alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 836.08

 835.39

 834.70

 834.08

 833.36

 833.06

 832.90

 832.75

 832.42

 831.94

 831.43

 830.91

 830.34

 829.82

 829.27

 828.71

 828.17

 827.52

 827.32

 827.46

 827.48

 827.41

 827.44

 827.47

 827.63

 827.64

 827.65

 827.67

 827.70

 827.74

 44.22

 43.39

 42.57

 41.84

 41.00

 40.65

 40.47

 40.29

 39.92

 39.37

 38.80

 38.21

 37.58

 37.01

 36.41

 35.80

 35.23

 34.54

 34.33

 34.48

 34.50

 34.42

 34.46

 34.49

 34.66

 34.67

 34.68

 34.70

 34.73

 34.77

STORAGE

-0.85

-0.83

-0.82

-0.73

-0.84

-0.35

-0.18

-0.17

-0.38

-0.55

-0.57

-0.58

-0.63

-0.57

-0.60

-0.61

-0.58

-0.69

-0.21

+0.15

+0.02

-0.07

+0.03

+0.03

+0.17

+0.01

+0.01

+0.02

+0.03

+0.04

CHANGE

189

227

228

275

217

195

239

249

146

59

73

60

39

72

58

55

66

14

36

119

44

1

57

58

127

46

49

51

62

65

INFLOW

 15

 15

 15

 15

 15

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

SPILL

 590

 617

 617

 617

 617

 358

 315

 315

 315

 315

 342

 337

 341

 341

 340

 340

 340

 339

 118

 23

 11

 17

 17

 17

 17

 17

 17

 17

 17

 17

OUTLET

 13

 12

 10

 12

 7

 2

 7

 11

 12

 10

 10

 7

 6

 9

 10

 10

 7

 11

 14

 12

 12

 11

 14

 15

 15

 14

 16

 13

 19

 17

C.F.S.

 .33

 .32

 .26

 .31

 .20

 .06

 .18

 .29

 .32

 .28

 .28

 .19

 .17

 .25

 .28

 .28

 .22

 .34

 .42

 .37

 .36

 .34

 .42

 .45

 .44

 .41

 .47

 .39

 .55

 .50

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .57

 1.06

 .01

 .14

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .58

 .05

 .03

 .25

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2009 RUN DATE: 07/01/2009

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -10.30 3,176 7,701 325 338 9.68 2.70

ACRE-FEET -10,300 6,300 15,275 645 670

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 645

OUTLET

TOTAL

 15,275

 15,920

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 2.70

JULY 1, 2008 15.58

 45.07

STONY GORGE RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS
================================================================================

                                  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




I,  Peter  Sotola,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the Annual
Report on Form  10-KSB of  Pacific  Spirit,  Inc.,  for the  fiscal  year  ended
December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB  fairly  presents  in all  material  respects  the
financial condition and results of operations of Pacific Spirit, Inc.

Date:  March 29, 2005

                                               /s/ Peter Sotola
                                               --------------------------------
                                               Peter Sotola
                                               Secretary, Treasurer & C.F.O.
                                               (Principal Financial Officer and
                                               Principal Accounting Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7142

JUAN CARLOS OCON-PARADA, a/k/a Juan Carlos Ocan-Parada,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

S. K. YOUNG, Warden,

Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate 

Judge. (3:09-cv-00087-MHL)

Submitted: October 18, 2010 Decided: October 25, 2010

Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Juan Carlos Ocon-Parada, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Theresa 

Armstrong, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, 

Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Juan Carlos Ocon-Parada seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record 

and conclude that Ocon-Parada has not made the requisite 

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability 

and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
3

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
#### In re SCHAFER’S ESTATE.

(216 N. W. 948.)

(File No. 5581.

Opinion filed December 28, 1927.)

For former opinion, see 209 N. W. 355.

*Campbell & Fletcher,*of Aberdeen, and *Hunt & Swiger,*of New York City, for Appellants.

*John M. Erwin,*of Redfield, for Respondents.

BIURCH, J.

This case is before us on rehearing. The first opinion is found in 209 N. W. 355. We are satisfied with the result reached and the law announced in our first opinion, but attorneys for both sides at the rehearing asked this court to indicate what issues are no'w open to the litigants for trial in the county court where the cause has been remanded for further proceedings. It is suggested that, with the views of this court on what is now issuable, counsel and the trial court will 'be able to confine themselves to such issues, and avoid confusion and another appeal to this court on conflicting views now entertained by opposing counsel. We are of the opinion that this court ought not to express any views at this time, but should consider only questions properly presented by the record. The former opinion is adhered to.

PORLEY, and SHERWOOD, JJ., concur.

CAM3PBEER, P. J., disqualified, and not sitting.

BROWN, J., not sitting.
### §6024. Severability

If any provision of this chapter or the amendments made by this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this chapter, the amendments made by this chapter, or the application thereof to other persons not similarly situated or to other circumstances shall not be affected by such invalidation.

(Pub. L. 104–114, §5, Mar. 12, 1996, 110 Stat. 791.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 104–114, Mar. 12, 1996, 110 Stat. 785, known as the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 6021 of this title and Tables.
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

 813.75

 813.55

 813.29

 813.00

 812.72

 812.41

 812.50

 812.54

 812.67

 812.72

 812.72

 812.70

 812.68

 812.67

 812.62

 812.59

 812.55

 812.51

 812.47

 812.43

 812.41

 812.37

 812.34

 812.30

 812.26

 812.24

 812.20

 812.16

 812.12

 812.08

 812.05

 21.76

 21.60

 21.40

 21.17

 20.95

 20.71

 20.78

 20.81

 20.91

 20.95

 20.95

 20.93

 20.92

 20.91

 20.87

 20.85

 20.82

 20.78

 20.75

 20.72

 20.71

 20.68

 20.65

 20.62

 20.59

 20.57

 20.54

 20.51

 20.48

 20.45

 20.43

STORAGE

-0.79

-0.16

-0.21

-0.23

-0.22

-0.24

+0.07

+0.03

+0.10

+0.04

+0.00

-0.02

-0.02

-0.01

-0.04

-0.02

-0.03

-0.03

-0.03

-0.03

-0.02

-0.03

-0.02

-0.03

-0.03

-0.02

-0.03

-0.03

-0.03

-0.03

-0.02

CHANGE

161

203

181

166

172

160

166

82

70

31

14

9

10

15

-2

7

4

4

3

4

11

4

7

1

2

11

3

5

4

4

8

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 546

 273

 273

 272

 272

 271

 122

 58

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

 9

OUTLET

 12

 11

 12

 9

 11

 11

 9

 8

 9

 1

 4

 7

 8

 9

 9

 10

 11

 11

 10

 11

 10

 11

 10

 8

 9

 10

 10

 12

 11

 11

 11

C.F.S.

 .47

 .43

 .47

 .35

 .45

 .43

 .34

 .33

 .34

 .05

 .16

 .28

 .30

 .35

 .37

 .41

 .43

 .45

 .39

 .42

 .41

 .44

 .41

 .30

 .35

 .40

 .41

 .47

 .46

 .45

 .43

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .12

 .12

 .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

JULY 2015 RUN DATE: 08/04/2015

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -2.13 1,520 2,300 0 296 11.75 .24

ACRE-FEET -2,130 3,015 4,562 0 587

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 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 4,562

 4,562

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .24

JULY 1, 2015 .24

 22.55

STONY GORGE RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS
Exhibit 32.1

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 this Quarterly Report of Uniwell Electronic Corporation., on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Luiz Brasil, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2012, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and July 31, 2012 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of Uniwell Electronic Corporation.





|                  |     |                                                               | 
|----------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|September 5, 2013 | By: | /s/ Luiz Brasil                                               | 
|                  |     | Luiz Brasil                                                   | 
|                  |     | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer               | 
|                  |     | (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer) |
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4627 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4627

 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide parity among 
  States in the timing of the application of higher Federal Medicaid 
            matching rates for the ACA-expansion population.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 25, 2016

  Mr. Lewis introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide parity among 
  States in the timing of the application of higher Federal Medicaid 
            matching rates for the ACA-expansion population.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicaid Expansion Parity Act of 
2016''.

SEC. 2. PARITY IN THE TIMING OF THE APPLICATION OF HIGHER MEDICAID 
              FEDERAL MATCHING RATES FOR ACA NEWLY ELIGIBLE 
              INDIVIDUALS.

    (a) In General.--Section 1905(y)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1396d(y)(1)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``for calendar 
        quarters in 2014, 2015, and 2016'' and inserting ``for calendar 
        quarters in the 12-calendar-quarter period beginning with the 
        first calendar quarter in which the State provides medical 
        assistance to newly eligible individuals'';
            (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``for calendar 
        quarters in 2017'' and inserting ``for the next 4 calendar 
        quarters for such State'';
            (3) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``for calendar 
        quarters in 2018'' and inserting ``for the next 4 calendar 
        quarters for such State'';
            (4) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``for calendar 
        quarters in 2019'' and inserting ``for the next 4 calendar 
        quarters for such State''; and
            (5) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``for calendar 
        quarters in 2020 and each year thereafter'' and inserting ``for 
        each succeeding calendar quarter for such State''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect as if included in the enactment of the Patient Protection 
and Affordable Care Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### M. H. Elliott and Nelson A. Pearson, Trading as Elliott & Pearson, Defendants in Error, v. Mansel B. Greene, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 17,301.

Appeal and *error*— presumption *as to court’s action.*In the absence of a contrary showing it will be presumed on appeal that the lower court proceeded regularly and set the cause for trial at the time of the defendant’s appearance as authorized by Municipal Court Act, § 45.

*214Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph Z. Uhlir, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1911.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 1, 1912.

Clair D. Vallette, for plaintiff in error.

No appearance for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.

The only ground urged for reversal is that this being a case of the fourth class it was imperative on the court to set it down for trial, and that no order of record to that effect appears.

The record shows that defendant entered his appearance December 6th, the return day of the summons, and that judgment was entered on December 17th. The judgment order recites that the cause came up in the regular course for trial, and that defendant was absent and not represented — presumably meaning at the trial. There is nothing to show that the court did not proceed regularly, and, in the absence of a showing to the contrary, the presumption is that it did, and that it set the cause for trial at the time of defendant’s appearance, as it might do under Section 45 of the Municipal Court Act.

Judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
§ 702.104 Transfer of individual case file. ( a ) At any time after a claim is filed, the district director having jurisdiction thereof may, with the prior or subsequent approval of the Director, transfer such case to the district director in another compensation district for the purpose of making an investigation, ordering medical examinations, or taking such other action as may be necessary or appropriate to further develop the claim. If, after filing a claim, the claimant moves to another compensation district, the district director may, upon request by the claimant or the employer and with the approval of the Director, transfer the case to such other compensation district.
( b ) The district director making the transfer may by letter or memorandum to the district director to whom the case is transferred give advice, comments, suggestions, or directions if appropriate to the particular case. All interested parties will be advised of the transfer.
[42 FR 45301, Sept. 9, 1977, as amended at 80 FR 12928, Mar. 12, 2015]
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-11-00036-CR

DAMOND JAVAR CASTLE,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 85th District Court

Brazos County, Texas

Trial Court No. 08-05436-CRF-85

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Damond Javar Castle filed a notice of appeal regarding his April 15, 2010 

conviction for aggravated kidnapping. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. 20.04 (Vernon 2003). By 

letter dated February 15, 2011, the Clerk of this Court notified Castle that the appeal 

was subject to dismissal because it appeared that the notice of appeal was untimely. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). The Clerk also warned Castle that the appeal would be 

dismissed unless, within 21 days of the date of this letter, a response was filed showing 

grounds for continuing the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3.
Castle v. State Page 2

This Court received notice that Castle timely filed a notice of appeal on May 10, 

2010. At that time, this Court assigned Cause No. 10-10-00234-CR to the appeal. That 

appeal was transferred to the Eleventh Court of Appeals in Eastland, Texas. Therefore, 

the record from that cause number is no longer before this Court.

On February 8, 2011, Castle filed a pro se notice of appeal in this Court for his 

conviction that is pending on appeal in the Eleventh Court of Appeals. This Court does 

not have jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

AL SCOGGINS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 2, 2011

Do not publish 

[CRPM]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         477,951
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      539
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               478,490
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,588,497
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,557
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        80,922
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,577,940
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,588,497
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                58,308
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               114,537
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (78,971)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
### §196. Repealed. Pub. L. 98–621, §10(m), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3380

Section, acts June 12, 1917, ch. 27, 40 Stat. 179; 1940 Reorg. Plan No. IV, §11(a), eff. June 30, 1940, 5 F.R. 2422, 54 Stat. 1236; 1953 Reorg. Plan No. 1, §5, eff. Apr. 11, 1953, 18 F.R. 2053, 67 Stat. 631; Oct. 18, 1962, Pub. L. 87–845, §6, 76A Stat. 699; Oct. 17, 1979, Pub. L. 96–88, title V, §509(b), 93 Stat. 695, related to transfer to Saint Elizabeths Hospital of American citizens adjudged insane in Canal Zone.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 1987, see section 12(b) of Pub. L. 98–621, set out as an Effective Date note under section 225 of this title.
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

 729.70

 730.17

 730.62

 731.07

 727.68

 728.15

 728.62

 729.04

 729.46

 729.83

 730.19

 730.54

 730.89

 731.21

 731.52

 731.83

 732.13

 730.14

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 730.15

 1,563

 1,583

 1,602

 1,621

 1,480

 1,499

 1,518

 1,536

 1,553

 1,569

 1,584

 1,599

 1,613

 1,627

 1,640

 1,654

 1,667

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

 1,582

STORAGE

+21

+20

+19

+19

-141

+19

+19

+18

+17

+16

+15

+15

+14

+14

+13

+14

+13

-85

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

+0

CHANGE

11

10

10

10

5

10

10

9

9

8

8

8

7

7

7

7

7

4

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

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

 0

 76

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 47

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

TIME COPPER

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2013 SPRING CREEK DEBRIS RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: March 1, 2013

IN LAKE

SPRING CR DEBRIS DAM

ZINC

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +40 147 0 123

ACRE-FEET +40 292 0 244

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 244

 244

 1,542

SPILL OUTLET

**KES

COPPER

MG/L