alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
November 2023

STORAGE 1000 ACRE-FEET COMPUTED* RELEASE - C.F.S. EVAPORATION** PRECIP**

DAY ELEV IN LAKE CHANGE INFLOW

C.F.S. POWER SPILL OUTLET C. F. S. INCHES INCHES

1,222.0

1 2,278.15 1,220.3 -1.6 180 1,011 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

2 2,278.06 1,219.4 -0.9 261 693 0 0 36 0.12 0.00

3 2,277.98 1,218.6 -0.8 282 697 0 0 0 0.00 0.05

4 2,277.86 1,217.3 -1.2 178 786 0 0 12 0.04 0.00

5 2,277.79 1,216.6 -0.7 330 679 0 0 12 0.04 0.04

6 2,277.80 1,216.7 0.1 753 699 0 0 3 0.01 1.06

7 2,277.73 1,216.0 -0.7 224 585 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

8 2,277.64 1,215.1 -0.9 358 784 0 0 39 0.13 0.01

9 2,277.54 1,214.1 -1.0 186 699 0 0 3 0.01 0.00

10 2,277.46 1,213.2 -0.8 273 686 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

11 2,277.38 1,212.4 -0.8 287 700 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

12 2,277.27 1,211.3 -1.1 166 716 0 0 18 0.06 0.00

13 2,277.17 1,210.3 -1.0 298 803 0 0 12 0.04 0.00

14 2,277.10 1,209.6 -0.7 356 696 0 0 21 0.07 0.00

15 2,277.10 1,209.6 0.0 296 296 0 0 0 0.00 0.08

16 2,277.14 1,210.0 0.4 505 286 0 0 12 0.04 0.15

17 2,277.13 1,209.9 -0.1 346 385 0 0 12 0.04 0.02

18 2,277.31 1,211.7 1.8 1,236 300 0 0 6 0.02 0.20

19 2,277.42 1,212.8 1.1 1,166 586 0 0 12 0.04 0.34

20 2,277.42 1,212.8 0.0 558 537 0 0 21 0.07 0.02

21 2,277.40 1,212.6 -0.2 446 534 0 0 15 0.05 0.01

22 2,277.35 1,212.1 -0.5 301 551 0 0 9 0.03 0.00

23 2,277.34 1,212.0 -0.1 458 509 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

24 2,277.29 1,211.5 -0.5 258 516 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

25 2,277.23 1,210.9 -0.6 137 447 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

26 2,277.19 1,210.5 -0.4 302 509 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

27 2,277.17 1,210.3 -0.2 279 379 0 3 0 0.00 0.00

28 2,277.14 1,210.0 -0.3 202 0 0 357 0 0.00 0.00

29 2,277.17 1,210.3 0.3 221 0 0 0 66 0.22 0.00

30 2,277.10 1,209.6 -0.7 272 0 0 567 66 0.22 0.00

TOTALS -12.1 11,115 16,069 0 927 375 1.25 1.98

ACRE-FEET -12,100 22,047 31,873 0 1,839 744

Comments: * COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, PUMPING AND EVAPORATION

 ** Evaporation and precipitation records taken from station at Trinity River Hatchery.

Precipitation

This month = 1.98

October 01, 2023 To date = 2.76

Release (ACRE-FEET)

Power 31,873 Outlet 1,839

Spill 0 Total 33,712

SUMMARY 

Historical Archive and Report Database

Trinity Lake Daily Operations

Run Date: 12/10/2023
#### § 702.343 Formal hearings; oral argument and written allegations.

Any party upon request shall be allowed a reasonable time for presentation of oral argument and shall be permitted to file a pre-hearing brief or other written statement of fact or law. A copy of any such pre-hearing brief or other written statement shall be filed with the Chief Administrative Law Judge or the administrative law judge assigned to the case before or during the proceeding at which evidence is submitted to the administrative law judge and shall be served upon each other party. Post-hearing briefs will not be permitted except at the request of the administrative law judge or upon averment on the record of a party that the case presents a specific novel or difficult legal or factual issue (or issues) that cannot be adequately addressed in oral summation. When permitted, any such brief shall be limited to the issue or issues specified by the administrative law judge or by the party in his or her averment and shall be due from any party desiring to address such issue or issues within 15 days of the conclusion of the proceeding at which evidence is submitted to the administrative law judge. Enlargement of the time for filing such briefs shall be granted only if the administrative law judge is persuaded that the brief will be helpful to him or her and that the enlargement granted will not delay decision of the case.

[42 FR 42552, Aug. 23, 1977]
### §1779b. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 107–331, title VI, §604, Dec. 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 2847, which set out definitions for this subchapter, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
#### William Dufey, as Administrator of the Estate of Thomas Duffy, Deceased, Respondent, v. 42nd Street Manhattanville *&*St. Nicholas Avenue Railway Company, Appellant.

Close, P. J., Hagarty, Adel, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
### §6911. Establishment of Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China

There is established a Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China (in this subchapter referred to as the "Commission").

(Pub. L. 106–286, div. B, title III, §301, Oct. 10, 2000, 114 Stat. 895.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          79,579
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          17,052
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   250
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    279,559
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        491,961
<ALLOWANCE>                                      8,722
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 897,960
<DEPOSITS>                                     608,746
<SHORT-TERM>                                   117,852
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             11,115
<LONG-TERM>                                     88,416<F1>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        14,364
<OTHER-SE>                                      57,467
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 897,960
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 46,905
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               15,343
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   842
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                63,090
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              23,738
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,017
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           30,073
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,245
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               (111)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 21,108
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,938
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       9,094
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,094
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.25<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.17
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.23
<LOANS-NON>                                      5,078
<LOANS-PAST>                                       227
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    29
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,933
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    3,542
<RECOVERIES>                                     1,086
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                8,772
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             8,772
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
<FN>
<F1>Long-term and other notes payable
<F2>Basic EPS
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### PORTER BABLE MACHINE COMPANY, Movant, v. MAX MIEHL AND SON, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

April 20, 1943.

George E. Wade and Thomas C. Mapother for movant.

H. S. Horen opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal denied; judgment affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-60288

VARRY EDWARDS ANDERSON; MARTHA RUSH; LILLIE EDWARDS;

CALVIN BEASLEY; BOBBY BANKS, JR; EDGAR DOUGLAS; ROSIETTA

GROWDY; LYNDELL HENDERSON; DANNY HENDERSON; GEORGIA

JENKINS; MARGARET ANDERSON; DAVID ANDERSON

Plaintiffs - Appellants

v.

GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION; GENERAL MOTORS

CORPORATION; YAZOO MOTOR COMPANY; HERRIN-GEAR

CHEVROLET COMPANY INC; ALL STAR MOTORS; GREENVILLE AUTO

MALL INC; YAZOO MOTORS; ROGERS USURY CHEVROLET; ROBERT

OLSON; CLAUDE POTTER; RICHARD VOSS; DEREK WRIGHT;

UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS, "A", "B", and "C", whether singular or plural,

those other persons, corporations, firms or other entities whose wrongful

conduct caused the injuries and damages to the plaintiff, all of whose true

and correct names, are unknown; BLACKWELL CHEVROLET CO 

Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, AND BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

AFFIRMED. See 5TH CIR. R. 47.6.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 11, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
FORM
      OF
      CERTIFICATION TO BE PROVIDED WITH FORM 10K




GMAC
      Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.


Commercial
      Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-C1






I,
      Robert
      D. Feller, certify that:




I
      have
      reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containing
      distribution date reports filed in respect of periods including in the year
      covered by this annual report, of the trust (the “Trust”) created pursuant the
      Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 2005 (the “Pooling and
      Servicing Agreement”), among GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., as
      depositor, GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corporation, as master servicer (the “Master
      Servicer”) and as special servicer (the “Special Servicer”) and LaSalle Bank
      National Association, as trustee (the “Trustee”).




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;




Based
      on
      my knowledge, the servicing information required to be provided to the trustee
      by the Master Servicer and the Special Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing
      Agreement for inclusion in these reports is included in these
      reports;




Based
      on
      my knowledge and upon the annual compliance statement included in the reports
      and required to be delivered to the Trustee in accordance with the terms of
      the
      Pooling and Servicing Agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
      servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements;
      and




The
      reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicers’
compliance with the minimum servicing 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 Pooling and Servicing Agreement, that is included
      in these reports.




Date:
      March 29, 2006




/s/
      Robert D. Feller


Robert
      D.
      Feller


Vice
      President
p. 1 

# OAR Box 1830 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 76 ) IV-C-4

2 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 11/13/20087:20:55AM Sheet 76 of 232EL2 _ 

### S5L~c-

H 

### 2 - UNITED STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON

, D.C. 2046 0

OFFIC E O F AI RAN D RADIATIO N Honorabl e Alber t G . Bustamant e Hous e o f Representative s Washington , D . C . 2051 5 Dea r Mr . Bustamante : Thank yo u fo r passing alon g th e comment s o f you r constituent s concernin g EPA' s proposa l t o requir e onboar d refueling emissio n control s an d propose d gasolin e volatilit y regulations . B e assure d tha t thes e comment s wil l b e considere d in the nex t phas e o f ou r rulemaking process . W e wil l als o b e placing themi n the publi c docket s fo r th e rulemaking . Thank yo u agai n fo r you r concer n in thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

'•"'• • .- . -Jyoo Richar d D . Wilso n Director , Offic e o f Mobil e Source s cc : Docke t A-87-11 ^ Docke t A-85-2 1
### §1658. Limitation on contract authority

The authority of the Secretary to enter into contracts under this subchapter shall be to the extent, and in an amount, provided for in appropriation Acts.

(Pub. L. 94–437, title V, §508, as added Pub. L. 100–713, title V, §501, Nov. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 4824.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 1658, Pub. L. 94–437, title V, §508, Sept. 30, 1976, 90 Stat. 1412, provided that not to exceed 1 per centum of the amounts authorized by section 1656 of this title be available for not to exceed two pilot projects providing outreach services to eligible Indians residing in rural communities near Indian reservations, prior to the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 96–537, §7, Dec. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 3176.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
         18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
          AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Earth Energy Reserves, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year end December 31, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, James E. Hogue, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
            (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
           (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of
operations of the Company.

/s/James E. Hogue
-----------------------------
James E. Hogue
Chief Executive Officer

August 30, 2007




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

In connection with the Annual Report of Earth Energy Reserves, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, John Malone, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
            (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
           (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of
operations of the Company.

/s/John Malone
-----------------------------
John Malone
Chief Financial Officer

August 30, 2007
§ 725.492 Successor operator defined. ( a ) Any person who, on or after January 1, 1970, acquired a mine or mines, or substantially all of the assets thereof, from a prior operator, or acquired the coal mining business of such prior operator, or substantially all of the assets thereof, shall be considered a “successor operator” with respect to any miners previously employed by such prior operator.
( b ) The following transactions shall also be deemed to create successor operator liability: ( 1 ) If an operator ceases to exist by reason of a reorganization which involves a change in identity, form, or place of business or organization, however effected;
( 2 ) If an operator ceases to exist by reason of a liquidation into a parent or successor corporation; or
( 3 ) If an operator ceases to exist by reason of a sale of substantially all its assets, or as a result of merger, consolidation, or division.
( c ) In any case in which a transaction specified in paragraph (b), or substantially similar to a transaction specified in paragraph (b), took place, the resulting entity shall be considered a “successor operator” with respect to any miners previously employed by such prior operator.
( d ) This section shall not be construed to relieve a prior operator of any liability if such prior operator meets the conditions set forth in § 725.494. If the prior operator does not meet the conditions set forth in § 725.494, the following provisions shall apply: ( 1 ) In any case in which a prior operator transferred a mine or mines, or substantially all of the assets thereof, to a successor operator, or sold its coal mining business or substantially all of the assets thereof, to a successor operator, and then ceased to exist within the terms of paragraph (b), the successor operator as identified in paragraph (a) shall be primarily liable for the payment of benefits to any miners previously employed by such prior operator.
( 2 ) In any case in which a prior operator transferred mines, or substantially all of the assets thereof, to more than one successor operator, the successor operator that most recently acquired a mine or mines or assets from the prior operator shall be primarily liable for the payment of benefits to any miners previously employed by such prior operator.
( 3 ) In any case in which a mine or mines, or substantially all the assets thereof, have been transferred more than once, the successor operator that most recently acquired such mine or mines or assets shall be primarily liable for the payment of benefits to any miners previously employed by the original prior operator. If the most recent successor operator does not meet the criteria for a potentially liable operator set forth in § 725.494, the next most recent successor operator shall be liable.
( e ) An “acquisition,” for purposes of this section, shall include any transaction by which title to the mine or mines, or substantially all of the assets thereof, or the right to extract or prepare coal at such mine or mines, becomes vested in a person other than the prior operator.
§ 670.915 When is a Job Corps student considered to be in the performance of duty? ( a ) Performance of duty is a determination that must be made by the OWCP under FECA, and is based on the individual circumstances in each claim.
( b ) In general, residential students may be considered to be in the “performance of duty” when: ( 1 ) They are on center under the supervision and control of Job Corps officials;
( 2 ) They are engaged in any authorized Job Corps activity;
( 3 ) They are in authorized travel status; or
( 4 ) They are engaged in any authorized offsite activity.
( c ) Non-resident students are generally considered to be “in performance of duty” as Federal employees when they are engaged in any authorized Job Corps activity, from the time they arrive at any scheduled center activity until they leave the activity. The standard rules governing coverage of Federal employees during travel to and from work apply. These rules are described in guidance issued by the Secretary.
( d ) Students are generally considered to be not in the performance of duty when: ( 1 ) They are Absent Without Leave (AWOL);
( 2 ) They are at home, whether on pass or on leave;
( 3 ) They are engaged in an unauthorized offsite activity; or
( 4 ) They are injured or ill due to their own willful misconduct, intent to cause injury or death to oneself or another or through intoxication or illegal use of drugs.
[77 FR 22207, Apr. 13, 2012]
Exhibit 24.7

POWER OF ATTORNEY

As a director of NewPage Holding Corporation, a
Delaware corporation, and of NewPage Corporation, a Delaware corporation (collectively, the Company), I hereby constitute and appoint Douglas K. Cooper, David J. Prystash, and George F. Martin, and each of them, with full
power to act without the others, as my true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution and re-substitution, for me and in my name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (Form 10-K), including all amendments and supplements to the Form 10-K, and to file the Form 10-K with all its exhibits and schedules and with all other documents in
connection with the Form 10-K, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto my attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do each and every act and thing necessary or desirable to be done in and about
the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as I might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that my attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, or their substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by
virtue of this Power of Attorney.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Power of Attorney this 15th day of
February, 2011.



/s/ Raymond H. WechslerSignaturePrintName:

Raymond H. Wechsler
Order filed August 30, 2016

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 16

- 00532

- CV

____________ DIANA G. OFFORD AND DIOGU KALU DIOGU II , Appellant s
V. WEST HOUSTON TREES, LTD , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No

. 2

Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 16

- CPR

- 028846



### ORDER
No reporter’s record has been filed in this case. The official court reporter for
the County Court at Law No. 2 informed this court that appellant had not made arrangements for payment for the reporter’s record. On July 29, 2016 , the clerk of this court notified appellant that we would consider and decide those issues that do not require a reporter ’ s record unless a ppellant, within 15 days of notice, provided this court with proof of payment for the record. See T ex. R. App

. P. 37.3(c). Appellant filed no reply.Accordingly, we order appellant to file a brief in this appeal within 30 days of

the date of this order. I f appellant fails to comply with this order, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM