alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 24.332 Hard cider materials. This section pertains to wine that is eligible for the hard cider tax rate as set out in § 24.331. ( a ) *Apples and pears.* Wine will be considered to be derived primarily from apples or pears, or from apple juice concentrate or pear juice concentrate and water, if the apple juice, pear juice, or combination of apple and pear juice, or the equivalent amount of concentrate of apple and/or pear juice reconstituted to the original brix of the juice prior to concentration, or any combination thereof, represents more than 50 percent of the volume of the finished product.
( b ) *Fruit products.* ( 1 ) Wine is not eligible for the hard cider tax rate if it contains any fruit product other than apple or pear. A fruit product is any material derived or made from any fruit or part of a fruit, including but not limited to, concentrates, extracts, juices, powders, or wine spirits.
( 2 ) Notwithstanding the provisions of § 24.332(b)(1), an authorized wine treating material set forth in § 24.246 that is derived from a fruit other than apple or pear may be used in the production of wine otherwise eligible for the hard cider tax rate if it is used for a purpose other than flavoring and it is either used in accordance with the wine treating materials provisions of § 24.246 (if used in a natural wine), or used in amounts insufficient to impart a fruit flavor other than apple or pear (if used in a special natural wine or other than standard wine). In determining whether the use of wine treating materials derived from a fruit other than apple or pear is for a purpose other than flavoring, TTB will consider such factors as the labeling and advertising of the product. Any written or pictorial reference to a material derived from a fruit other than apple or pear (other than the inclusion of a wine treating material in an ingredient labeling statement) in the labeling or advertising of a wine will be treated as evidence that the wine treating material was added for the purpose of flavoring the wine.
( c ) *Flavorings.* Wine is not eligible for the hard cider tax rate if it contains any fruit flavoring other than apple or pear. For purposes of this section, a fruit flavoring other than apple or pear is any flavoring that imparts the flavor of a fruit other than apple or pear and includes a natural fruit flavor, an artificial fruit flavor, and a natural flavor that artificially imparts the flavor of a fruit that is not contained in that flavor. In determining whether the use of a flavoring imparts the flavor of a fruit other than apple or pear, TTB will consider such factors as the labeling and advertising of the product. Any written or pictorial reference to a fruit flavor other than apple or pear in the labeling or advertising of a wine that contains a flavoring will be treated as evidence that the wine contains a flavoring that imparts a fruit flavor other than apple or pear and thus the wine is not eligible for the hard cider tax rate. The use of spices, honey, hops, or pumpkins as a flavoring will not make a wine ineligible for the hard cider tax rate.
(Sec. 335, Pub. L. 114-113, 129 Stat. 3109, as amended (26 U.S.C. 5041))
### §4535. Regulations

#### (a) Secretary of the Treasury

The Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out this title 1 and the amendments made by this title 1 (except as provided by subsection (b)).

#### (b) Secretary of Labor

The Secretary of Labor shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the labor value content determination under section 4532 of this title.

(Pub. L. 116–113, title II, §210, Jan. 29, 2020, 134 Stat. 53.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This title, referred to in subsec. (a), is title II of Pub. L. 116–113, Jan. 29, 2020, 134 Stat. 19, which enacted this subchapter and amended and enacted provisions set out as notes under several sections within this title. For complete classification of title II to the Code, see Tables.

1 See References in Text note below.
(No. 74-CC-116

#### Town House Hotel, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Conservation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed November 13, 1973.*

Town House Hotel, Claimant, pro se.

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

Per Curiam.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00182-CV

John J. Rogers, Jr.; James R. Winton and Burl Richardson, Appellants

v.

Texas Board of Architectural Examiners, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-08-004634, HONORABLE GISELA D. TRIANA-DOYAL, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The parties’ third joint motion to abate this cause is GRANTED, and the appeal is

ABATED until June 8, 2012. The parties shall submit either a motion to reinstate or a joint

status report concerning the status of settlement negotiations no later than June 8, 2012. 

Upon reinstatement, motions for rehearing will be due no later than the tenth (10th) date

following reinstatement.

_______________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Abated

Filed: February 17, 2012
**J
                  L Stephan Co PC**Jerry
                  L. Stephan, CPA**Certified
                  Public Accountants**
              Marty
                  Szasz, CPADavid
                  Skibowski, Jr., CPA






Exhibit
        23.1
 
 **INDEPENDENT
        AUDITOR’S CONSENT**
 
 
 We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Statement of The
        Tracker Corporation of America on Form 10-KSB of our report dated
        December 23, 2005 for the year ended March 31, 2005.
 
 
  J.
        L.
        Stephan Co., P.C.
 
 Traverse
        City, Michigan
 
 December
        23, 2005
 
 
                      862
          East
          Eighth Street • Traverse City, MI 49686
 (231)
          941-7600 • E-mail: jstephan@jlspc.com • Primary Fax (231) 941-1996 • Alternate
          Fax (231) 929-3350
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. William Kahl, Appellant.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted. Present — Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 19379]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8315]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the 
Center for Scientific Review Advisory Council.
    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to 
space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in 
advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Advisory 
Council.
    Date: May 2, 2011.
    Time: 8:15 a.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: Provide advice to the Director, Center for Scientific 
Review (CSR), on matters related to planning, execution, conduct, 
support, review, evaluation, and receipt and referral of grant 
applications at CSR.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, 45 
Center Drive, Room E1/E2, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Cheryl A. Kitt, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, 
Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, Room 3030, MSC 7776, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-
1112, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0b60627f7f684b68787925656263256c647d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="513a38252532113222237f3f38397f363e27">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Any interested person may file written comments with the 
committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed 
on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, 
telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional 
affiliation of the interested person.
    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent 
procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, 
including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected 
before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one 
form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, 
driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their 
visit.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 
93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: March 31, 2011.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-8315 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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

 360.11

 360.11

 360.11

 360.11

 360.11

 360.11

 360.11

 360.11

 360.11

 360.16

 360.16

 360.16

 360.24

 360.30

 360.30

 360.38

 360.46

 360.57

 360.57

 360.57

 360.57

 360.57

 360.57

 360.55

 360.49

 360.49

 360.49

 360.41

 360.30

 360.30

 545

 545

 545

 545

 545

 545

 545

 545

 545

 548

 548

 548

 554

 558

 558

 564

 569

 577

 577

 577

 577

 577

 577

 576

 571

 571

 571

 566

 558

 558

STORAGE

-1

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+3

+0

+0

+6

+4

+0

+6

+5

+8

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

-1

-5

+0

+0

-5

-8

+0

CHANGE

 384

 394

 407

 400

 379

 357

 351

 362

 383

 383

 384

 384

 384

 403

 412

 396

 393

 404

 405

 405

 396

 390

 389

 403

 412

 415

 423

 424

 426

 440

 381

 372

 363

 346

 351

 362

 376

 376

 375

 412

 447

 445

 503

 590

 647

 712

 862

 1,050

 1,160

 1,170

 1,160

 1,180

 1,180

 1,130

 1,030

 991

 989

 894

 736

 661

SPILL

 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

OUTLET

OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT

SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION DISTRICT

TRI DAMS PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JUNE 2004 GOODWIN RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: October 25, 2004

RES.

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +12 0 21,251 11,888

ACRE-FEET +12 0 42,151 23,580

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

JOINT MAIN CANAL 55,964

SOUTH MAIN CANAL 23,580

 121,695

 546

OUTLET 0

TOTAL 

TULLOCH

RELEASE

 1,959

 1,981

 1,992

 1,970

 1,962

 1,837

 1,780

 1,812

 1,807

 1,862

 1,904

 1,890

 1,945

 2,065

 2,035

 2,055

 2,206

 2,418

 2,545

 2,541

 2,518

 2,485

 2,523

 2,520

 2,466

 2,474

 2,492

 2,365

 2,285

 2,289

 64,983

 128,894

JOINT MAIN OPERATED BY SSJID AND OID.

SOUTH MAIN OPERATED BY OID.

JOINT

MAIN

SOUTH

MAIN

SPILL 42,151

 1,090

 1,100

 1,100

 1,100

 1,100

 996

 943

 959

 960

 960

 961

 958

 951

 948

 870

 829

 824

 815

 829

 829

 829

 813

 850

 890

 898

 912

 921

 930

 1,000

 1,050

 28,215

 55,964

RIVER CANALS
(No. 77-CC-2105

#### Victor Hubbard, Claimant, *v.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed November 2, 1978.*

Polos, J.C.

Claimant, an inmate of an Illinois penal institution, has brought this action to recover the value of certain items of personal property of which he was allegedly possessed while incarcerated. Claimant contends that the property in question was lost while in the *733actual physical possession of the State of Illinois, and that the State is liable as a bailee for the return of that property.

Claimant has established that on December 24, 1976, five eight track tapes were delivered to the State-ville Correctional Center, after Claimant had ordered them from Music Wholesalers of Des Moines, Iowa, at a cost of $32.50. The institution took possession of the tapes, but they were never delivered to Claimant.

This Court held in *Doubling v. State, 32 Ill.Ct.Cl.1,*deciding that the State has a duty to exercise reasonable care to safeguard and return an inmate’s property when it takes actual physical possession of such property during the course of the transfer of an inmate between penal institutions.

While bailment is ordinarily a voluntary contractual transaction between bailor and bailee, various types of constructive and involuntary bailments have been recognized:

> “A constructive bailment can be created between an owner of the property and one in possession thereof.” 4A Illinois Law and Practice 550, Bailments, citing *Chesterfield Sewer & Water, Inc., v. Citizens Insurance Co. of New Jersey, et al., 57 Ill. App. 2d 90, 207 NE2d 84.*

In *Chesterfield,*the Court quotes from *Woodson v. Hare, 244 Ala. 301, 13 So2d. 172, at 174,*as follows;

> “An actual contract or one implied in fact is not always necessary to create a bailment. Where, otherwise than by mutual contract of bailment, one person has lawfully acquired the possession of personal property of another and holds it under circumstances whereby he ought, upon principles of justice, to keep it safely and restore it or deliver it to the owner, such person and the owner of the property are, by operation of law, generally treated as bailee and bailor under a contract of bailment, irrespective of whether or not there has been any mutual assent, express or implied, to such relationship.”

The loss or damage to bailed property while in the possession of the bailee raises a presumption of negligence which the bailee must rebut by evidence of due *734care. The effect of this rule is not to shift the ultimate burden of proof from the bailor to the bailee, but simply to shift the burden of proceeding or going forward with the evidence.

At the trial of this cause the State presented no testimony to explain the disappearance of Claimant’s property, and presented no testimony of its freedom from negligence.

The presumption of the State’s negligence is thus unrebutted.

It is therefore ordered that Claimant be, and hereby is, awarded the sum of $32.50 in full satisfaction of this claim.
#### § 648.1 What is the Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need program?

The Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need program provides fellowships through academic departments of institutions of higher education to assist graduate students of superior ability who demonstrate financial need.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1135, 1135a)

[58 FR 65842, Dec. 16, 1993, as amended at 64 FR 13487, Mar. 18, 1999]
§ 76.710 Obligations made during a carryover period are subject to current statutes, regulations, and applications. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70339 , Aug. 29, 2024.
A State and a subgrantee shall use carryover funds in accordance with: ( a ) The Federal statutes and regulations that apply to the program and are in effect for the carryover period; and
( b ) Any State plan, or application for a subgrant, that the State or subgrantee is required to submit for the carryover period.
Note:
This section is based on a provision in the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA). Section 427 of the Department of Education Organization Act (DEOA), 20 U.S.C. 3487, provides that except to the extent inconsistent with the DEOA, the GEPA “shall apply to functions transferred by this Act to the extent applicable on the day preceding the effective date of this Act.” Although standardized nomenclature is used in this section to reflect the creation of the Department of Education, there is no intent to extend the coverage of the GEPA beyond that authorized under section 427 or other applicable law.
(Authority: U.S.C. 1221e-3, 1225(b), and 3474)
[45 FR 22517, Apr. 3, 1980. Redesignated at 45 FR 77368, Nov. 21, 1980, as amended at 45 FR 86296, Dec. 30, 1980. Redesignated at 60 FR 41295, Aug. 11, 1995]
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

 477

 481

 488

 492

 505

 509

 514

 524

 520

 524

 523

 561

 551

 519

 481

 467

 451

 440

 434

 430

 477

 489

 487

 476

 428

 421

 414

 429

 428

 427

 365

 434

 429

 446

 470

 487

 494

 491

 484

 482

 479

 482

 497

 474

 455

 438

 427

 420

 418

 399

 393

 448

 427

 411

 394

 390

 387

 384

 414

 378

 433

 460

 464

 472

 488

 500

 505

 508

 505

 507

 504

 517

 529

 501

 471

 452

 439

 431

 426

 416

 417

 467

 448

 443

 414

 403

 401

 406

 422

 410

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

SEPTEMBER 2020 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE:October 19, 2020

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 284

 300

 303

 308

 318

 325

 328

 330

 328

 329

 327

 336

 343

 326

 307

 295

 287

 282

 279

 273

 274

 305

 293

 290

 272

 265

 264

 267

 277

 269

TOTAL 13,759

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT HEADWORKS
Editorial Note on Part 21
Editorial Notes: Nomenclature changes to part 21 appear by T.D. ATF-435, 66 FR 5475, Jan. 19, 2001. Nomenclature changes to part 21 appear by 81 T.D. TTB-140, 81 FR Aug. 30, 2016.

§ 21.79 Formula No. 44. ( a ) *Formula.* To every 100 gallons of alcohol add: Ten gallons of *n*-butyl alcohol
( b ) *Authorized uses.* ( 1 ) As a solvent: 430. Sterilizing and preserving solutions.
( 2 ) Miscellaneous uses:
812. Product development and pilot plant uses (own use only).
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**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 Quarterly Report of CorVu Corporation (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, David C. Carlson, Chief Financial
      Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
      pursuant to §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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
                February 12, 2007/s/
                David C. CarlsonDavid
                C. CarlsonChief
                Financial Officer
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 45771

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

OLIVIA MERCADO MUNOZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Filed: August 14, 2018

Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Cassia

County. Hon. Michael P. Tribe, District Judge. 

Order denying Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Maya P. Waldron, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge;

and LORELLO, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Olivia Mercado Munoz pleaded guilty to felony fraudulent procurement of public 

assistance, Idaho Code § 56-227(1). The district court imposed a unified ten-year sentence, with 

two years determinate and retained jurisdiction. Following Munoz’s period of retained 

jurisdiction, the district court relinquished jurisdiction and executed the underlying sentence. 

Munoz filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, which the district court denied. Munoz appeals.

A motion for reduction of sentence under I.C.R. 35 is essentially a plea for leniency, 

addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 

23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In 

presenting an I.C.R. 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of 
2

new or additional information subsequently provided to the district court in support of the 

motion. State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). An appeal from the 

denial of an I.C.R. 35 motion cannot be used as a vehicle to review the underlying sentence 

absent the presentation of new information. Id. Because no new or additional information in 

support of Munoz’s I.C.R. 35 motion was presented, the district court did not abuse its 

discretion. For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s order denying Munoz’s I.C.R. 35 

motion is affirmed.
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

 1,196.51

 1,196.48

 1,196.45

 1,196.42

 1,196.39

 1,196.36

 1,196.33

 1,196.31

 1,196.27

 1,196.24

 1,196.21

 1,196.18

 1,196.15

 1,196.12

 1,196.10

 1,196.07

 1,196.04

 1,196.01

 1,195.98

 1,195.96

 1,195.93

 1,195.91

 1,195.89

 1,195.83

 1,195.78

 1,195.75

 1,195.73

 1,195.71

 1,195.69

 1,195.66

 45.33

 45.28

 45.23

 45.18

 45.13

 45.08

 45.03

 44.99

 44.93

 44.88

 44.82

 44.77

 44.72

 44.67

 44.64

 44.59

 44.54

 44.49

 44.44

 44.40

 44.35

 44.32

 44.29

 44.19

 44.10

 44.05

 44.02

 43.99

 43.95

 43.90

STORAGE

-0.03

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.03

-0.07

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.03

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.05

-0.03

-0.05

-0.03

-0.03

-0.10

-0.08

-0.05

-0.03

-0.03

-0.03

-0.05

CHANGE

16

5

2

2

-1

0

-1

8

-8

-3

-4

-3

-3

-2

5

-3

-4

-4

-1

8

3

6

2

-26

-14

1

8

6

10

1

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

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

OUTLET

 18

 15

 13

 13

 10

 11

 10

 10

 11

 8

 7

 8

 8

 9

 8

 9

 8

 8

 10

 11

 14

 9

 5

 10

 14

 12

 11

 9

 13

 12

C.F.S.

 .33

 .28

 .23

 .23

 .19

 .20

 .19

 .19

 .21

 .15

 .13

 .15

 .15

 .17

 .14

 .17

 .15

 .14

 .18

 .20

 .26

 .16

 .09

 .19

 .26

 .22

 .21

 .16

 .25

 .23

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

SEPTEMBER 2005 EAST PARK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 03/14/2006

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -1.42 6 434 0 314 5.81 .00

ACRE-FEET -1,420 12 861 0 623

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

 861

 861

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .00

JULY 1, 2005 .00

 45.37