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

31

DAY ELEV

 501.16

 501.25

 500.83

 502.05

 501.61

 501.50

 501.59

 500.79

 500.00

 500.10

 501.17

 501.16

 501.29

 501.23

 501.14

 499.88

 499.61

 498.96

 500.57

 500.26

 499.95

 499.91

 499.59

 499.64

 500.47

 501.34

 501.97

 502.28

 502.21

 502.07

 502.65

 56,563

 56,663

 56,203

 57,546

 57,060

 56,939

 57,038

 56,159

 55,303

 55,411

 56,575

 56,563

 56,707

 56,641

 56,541

 55,175

 54,887

 54,194

 55,921

 55,585

 55,250

 55,207

 54,866

 54,919

 55,812

 56,762

 57,457

 57,804

 57,725

 57,568

 58,218

STORAGE

-188

+100

-460

+1,343

-486

-121

+99

-879

-856

+108

+1,164

-12

+144

-66

-100

-1,366

-288

-693

+1,727

-336

-335

-43

-341

+53

+893

+950

+695

+347

-79

-157

+650

CHANGE

140

264

60

962

27

214

433

70

85

570

1,154

611

643

548

650

46

843

828

2,316

1,488

1,525

1,742

1,627

1,784

2,113

2,119

1,772

1,564

1,308

1,101

1,436

INFLOW

 233

 211

 291

 284

 271

 270

 378

 509

 512

 512

 563

 613

 566

 570

 694

 729

 981

 1,170

 1,438

 1,652

 1,682

 1,757

 1,792

 1,749

 1,655

 1,636

 1,420

 1,386

 1,344

 1,151

 1,101

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

 2

 3

 1

 1

 1

 5

 5

 4

 5

 4

 4

 4

 4

 11

 6

 6

 7

 7

 7

 5

 12

 7

 7

 8

 8

 4

 2

 3

 4

 29

 7

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MARCH 2014 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 04/01/2014

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +1,467 30,043 29,120 0 0 183

ACRE-FEET +1,467 59,590 57,760 0 0 363

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 57,760

SPILL 0 57,760

 56,751

OUTLET 0

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 102

 253

 32

 929

 14

 69

 381

 26

 24

 522

 1,090

 559

 638

 539

 639

 47

 656

 591

 2,184

 1,517

 1,492

 1,744

 1,618

 1,756

 2,087

 2,085

 1,786

 1,552

 1,251

 1,057

 1,395

 28,635

 56,798

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

EVAPORATION.
!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

T25N

R114W

T26N

T27N

T28N

T29N

T30N

T31N

T32N

T33N

T34N

T35N

T36N

R113W R112W R111W R110W R109W R108W R107W R106W

UV352

UV354

UV353

UV350

UV351

£¤191

£¤189

UV235

Cora

Merna

Daniel

Boulder

Pinedale

LaBarge

Marbleton

Big Piney

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

o

0 2.5 5 10 15 20 25 30

Miles

Transportation Routes

Map A17-2

SUBLETTE

LINCOLN

0 5 10 20 30 40 50

Kilometers

U.S. Highway

State Highway

County Road

BLM Road
#### § 686.460 What restrictions are there on the assignment of eligible applicants for nonresidential enrollment in Job Corps?

No more than 20 percent of students enrolled in Job Corps nationwide may be nonresidential students.
Exhibit
32.1


Certification
of Chief Executive Officer
  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 on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2009 (the “Report”) of MCG Capital Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Steven F.
Tunney, the Chief
Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my
knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350 that:
  (1)
              The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
  (2)
              The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Registrant.
  /s/ STEVENF.
  TUNNEYName:
              Steven
      F. TunneyTitle:
              Chief
      Executive OfficerDate:
              March
      4, 2010
#### § 2524.8 Cancellation of entries for nonpayment of water-right charges.

All homestead and desert-land entrymen holding land under the reclamation law must, in addition to paying the water-right charges, reclaim the land as required by the reclamation law. Homestead entrymen must reside upon, cultivate, and improve the lands embraced in their entries for not less than the period required by the homestead laws. Desert-land entrymen must comply with the provisions of the desert-land laws as amended by the reclamation law. Failure to make payment of any water-right charges due for more than 1 year, will render the entry subject to cancellation and the money paid subject to forfeiture, whether water-tight application has been made or not.
#### § 3137.135 What are the unit operator's obligations after unit termination?

Within three months after unit termination, the unit operator must submit to BLM for approval a plan and schedule for mitigating the impacts resulting from unit operations. The plan must describe in detail planned plugging and abandonment and surface restoration operations. The unit operator must then comply with the BLM-approved plan and schedule.
§ 2866.35 How will the BLM calculate rent for private mobile radio service (PMRS), internal microwave, and “other” category uses? If an entity engaged in a PMRS, internal microwave, or “other” use is: ( a ) Using space in a facility owned by either a facility owner or facility manager, the BLM will consider the entity to be a customer and not include these uses in the rent calculation for the facility; or
( b ) The facility owner, the BLM will follow the provisions in § 2866.31 to calculate rent for a grant involving these uses. However, the BLM includes the rent from the rent schedule for a PMRS, internal microwave, or other use in the rental calculation only if the value of that use is equal to or greater than the value of any other use in the facility. The BLM excludes these uses in the 25 percent calculation (see § 2866.31(a)) when their value does not exceed the highest value in the facility.
#### Robert W. Crossen, Appellee, v. Chicago & Joliet Electric Railway Company, Appellant.

Gen. No. 5564.

Vekdicts&emdash;when *not disturbed as against the evidence.*A verdict will not he set aside as against the evidence unless clearly and manifestly so.

Action in case for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Will county; the Hon. Charles B. Campbell, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the October term, 1911.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed March 13, 1912.

E. Meers, for appellant.

J. W. Downey and J. W. D’Arcy, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Morton

W. Thompson delivered the opinion of the court.

This case was before us at the October term, 1910, 158 Ill. App. 42, when it was reversed and remanded for errors of law. At the first trial, plaintiff recovered a judgment for $1,750. At this trial plaintiff recovered a judgment for $800.

.While several errors are assigned by appellant, only one is insisted upon in the argument, namely, that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. We will therefore confine ourselves to that assignment. While there was some testimony heard on this trial not given at the former, yet the main facts are as stated in our former opinion, and we see no need of repeating them here. We have examined all the evidence carefully and find it so conflicting that the jury might have found their verdict either way. In view of the fact that two juries have found the defendant guilty and two trial judges have approved the verdicts, we cannot say it is so manifestly against the weight of the evidence that we should, for that reason, set it aside and reverse the case. C. & J. Electric Railway Co. v. Barrows, 128 Ill. App. 11.

*284Finding no error in the record the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
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

 501.51

 502.00

 502.93

 504.12

 504.02

 503.29

 502.55

 501.88

 501.13

 500.93

 500.28

 500.43

 501.39

 503.92

 504.69

 503.13

 501.49

 501.39

 499.52

 499.92

 500.08

 501.01

 501.78

 500.61

 500.66

 503.27

 502.24

 502.05

 56,950

 57,490

 58,532

 59,889

 59,773

 58,941

 58,106

 57,358

 56,530

 56,311

 55,607

 55,769

 56,817

 59,659

 60,548

 58,758

 56,927

 56,817

 54,791

 55,218

 55,390

 56,398

 57,247

 55,964

 56,018

 58,918

 57,759

 57,546

STORAGE

-932

+540

+1,042

+1,357

-116

-832

-835

-748

-828

-219

-704

+162

+1,048

+2,842

+889

-1,790

-1,831

-110

-2,026

+427

+172

+1,008

+849

-1,283

+54

+2,900

-1,159

-213

CHANGE

259

1,701

1,805

1,753

885

396

302

211

169

471

445

672

1,117

2,023

1,482

577

554

1,425

457

1,698

1,567

1,989

1,922

837

1,510

2,951

1,199

2,352

INFLOW

 570

 600

 600

 175

 0

 0

 0

 254

 581

 581

 597

 583

 589

 589

 1,025

 1,479

 1,477

 1,480

 1,478

 1,478

 1,480

 1,481

 1,484

 1,481

 1,481

 1,486

 1,780

 2,255

POWER

 58

 390

 542

 735

 831

 691

 623

 333

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 148

SPILL

 98

 437

 137

 156

 109

 123

 99

 0

 0

 0

 203

 3

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 54

OUTLET

 3

 2

 1

 3

 3

 1

 1

 1

 5

 0

 0

 4

 0

 1

 9

 0

 0

 0

 0

 5

 0

 0

 10

 3

 2

 3

 3

 2

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2019 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 03/01/2019

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -336 32,729 27,064 4,351 1,419 62

ACRE-FEET -336 64,918 53,681 8,630 2,815 123

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 53,681

SPILL 8,630 65,126

 57,882

OUTLET 2,815

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 196

 926

 1,134

 815

 90

 14

 14

 14

 14

 14

 244

 552

 721

 715

 459

 14

 14

 987

 236

 1,517

 1,419

 1,854

 1,841

 725

 1,467

 2,842

 1,108

 2,243

 22,189

 44,012

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

     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of WorldHeart
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, D. Mark Goudie, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; as amended, and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of
March 31, 2005.

Dated:  May 16, 2005                /s/ D. Mark Goudie
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    D. Mark Goudie, Vice President Finance
                                    and Chief Financial Officer
                                    (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

------------------
*    A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has
     been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
     furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
     request.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13(a)-14(a)/15d-14(a) OFTHE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
     I, Richard H. De Voto, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Canyon ResourcesCorporation;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the period presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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 theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):
     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   /s/ Richard H. De Voto Date: November 15, 2004  Richard H. De Voto, Chief Executive Officer
§ 28.2 Definitions. As used in this part: ( a ) The term *agency head* means the Secretary of the Interior or an official of the Department of the Interior who exercises authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior.
( b ) The term *fire protection* includes personnel services and equipment required for fire prevention, the protection of life and property, and firefighting; and
§ 2741.8 Price. ( a ) Conveyances for recreational or historic-monument purposes to a State, county, or other State or Federal instrumentality or political subdivision shall be issued without monetary consideration.
( b ) All other conveyances shall be made at prices established by the Secretary of the Interior through appraisal or otherwise, taking into consideration the purpose for which the land is to be used.
( c ) Patents shall be issued only after payment of the full purchase price by a patent applicant.
[44 FR 43472, July 25, 1979. Redesignated at 50 FR 50300, Dec. 10, 1985]
(No. 870

Claimant awarded $832.25 with interest.)

#### Emanuel Buxbaum, Henry Kuh and Myra C. Ellenbogen, Trustees Under the Last Will and Testament of Abraham Kuh, Deceased, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 16, 1925.*

Inheritance *tax*— when *claimant entitled to refund. Sec. 25.*Where an order of court has been made, in a proper proceeding, re-assessing the tax under Sec. 25, Inheritance Tax Law, upon the happening of certain contingencies provided for in the will, claimant is entitled to a refund of the difference between the amount of the tax originally assessed and the amount found due under the order of the court re-assessing the tax.

Merwin M. Hart, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General ; S. S. DuHamel, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Phillips

delivered the opinion of the court:

Emanuel Buxbaum, Henry Kuh and Myra 0. Ellenbogen, trustees under the last will and testament of Abraham Kuh, deceased, bring this action for refund of inheritance taxes paid on account of the operation of Section 25 of the inheritance tax laws of Illinois.

It appears from the declaration and the statement and consent of the Attorney General that in this estate there was paid to the State of Illinois, on account of the property, subject to the operation of said Section 25 of the inheritance tax laws of Illinois, a net tax of $9886.67, whereas, under an order re-assessing said property after the happening of the contingencies provided for by said will, it was found that the net tax should be $9054.42, thereby leaving, as found by order oi the court, the sum of $832.25 to which claimants are entitled to have refunded, with *3%*interest per annum from the 16th day of April, 1917. The Attorney General consents to an allowance of the amount claimed, which is proven by the evidence in the case.

The court accordingly awards the claimant the said sum of $832.25 with interest.
§ 2569.302 What if I believe I am an Eligible Individual, but I was not notified by the BLM? If the BLM has not notified you that it believes that you are an Eligible Individual, you may still apply for an allotment under this subpart. However, as described in § 2569.404(b), you will need to provide evidence with your application that you are an Eligible Individual. Supporting evidence with your application must include: ( a ) A Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood or other documentation from the BIA to verify you meet the definition of Native; and
( b ) A Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (Form DD-214) or other documentation from DoD to verify your military service.
#### § 3130.0-7 Cross references. [Reserved]
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

 242

 243

 245

 244

 255

 269

 278

 288

 283

 277

 271

 277

 286

 315

 326

 332

 328

 316

 294

 284

 255

 207

 186

 236

 202

 188

 171

 171

 175

 175

 175

 233

 236

 242

 241

 242

 256

 270

 280

 277

 271

 268

 269

 277

 287

 314

 324

 317

 298

 281

 256

 210

 169

 159

 193

 188

 168

 167

 167

 169

 174

 171

 236

 240

 244

 242

 249

 264

 275

 285

 281

 273

 269

 272

 281

 307

 322

 328

 324

 311

 288

 269

 231

 188

 167

 215

 196

 179

 169

 169

 171

 174

 174

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MARCH 2011 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: April 25, 2011

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

30 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

30 DAY

AVG 

MEAN

 7,663

 7,655

 7,631

 7,592

 7,546

 7,529

 7,521

 7,522

 7,524

 7,521

 7,514

 7,520

 7,549

 7,600

 7,673

 7,755

 7,829

 7,894

 7,948

 7,982

 7,975

 7,942

 7,887

 7,891

 7,829

 7,747

 7,656

 7,568

 7,493

 7,419

 7,357

 255

 255

 254

 253

 252

 251

 251

 251

 251

 251

 250

 251

 252

 253

 256

 259

 261

 263

 265

 266

 266

 265

 263

 263

 261

 258

 255

 252

 250

 247

 245

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

30 DAY ACCUM MEAN and 30 DAY AVG MEAN columns are 30 day runnings, except for April 1 and September 1, 

 where they do not go back 30 days.

VERNALIS ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ruben DE LEON-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-41705.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided March 6, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Philip G. Gallagher, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before BARKSDALE, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Ruben De Leon-Garcia appeals his sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b) for illegal re-entry into the United States after having been deported following conviction for an aggravated felony. For the following reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

For the first time on appeal, De Leon-Garcia asserts that the district court’s belief during sentencing that the United States Sentencing Guidelines were mandatory, rather than advisory, is reversible error under *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). He asserts that we should review the Fanfan error de novo. He also suggests that the error is structural, or at least presumptively prejudicial. However, we have firmly established that the plain error standard of review applies to a forfeited Fanfan error. *See United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo,*407 F.3d 728, 732 (5th Cir.2005) (citing *United States v. Mares,*402 F.3d 511, 513-14 (5th Cir. 2005), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 267, 163 L.Ed.2d 240 (2005) (No. 04-9517)), *cert, denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 267, 163 L.Ed.2d 240 (2005) (No. 05-5556). The error is not structural, and prejudice is not presumed. *United States v. Martinez-Lugo,*411 F.3d 597, 600-01 (5th Cir.2005), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 464, 163 L.Ed.2d 352 (2005) (No. 05-6242). Accordingly, these arguments are foreclosed.

In the alternative, De Leon-Garcia asserts that he is entitled to a reversal under the plain error standard. However, the Fanfan error did not affect his substantial *864rights. *See United States v. Bringier,*405 F.3d 310, 317 n. 4 (5th Cir.2005), *cert. denied,,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 264, 163 L.Ed.2d 238 (2005) (No. 05-5535); *United States v. Garcia-Rodriguez,*415 F.3d 452, 456 (5th Cir.2005). Therefore, he has failed to demonstrate plain error. *See Valenzuela-Quevedo,*407 F.3d at 732-33.

Finally, De Leon-Garcia asserts that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. The Supreme Court’s decision in *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), controls this issue. We must follow *Almendarez-Torres*“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” *United States v. Dabeit,*231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.2000). Accordingly, this issue is also foreclosed.

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.