alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 10.101 How and when is a notice of occupational disease filed? ( a ) To claim benefits under the FECA, an employee who has a disease which he or she believes to be work-related must give notice of the condition in writing on Form CA-2, which may be obtained from the employer or from the Internet at *www.dol.gov* under forms. The employee must forward this notice to the employer. Another person, including the employer, may do so on the employee's behalf. The person submitting a notice shall include the Social Security Number (SSN) of the injured employee. All such notices should be submitted electronically wherever feasible to facilitate processing of such claims. All employers that currently do not have such capability should create such a method by December 31, 2012. The claimant may withdraw his or her claim (but not the notice of occupational disease) by so requesting in writing to OWCP at any time before OWCP determines eligibility for benefits.
( b ) For occupational diseases sustained as a result of exposure to injurious work factors that occurs on or after September 7, 1974, a notice of occupational disease must be filed within three years of the onset of the condition. (The form contains the necessary words of claim.) The requirements for timely filing are described in § 10.100(b)(1) through (3).
( c ) However, in cases of latent disability, the time for filing claim does not begin to run until the employee has a compensable disability and is aware, or reasonably should have been aware, of the causal relationship between the disability and the employment (see 5 U.S.C. 8122(b)).
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

DAY HIGH

 118

 121

 123

 129

 131

 139

 128

 125

 116

 101

 100

 102

 96

 97

 98

 105

 101

 107

 115

 114

 110

 106

 106

 107

 120

 161

 150

 132

 136

 117

 105

 113

 114

 114

 127

 124

 116

 100

 98

 98

 97

 93

 93

 95

 94

 95

 94

 94

 110

 105

 104

 103

 103

 103

 110

 125

 127

 132

 117

 115

 116

 119

 121

 132

 126

 123

 111

 99

 99

 100

 94

 95

 96

 97

 98

 98

 108

 112

 108

 105

 104

 104

 109

 129

 134

 130

 134

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2004 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: March 10, 2004

HIGH LOW MEAN

 51.2

 51.8

 52.0

 52.3

 52.1

 52.5

 53.3

 52.6

 52.4

 52.0

 52.0

 52.6

 51.7

 53.1

 54.0

 54.1

 55.2

 56.5

 54.8

 54.6

 55.4

 55.6

 56.3

 56.5

 55.9

 55.0

 54.7

 55.5

 55.9

 49.6

 50.6

 50.1

 50.8

 49.3

 49.6

 50.3

 49.5

 49.2

 49.0

 48.8

 49.3

 50.4

 50.4

 51.6

 53.5

 53.3

 54.4

 53.2

 53.6

 53.7

 54.1

 53.8

 54.2

 54.1

 53.1

 52.8

 52.7

 53.1

 50.6

 51.2

 51.0

 51.4

 50.8

 51.1

 51.8

 51.2

 51.0

 50.6

 50.5

 51.0

 51.1

 51.8

 52.9

 53.7

 54.2

 55.3

 54.1

 54.1

 54.5

 54.9

 55.0

 55.4

 54.9

 53.9

 53.7

 54.1

 54.6

HIGH LOW MEAN

 10.8

 10.2

 10.3

 9.9

 10.0

 9.9

 9.9

 10.0

 10.0

 10.2

 10.1

 10.0

 10.6

 10.7

 10.4

 10.0

 9.8

 9.7

 9.4

 9.0

 9.2

 9.1

 9.2

 9.2

 8.8

 8.7

 9.1

 8.7

 8.8

 10.0

 9.9

 9.7

 9.5

 9.5

 9.4

 9.4

 9.4

 9.5

 9.7

 9.6

 9.6

 9.6

 10.3

 10.0

 9.6

 9.4

 9.3

 8.9

 8.8

 8.9

 8.9

 8.9

 8.8

 8.5

 7.2

 7.9

 8.5

 8.5

 10.3

 10.1

 10.1

 9.7

 9.8

 9.7

 9.6

 9.7

 9.7

 9.9

 9.9

 9.8

 10.0

 10.4

 10.2

 9.8

 9.6

 9.5

 9.1

 8.9

 9.0

 9.0

 9.0

 9.0

 8.7

 8.2

 8.5

 8.6

 8.7

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIPON ON THE STANISLAUS RIVER

 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS WATER TEMPERATURE, DEG DISSOLVED OXYZEN, PPM
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

 76

 68

 77

 73

 88

 65

 68

 64

 69

 66

 65

 74

 73

 67

 65

 66

 68

 67

 65

 65

 65

 66

 64

 65

 72

 66

 73

 66

 67

 64

 33

 63

 63

 63

 63

 62

 62

 60

 64

 63

 63

 62

 63

 62

 62

 63

 63

 63

 63

 62

 62

 63

 62

 63

 64

 63

 63

 62

 62

 61

 64

 64

 66

 67

 72

 63

 63

 62

 66

 65

 64

 66

 65

 64

 64

 64

 65

 65

 64

 63

 64

 64

 63

 64

 66

 64

 66

 64

 64

 62

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

HIGH LOW MEAN

 75.0

 74.8

 75.5

 76.3

 77.3

 79.2

 78.9

 76.2

 73.9

 70.4

 70.0

 70.6

 70.9

 70.7

 71.1

 72.2

 72.5

 72.9

 72.3

 72.3

 72.6

 72.9

 72.4

 73.1

 72.1

 72.1

 72.9

 72.7

 72.2

 71.3

 70.6

 69.4

 69.8

 70.2

 71.5

 73.1

 73.8

 73.3

 70.7

 68.0

 65.8

 66.5

 66.8

 66.5

 66.5

 66.9

 67.6

 68.2

 67.4

 67.4

 67.4

 67.6

 67.1

 67.5

 67.0

 67.1

 68.1

 68.2

 68.0

 67.8

 72.7

 72.0

 72.5

 73.1

 74.2

 75.9

 76.2

 74.7

 72.3

 69.3

 67.9

 68.6

 68.7

 68.6

 68.7

 69.4

 70.0

 70.2

 69.8

 69.7

 69.8

 70.0

 69.6

 70.0

 69.5

 69.6

 70.4

 70.3

 69.9

 69.5

HIGH LOW MEAN

 0.0

 9.9

 9.8

 9.6

 9.6

 9.3

 9.0

 9.0

 8.9

 9.2

 9.7

 9.6

 9.7

 9.7

 9.8

 9.7

 9.6

 9.5

 9.6

 9.6

 9.5

 9.4

 9.5

 9.4

 9.4

 9.5

 9.4

 9.4

 9.5

 9.5

 0.0

 8.3

 8.2

 8.2

 8.0

 7.9

 7.9

 7.9

 8.0

 8.4

 8.8

 8.8

 8.8

 8.8

 8.9

 8.8

 8.7

 8.6

 8.6

 8.7

 8.7

 8.6

 8.6

 8.6

 8.6

 8.6

 8.5

 8.5

 8.6

 8.6

 0.0

 8.9

 8.8

 8.7

 8.6

 8.4

 8.4

 8.4

 8.4

 8.8

 9.2

 9.2

 9.2

 9.2

 9.3

 9.2

 9.1

 9.0

 9.0

 9.0

 9.0

 8.9

 9.0

 8.9

 8.9

 9.0

 8.9

 8.9

 9.0

 9.0

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIPON ON THE STANISLAUS RIVER

 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS WATER TEMPERATURE, DEG DISSOLVED OXYZEN, PPM
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

 850

 902

 887

 896

 948

 927

 921

 942

 934

 938

 941

 980

 922

 897

 914

 916

 921

 921

 939

 918

 912

 919

 947

 886

 828

 849

 854

 825

 812

 861

 801

 712

 696

 535

 659

 682

 678

 686

 714

 742

 743

 800

 795

 761

 733

 747

 752

 757

 756

 765

 745

 737

 726

 719

 725

 729

 737

 740

 791

 772

 786

 719

 792

 774

 700

 761

 775

 770

 808

 826

 835

 815

 865

 874

 835

 822

 837

 841

 845

 843

 845

 832

 809

 801

 820

 782

 764

 788

 800

 813

 785

 826

 776

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JANUARY 2021 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 2, 2021

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 13 (O'NEILL)
(No. 6496

#### Atlantic Richfield Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Various Agencies, Respondent.

*Opinion filed July 13, 1973.*

Atlantic Richfield Company, Claimant, pro se.

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

Per Curiam.
#### Michael Cumbo, Respondent, v. Rochester Transit Corporation, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Dowling, Harris and MeCurn, JJ.
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

 996.74

 997.28

 997.74

 998.18

 998.60

 999.00

 999.42

 999.85

 1,000.27

 1,000.61

 1,000.86

 1,001.28

 1,001.59

 1,001.93

 1,002.24

 1,002.28

 1,002.56

 1,002.76

 1,002.97

 1,003.45

 1,003.93

 1,004.74

 1,006.33

 1,007.12

 1,007.71

 1,008.24

 1,008.77

 1,009.61

 1,010.29

 1,010.89

 1,011.42

 1,441.4

 1,446.3

 1,450.5

 1,454.5

 1,458.4

 1,462.0

 1,465.9

 1,469.8

 1,473.7

 1,476.8

 1,479.1

 1,483.0

 1,485.8

 1,489.0

 1,491.8

 1,492.2

 1,494.8

 1,496.7

 1,498.6

 1,503.1

 1,507.5

 1,515.1

 1,530.0

 1,537.5

 1,543.0

 1,548.0

 1,553.1

 1,561.1

 1,567.5

 1,573.3

 1,578.4

STORAGE

+4.4

+4.9

+4.2

+4.0

+3.8

+3.7

+3.9

+3.9

+3.9

+3.1

+2.3

+3.9

+2.9

+3.1

+2.9

+0.4

+2.6

+1.9

+1.9

+4.5

+4.5

+7.6

+14.9

+7.4

+5.6

+5.0

+5.0

+8.0

+6.5

+5.7

+5.1

CHANGE

2,286

2,504

2,134

2,046

1,949

1,866

1,966

2,021

1,977

2,092

2,027

2,004

1,964

2,064

1,534

1,532

1,383

1,569

1,851

2,288

2,307

4,946

7,575

3,801

2,865

2,592

2,585

4,112

3,295

2,960

2,630

INFLOW

 22

 7

 7

 7

 7

 7

 7

 7

 7

 481

 837

 27

 485

 451

 32

 1,309

 32

 598

 854

 27

 27

 1,102

 26

 26

 26

 26

 26

 26

 26

 26

 26

POWER

 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

 0

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

 0

OUTLET

 26

 26

 18

 18

 9

 18

 18

 27

 24

 33

 30

 24

 36

 30

 54

 36

 42

 36

 15

 9

 27

 30

 30

 24

 28

 37

 25

 59

 0

 43

 43

C.F.S.

 .09

 .09

 .06

 .06

 .03

 .06

 .06

 .09

 .08

 .11

 .10

 .08

 .12

 .10

 .18

 .12

 .14

 .12

 .05

 .03

 .09

 .10

 .10

 .08

 .09

 .12

 .08

 .19

 .00

 .14

 .14

INCHES

 .01

 .61

 .01

 .08

 .18

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .55

 .34

 1.10

 .66

 .66

 .40

 .00

 .00

 .00

 1.13

 .10

 .24

 .24

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MARCH 2005 NEW MELONES LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: May 12, 2005

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +141.5 78,725 6,574 0 0 875 2.90 6.32

ACRE-FEET +141,500 156,151 13,040 0 0 1,736

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 13,040

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 13,040

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 6.32

JULY 1, 2004 35.13

 1,437.0

Table 13
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
Exhibit  27  contains   summary   information   extracted  from  OMI  Corp.  and
subsidiaries Consolidated condensed finanical statements and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                          1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1
<CASH>                                               23,309
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        23,737
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     63,339
<PP&E>                                              561,116
<DEPRECIATION>                                      197,509
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      538,812
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                48,864
<BONDS>                                             158,365
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             21,512
<OTHER-SE>                                          200,358
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        538,812
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    169,384
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       128,445
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     33,885
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    9,951
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         146
<INCOME-TAX>                                          1,127
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                            13,797
<NET-INCOME>                                         12,816
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.30
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, John Fitzgerald, Chief Financial Officer of BakBone Software Incorporated (the “Registrant”), certify that: 

 

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of theRegistrant; 

 

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterlyreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report; 

 

3.    Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4.    TheRegistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have: 

 

(a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

(b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c)    disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5.    The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of directors: 

 

(a)    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theRegistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b)    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting. 

 

Dated: August 16, 2004
EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATIONS
      (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;(b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;(c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and(d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
  /s/ Donald R. Chappel

Donald R. ChappelChief Financial Officer of Williams Partners GPLLC, general partner of Williams Partners L.P.(Principal Financial Officer)
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

 75

 74

 76

 73

 73

 76

 75

 73

 74

 74

 72

 74

 73

 73

 73

 73

 72

 75

 75

 78

 75

 75

 76

 77

 75

 76

 0

 0

 0

 0

 66

 70

 71

 71

 70

 70

 71

 70

 71

 71

 71

 70

 70

 70

 70

 70

 69

 71

 72

 72

 73

 73

 71

 72

 72

 72

 66

 0

 0

 0

 0

 64

 72

 72

 73

 71

 71

 72

 72

 71

 71

 72

 71

 71

 71

 71

 71

 70

 71

 73

 73

 74

 74

 72

 73

 73

 73

 73

 0

 0

 0

 0

 65

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MAY 2000 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: June 6, 2000

HIGH LOW MEAN

 60.1

 60.7

 61.2

 61.0

 60.0

 58.9

 57.2

 59.1

 59.7

 58.6

 57.7

 58.3

 58.7

 58.1

 58.0

 57.3

 57.9

 60.3

 61.6

 62.4

 63.1

 62.6

 61.8

 62.6

 62.3

 61.3

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 62.1

 57.9

 57.7

 58.4

 58.2

 58.1

 57.0

 56.2

 56.6

 57.9

 56.8

 55.4

 55.8

 56.8

 56.6

 57.1

 56.1

 55.4

 57.3

 58.6

 59.8

 59.7

 60.4

 60.0

 60.0

 59.9

 59.5

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 61.2

 59.0

 59.2

 59.8

 59.6

 59.1

 57.7

 56.7

 57.6

 58.6

 57.7

 56.7

 57.1

 57.7

 57.4

 57.5

 56.6

 56.6

 58.6

 60.0

 61.1

 61.3

 61.6

 61.0

 61.2

 61.1

 60.3

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 61.7

HIGH LOW MEAN

 10.6

 10.6

 10.2

 10.3

 10.3

 10.3

 10.4

 10.2

 10.1

 10.2

 10.4

 10.4

 10.3

 10.2

 10.1

 10.1

 10.2

 10.0

 9.7

 9.3

 9.4

 9.3

 9.3

 9.3

 9.3

 9.8

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 10.9

 10.2

 10.1

 9.8

 9.8

 10.0

 10.1

 10.0

 9.9

 9.8

 9.9

 10.1

 10.1

 9.9

 9.9

 9.7

 9.8

 9.9

 9.5

 9.2

 9.0

 9.0

 9.0

 8.9

 8.9

 8.9

 9.2

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 10.5

 10.4

 10.3

 10.0

 10.0

 10.1

 10.2

 10.2

 10.1

 10.0

 10.1

 10.3

 10.3

 10.1

 10.1

 10.0

 9.9

 10.1

 9.8

 9.5

 9.2

 9.2

 9.1

 9.1

 9.1

 9.1

 9.3

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 0.0

 10.6

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIPON ON THE STANISLAUS RIVER

 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS WATER TEMPERATURE, DEG DISSOLVED OXYZEN, PPM
§ 30.310 What must the claimant do if he or she objects to the recommended decision or wants to request a hearing? ( a ) Within 60 days from the date the recommended decision is issued, the claimant must state, in writing, whether he or she objects to any of the findings of fact and/or conclusions of law discussed in such decision, including NIOSH's reconstruction of the radiation dose to which the employee was exposed (if any), and whether a hearing is desired. This written statement should be filed with the FAB at the address indicated in the notice accompanying the recommended decision.
( b ) For purposes of determining whether the written statement referred to in paragraph (a) of this section has been timely filed with the FAB, the statement will be considered to be “filed” on the date that the claimant mails it to the FAB, as determined by postmark or other carrier's date marking, or on the date that such written statement is actually received, whichever is the earliest determinable date.
[84 FR 3050, Feb. 8, 2019]
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

 1,520

 2,129

 2,180

 1,412

 1,076

 820

 474

 326

 362

 308

 346

 435

 546

 585

 673

 782

 953

 1,100

 873

 831

 496

 366

 334

 425

 395

 822

 1,017

 1,688

 1,643

 2,009

 2,248

 199

 200

 199

 200

 202

 201

 201

 202

 202

 203

 202

 201

 202

 203

 201

 199

 196

 197

 199

 199

 202

 205

 207

 207

 203

 200

 200

 199

 201

 201

 202

 372

 443

 538

 406

 353

 295

 254

 227

 220

 218

 230

 238

 248

 255

 263

 289

 305

 356

 315

 309

 266

 245

 234

 245

 229

 260

 302

 399

 430

 506

 552

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

DECEMBER 2013 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 21, 2014

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIO VISTA ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
(No. 73-CC-466

#### The Perkin-Elmer Corporation, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Environmental Protection Agency, Respondent.

*Opinion filed September 17, 1973.*

The Perkin-Elmer Corporation, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
## NO. 12

- 1 3

- 00 20 3

- C R

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

ADAM RYAN DAVIS

, § APPEAL FROM THE 241ST

APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

A supplemental clerk’s record filed in this appeal includes a motion filed in the trial court,

signed by Appellant and his counsel, requesting that the trial court accept Appellant’s waiver of his

right to a ppeal. The trial court granted the motion. The record also includes Appellant’s

affidavit requesting that this court dismiss the appeal, which we construe as a motion to dismiss.

No decision has been delivered in this appeal. Accordingly, Appellant’ s motion to

dismiss is granted , and the appeal is dismissed

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2 (a).

Opinion delivered July 10 , 2013.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JULY 10 

### , 2013

NO. 12

- 13

- 00203

- CR

ADAM RYAN DAVIS

, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

Appeal from the 241st Judicial District Court

of Smith County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 241

- 0370

- 07 )

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motion of the Appella nt to dismiss the

appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and

DECREED by this Court that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal be dismissed , and

that this decision be certified to the court below for observanc e.

By per curiam opinion.

P anel consisted of Worthen, C .J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.