alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 30

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 30 appear by T.D. ATF-438, 66 FR 5481, Jan. 19, 2001.

#### § 30.25 Use of precision specific gravity hydrometers.

The provisions of § 30.23 respecting the care, handling, and use of precision instruments shall be followed with respect to the care, handling, and use of precision grade specific gravity hydrometers. Specific gravity hydrometers shall be read to the nearest subdivision. Because of temperature density relationships and the selection of the standardization temperature of 60 °/60 °F., the specific gravity readings will be greater at temperatures below 60 degrees Fahrenheit and less at temperatures above 60 degress Fahrenheit. Hence, correction of the specific gravity readings will be made for temperature other than 60 degrees Fahrenheit. Such correction may be ascertained by dividing the specific gravity hydrometer reading by the applicable correction factor in Table 7.

# Example:

The specific gravity hydrometer reading is 1.1525, the thermometer reading is 68 degrees Fahrenheit, and the true proof of the spirits is 115 degrees. The correct specific gravity reading will be ascertained as follows:

(a) From Table 7, the correction factor for 115° proof at 68 °F. is 0.996.

(b) 1.1525 divided by 0.996 = 1.1571, the corrected specific gravity.

(Sec. 201, Pub. L. 85-859, 72 Stat. 1358, as amended (26 U.S.C. 5204))
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HALIS, INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         719,989
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   84,030
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (39,027)
<INVENTORY>                                     10,178
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               798,341
<PP&E>                                         147,126
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (86,972)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,138,129
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,723,955
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       239,726
<OTHER-SE>                                  (2,331,552)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,138,129
<SALES>                                      1,925,412
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,925,412
<CGS>                                        1,656,113
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,656,113
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,258,995
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                74,298
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              67,613
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,989,696)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,989,696)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,989,696)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
## In the Court of Appeals Second App el la te District of Texas at Fort Worth

___________________________ No. 02

- 22

- 00301

- CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law Hood County, Texas Trial Court No. C08061
Before Kerr, Birdwell, and Wallach, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr 

### B RIAN 

### M ATTHEW 

### C RABBE 

### , Appellant

V


### . B RITTNY 

### M ICHELLE 

### S ANDERS 

### , Appellee2 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT
We have conside red A ppellant’s “Unopposed Motion to Set Aside the Trial Court’s Judgment, Remand the Case to the Trial Court for Rendition of Judgment, and Dismiss the Appeal.” In this u noppose d motion, App ella n t represen ts that the parties have rea ched an agree ment to set tle the case . A s part of that agreement, 1 Appellant asks us to set aside the trial court’s judgment without regard to the m erits ,
to remand the case to the trial court for ren dition of judgment in accordance with the parties ’ se ttlement agre ement, and to dismiss the appeal. Based on Appellant ’s unopposed representation of the parties ’ settlement ag reement, we grant the motion as to App ellant ’s req ues t that we set aside the trial co urt ’s j udgment and remand the

case to th e trial co urt. See R obertson v. Robe rtso n , No. 02

- 21

- 00387

- CV,
2022 WL 1183339 , at *1 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth Apr. 21, 2022, no pet. ) (per c uriam) ( mem. op.) ; see also Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B)

. We den y the re st of the motion. S ee Lone Tree Res. & Consul ting, Inc. v. Persepolis, Inc. , No. 02

- 21

- 00246

- CV,
2021 WL 6143641, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth Dec. 30, 2021, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op. ) (“ Because we cannot both set aside the trial court ’ s judgm ent and dismi ss the appeal, we den y the motion as to the partie s’ request that we dismiss the appeal

. ”) ; see also Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(d) , (f)

.

1 Neither par ty has filed a copy of the parti es ’ settlement agreement with this
cou rt. See Te x. R. App. P. 4 2.1(a)(2).3 Accord ingly, we set aside the trial court’s September 2, 2022 Amended Final Judgment witho ut regard to the merit s and remand this case to t he trial court to render judgment in accordance with the p arties’ ag reement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). Each party must bear its own appellate costs

. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr Eli zabeth Kerr Justice
D elivered: August 31, 2023
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5599 

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 to require 

the deposit of enterprise guarantee fees in the Housing Trust Fund, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 14, 2020 

Mr. HECK (for himself, Mr. CLAY, Mr. BLUMENAUER, and Mr. PERLMUTTER) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act 

of 1992 to require the deposit of enterprise guarantee 

fees in the Housing Trust Fund, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fulfilling the Promise 

5 of the Housing Trust Fund Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEPOSIT OF FEES. 

7 Section 1327 of the Housing and Community Devel8 opment Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4547) is amended— 

9 (1) in subsection (b)— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5599 IH

1 (A) in paragraph (3)— 

2 (i) by striking ‘‘Amounts received’’ 

3 and inserting the following: ‘‘With regard 

4 to a mortgage-backed security guaranteed 

5 by the Federal National Mortgage Associa6 tion before October 1, 2021, or a participa7 tion certificate guaranteed by the Federal 

8 Home Loan Mortgage Corporation before 

9 October 1, 2021,’’; and 

10 (ii) by striking ‘‘The fees’’ and insert11 ing the following: 

12 ‘‘(5) TREATMENT OF FEES.—The fees’’; and 

13 (B) by inserting before paragraph (5), as 

14 designated by paragraph (1)(B), the following: 

15 ‘‘(4) DEPOSIT IN HOUSING TRUST FUND.—With 

16 regard to a mortgage-backed security guaranteed by 

17 the Federal National Mortgage Association on or 

18 after October 1, 2021, or a participation certificate 

19 guaranteed by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage 

20 Corporation on or after October 1, 2021, amounts 

21 received from fee increases imposed under this sec22 tion shall be deposited directly into the Housing 

23 Trust Fund established under section 1338, and 

24 shall be available without further appropriation.’’; 

25 and 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5599 IH

1 (2) by striking subsection (f). 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed January 4, 2023.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-60

Lower Tribunal No. F21-4017

________________

Angel Barrera-Zaldivar,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Laura Anne 

Stuzin, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, Maria E. Lauredo, Chief Assistant 

Public Defender and Jennifer Thornton, Assistant Public Defender, for 

appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Katryna Santa Cruz, Assistant 

Attorney General, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LOGUE, and LINDSEY, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
### **CHAPTER 67—CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS FELLOWSHIP FOUNDATION**
#### Marsha Harrington et al. *v.*Palmer S. Willard et al.

Alcorn, O. J., House, Thim, Ryan and Shapiro, Js.

Argued March 3

decided March 5, 1971

*John B. Willard,*for the appellants (defendants).

*Hadleigh H. Howd, Jr.,*for the appellees (plaintiffs).

Per Curiam.

The defendants have appealed from a judgment for the named plaintiff and her father for injuries and expenses resulting from a bite which the dog of the defendants inflicted on her. Although the defendants have attacked the findings of the court they have printed no appendix to their brief in support of their attack. See Practice Book §715, 716, 717, 720, 722; *Drazen Lumber Co.*v. *Casner,*156 Conn. 401, 403, 242 A.2d 754; Maltbie, Conn. App. Proc. §§ 163, 331. The finding is that in the trial court the defendants made no claims of law respecting the judgment to be rendered. See Practice Book § 223.

The defendants are not entitled to any corrections in the finding of facts and those facts amply support the conclusions of the court.

There is no error.
No. 89-711.

#### Universal Fabricators, Inc. *v.*Smith et al., 493 U. S. 1070.

Motion of respondent Carl Smith for approval of application for attorney’s fees denied without prejudice to filing the motion in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
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

DAY ELEV

 122.46

 122.28

 122.18

 122.02

 122.07

 122.08

 122.27

 122.42

 122.67

 122.66

 122.49

 122.21

 122.28

 122.23

 122.11

 122.55

 123.13

 123.20

 123.20

 122.41

 121.90

 121.84

 121.57

 121.42

 123.05

 123.04

 122.83

 122.06

 7,548

 7,467

 7,422

 7,350

 7,373

 7,377

 7,463

 7,530

 7,643

 7,638

 7,562

 7,436

 7,467

 7,445

 7,391

 7,589

 7,852

 7,885

 7,885

 7,526

 7,299

 7,274

 7,160

 7,097

 7,815

 7,810

 7,715

 7,368

STORAGE

-54

-81

-45

-72

+23

+4

+86

+67

+113

-5

-76

-126

+31

-22

-54

+198

+263

+33

+0

-359

-227

-25

-114

-63

+718

-5

-95

-347

CHANGE

2,461

2,446

2,523

2,510

2,560

2,503

2,485

2,506

2,544

2,545

2,510

2,478

2,552

2,495

2,466

2,622

2,668

2,536

2,506

2,319

2,390

2,509

2,486

2,523

2,935

2,578

2,532

2,399

INFLOW

 2,392

 2,386

 2,445

 2,435

 2,433

 2,385

 2,326

 2,355

 2,376

 2,442

 2,442

 2,442

 2,440

 2,410

 2,398

 1,826

 2,440

 2,105

 2,446

 2,439

 2,438

 2,447

 2,452

 2,457

 2,468

 2,475

 2,469

 2,463

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 600

 0

 323

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

HATCHERY

 1

 1

 1

 1

 0

 1

 1

 2

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 0

 1

 0

 1

 0

 1

 1

 1

 1

 0

 0

 1

 1

 1

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2011 LAKE NATOMA DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: March 1, 2011

IN LAKE

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -234 70,587 67,032 923 1,680 23

ACRE-FEET -234 140,009 132,958 1,831 3,332 46

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 132,958

SPILL 1,831

FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL

HATCHERY

 2,075

 3,332

 7,602

FOLSOM

SOUTH 

CANAL

 35

 40

 40

 50

 55

 55

 55

 55

 50

 45

 45

 39

 35

 35

 35

 35

 35

 30

 0

 0

 5

 14

 30

 38

 45

 45

 50

 50

 1,046

 2,075

(1)

(1) INCHES OF EVAPORATION TAKEN FROM FOLSOM PAN.

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET)

TOTAL 140,196
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 ELEV

 1,901.19

 1,901.23

 1,901.00

 1,901.00

 1,901.14

 1,900.96

 1,900.99

 1,900.73

 1,900.82

 1,900.86

 1,900.94

 1,901.05

 1,901.33

 1,901.31

 1,901.07

 1,900.88

 1,901.12

 1,901.16

 1,901.31

 1,901.30

 1,901.33

 1,900.97

 1,901.02

 1,901.23

 1,901.07

 1,901.51

 1,901.26

 1,901.20

 1,901.06

 1,901.08

 1,900.95

 14,053

 14,083

 13,911

 13,911

 14,016

 13,882

 13,904

 13,712

 13,779

 13,808

 13,867

 13,948

 14,158

 14,143

 13,963

 13,823

 14,001

 14,031

 14,143

 14,135

 14,158

 13,889

 13,926

 14,083

 13,963

 14,292

 14,105

 14,061

 13,956

 13,971

 13,874

STORAGE

+52

+30

-172

+0

+105

-134

+22

-192

+67

+29

+59

+81

+210

-15

-180

-140

+178

+30

+112

-8

+23

-269

+37

+157

-120

+329

-187

-44

-105

+15

-97

CHANGE

439

430

327

413

464

345

423

315

445

428

442

453

521

402

317

339

498

421

466

403

419

268

427

483

335

570

319

388

352

412

354

INFLOW

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

 80

POWER

 140

 142

 140

 140

 138

 140

 140

 140

 139

 140

 139

 139

 138

 137

 136

 136

 134

 133

 136

 136

 136

 135

 133

 132

 125

 163

 188

 180

 178

 175

 176

SPILL

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 40

 25

 29

 29

 29

 29

OUTLETS

 2

 2

 3

 2

 2

 2

 1

 1

 1

 2

 2

 2

 1

 2

 1

 3

 3

 2

 3

 0

 2

 1

 7

 4

 2

 3

 2

 3

 0

 2

 0

C.F.S.

 .07

 .09

 .12

 .09

 .09

 .10

 .05

 .06

 .06

 .11

 .11

 .11

 .06

 .11

 .04

 .14

 .13

 .10

 .13

 .00

 .11

 .05

 .31

 .16

 .08

 .14

 .11

 .12

 .00

 .09

 .00

INCHES

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MARCH 2008 LEWISTON LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: June 25, 2008

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

C.F.S. FRANCIS CARR

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -127 12,618 2,480 1,931 4,484 63 2.94

ACRE-FEET -127 25,028 4,919 3,830 8,894 125

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

(1) OUTLET RELEASE INCLUDES THE CONTINUOUS FISH RELEASE OF 75 C.F.S.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

TOTAL POWER 4,919

TOTAL RIVER 17,643 25,030

 14,001

 7,387

RIVER

JUDGE FRANCIS CARR POWERPLANT

TOTAL RELEASE

JUDGE (2)

(1) POWERPLANT

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 126

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 121

 119

 118

 118

 118

 118

 118

 118

 118

 118

 118

 118

 3,724

 7,387

Table 6
### SUBCHAPTER II—EDUCATION FOR ECONOMIC SECURITY
(No. 6607

#### Sheldon J. Skodki, M.D., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Mental Health, Respondent.

*Opinion filed July 27, 1972.*

Dr. Sheldon J. Skodki, Claimant, pro se.

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

Perlin, C.J.
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

 3,566

 3,324

 2,903

 2,486

 2,190

 2,048

 2,196

 2,190

 2,218

 2,085

 2,113

 2,189

 2,426

 2,569

 2,295

 2,183

 2,095

 2,070

 2,141

 2,291

 2,732

 2,704

 2,816

 2,979

 3,106

 2,585

 2,281

 2,379

 2,425

 2,283

 1,468

 1,301

 1,200

 1,120

 1,159

 1,085

 1,062

 1,033

 960

 772

 716

 815

 847

 785

 723

 741

 809

 838

 861

 846

 877

 878

 851

 809

 874

 751

 829

 834

 921

 971

 2,261

 2,046

 1,840

 1,655

 1,505

 1,393

 1,356

 1,344

 1,339

 1,248

 1,231

 1,269

 1,312

 1,326

 1,216

 1,182

 1,211

 1,296

 1,287

 1,283

 1,366

 1,319

 1,338

 1,442

 1,429

 1,341

 1,311

 1,324

 1,360

 1,438

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 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY 

AVG

MEAN

 26,430

 27,154

 27,621

 27,811

 27,875

 27,679

 27,350

 26,767

 25,960

 25,011

 24,019

 22,940

 22,013

 21,125

 20,080

 19,216

 18,587

 18,228

 18,010

 17,900

 17,910

 17,885

 17,884

 18,078

 18,276

 18,348

 18,347

 18,345

 18,489

 18,745

 1,888

 1,940

 1,973

 1,987

 1,991

 1,977

 1,954

 1,912

 1,854

 1,787

 1,716

 1,639

 1,572

 1,509

 1,434

 1,373

 1,328

 1,302

 1,286

 1,279

 1,279

 1,278

 1,277

 1,291

 1,305

 1,311

 1,311

 1,310

 1,321

 1,339

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

JERSEY POINT TOP ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
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 ELEV

 124.08

 124.05

 123.79

 123.84

 123.94

 123.74

 123.15

 122.24

 121.44

 121.94

 123.22

 123.76

 123.93

 123.94

 123.93

 123.77

 124.62

 124.93

 125.00

 124.14

 123.80

 123.77

 124.52

 124.64

 123.77

 123.91

 124.14

 124.58

 124.60

 123.27

 124.16

 8,301

 8,286

 8,162

 8,186

 8,233

 8,139

 7,862

 7,449

 7,106

 7,316

 7,894

 8,148

 8,228

 8,233

 8,228

 8,153

 8,571

 8,726

 8,761

 8,331

 8,167

 8,153

 8,521

 8,581

 8,153

 8,219

 8,331

 8,551

 8,561

 7,918

 8,341

STORAGE

+49

-15

-124

+24

+47

-94

-277

-413

-343

+210

+578

+254

+80

+5

-5

-75

+418

+155

+35

-430

-164

-14

+368

+60

-428

+66

+112

+220

+10

-643

+423

CHANGE

1,861

1,826

1,770

1,846

1,857

1,788

1,665

1,592

1,643

1,928

2,108

1,942

1,825

1,793

1,781

1,764

2,022

1,894

1,842

1,644

1,760

1,793

1,894

1,702

1,444

1,810

1,857

1,919

1,818

1,488

2,015

INFLOW

 1,746

 1,744

 1,742

 1,743

 1,743

 1,745

 1,715

 1,710

 1,726

 1,731

 1,727

 1,732

 1,725

 1,729

 1,724

 1,727

 1,721

 1,726

 1,734

 1,771

 1,324

 1,445

 1,622

 1,586

 1,575

 1,694

 1,732

 1,728

 1,723

 1,722

 1,712

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 429

 266

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

HATCHERY

 0

 0

 1

 1

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1

 0

 0

 0

 1

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1

 1

 0

 1

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

DECEMBER 2009 LAKE NATOMA DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: January 1, 2010

IN LAKE

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +89 55,891 52,524 695 1,860 7

ACRE-FEET +89 110,860 104,181 1,379 3,689 14

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 104,181

SPILL 1,379

FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL

HATCHERY

 1,511

 3,689

 8,252

FOLSOM

SOUTH 

CANAL

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 22

 0

 0

 0

 15

 30

 30

 30

 30

 30

 29

 25

 25

 25

 22

 9

 20

 30

 30

 30

 762

 1,511

(1)

(1) INCHES OF EVAPORATION TAKEN FROM FOLSOM PAN.

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET)

TOTAL 110,760
###### Editorial Note on Part 44

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 44 appear by T.D. ATF-464, 66 FR 43480, Aug. 20, 2001, and T.D. ATF-480, 67 FR 30801-30803, May 8, 2002.

#### § 44.88 Description and diagram of premises.

The premises to be used by an export warehouse proprietor as his warehouse shall be described, in the application for permit required by § 44.82, and bond required by § 44.86, by number, street, and city, town, or village, and State. Such premises may consist of more than one building, which need not be contiguous: *Provided,* That such premises are located in the same city, town, or village and each located is described in the application for permit and the bond by number and street. Where such premises consist of less than an entire building, a diagram, in duplicate, shall also be furnished showing the particular floor or floors, or room or rooms, comprising the warehouse.

(72 Stat. 1421; 26 U.S.C. 5712)
§ 19.604 Rebottling, relabeling, and reclosing records. ( a ) If a proprietor dumps spirits for rebottling, the proprietor must prepare in accordance with § 19.599 a bottling and packaging record that covers the rebottling operation.
( b ) If a proprietor relabels or recloses bottled products in accordance with § 19.363, the proprietor must maintain records of the operation that reflect the following: ( 1 ) The identity of the spirits relabeled or reclosed;
( 2 ) The date of the transaction;
( 3 ) The serial numbers of any cases involved; and
( 4 ) The total number of bottles.
(26 U.S.C. 5207)
EXHIBIT 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Imaging Diagnostic Systems, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Allan
L. Schwartz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(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 result of operations of the Company.


                              /s/ Allan L. Schwartz
                              ---------------------
                              Allan L. Schwartz
                              Chief Financial Officer
                              September 17, 2004