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

31

DAY HIGH

 1,276

 998

 1,084

 715

 721

 940

 920

 1,123

 1,967

 2,745

 3,377

 2,598

 2,499

 2,471

 2,352

 2,067

 1,513

 835

 918

 939

 656

 1,068

 891

 1,344

 1,438

 2,139

 2,313

 2,693

 2,841

 2,749

 2,701

 178

 176

 179

 175

 172

 164

 154

 150

 158

 189

 220

 224

 207

 262

 248

 248

 214

 192

 184

 171

 165

 157

 160

 173

 206

 197

 204

 252

 220

 253

 271

 368

 335

 316

 287

 268

 278

 252

 276

 397

 658

 786

 721

 648

 658

 649

 525

 451

 308

 277

 251

 214

 221

 232

 312

 422

 523

 605

 680

 753

 772

 764

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JULY 2007 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: August 2, 2007

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 5,451

 5,226

 4,922

 4,767

 4,724

 4,710

 4,663

 4,671

 4,814

 5,158

 5,567

 5,863

 6,028

 6,248

 6,529

 6,719

 6,854

 6,875

 6,884

 6,857

 6,819

 6,764

 6,599

 6,253

 5,889

 5,691

 5,648

 5,670

 5,774

 6,021

 6,334

 389

 373

 352

 341

 337

 336

 333

 334

 344

 368

 398

 419

 431

 446

 466

 480

 490

 491

 492

 490

 487

 483

 471

 447

 421

 407

 403

 405

 412

 430

 452

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
May 17,2012 Aloha ley Office ofAviation Analysis 1200 NewJersey Ave., SE, W86-310 Washington, DC 20590

Dear Ms. ley: We supportthe City ofAbilene's request fora Small CommunityAir Service Development Grantto improve air service at Abilene Regional Airport. As an under-served airport, ABI is requesting funding to subsidize new service with an additional airline. More direct flight options, competition and choice from improvements would increase demand. Your approval ofthe grant proposal, resulting in additional air service for our region, would provide: • Increased customer

### choices byadding non-stop service from ABI to additional hub airports 

### such as Denver, Phoenix and las Vegas. • Increased route opportunities and capacity • Reduced average fares paid by passengers using ABI • Reduced leakage to other airports in the region We respectfully request your favorable action on Abilene Regional Airport's grant application. Sincerely,

# ~~/--~~**MfT:like~;~cr~/{ ~**  789 Norman Ave Pleasant Gap, PA 16823
§ 86.304 What are the procedures used by the Secretary to demand repayment of Federal financial assistance or terminate an IHE's eligibility for any or all forms of Federal financial assistance? ( a ) A designated Department official begins a proceeding for repayment of Federal financial assistance or termination, or both, of an IHE's eligibility for any or all forms of Federal financial assistance by sending the IHE a notice by certified mail with return receipt requested. This notice— ( 1 ) Informs the IHE of the Secretary's intent to demand repayment of Federal financial assistance or to terminate, describes the consequences of that action, and identifies the alleged violations that constitute the basis for the action;
( 2 ) Specifies, as appropriate— ( i ) The amount of Federal financial assistance that must be repaid and the date by which the IHE must repay the funds; and
( ii ) The proposed effective date of the termination, which must be at least 30 days after the date of receipt of the notice of intent; and
( 3 ) Informs the IHE that the repayment of Federal financial assistance will not be required or that the termination will not be effective on the date specified in the notice if the designated Department official receives, within a 30-day period beginning on the date the IHE receives the notice of intent described in this paragraph— ( i ) Written material indicating why the repayment of Federal financial assistance or termination should not take place; or
( ii ) A request for a hearing that contains a concise statement of disputed issues of law and fact, the IHE's position with respect to these issues, and, if appropriate, a description of which Federal financial assistance the IHE contends need not be repaid.
( b ) If the IHE does not request a hearing but submits written material— ( 1 ) The IHE receives no additional opportunity to request or receive a hearing; and
( 2 ) The designated Department official, after considering the written material, notifies the IHE in writing whether— ( i ) Any or all of the Federal financial assistance must be repaid; or
( ii ) The proposed termination is dismissed or imposed as of a specified date.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1145g)
[55 FR 33581, Aug. 16, 1990, as amended at 61 FR 66225, Dec. 17, 1996]
VERTX

– A DDENDUM TO ADD ALL APPROVED UA S

- 1 of 1

3/10/2016
U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12

- 140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590
Submitted Electronically via the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS)

Dear Sir or Madam :
Vertical Information Services, Inc., (VERTX) h a s prepared the following a ddendum to Exemption # 11 624 and 11624A under Docket FAA

- 2015

- 0544
This a ddendum adds any aircraft identified on the List of Approved Unmanned Aerial Sys tems (UAS) under Section 333 at regulatory docket FAA

– 2007

– 3330 at www.regulatio ns.gov , ( which is updated regularly ) when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Allowing th e use of any aircraft on the List of Approved Unmanned Systems (UAS) has been use d recently in exemptions:

 Exemption No. 15233 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5418

 Exemption No. 15234 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5360

 Exemption No. 15235 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5272

 Exemption No. 15236 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5253

 Exemption No. 15237 Reg ulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 5236
The exemptions listed above are identica l in nature to VERTX ’s exemption and th erefore no new precedent would be set by extending the same List to VERTX

. This a ddendum makes no other changes to the currently approved exemption 11624 and 11624A , rea sons for exemption request, and/or operating parameters.
The name and contact information of the applicant remains the same:

S inc e r e l y ,

Eric Andelin President Vertical Information Services, Inc. 301 W Platt St, Suite 654 Tampa, FL 33606 Phone: 813.992.6612 Email: eric@vertisx.com
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

 229

 264

 275

 228

 214

 241

 198

 202

 204

 211

 207

 205

 200

 206

 299

 223

 255

 243

 250

 248

 222

 214

 216

 280

 218

 268

 405

 409

 371

 333

 180

 186

 191

 181

 177

 182

 184

 188

 189

 184

 178

 178

 178

 174

 184

 188

 188

 186

 181

 175

 180

 180

 180

 184

 185

 187

 191

 192

 193

 192

 190

 200

 210

 205

 192

 195

 190

 193

 195

 193

 192

 189

 186

 191

 221

 200

 210

 206

 198

 195

 197

 194

 194

 205

 199

 206

 219

 221

 225

 221

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

APRIL 2002 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 8, 2002

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 2,550

 2,584

 2,621

 2,644

 2,648

 2,655

 2,654

 2,657

 2,669

 2,682

 2,696

 2,708

 2,714

 2,721

 2,752

 2,752

 2,752

 2,753

 2,759

 2,759

 2,766

 2,767

 2,766

 2,778

 2,785

 2,802

 2,835

 2,865

 2,869

 2,890

 182

 185

 187

 189

 189

 190

 190

 190

 191

 192

 193

 193

 194

 194

 197

 197

 197

 197

 197

 197

 198

 198

 198

 198

 199

 200

 203

 205

 205

 206

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
### §121. Repealed. June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title IV, §651(a)(1), 46 Stat. 762, eff. June 18, 1930

Section, act Sept. 21, 1922, ch. 356, title I, §1, 42 Stat. 858, related to articles dutiable, rates and schedules. Corresponding provisions of Tariff Act of 1930, see section 1202 of this title.
### §§1802 to 1805. Repealed. Pub. L. 93–618, title VI, §602(d), Jan. 3, 1975, 88 Stat. 2072

Section 1802, Pub. L. 87–794, title IV, §401, Oct. 11, 1962, 76 Stat. 902, enumerated activities to be performed by heads of agencies in performing functions under Trade Expansion Act of 1962.

Section 1803, Pub. L. 87–794, title IV, §402, Oct. 11, 1962, 76 Stat. 902, required an annual Presidential report to Congress on trade agreement program and on tariff adjustment and other adjustment assistance. See section 2213 of this title.

Section 1804, Pub. L. 87–794, title IV, §403, Oct. 11, 1962, 76 Stat. 902, covered operations of United States Tariff Commission [now the United States International Trade Commission]. See section 2231 of this title.

Section 1805, Pub. L. 87–794, title IV, §404, Oct. 11, 1962, 76 Stat. 902, provided for separability of provisions of Trade Expansion Act of 1962. See section 605 of Pub. L. 93–618, set out as a note under section 2101 of this title, for provisions covering separability of various parts of Trade Act of 1974.
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

 297

 284

 319

 331

 354

 372

 355

 389

 399

 369

 399

 443

 396

 397

 412

 424

 362

 404

 426

 474

 536

 430

 560

 585

 643

 385

 472

 533

 352

 625

 226

 228

 278

 298

 304

 313

 232

 261

 373

 347

 355

 347

 353

 354

 376

 353

 299

 335

 345

 353

 387

 345

 338

 273

 399

 334

 334

 352

 318

 362

 249

 250

 297

 316

 327

 343

 266

 323

 387

 358

 375

 397

 376

 378

 395

 391

 335

 368

 386

 424

 460

 382

 416

 437

 531

 348

 383

 471

 327

 525

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

NOVEMBER 2019 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: December 11, 2019

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 170

 171

 200

 211

 218

 228

 180

 216

 255

 237

 248

 261

 248

 250

 260

 258

 223

 243

 255

 278

 300

 252

 273

 286

 344

 231

 253

 307

 218

 340

TOTAL 11,221

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 21
(No. 75-CV-0057

#### In Re Application of Sol Goldberg

*Opinion filed April 6, 1979.*

Pierce & Goldman, by Allen S. Pierce, Attorney for Claimant.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; by Orisha Kulick, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Poch, J.

This matter comes before this Court on Respondent’s motion to dismiss the claim on the grounds that a claim for compensation under the “Crime Victims Compensation Act” does not survive the death of the Claimant.

*1069Claimant filed his claim for benefits under the “Crime Victims Compensation Act” on July 29,1974. There were several hearings on this matter, and during the pendency of the claim, the Claimant, Goldberg, died of causes unrelated to his original injury. He apparently had a heart attack on July 13,1977 which caused his death.

The Court has never rendered an opinion on this claim, and upon the Claimant’s death, the Attorney General moved to dismiss the claim on the grounds that a claim for compensation under the “Crime Victims Compensation Act” does not survive the death of the Claimant.

The statute which the Court must consider is the “Survival Act” which is found in Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, Ch. 110-1/2, Sec. 27-6. That statute sets forth the Acts which, in addition to common law, survive the death of a party. The Court must determine whether or not the “Crime Victims Compensation Act” is therefore one of those which does survive the death of the Claimant..

There is no doubt that the Crime Victims Compensation Law was unknown at common law and thus is a purely statutory cause of action. It is clear that a statutory cause of action does not survive unless declared by statute to do so.

The case before the Court is a claim for an award in a Statutory Court and is not an adversary proceeding against a defendant as in a tort action.

In the instant case, the “Crime Victim Compensation Act,” Section 11 (Ill. Rev. Stat. Ch. 70, Sec. 81) provides as follows: “ Compensation due under this Act may not be assigned, pledged, encumbered, released or commuted____” It is clear that the compensa*1070tion cannot be assigned, and that the drafters of the law in the Legislature did not wish it to survive because no mention is made in the Act that it survive the death of the Claimant.

In this case, the Claimant, Sol Goldberg, died prior to the adjudication on the merits of his claim. Goldberg claim did not survive his death because it is not an “action” to recover damages for the injury to the person. It is rather a statutory creation allowing a Claimant to seek compensation from the State.

Since the Crime Victim’s Act is totally silent as to survival, it is a strict statutory action which terminates and abates at the death of a Claimant.

It is therefore the finding of the Court that the claim of Sol Goldberg abated upon his death and the motion of the State to dismiss this claim is hereby granted.
### SUBCHAPTER III—IMPORT-RELATED PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean TDS

1 0 0 0 16

2 0 0 0 16

3 0 0 0 16

4 0 0 0 16

5 151 55 91 72

6 78 54 66 57

7 73 64 69 59

8 97 65 75 62

9 94 70 80 65

10 100 77 87 70

11 85 52 71 60

12 0 0 0 16

13 0 0 0 16

14 130 112 122 91

15 132 107 120 90

16 0 0 0 16

17 0 0 0 16

18 0 0 0 16

19 0 0 0 16

20 0 0 0 16

21 0 0 0 16

22 0 0 0 16

23 108 37 83 67

24 104 49 77 64

25 108 65 86 69

26 96 61 76 63

27 98 65 76 63

28 103 72 89 71

29 104 91 97 76

30 102 67 82 67

31 106 91 99 77

Total 1546

COMMENT(S):

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Delta Mendota Canal At Headworks

Period: May 2023 Run Date: 6/12/2023
### Part A—Dispute Settlement
1/25/2021

Note: Shaded area not verified with CDFW data

Delta Smelt Splittail Longfin Pumping

Daily Total Daily Total

Daily Combined Daily Combined Daily In CFS In Acre Feet

Total Daily 14-Day Total Daily 14-Day Total

SWP Larval 

Yor N CVP Larval Yor N Total Average SWP CVP Total Average SWP Larval Yor N CVP Larval Yor N

1-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2,605 968 3,573 5,168 1,920 7,088 0.0 0.0

2-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1,932 969 2,902 3,833 1,923 5,756 0.0 0.0

3-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1,938 969 2,908 3,845 1,923 5,768 0.0 0.0

4-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1,729 834 2,563 3,430 1,654 5,084 0.0 0.0

5-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1,721 834 2,555 3,414 1,654 5,068 0.0 0.0

6-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,389 833 2,222 2,756 1,652 4,408 0.0 0.0

7-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,058 824 1,882 2,098 1,634 3,732 0.0 0.0

8-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 847 832 1,679 1,680 1,651 3,331 0.0 0.0

9-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 846 827 1,673 1,679 1,640 3,319 0.0 0.0

10-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 630 829 1,459 1,249 1,645 2,894 0.0 0.0

11-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 847 825 1,672 1,680 1,637 3,317 0.0 0.0

12-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 847 830 1,677 1,680 1,647 3,327 0.0 0.0

13-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 636 830 1,466 1,261 1,647 2,908 0.0 0.0

14-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 847 831 1,678 1,680 1,649 3,329 0.0 0.0

15-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 853 834 1,687 1,692 1,655 3,347 0.0 0.0

16-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 847 838 1,685 1,680 1,662 3,342 0.0 0.0

17-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 630 835 1,465 1,249 1,656 2,905 0.0 0.0

18-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1,058 837 1,895 2,098 1,661 3,759 0.0 0.0

19-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,064 822 1,886 2,110 1,631 3,741 0.0 0.0

20-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,064 827 1,891 2,110 1,641 3,751 0.0 0.0

21-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,492 829 2,322 2,960 1,645 4,605 0.0 0.0

22-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,924 833 2,757 3,817 1,652 5,469 0.0 0.0

23-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,101 830 3,931 6,150 1,647 7,797 0.0 0.0

24-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,223 826 4,049 6,393 1,639 8,032 0.0 0.0

25-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,523 831 4,353 6,987 1,648 8,635 0.0 0.0

26-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,469 826 4,294 6,880 1,638 8,518 0.0 0.0

27-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,983 831 3,814 5,917 1,649 7,566 0.0 0.0

28-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,019 838 3,858 5,989 1,663 7,652 0.0 0.0

29-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,922 834 2,757 3,813 1,655 5,468 0.0 0.0

30-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,383 836 2,220 2,744 1,659 4,403 0.0 0.0

31-Dec-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,703 842 2,545 3,377 1,671 5,048 0.0 0.0

Total 0 0 0 XXXX 1 0 1 XXXX 0 0 51,131 26,190 77,321 101,419 51,948 153,367 XXXX XXXX

Official data is posted on CDFW's webpage.

Banks Tracy Combined Banks SWP CVP

CENTRAL VALLEY OPERATIONS OFFICE

DELTA SMELT, SPLITTAIL and LONGFIN REPORT

DECEMBER 2020

DATE

Delta Smelt Daily 

Density

Tracy Combined
#### § 690.71 Scope.

This subpart deals with program administration by an institution of higher education.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1070a)

[50 FR 10724, Mar. 15, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 43162, Nov. 28, 1986; 59 FR 54730, Nov. 1, 1994; 60 FR 61816, Dec. 1, 1995]
#### James Edward RAY, to his own use and to the use of State Accident Fund, and Ozell Mayer, to his own use and to the use of State Accident Fund v. Ernest A. HARRIS, Jr., and Otis Craig, and United States of America.

Civ. No. 18322.

United States District Court D. Maryland.

Sept. 25, 1967.

Gerald H. Cooper, Baltimore, Md., for plaintiff.

Stephen H. Sachs, Paul M. Rosenberg, Baltimore, Md., for the United States.

No appearance for defendant Otis Craig.

Ernest A. Harris, David D. Patton, Baltimore, Md., for defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

FRANK A. KAUFMAN, District Judge.

Plaintiffs allege they suffered injuries in an automobile accident due to the neg*111ligence of defendant Craig, the driver of one vehicle, and the negligence of defendant Harris, the driver of a second vehicle. Plaintiffs also assert that at the time and place of the alleged accident, defendant Harris was acting within the scope of his employment as an employee of the Post Office Department, an agency of defendant United States of America. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346 and 2671 et seq. Defendant Harris has moved to dismiss on the grounds, *inter alia,*that the statutory remedy is exclusively against the United States and not against one of its employees. The Government, as a defendant, in its answer also takes the position that Harris is not a proper party defendant.

Section 2679(b) of 28 U.S.C. provides:

> (b) The remedy by suit against the United States as provided by section 1346(b) of this title for damage to property or for personal injury, including death, resulting from the operation by any employee of the Government of any motor vehicle while acting within the scope of his office or employment, shall hereafter be exclusive of any other civil action or proceeding by. reason of the same subject matter against the employee or his estate whose act or omission gave rise to the claim.

In Perez v. United States, 218 F.Supp. 571 (S.D.N.Y.1963), Judge Peinberg, then a District Judge, after reviewing the legislative history of 28 U.S.C. § 2679(b), held that a suit against the Government driver employee, in his individual capacity, for his alleged negligent operation of a Government vehicle in the scope of his employment by the Government, is barred by the provisions of that statute. The language of 28 U.S.C. § 2679(b) itself and the legislative history as set forth by Judge Peinberg in *Perez*clearly impose the bar which is the basis of the motion to dismiss of defendant Harris and the Government’s position to that same effect.

Neither of the plaintiffs has filed any memorandum in opposition to the motion to dismiss- of defendant Harris, nor has either of them requested a hearing, within the* provisions and time limitations set forth in Local Rule 7 of this Court.

It is therefore ordered this 25th day of September, 1967, by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, that the action of plaintiffs against defendant Ernest A. Harris, Jr. be, and the same is, hereby dismissed as against said defendant.
(No. 6132

#### Laventhol, Krekstein, Horwath & Horwath, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed January 9, 1973.*

Laventhol, Krekstein, Horwath & Horwath, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
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 ELEV

 1,155.99

 1,155.99

 1,155.98

 1,155.97

 1,155.95

 1,155.93

 1,155.91

 1,155.90

 1,155.89

 1,155.88

 1,155.87

 1,155.86

 1,155.85

 1,155.84

 1,155.83

 1,155.82

 1,155.81

 1,155.80

 1,155.79

 1,155.78

 1,155.77

 1,155.76

 1,155.75

 1,155.74

 1,155.73

 1,155.72

 1,155.71

 1,155.71

 1,155.71

 1,155.70

 5.06

 5.06

 5.06

 5.05

 5.04

 5.04

 5.03

 5.02

 5.02

 5.02

 5.01

 5.01

 5.00

 5.00

 5.00

 4.99

 4.99

 4.98

 4.98

 4.98

 4.97

 4.97

 4.96

 4.96

 4.96

 4.95

 4.95

 4.95

 4.95

 4.94

STORAGE

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

-0.01

-0.01

-0.01

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

-0.01

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

CHANGE

8

10

8

8

5

5

6

7

6

5

5

5

6

8

7

7

7

8

8

8

9

8

7

8

7

7

8

10

9

8

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

OUTLET

 5

 7

 7

 7

 6

 6

 7

 6

 5

 4

 4

 5

 5

 7

 6

 6

 6

 7

 7

 7

 8

 7

 6

 7

 6

 6

 7

 7

 6

 7

C.F.S.

 .35

 .52

 .50

 .50

 .47

 .45

 .51

 .44

 .37

 .28

 .33

 .38

 .36

 .50

 .46

 .45

 .49

 .53

 .52

 .50

 .58

 .52

 .48

 .51

 .48

 .49

 .56

 .51

 .49

 .51

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-ORLAND PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JUNE 2021 EAST PARK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 09/02/2021

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -.04 218 90 0 187 14.04 .00

ACRE-FEET -40 432 179 0 371

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 AM.

SUMMARY RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 179

 179

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .00

JULY 1, 2020 11.40

 5.06

OCT 1, 2020 TO DATE = 11.36
#### § 75.613 Relocation assistance by the grantee.

###### Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70332, Aug. 29, 2024.

A grantee is subject to the regulations on relocation assistance and real property acquisition in 34 CFR part 15.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)
### **CHAPTER 10—CUSTOMS SERVICE**

Sec.
2071.
Establishment of Service; Commissioner; appointment.
2072.
Officers and employees.
2073.
Transfer of personnel, etc., to Service.
2074.
Establishment of revolving fund.
2075.
Appropriations authorization.
2076.
Advances in foreign countries.
2077.
Advances for enforcement of customs provisions.
2078.
Certification of reason for advance.
2079.
Payments in foreign countries; claims for reimbursement.
2080.
Advances from available appropriations; rules and regulations.
2081.
Undercover investigative operations of Customs Service.
2082.
Customs Service administration.
2083.
Annual national trade and customs law violation estimates and enforcement strategy.
2084.
Office of Trade.