0 Miles 25
 Environmental Concern (ACEC) Special Designations

Butte Field Office - EIS

No warranty is made by the Bureau of

Land Management (BLM) for use of RMP Planning Area, Montana

data for purposes not intended by BLM. FIGURE 2-26
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Newport News Division

Case No.: 18-51349-FJS

Chapter 13

In re: MARC ERICSON DARNELL

Debtor

NOTICE OF TRUSTEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS

Michael P. Cotter, Chapter 13 Trustee, has filed papers with the court to dismiss your case. Your rights may be 

affected. You should read these papers carefully and discuss them with your attorney, if you have one in this 

bankruptcy case. (If you do not have an attorney, you may wish to consult one.)

If you do not want the court to dismiss your case or if you want the court to consider your views on the motion, then 

you and your attorney must:

ATTEND THE HEARING SCHEDULED TO BE HELD:

at on January 18, 2019 at 10:30 am

If you or your attorney do not take these steps, the court may decide that you do not oppose on the motion and may 

enter an order granting that relief.

MICHAEL P. COTTER, TRUSTEE

BY /s/ Michael P. Cotter 

U.S. Courthouse

2400 WEST AVENUE

NEWPORT NEWS, VA 23607

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Motion and Notice of Hearing was mailed this 11th day of December, 

2018 to:

MARC ERICSON DARNELL

P.O. BOX 1673

NEWPORT NEWS, VA 23601

/s/ Michael P. Cotter

Case 18-51349-FJS Doc 38 Filed 12/11/18 Entered 12/11/18 16:11:23 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Newport News Division

Case No.: 18-51349-FJS

Chapter 13

In re: MARC ERICSON DARNELL

Debtor

____

TRUSTEE'S MOTION FOR DISMISSAL

COMES NOW Michael P. Cotter, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee, who moves for dismissal of the above referenced 

bankruptcy matter, due to the debtors failure to file 2016 and 2017 tax returns

For the foregoing reason, this case should be dismissed.

MICHAEL P. COTTER, TRUSTEE

BY /s/ Michael P. Cotter 

I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Motion and Notice of Hearing was mailed this 11th day of December, 

2018 to:

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

MARC ERICSON DARNELL

P.O. BOX 1673

NEWPORT NEWS, VA 23601

/s/ Michael P. Cotter

Michael P. Cotter VSB No. 19526

Chapter 13 Standing Trustee

870 Greenbrier Circle, Suite 402

Chesapeake, VA 23320

(757) 961-3000

Case 18-51349-FJS Doc 38 Filed 12/11/18 Entered 12/11/18 16:11:23 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 721

 684

 665

 720

 594

 665

 670

 664

 608

 602

 572

 578

 586

 598

 586

 572

 571

 549

 578

 549

 552

 556

 578

 582

 578

 580

 576

 561

 553

 594

 435

 554

 497

 554

 511

 477

 487

 559

 472

 464

 455

 440

 443

 517

 530

 490

 483

 446

 485

 486

 510

 523

 540

 533

 532

 528

 543

 539

 526

 535

 617

 611

 529

 673

 532

 624

 615

 613

 555

 522

 514

 510

 507

 567

 561

 524

 534

 493

 551

 529

 539

 541

 566

 566

 565

 562

 557

 552

 541

 559

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2008 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 5, 2008

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 397

 394

 343

 432

 345

 402

 396

 395

 359

 339

 334

 331

 329

 366

 363

 340

 346

 321

 357

 343

 349

 350

 366

 366

 365

 363

 360

 357

 350

 361

TOTAL 16,729

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 21
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean TDS

1 222 170 182 128

2 240 170 190 133

3 233 147 183 129

4 269 157 192 135

5 217 160 186 131

6 208 156 170 121

7 217 163 179 127

8 217 192 202 141

9 214 190 199 139

10 223 202 209 145

11 230 209 221 153

12 240 228 235 161

13 232 220 226 156

14 224 196 212 147

15 205 180 189 133

16 204 164 181 128

17 192 168 180 127

18 0 0 0 0

19 0 0 0 0

20 0 0 0 0

21 0 0 0 0

22 0 0 0 0

23 0 0 0 0

24 0 0 0 0

25 0 0 0 0

26 0 0 0 0

27 0 0 0 16

28 0 0 0 16

29 0 0 0 16

30 0 0 0 16

31 0 0 0 16

Total 3336

COMMENT(S):

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Delta Mendota Canal At Headworks

Period: July 2023 Run Date: 8/15/2023