alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                                    
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                                                
|View History:                                                                                                       
|                                                                                                                    
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Percentage of Dry Natural Gas Production from Greater than 200 Meters Deep (Percent)
|                                                                                                                    
|                                                                                                                    
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Percentage of Dry Natural Gas Production from Greater than 200 Meters Deep (Percent)
|                                                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 3.6    | 4.9    | 6.1    | 7.8    | 10.9   | 11.0   | 14.6   | 22.5  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 24.4   | 27.4   | 30.0   | 35.1   | 31.5   | 36.8   | 39.6   | NA     |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 195 (Friday, October 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59820-59821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25690]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory Committee will hold a 
meeting October 17, 2000, at the Tahoe City Public Utility District 
Board Room, 221 Fairway Drive, Tahoe City, California 96145. This 
committee, established by the Secretary of Agriculture June 23, 2000 
(65 FR 44519), is chartered to provide advice to the Secretary on 
implementing the terms of the Federal Interagency

[[Page 59821]]

Partnership at Lake Tahoe and on other matters raised by the Secretary.

DATES AND TIME: The meeting will be held October 17, 2000, beginning at 
9 a.m. and ending at 4 p.m. Public comment period is scheduled for 2 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Tahoe City Public Utility 
District Board Room, 221 Fairway Drive, Tahoe City, California 96145.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maribeth Gustafson or Sue Fitzgerald, 
Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, Forest Service, 870 Emerald Bay Road, 
Suite 1, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150; (530) 573-2773.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Items to be covered on the agenda include:

(1) Agenda Review
(2) Budget Subcommittee Report
(3) Legislative Update
(4) Update on the Federal Partnership Actions Progress Report
(5) Update on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's proposal to list the 
Tahoe Yellow Cress As an Endangered Species
(6) Update on the Environmental Improvement Program
(7) Discussion on the need for a communications subcommittee
(8) Discussion on possible amendments to the Lake Tahoe Basin Federal 
Advisory Committee consensus process
(9) Public comment.

    All Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory Committee meetings are open 
to the public. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend. Issues may 
be brought to the attention of the committee during the open public 
comment period at the meeting or by filing written statements with the 
secretary for committee before or after the meeting. Please refer any 
written comments to the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit at the contact 
address above.
    Late Notice: Owing to staff transition and shortages at the Lake 
Tahoe Basin related to this year's extremely heavy fire season in the 
western states, this notice is being filed under the usual 15-day 
notification period.

    Dated: October 2, 2000.
Maribeth Gustafson,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-25690 Filed 10-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
EXHIBIT 12.2

                   Kronos International, Inc. and Subsidiaries
         Statements of Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                   (Unaudited)
                          (In millions, except ratios)


<TABLE>
                                                                      Years ended December 31,
                                                       ----------------------------------------------------
                                                        2001        2002       2003        2004       2005
                                                       -----        ----       ----        ----       ----

Fixed charges:
<S>                                                   <C>         <C>        <C>         <C>         <C>
  Total interest expense                              $  38.4     $  35.4    $  32.6     $  36.7     $  43.9
  Interest component of rent expense(1)                   2.1         2.4        3.0         2.7         2.8
                                                      -------     -------    -------     -------     -------

    Total fixed charges                                  40.5        37.8       35.6        39.4        46.7
                                                      -------     -------    -------     -------     -------

Adjustments:
  Income before income taxes and minority
   interest                                             128.2        63.2       82.6        64.8       118.9
  Amortization of capitalized interest                     .5          .5         .5          .5          .4
                                                      -------     -------    -------     -------     -------

    Total adjustments                                   128.7        63.7       83.1        65.3       119.3
                                                      -------     -------    -------     -------     -------

    Total earnings available for fixed
     charges                                          $ 169.2     $ 101.5    $ 118.7     $ 104.7     $ 166.0
                                                      =======     =======    =======     =======     =======

Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges (2)                                       4.2         2.7        3.3         2.7         3.6
                                                      =======     =======    =======     =======     =======
</TABLE>


(1)  The interest expense component of rental expense is calculated as one-third
     of the  aggregate  rent  expense  for  each  year,  which  is a  reasonable
     approximation of the interest factor.

(2)  Computed as (y) total  earnings  available  for fixed  charges to (z) total
     fixed charges.
**Exhibit 31(a)**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, Richard K.Davidson, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Union Pacific Railroad Company; 

 

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report; 

 

3. Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated 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 and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely 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 other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 7, 2004
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - [I.D. 100400B] 

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice of workshop.

# SUMMARY:

NMFS will present a workshop on proposed catch-monitoring standards for shoreside processors that take deliveries of pollock from the Bering Sea. 

# DATES:

The workshop will be held on Thursday, November 16, 2000, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The workshop will be held at the Nordby Center, located in Fishermen's Terminal, 1711 West Nickerson Street, Seattle, WA.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alan Kinsolving, 907-586-7228.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

NMFS is developing a proposed rule to implement the American Fisheries Act (AFA). One aspect of this rulemaking is the development of catch monitoring standards for inshore processors that receive deliveries of pollock harvested in the directed fishery for pollock in Bering Sea. As currently envisioned by NMFS, these standards would require that the AFA shoreside processors develop and implement a Catch Monitoring and Control Plan (Plan). The Plan would address performance standards designed to ensure that all catch delivered to the processor is accurately weighed and accounted for.

NMFS is conducting the November 16, 2000, workshop for interested industry members to provide guidance on the development and implementation of these performance standards.

## Special Accommodations

This workshop is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Alan Kinsolving at 907-586-7228 at least 7 working days prior to the workshop.

Dated: October 5, 2000.

Bruce C. Morehead,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries. National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 00-26083  Filed 10-10-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
#### STATE ex rel. C. M. BURCHAM, Drainage District No. 48 et al., Appellant, v. DRAINAGE DISTRICT NO. 25 et al. (J. B. Caneer, Exceptions), Respondent.

No. 44114.

Supreme Court of Missouri. Division No. 1.

Oct. 11, 1954.

*526Ford & Ford, Jones & Jones, Kennett, for appellant.

Bradley & Noble, Lawrence L. Bradley, Kennett, for respondent.

HYDE, Judge.

Condemnation by Drainage District No. 48 of Dunklin County of right-of-way for a levee and for flowage easement. The landowner exceptor J. B. Caneer owned 45.12 acres of whi-ch 8.11 acres were taken for right-of-way, 35.14 acres were left between the levee and the St. Francis River subject to flowage easement from overflow, and 1.87 acres left on the protected side of the levee. The award of the Commissioners to Caneer was $5,763.10 and both parties filed exceptions. The verdict of the jury was $10,350.00 for Caneer and the District has appealed.

We do not have jurisdiction of this appeal. Sec. 3, Art. V, Const., V.A. M.S. As hereinafter shown, the “amount in dispute, exclusive of costs,” does not exceed $7,500. “The record must show affirmatively that the amount in dispute exceeds $7,500, independent of all contingencies and speculation as to the amount in dispute, and a mere chance that the amount in dispute may exceed $7,500 is insufficient.” State ex rel. State Highway Commission of Missouri v. Schade, Mo.Sup., 265 S.W.2d 383; Kansas City v. National Engineering & Mfg. Co., Mo.Sup., 265 S.W.2d 384.

The issue in this case was the amount of damages to which Caneer was entitled. Since both parties filed exceptions to the Commission’s award, the amount of that award cannot be considered as the basis for determining the amount involved as was true in Kansas City v. National Engineering & Mfg. Co., supra. However, it was conceded that Caneer was entitled to damages and the District’s witnesses testified as to his damages up to $5,250. The lowest estimate made by any witness for the District was $3,493. Thus there is no dispute about Caneer being entitled to at least that much. The difference between the amount of the judgment Caneer seeks to have affirmed ($10,350) and the amount to which the District concedes he is entitled ($3,493) being less than $7,500, it is apparent that the amount necessary for our jurisdiction is not involved. Not only does the record herein fail to show affirmatively that the amount now in dispute exceeds $7,500, but, on the contrary, it affirmatively appears that the amount in dispute on this appeal is less than $7,500. No other ground for our jurisdiction is urged or appears from the record.

Therefore, the case is ordered transferred to the Springfield Court of Appeals.

All concur.
**Exhibit 12.2****Certification**I, David Mitchell, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report onForm 20-F ofViatel Holding (Bermuda) Limited;     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to statea material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this annualreport;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this annual report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, andfor, the periods presented in this annual report;     4. The company’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controlsand procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for thecompany and have:          a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or    caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed    under our supervision, to ensure that material information    relating to the company, including its consolidated    subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those    entities, particularly during the period in which this annual    report is being prepared;           b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s    disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report    our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure    controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by    this report based on such evaluation;           c) disclosed in this report any change in the    company’s internal control over financial reporting that    occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has    materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially    affect, the company’s internal control over financial    reporting;     5. The company’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the company’s auditorsand the audit committee of the company’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):          a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in    the design or operation of internal controls which could    adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process,    summarize and report financial data; and           b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves    management or other employees who have a significant role in the    company’s internal controls over financial reporting.     /s/ David Mitchell       Chief Financial OfficerDate: June 30, 2006
#### Denis Dougherty, Appellant, v County of Nassau et al., Respondents.

Order unanimously reversed in the exercise of discretion with costs and default judgment granted. Memorandum: After defendants’ failure to answer plaintiff’s summons and complaint, plaintiff’s counsel notified defendants’ counsel of the default and gave him an opportunity to serve an answer. Defendants failed to respond and plaintiff’s attorney then moved for a default. The court gave defendants a second opportunity to avoid the consequences of their default by denying plaintiff’s motion and vacating defendants’ default upon the condition that defendants pay a minimum penalty of $250 within 20 days of service of the order. Defendants failed to comply with that conditional order. Plaintiff’s attorney again moved for entry of a default judgment. In response, defendants failed to present in proper evidentiary form any reasonable excuse for the default or a meritorious defense (CPLR 3012 [d]). Absent such a showing, particularly under the facts of this case, Special Term abused its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment *(see, Egan v*
      *990
      *Federated Dept. Stores,*108 AD2d 718). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Nassau County, Wager, J.—default judgment.) Present—Boomer, J. P., Green, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.
#### Alice Ietto, Respondent, *v.*Greyhound Bus Lines, Inc., Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

November 8, 1957.

*Thomas M. Russell*and *Harry Kalman*for appellant.

*H. Lee Kanner*and *Clarence R. Risen*for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

Plaintiff-respondent has shown no facts indicating that the failure of her attorney to demand a jury at the time a note of issue was served and filed placing the case on the calendar was due to excusable error, and that it was not plaintiff’s intention to waive a jury trial. Moreover, the relief is sought by plaintiff over 16 months from the date that the case was placed on the calendar and to grant such relief at this late date would prejudice defendant’s rights.

The order granting discovery and inspection should be affirmed, with $10 costs and taxable disbursements. No opinion.

The order granting plaintiff’s application for leave to file jury demand *nunc pro tunc*should be unanimously reversed upon the law and facts, with $10 costs and taxable disbursements to appellant, and motion denied.

Pette, Hart and Di Giovanna, JJ., concur.

Order granting discovery affirmed, etc. Order granting leave to file jury demand reversed, etc.
Document

                            September 10, 2021


Multi Solutions II, Inc.
4400 Biscayne Boulevard; 10th Floor
Miami, FL 33137


Re:    Amendment No. 10 to Revolving Credit Promissory Note


Reference is made to the Revolving Credit Promissory Note (the “Revolver”) dated April 23, 2012 in consideration of the mutual agreements and covenants contained and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree to increase the Commitment Amount, as defined in the Revolver, from $550,000 to $600,000 and extend the Maturity Date of the Revolver to December 31, 2023 from December 31, 2022.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 10 to the Revolving Credit Promissory Note to be duly executed and attested, all as of the date first written above.


BORROWER:


MULTI SOLUTIONS II, INC., a Florida Corporation




By:      /s/ Robert M. Lundgren    
    Name:    Robert M. Lundgren
        Director


LENDER:


VECTOR GROUP LTD., a Delaware Corporation




By:      /s/ Marc N. Bell        
    Name:    Marc N. Bell
        Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary