alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CENTRAL VALLEY OPERATIONS OFFICE

CHINOOK SALMON REPORT

May 2009

Note:Bold numbers are not verified by DFG & DWR Preliminary Data - Subject to Change

Colored background verified with DFG's report 

Winter Run Chinook Salmon Estimated Loss (Incidental Take) Spring Run Chinook Salmon Estimated Loss (Incidental Take) 

Daily SWP Daily CVP Daily Combined Season Combined Daily SWP Daily CVP Daily Combined Season Combined Dail

Tagged* No Tag Tagged* No Tag Tagged* No Tag Tagged* No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag Tagged No Tag In 

DATE Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated

Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss Loss

1-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 154 0 40 0 194 9 6,430 1,079 

2-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 137 3 37 3 174 12 6,604 1,077 

3-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 206 0 97 0 303 12 6,907 1,078 

4-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 290 0 60 0 350 12 7,257 1,077 

5-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 163 0 34 0 197 12 7,454 1,078 

6-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 105 0 23 0 128 12 7,582 675 

7-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 71 0 35 0 106 12 7,688 1,088 

8-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 53 0 25 0 78 12 7,766 1,085 

9-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 36 0 25 0 61 12 7,827 1,083 

10-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 123 0 21 0 144 12 7,971 2,182 

11-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 333 0 35 0 368 12 8,339 2,447 

12-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 0 0 24 0 24 12 8,363 0 

13-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 0 0 46 0 46 12 8,409 0 

14-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 0 0 33 0 33 12 8,442 0 

15-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 81 0 33 0 114 12 8,556 1,260 

16-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 81 0 16 0 97 12 8,653 1,138 

17-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 21 0 15 0 36 12 8,689 1,126 

18-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 0 0 14 0 14 12 8,703 2,193 

19-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0908 0 17 12 8,720 1,758 

20-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 18 0 4 0 22 12 8,742 627 

21-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0008 0 8 12 8,750 798 

22-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0008 0 8 12 8,758 424 

23-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0000 0 0 12 8,758 1,391 

24-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 25 0 4 0 29 12 8,787 1,295 

25-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0000 0 0 12 8,787 1,323 

26-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 30 0 0 0 30 12 8,817 1,290 

27-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0 20 0 0 0 20 12 8,837 1,328 

28-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0000 0 0 12 8,837 209 

29-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0000 0 0 12 8,837 455 

30-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0000 0 0 12 8,837 0 

31-May-09 0000 0 0 489 1,459 0000 0 0 12 8,8370

Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 489 1,459 0 1956 3 645 3 2,601 12 8,837 30,564 

Winter Run Incidental Take Levels (Oct 1 thru May 31) Spring Run Incidental Take Levels for Season Combined Total (Oct 1 thru Jun 30)Official numbers are posted on DFG's website

Banks T
§ 725.415 Action by the district director after development of evidence. ( a ) At the end of the period permitted under § 725.410(b) for the submission of evidence, the district director shall review the claim on the basis of all evidence submitted in accordance with § 725.414.
( b ) After review of all evidence submitted, the district director may issue another schedule for the submission of additional evidence pursuant to § 725.410, identifying another potentially liable operator as the responsible operator liable for the payment of benefits. In such a case, the district director shall not permit the development or submission of any additional medical evidence until after he has made a final determination of the identity of the responsible operator liable for the payment of benefits. If the operator who is finally determined to be the responsible operator has not had the opportunity to submit medical evidence pursuant to § 725.410, the district director shall allow the designated responsible operator and the claimant not less than 60 days within which to submit evidence relevant to the claimant's eligibility for benefits. The designated responsible operator may elect to adopt any medical evidence previously submitted by another operator as its own evidence, subject to the limitations of § 725.414. The district director may also schedule a conference in accordance with § 725.416, issue a proposed decision and order in accordance with § 725.418, or take such other action as the district director considers appropriate.
# Current Pay, Army

# Current Pay, Navy

# Current Pay, Marine Corps

# Current Pay, Air Force

# Current Pay, Coast Guard

# Current Pay, NOAA

# Retirement, AC (DoD)

# Retirement, RC (DoD)

# Retirement, Coast Guard

# Retirement, NOAA

# Retirement, Treasury, Con Recpt

# Health Benefits, (DoD)

# Health Benefits, AC (DoD)

# Health Benefits, RC (DoD)

# Health Benefits, Coast Guard

# Health Benefits, NOAA

# Health Benefits, VA

# QoL, DoD

# QoL, Army

# QoL, Navy

# QoL, Marine Corps

# QoL, Air Force

# QoL, Coast Guard

# QoL, VA

# Unfunded Liability Pmts, Treas
§ 670.730 What are the responsibilities of placement agencies? ( a ) Placement agencies are responsible for: ( 1 ) Contacting graduates;
( 2 ) Assisting them in improving skills in resume preparation, interviewing techniques and job search strategies;
( 3 ) Identifying job leads or educational and training opportunities through coordination with local Workforce Investment Boards, One-Stop operators and partners, employers, unions and industry organizations; and
( 4 ) Placing graduates in jobs, apprenticeship, the Armed Forces, or higher education or training, or referring former students for additional services in their local communities as appropriate. Placement services may be provided for former students according to procedures issued by the Secretary.
( b ) Placement agencies must record and submit all Job Corps placement information according to procedures established by the Secretary.
#### § 725.411 Initial adjudication in Trust Fund cases.

Notwithstanding the requirements of § 725.410 of this part, if the district director concludes that the results of the complete pulmonary evaluation support a finding of eligibility, and that there is no operator responsible for the payment of benefits, the district director shall issue a proposed decision and order in accordance with § 725.418 of this part.
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

 708.43

 708.43

 708.57

 708.65

 708.67

 707.13

 707.11

 707.13

 707.12

 707.17

 707.14

 707.12

 707.12

 707.12

 707.12

 707.18

 707.54

 707.83

 707.92

 706.96

 707.02

 707.29

 707.46

 707.50

 707.48

 707.45

 707.44

 707.49

 707.71

 707.97

 708.21

 817

 817

 821

 823

 824

 781

 780

 781

 780

 782

 781

 780

 780

 780

 780

 782

 792

 800

 803

 776

 778

 785

 790

 791

 790

 790

 789

 791

 797

 804

 811

STORAGE

+0

+0

+4

+2

+1

-43

-1

+1

-1

+2

-1

-1

+0

+0

+0

+2

+10

+8

+3

-27

+2

+7

+5

+1

-1

+0

-1

+2

+6

+7

+7

CHANGE

1

1

3

2

2

-13

0

2

0

2

0

0

1

1

1

2

6

5

3

-9

2

5

4

2

0

1

0

2

4

5

5

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

 0

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 9

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 5

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1005

 1020

TIME

 .22

 .23

COPPER

 .64

 .66

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JULY 2008 SPRING CREEK DEBRIS RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: September 4, 2008

IN LAKE

SPRING CR DEBRIS DAM

ZINC

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -6 40 0 43

ACRE-FEET -6 79 0 85

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 85

 85

 817

SPILL OUTLET

**KES

COPPER

MG/L

 .001

 .001

 .001

 .001

Table 7
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

 820.05

 820.13

 820.18

 820.26

 820.32

 820.42

 820.51

 820.56

 820.66

 820.75

 820.84

 820.95

 821.05

 821.12

 821.22

 821.67

 822.75

 823.70

 824.03

 824.12

 824.23

 824.44

 826.44

 829.49

 831.20

 831.90

 832.55

 833.01

 27.18

 27.25

 27.30

 27.38

 27.43

 27.52

 27.61

 27.65

 27.75

 27.83

 27.91

 28.01

 28.11

 28.17

 28.27

 28.69

 29.72

 30.65

 30.97

 31.06

 31.17

 31.38

 33.41

 36.65

 38.54

 39.32

 40.07

 40.59

STORAGE

+0.08

+0.07

+0.05

+0.07

+0.06

+0.09

+0.08

+0.05

+0.09

+0.08

+0.08

+0.10

+0.09

+0.07

+0.09

+0.43

+1.03

+0.93

+0.32

+0.09

+0.11

+0.21

+2.03

+3.24

+1.89

+0.79

+0.74

+0.53

CHANGE

58

54

41

54

44

64

58

41

64

58

59

67

64

49

62

229

527

478

179

64

73

124

1,040

1,655

975

419

404

295

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 5

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 15

 15

 15

 20

 20

SPILL

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

 6

OUTLET

 2

 2

 2

 2

 1

 2

 1

 3

 2

 1

 2

 1

 2

 1

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 3

 2

 2

 1

 3

 3

 1

 4

 3

C.F.S.

 .06

 .08

 .06

 .06

 .04

 .06

 .03

 .10

 .07

 .04

 .06

 .04

 .05

 .04

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .09

 .07

 .07

 .03

 .09

 .07

 .04

 .10

 .07

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .14

 .13

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .07

 .05

 .23

 .01

 .57

 1.66

 1.87

 .24

 .02

 .00

 .00

 .43

 .20

 .30

 .00

 .02

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2009 RUN DATE: 03/01/2009

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +13.49 7,299 312 140 46 1.42 5.94

ACRE-FEET +13,490 14,478 619 278 91

COMMENTS:

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

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 HOURS.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 278

OUTLET

TOTAL

 619

 897

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 5.94

JULY 1, 2008 10.03

 27.10

STONY GORGE RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 26, 2014

No. 04-14-00500-CR

Edward ROMERO,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR3128

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant’s Motion for Exemption from Local E-Filing Requirements for Limited 

Purposes of Moving to Extend Time to File Defendant’s Notice of Appeal is hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 26th day of August, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
STORAGE - A.F. CHANGE SHASTA NATURAL ACCUM * FULL

Day LAKE

BRITTON

MCCLOUD

DIV

IRON

CANYON PIT 6 PIT 7

RESERVOIR

TOTAL A.F. C.F.S. INFLOW C.F.S

RIVER 

C.F.S

NATURAL 

1000 A.F.

1 35,267 16,318 11,512 13,097 33,573 109,767 -304 -153 6,172 6,019 5,437.9

2 36,230 16,334 11,645 12,813 33,363 110,385 618 312 3,064 3,376 5,444.6

3 36,077 16,364 12,684 13,886 32,471 111,482 1,097 553 2,867 3,420 5,451.4

4 36,154 16,534 13,261 14,766 32,748 113,463 1,981 999 2,133 3,132 5,457.6

5 35,530 16,725 12,945 14,788 33,094 113,082 -381 -192 3,286 3,094 5,463.8

6 35,050 16,829 12,936 14,364 33,333 112,512 -570 -287 3,608 3,321 5,470.4

7 35,399 16,913 13,054 13,749 33,486 112,601 89 45 3,257 3,302 5,476.9

8 35,283 16,984 12,654 13,310 33,108 111,339 -1,262 -636 786 150 5,477.2

9 34,888 16,990 12,495 13,174 33,232 110,779 -560 -282 3,045 2,763 5,482.7

10 34,553 17,012 13,075 14,216 33,131 111,987 1,208 609 3,057 3,666 5,490.0

11 34,081 17,107 13,567 14,616 31,871 111,242 -745 -376 3,476 3,100 5,496.1

12 34,398 17,215 13,125 13,597 32,476 110,811 -431 -217 3,438 3,221 5,502.5

13 34,453 17,240 12,784 13,744 33,764 111,985 1,174 592 3,072 3,664 5,509.8

14 34,658 17,230 12,670 12,843 33,014 110,415 -1,570 -792 3,359 2,567 5,514.9

15 34,065 17,188 12,350 12,691 33,462 109,756 -659 -332 3,282 2,950 5,520.7

16 35,084 17,143 12,588 12,788 33,327 110,930 1,174 592 2,610 3,202 5,527.1

17 35,598 17,137 12,874 13,830 32,657 112,096 1,166 588 2,642 3,230 5,533.5

18 35,294 17,147 12,933 14,284 32,219 111,877 -219 -110 3,309 3,271 5,539.9

19 34,427 17,164 12,995 14,432 33,200 112,218 341 172 2,951 3,123 5,546.1

20 34,421 17,174 12,807 13,436 33,508 111,346 -872 -440 2,940 2,500 5,551.1

21 33,755 17,194 13,534 12,572 33,430 110,485 -861 -434 3,411 2,977 5,557.0

22 34,925 17,204 12,388 12,354 33,490 110,361 -124 -63 3,198 3,135 5,563.2

23 34,940 17,147 12,819 13,444 32,546 110,896 535 270 2,849 3,119 5,569.4

24 35,257 17,171 13,496 12,724 33,121 111,769 873 440 2,338 2,778 5,574.9

25 35,268 17,243 13,154 13,700 32,430 111,795 26 13 2,922 2,935 5,580.7

26 35,092 17,282 13,136 12,847 33,541 111,898 103 52 5,320 5,372 5,591.4

27 35,029 17,300 13,100 12,048 33,073 110,550 -1,348 -680 3,664 2,984 5,597.3

28 34,336 17,266 12,480 11,705 33,269 109,056 -1,494 -753 3,511 2,758 5,602.8

29 33,773 17,173 12,583 7,762 32,997 104,288 -4,768 -2,404 5,338 2,934 5,608.6

30 33,550 17,081 11,998 8,121 31,717 102,467 -1,821 -918 4,087 3,169 5,614.9

Totals -7,604 95,232

Acre - Feet 188,893

* October 1, 2022 to date

Historical Archive and Report Database

Full Natural Flow At Shasta Dam

Run Date: 10/10/2023

September 2023
§ 678.700 What are the one-stop infrastructure costs? ( a ) Infrastructure costs of one-stop centers are nonpersonnel costs that are necessary for the general operation of the one-stop center, including: ( 1 ) Rental of the facilities;
( 2 ) Utilities and maintenance;
( 3 ) Equipment (including assessment-related products and assistive technology for individuals with disabilities); and
( 4 ) Technology to facilitate access to the one-stop center, including technology used for the center's planning and outreach activities.
( b ) Local WDBs may consider common identifier costs as costs of one-stop infrastructure.
( c ) Each entity that carries out a program or activities in a local one-stop center, described in §§ 678.400 through 678.410, must use a portion of the funds available for the program and activities to maintain the one-stop delivery system, including payment of the infrastructure costs of one-stop centers. These payments must be in accordance with this subpart; Federal cost principles, which require that all costs must be allowable, reasonable, necessary, and allocable to the program; and all other applicable legal requirements.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0744

In the matter of

B.A.F., 

An Alleged Mentally Ill Person,

Respondent and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including August 30, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 25 2024

07/25/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0744
|   | 1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K in respect of the Trust, and all reports on Form 8-K filed by the Trustee in respect of the Trust and all distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of the Trust during the 2012 calendar year; |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report; |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3. | Based on my knowledge, the distribution information required to be provided to the certificateholders by the Trustee under the trust agreement for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports; |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 4. | I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the Trustee, under the trust agreement and based on my knowledge, except as disclosed in this annual report, the Trustee has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 5. | The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the Trustee’s compliance with the minimum servicing or similar standards based upon the report provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the trust agreement, that is included in these reports. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
* After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this panel has

determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted w ithout oral argument. This Order and Judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. T he court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R . 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JUN 12 2003 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

MILTON VERAN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. THE CITY OF GUTHRIE, OKLAHOMA; LOGAN COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY; LOGAN COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; MARVIN QUINN, Oklahoma Indigent Defense System; VINCENT ANTONIOLI, Logan County District Attorney; REX BROWN; MARK BRUNING; RICHARD FULTON; MIKE COURTRIGHT; DEXTER PUGH; DAVID TUCKER; STEVE MIZE; TUCKER HODGSON, Defendants - Appellees. No. 02-6332 (D.C. No. CIV-01-1918-C) (W.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *- 2 -

Before EBEL , HENRY and HARTZ , Circuit Judges.
Plaintiff Milton Veran Williams is currently incarc erated in the Cimarron Correctional Facility in Cushing, Oklahoma. Procee ding pro se, he filed the instant action asking the Western District of Oklah oma to issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction enjoini ng the Defendants “from transporting him or housing him and from adjudicati ng claims against him pending in ‘the Logan County Court arena.’” (Magist rate’s Report and Recommendation at 1.) He also requested an order “ ‘prohibiting Defendants or their agents from further retaliation against Plain tiff.’” (Id. (quoting Motion for TRO at 1).) He alleges that the Defendants previou sly violated his constitutional rights and will do so again if he is transferred ba ck to “the Logan County Court
arena.” The Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff’s m otion be denied, finding that “Plaintiff has wholly failed to carry his burden of proof and persuasion.” (Id. at 2.) The district court adopt ed the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety and denied Plaintiff’s motion. (Slip Op. at 2.) We review a district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order for abuse of discretion . Duvall v. Keating , 162 F.3d 1058, 1062 (10th Cir. 1998). For substantially the reasons stated in the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation, we find tha t the district court did not- 3 -

abuse its discretion and AFFIRM its denial of Plain tiff’s motion. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed without prepayment of the appella te filing fee is GRANTED; Plaintiff must continue making payments until the e ntire filing fee is paid. Plaintiff’s motion to file a supplemental brief is GRANTED. All other pending motions are DENIED.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

David M. Ebel Circuit Judge
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 HIGH

 11,260

 11,903

 13,408

 15,269

 16,590

 15,659

 15,021

 15,678

 13,691

 10,719

 9,393

 7,909

 9,564

 9,009

 10,263

 11,395

 11,644

 6,942

 4,669

 3,696

 2,022

 2,816

 1,915

 698

 533

 472

 408

 387

 3,924

 3,494

 3,648

 4,160

 4,649

 4,568

 4,547

 4,579

 4,167

 3,344

 3,573

 3,296

 2,984

 3,051

 3,359

 3,369

 2,271

 1,112

 520

 515

 501

 496

 515

 458

 409

 362

 332

 302

 6,440

 6,132

 7,140

 8,634

 9,680

 9,508

 8,732

 8,857

 8,337

 6,504

 5,841

 5,196

 5,370

 5,002

 5,850

 6,878

 7,046

 4,110

 2,371

 1,574

 1,044

 1,036

 779

 566

 470

 407

 371

 344

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2009 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: March 6, 2009

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
(No. 6226

#### Anesthesiology Associates of Elgin, S.C., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed December 13, 1972.*

Anesthesiology Associates of Elgin, S.C., Claimant, pro se.

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

*160Per Curiam.