alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsA Progressive Damage Methodology for Residual Strength Predictions of Notched Composite PanelsThe translaminate fracture behavior of carbon/epoxy structural laminates with through-penetration notches was investigated to develop a residual strength prediction methodology for composite structures. An experimental characterization of several composite materials systems revealed a fracture resistance behavior that was very similar to the R-curve behavior exhibited by ductile metals. Fractographic examinations led to the postulate that the damage growth resistance was primarily due to fractured fibers in the principal load-carrying plies being bridged by intact fibers of the adjacent plies. The load transfer associated with this bridging mechanism suggests that a progressive damage analysis methodology will be appropriate for predicting the residual strength of laminates with through-penetration notches. A progressive damage methodology developed by the authors was used to predict the initiation and growth of matrix cracks and fiber fracture. Most of the residual strength predictions for different panel widths, notch lengths, and material systems were within about 10% of the experimental failure loads.Document ID19980201405Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsCoats, Timothy W.*(National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council Hampton, VA United States)*Harris, Charles E.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1998Subject CategoryComposite MaterialsReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-1998-207646NAS 1.15:207646L-17729Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 538-13-11-05Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19980201405.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
#### Jan C. RUST, Plaintiff — Appellant, v. CARONDELET HEALTH CARE AND HEALTH NETWORK, aka: Carondelet — St. Joseph’s Hospital Inc., Defendant — Appellee.

No. 05-15490.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 22, 2006.

Jan C. Rust, Tucson, AZ, pro se.

Diane L. Madenci, Esq., Lewis & Roca, LLP, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant — Appellee.

Before: FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

*242MEMORANDUM **

Jan Rust appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment dismissing her retaliation action against her former employer, Carondelet Health Network (“CHN”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Porter v. California Dep’t of Corrections,*419 F.3d 885, 891 (9th Cir.2005), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that Rust failed to establish a prima facie claim of retaliation. *See id.*at 894. Although dissemination of an adverse employment reference can amount to an adverse employment action, Rust failed to submit sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror could find that CHN gave Rust a negative employment reference. *See Hashimoto v. Dalton,*118 F.3d 671, 674 (9th Cir.1997).

Rust’s remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Exhibit 23.2


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  registration
statements on Form S-3 (Registration Nos. 333-48680,  333-31217 and 33-77286) of
Aphton  Corporation of our report dated April 24, 2000 relating to the financial
statements which appear in this Form 10-K/A.


                                                   /s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Honolulu, Hawaii
December 19, 2001
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549


FORM 6-K


Report of Foreign Issuer Pursuant to Rules 13a-16 and 15d-16 under The
Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter:
----------------------------------------------------

Koninklijke Ahold N.V.


Registrant's name in English
----------------------------

Royal Ahold


Jurisdiction of organisation
----------------------------

The Kingdom of The Netherlands


Address of principal executive offices
--------------------------------------

Albert Heijnweg 1, P.O. Box 3050, 1500 HB Zaandam, The Netherlands
Telephone:  international +31 75 659 5604
Fax:        international +31 75 659 8366

Commission File Number
----------------------
0-18898

Date:
----
January 7, 2003

<PAGE>


SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Secruities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorised.

Koninklijke Ahold N.V.


/s/ C.H. van der Hoeven
----------------------------
C.H. van der Hoeven
President




This Form 6-K shall be deemed to be incorporated by reference into the
prospectuses formingt a part of the Company's Registration Statement on Form F-3
and Form S-3 (No. 333-52934, No. 333-52934-01 No. 333-80245 and No.
333-80245-01) and the Company's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No.
333-10044, No. 333-09774 and No. 333-70636 and be a part of such prospectuses
from the date of the filing thereof.

<PAGE>



LIST OF EXHIBITS
----------------

The following exhibits have been filed as part of this Form 6-K

Exhibit         Description

1.              Ahold 2002 sales rise 9.2% to Euro 72.7 billion
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION

I, Alexander Shen, certify that:



1.    I have reviewed this
Amendment No.1 to annual report on Form 10-K/A of TechPrecision Corporation for the year ended March 31, 2017;



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



|Dated: July 28, 2017 | /s/ Alexander Shen     
|-------------------- | -----------------------
|                     | Alexander Shen         
|                     | Chief Executive Officer
#### Commissioner of Welfare of the City of New York, Respondent, v. John Roman, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Yoorhis, JJ.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 738.71

 739.03

 739.35

 739.68

 740.05

 740.40

 740.74

 741.07

 741.37

 741.63

 741.85

 742.14

 742.41

 742.67

 742.89

 743.06

 743.32

 743.50

 743.65

 743.81

 743.99

 744.26

 744.45

 744.67

 744.93

 745.19

 745.43

 745.07

 744.68

 744.83

 744.98

 1,968

 1,983

 1,999

 2,015

 2,033

 2,050

 2,067

 2,084

 2,099

 2,112

 2,123

 2,137

 2,151

 2,164

 2,175

 2,184

 2,198

 2,207

 2,215

 2,223

 2,232

 2,247

 2,257

 2,269

 2,282

 2,296

 2,309

 2,290

 2,269

 2,277

 2,285

STORAGE

+17

+15

+16

+16

+18

+17

+17

+17

+15

+13

+11

+14

+14

+13

+11

+9

+14

+9

+8

+8

+9

+15

+10

+12

+13

+14

+13

-19

-21

+8

+8

CHANGE

9

8

8

8

9

9

9

9

8

7

6

7

7

7

6

5

7

5

4

4

5

8

5

6

7

7

7

5

3

4

4

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

 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

 15

 14

 0

 0

TIME COPPER

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MAY 2016 SPRING CREEK DEBRIS RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: June 1, 2016

IN LAKE

SPRING CR DEBRIS DAM

ZINC

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +334 203 0 29

ACRE-FEET +334 403 0 58

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 58

 58

 1,951

SPILL OUTLET

**KES

COPPER

MG/L
### §1102. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 89–656, §2, Oct. 14, 1966, 80 Stat. 906, which related to distribution of funds to tribe members, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
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

 147

 142

 149

 149

 148

 153

 147

 138

 139

 143

 130

 135

 143

 142

 138

 134

 141

 143

 137

 135

 139

 136

 135

 140

 142

 140

 141

 142

 142

 142

 147

 136

 138

 138

 140

 141

 141

 133

 128

 129

 127

 126

 125

 134

 127

 125

 125

 125

 130

 125

 127

 133

 128

 131

 134

 135

 135

 135

 136

 137

 136

 138

 140

 140

 140

 142

 143

 145

 141

 133

 131

 130

 128

 129

 139

 133

 130

 127

 129

 135

 131

 131

 135

 134

 132

 136

 139

 137

 138

 138

 140

 139

 141

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

OCTOBER 2000 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: November 3, 2000

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

STATEN ISLAND ON THE SOUTH FORK MOKELUMNE RIVER
### §5955. Repealed. Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title XIII, §1351(3), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3607

Section, Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title XII, §1206, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1781, related to prior notice to Congress of obligation of funds for cooperative threat reduction programs.
CENTRAL VALLEY OPERATIONS OFFICE

CHINOOK SALMON REPORT

February 2011

Note: Shaded area not verified with DFG data Preliminary Data - Subject to Change

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-Feb-11 59 4 0 3 59 7 1,147 904 0000 0 0 0 23 6,438 2-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,147 904 0000 0 0 0 23 5,177 3-Feb-11 9 18 0 3 9 21 1,156 925 0000 0 0 0 23 4,758 4-Feb-11 0003 0 3 1,156 928 0000 0 0 0 23 4,427 5-Feb-11 0030 3 0 1,159 928 0000 0 0 0 23 4,392 6-Feb-11 0033 3 3 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 4,936 7-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 5,842 8-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 5,663 9-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 6,193 

10-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 6,310 11-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 7,095 12-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 6,691 13-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 7,029 14-Feb-11 0000 0 0 1,162 931 0000 0 0 0 23 7,038 15-Feb-11 0 18 0 0 0 18 1,162 949 0000 0 0 0 23 6,940 

16-Feb-11 0 18 0 0 0 18 1,162 967 0000 0 0 0 23 6,437 17-Feb-11 0903 0 12 1,162 979 0000 0 0 0 23 6,347 18-Feb-11 18 80 0 0 18 80 1,180 1,059 0000 0 0 0 23 5,882 19-Feb-11 0 137 3 3 3 140 1,183 1,199 0000 0 0 0 23 6,662 20-Feb-11 0 116 0 3 0 119 1,183 1,318 0000 0 0 0 23 7,038 21-Feb-11 0 178 0 16 0 194 1,183 1,512 0000 0 0 0 23 7,241 22-Feb-11 36 174 0 19 36 193 1,219 1,705 0000 0 0 0 23 5,985 23-Feb-11 18 71 0 19 18 90 1,237 1,795 0000 0 0 0 23 5,937 24-Feb-11 0 152 0 13 0 165 1,237 1,960 0000 0 0 0 23 5,562 25-Feb-11 0 105 0 0 0 105 1,237 2,065 0000 0 0 0 23 4,836 26-Feb-11 0 17 0 3 0 20 1,237 2,085 0000 0 0 0 23 4,836 27-Feb-11 18 0 0 6 18 6 1,255 2,091 0000 0 0 0 23 4,930 28-Feb-11 18 133 0 4 18 137 1,273 2,228 0000 0 0 0 23 5,118 

Total 176 1,230 9 101 185 1,331 1,273 2,228000 0 0 0 0 23 165,740 

Winter Run Incidental Take Levels (Oct 1 thru May 31) Spring Run Incidental Take Levels for Season Combined Total (Oct 1 thru Jun 30)

Banks T
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 21, 2020.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, December 21, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21I0095. NICHOLAS GEORGE ANDERS JOHNSON v. LAURA TAYLOR JOHNSON.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

19102951
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

TRAVEL GROUP, INC., D/B/A REPUBLIC AIR TRAVEL 

AND SCOT SPENCER 

AIRLIFT GROUP, INC. 

AND RICHARD BERNARD 

Unauthorized Air Transportation, Unfair and Deceptive 

Practices and Unfair Methods of Competition, and 

Violations of Public Charter Rules 

EXPRESS ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC. 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

Enforcement Proceeding 

STATUS REPORT 

,-'E?i~RTMENT OF ::'.:i·~SPORTATION 

',<:T OPERATIONS 

e"I.) :""[1 r;)._ ~PG?1 P 2: 03 

DOT -OST -1995-272 

formerly 

Docket 49233 

The Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings ("Enforcement Office"), pursuant to Your Honor's March 22,2006, Order 

staying this proceeding, files this report detailing the current status of this proceeding and 

settlement negotiations. 

The Department has not ruled on the outstanding motions filed by Respondents 

and opposed by the Enforcement Office in Ascend Aviation Group, Docket OST-2004-

17486. 
2 

There have been no further settlement discussions. 

Date: August 27,2010. 

Respectfully submitted, 

uel Podberes y 

Assistant General Counsel for 

A viation Enforcement and Proceedings 

Dayton Lehman, Jr. 

Deputy Assistant General Counsel for 

Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

~il~r07 Senior Trial Attorney 

United States Department of Transportation 

Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Room 96-429 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: 202-366-9342 

FAX: 202-366-7152 
3 

Docket No. DOT-OST-1995-272 

I hereby certify that on this 27th day of August, 2010, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Status Report was served in the following manner to the following: 

Original 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

By Personal Service 

The Honorable Ronnie A Yoder 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

East Building Ground Floor 

Room E12-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: (202) 366-2142 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

By First Class Mail 

Scot Spencer 

SBD Aircraft Services 

255 S Leland Norton Way 

Sam Bernardino, CA 92408
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Adolfo NOLASCO-SALAZAR, Defendant — Appellant.

No. 04-50536.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

*831Lawrence E. Spong, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Jeremy D. Warren, Esq., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Adolfo Nolasco-Salazar appeals from the 30-month sentence imposed after he pled guilty to unlawful re-entry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Because Nolasco-Salazar was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the district court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to *United States v. Ameline,*409 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). *See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez,*419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir.2005) (extending *Ameline’s*limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional error under *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)).

Nolasco-Salazar’s other contentions are foreclosed by this circuit’s case law. *See United States v. Velasquez-Reyes,*427 F.3d 1227, 1228 (9th Cir.2005)- (rejecting contention that prior convictions must be proved to a jury if not admitted by the defendant and reaffirming that *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998) has not been overruled); *United States v. Ochoa-Gaytan,*265 F.3d 837, 845-46 (9th Cir.2001) (holding that *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) carved out an exception for prior convictions that specifically preserved the holding of *Almendarez-Torres); see also United States v. Castillo-Rivera,*244 F.3d 1020, 1025 (9th Cir.2001) (rejecting contention that the fact of the *832temporal relationship of the removal to the prior conviction is beyond the scope of the Supreme Court’s recidivism exception).

SENTENCE REMANDED

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
(No. 4757

#### Saul Goodman, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed January 14, 1958.*

Epton, Scott, McCarthy and Epton, Attorneys for Claimant.

Latham Castle, Attorney General; Lester Slott, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Fearer, J.

A claim has been filed in this Court for property damage to claimant’s automobile growing out of an accident, which occurred on May 7,1956, at or about the hour of 5:30 P.M., at the intersection of Wacker Drive and Monroe Street, in the City of Chicago, Illinois.

Respondent’s vehicle, a truck of the Illinois National Guard, was driven by Master Sgt. Solario.

The record consists of the complaint, which was filed in this Court-on January 4, 1957. It charges respondent with general acts of negligence, i.e., failure to keep the vehicle driven by Master Sgt. Solario under proper control ; disregard of traffic signals; failure to stop said automobile at a stop sign, where claimant was waiting; and, failure to yield the right of way to traffic having the green light at the intersection, and proceeding in the opposite direction just prior to the collision.

No answer having been filed by respondent, a general traverse is considered.

The only witness testifying in the case was claimant. The only evidence offered by respondent was a Departmental Report.

*682As to damages sustained as a result of said accident, claimant has proven by a preponderance or greater weight of the evidence a total cost of repairs to his automobile in the amount of $105.23.

The Commissioner, who heard this case, recommended that the claim be allowed in the sum of $105.23. The Commissioner interrogated claimant, and had an opportunity to observe him, and his demeanor and manner of testifying. After making a careful review of the Departmental Report, he found that claimant maintained the burden of proving that he was free from contributory negligence, and that it was the negligence of Master Sgt. Solario in failing to observe claimant’s automobile parked at the intersection waiting for the traffic signal to change, which was the proximate cause of the accident, and which resulted in the damages testified to by claimant. Also, an exhibit was introduced substantiating the amount of damages to the trunk and bumper of claimant’s automobile. The sum of $105.23 was paid to restore said damaged parts to the condition they were in just prior to the time of the accident.

It is, therefore, the order of this Court that claimant, Saul Goodman, be allowed his claim in the sum of $105.23.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2004)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 4843]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2151]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 21 / Monday, February 2, 2004 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 4843]]

                Presidential Determination No. 2004-21 of January 15, 
                2004

                
Designation of the State of Kuwait as a Major 
                Non-NATO Ally

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                Consistent with the authority vested in me by section 
                517 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended 
                (the ``Act''), I hereby designate the State of Kuwait 
                as a Major Non-NATO Ally of the United States for the 
                purposes of the Act and the Arms Export Control Act.

                You are authorized and directed to publish this 
                determination in the Federal Register.

                    (Presidential Sig.)B

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, January 15, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04-2151
Filed 1-30-04; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4710-10-P
EXHIBIT 12


                 KERR-McGEE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES



(Millions of dollars)            2001       2000      1999       1998       1997
                               ------     ------      ----      -----       ----

Income (loss) from
  continuing operations        $  506     $  842      $146      $(345)      $351

Add -
  Provision (benefit) for
    income taxes                  298        457       111       (175)       184
  Interest expense                192        208       190        157        141
  Rental expense
    representative
    of interest factor             13         11        12         12         13
                               ------     ------      ----      -----       ----

  Earnings                     $1,009     $1,518      $459      $(351)      $689
                               ======     ======      ====      =====       ====

Fixed Charges -
  Interest expense             $  192     $  208      $190      $ 157       $141
  Rental expense
    representative
    of interest factor             13         11        12         12         13
  Interest capitalized             33          5         9         28         24
                               ------     ------      ----      -----       ----
        Total fixed charges    $  238     $  224      $211      $ 197       $178
                               ======     ======      ====      =====       ====

Ratio of earnings to
  fixed charges                   4.2        6.8       2.2          -(1)     3.9
                               ======     ======      ====      =====       ====


(1)Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges by $548 million in 1998.
#### Lee A. Ochs v. Albert H. Woods.

Motion granted. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarks, Scott and Dowling, JJ.