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

 

Re:          **Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2012-C4, Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2012-C4**(the “Transaction”), issued pursuant tothe Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2012 (the “Pooling andServicing Agreement”), executed in connection with the Transaction(capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth inthe Pooling and Servicing Agreement).

 

 

               I, George Kok, certify that:

 

               1.             Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required tobe filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of MorganStanley Capital I Trust 2012-C4 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

               2.            Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 

 

               3.            Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this reportis included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; 

 

               4.            Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in thisreport under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in theExchange Act periodic reports, the servicer(s) have fulfilled their obligationsunder the servicing agreement(s) in all material respects; and

 

               5.             Allof the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to beincluded in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB andExchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to thisreport, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any materialinstances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed inthis report on Form 10-K.  

 

               In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on informationprovided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

 

·        Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asTrustee

·        Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asCertificate Administrator

·        Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asCustodian

·        KeyBank National Association, as MasterServicer

·        Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNCBank, National Association, as Special Servicer

·        Pacific Life Insurance Company, asOperating Advisor

·        Berkadia Commercial Mortgage LLC, asPrimary Servicer

 

 

Date:  March 29, 2019

 

 

By /s/ George Kok

Name: George Kok

Title: President
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 9348]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3580]



[[Page 9348]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-2856-000]


Sand Drag LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate 
Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Sand Drag LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an 
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is March 2, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance 
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#81c7c4d3c2ceefede8efe4d2f4f1f1eef3f5c1e7e4f3e2afe6eef7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9fd9dacddcd0f1f3f6f1facceaefeff0edebdff9faedfcb1f8f0e9">[email protected]</span></a> 
or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: February 10, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-3580 Filed 2-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 115.503 May money in an IIM account be withdrawn after the death of an account holder but prior to the end of the probate proceedings? ( a ) If you are responsible for making the funeral arrangements of a decedent who had an IIM account and you have an immediate need for emergency assistance to pay for funeral arrangements prior to burial, you may make a request to the BIA for up to $1,000 from the decedent's IIM account if the decedent's IIM account has more than $2,500 in the account at the date of death.
( b ) You must apply for this assistance and submit to the BIA an original itemized estimate of the cost of the service to be rendered and the identification of the service provider.
( c ) We may approve reasonable costs up to $1,000 that are necessary for the burial services.
( d ) We will make payments directly to the providers of the service(s).
# INDAGO

VERTICAL TAKE-OFF AND LANDING (VTOL) SYSTEM

FOR COMMERICAL AND MILITARY MARKETS

# HANDCONTROLLER

• For small UAS; fixed wing and VTOL

• Stand-alone, untethered operation

• Secure digital data link

• Windows 8.1 based operating system

• Onboard recording of HD video and stills

• Small ergonomic design with large outdoor

readable touchscreen

• Ruggedized and weather resistant

• Lightweight: 2.7 -3.3 lbs.

• Long run time (4

- 8 hours) 

# FEATURES

• Man packable, compact folding design

• Setup in 60 seconds, airborne in 2.5 minutes

• Whisper quiet, rugged, all-weather capability

• Configurable Failsafe behaviors

• Operation via handcontroller and/or full Virtual

CockpitTM GCS

• Hot-swappable payload options for ISR, search &

rescue, inspection and agriculture

• Industry-leading image stabilization with vision

tracking



### Specifications

Endurance Up to 50 minutes with payload

Payload Multiple, hot-swappable payloads

Range 2-10 km (radio and antenna dependent)

Dimensions 32 x 32 x 7 in (12 x 9 x 7 folded)

Weight 5 lbs. (2,300g) with ION payload

Operating Altitude 10-500 ft AGL (typical)

GCS touchscreen handcontroller or

laptop-based Virtual Cockpit 

### Lockheed Martin

Mission Systems and Training (MST)

300 M Streeet, SE

Washington, D.C. 20003

www.lockheedmartin.com/unmanned

© 2015 Lockheed Martin Corporation

PIRA# OWG20150400436971 

# EXPLORE.

EXAMINE.

INVESTIGATE.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 4 

ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER 

61 FORSYTH STREET 

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960 

To Whom It May Concern: 

Please find enclosed for your review and comment the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) 

for designation of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) offshore Jacksonville, Florida. 

This document is being circulated to agencies and the public for a 45-day comment period. 

The DEIS was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, in cooperation with 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Jacksonville District. The DEIS provides the information 

necessary to evaluate the need for and alternatives to the designation of a new ODMDS or expansion of 

the existing Jacksonville ODMDS pursuant to Section 102 of the Marine Protection, Research and 

Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended. The DEIS identifies two preferred alternatives. Alternative 1 

consists of expansion of the existing ODMDS to the south and east. Alternative 2 consists of designation 

of a new ODMDS south of the existing ODMDS. A final preferred alternative will be selected in the 

Final EIS based on agency and public input. The purpose of the ODMDS is to accommodate disposal of 

dredged material generated over the next 50 years from the Jacksonville Harbor Navigation Project, 

Naval Station Mayport and the proposed Jacksonville Harbor Deepening Project. All dredged material 

must meet the environmental criteria established in the EPA's Ocean Dumping Regulations. The DEIS 

contains a draft Site Management and Monitoring Plans (Appendix F) for each alternative site. In 

addition, the DEIS contains a Biological Assessment (Appendix C) in accordance with Section 7 ofthe 

Endangered Species Act and an Essential Fish Habitat Assessment (Appendix D) in accordance with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. 

Comments on the DEIS (including the draft SMMP) must be received by the EPA at the address below 

by or 45 days after publication of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. 

U.S. EPA, Region 4 

ATTN: Ms. Jennifer S. Derby, Chief 

Wetlands and Marine Regulatory Section 

Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 

61 Forsyth Street, SW 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 

derby.jennifer@epa.gov 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed wrth Vegetable on Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer) 
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Mr. Christopher McArthur at 

(404) 562-9391 or mcarthur.christopher@epa.gov. 

f 

Enclosure 

Sincerely, 

/J~?f2L. Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming 

Regional Administrator
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsA Comparison of Brayton and Stirling Space Nuclear Power Systems for Power Levels from 1 Kilowatt to 10 MegawattsAn analytical study was conducted to assess the performance and mass of Brayton and Stirling nuclear power systems for a wide range of future NASA space exploration missions. The power levels and design concepts were based on three different mission classes. Isotope systems, with power levels from 1 to 10 kW, were considered for planetary surface rovers and robotic science. Reactor power systems for planetary surface outposts and bases were evaluated from 10 to 500 kW. Finally, reactor power systems in the range from 100 kW to 10 mW were assessed for advanced propulsion applications. The analysis also examined the effect of advanced component technology on system performance. The advanced technologies included high temperature materials, lightweight radiators, and high voltage power management and distribution.Document ID20010016863Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsMason, Lee S.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 2000Subject CategorySpacecraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:210593E-12551NASA/TM-2001-210593Meeting InformationMeeting: Space Technology and Applications International ForumLocation: Albuquerque, NMCountry: United StatesStart Date: February 11, 2001End Date: February 14, 2001Sponsors:Institute for Space and Nuclear Power StudiesFunding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 953-20-0DDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20010016863.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
§ 426.204 Responsibility for responding to requests. ( a ) *In general.* In determining which records are responsive to a request, an agency ordinarily will include only records in its possession as of the date that it begins its search. If any other date is used, the agency must inform the requester of that date. A record that is excluded from the requirements of the FOIA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(c), is not considered responsive to a request.
( b ) *Authority to grant or deny requests.* The Chief FOIA Officer or designee is authorized to grant or to deny any requests for records.
( c ) *Consultation, referral, and coordination.* When reviewing records in response to a request, the Commission will determine whether another agency of the Federal Government is better able to determine whether the record is exempt from disclosure under the FOIA. As to any such record, the Commission will proceed in one of the following ways: ( 1 ) *Consultation.* When records originated within the Commission, but contain within them information of interest to another agency or other Federal Government office, the Commission will typically consult with that other entity prior to making a release determination.
( 2 ) *Referral.* When the Commission believes that a different agency is best able to determine whether to disclose the record, the Commission typically should refer the responsibility for responding to the request regarding that record to that agency. Ordinarily, the agency that originated the record is presumed to be the best agency to make the disclosure determination. Whenever an agency refers any part of the responsibility for responding to a request to another agency, it must document the referral, maintain a copy of the record that it refers, and notify the requester of the referral, the name of the agency, and the FOIA agency contact.
( 3 ) *Coordination.* The standard referral procedure is not appropriate where disclosure of the identity of the agency to which the referral would be made could harm an interest protected by an applicable exemption, such as the exemptions that protect personal privacy or national security interests. In such instances, in order to avoid harm to an interest protected by an applicable exemption, the agency that received the request should coordinate with the originating agency to seek its views on the disclosability of the record. The release determination for the record that is the subject of the coordination should then be conveyed to the requester by the agency that originally received the request.
( d ) *Timing of response to consultations and referrals.* All consultations and referrals received by the Commission will be handled according to the date that the first agency received the perfected FOIA request.
155 So.2d 533

#### Ray COCHRAN v. STATE.

4 Div. 172.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 11, 1963.

Richmond M. Flowers, Atty. Gen., and Paul T. Gish, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

J. Hubert Farmer, Dothan, opposed.

LAWSON, Justice.

Petition of the State, by its Attorney General, for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that Court in Cochran v. State, 155 So.2d 530.

Writ denied.

LIVINGSTON, C. J., and GOODWYN and COLEMAN, JJ., concur.
##### 



MIDLAND CAPITAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION
 EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 results of operations of the Company.
 Date:  November 10, 2005
    BY:
    
    /s/ Paul ZogasPaul ZogasPresident, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
### Bathygalea, a genus of moderately deep-water and deep-water Miocene to Recent cassids

By: W. P. WoodringA.A. Olsson

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp314B

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
§ 15.405 What happens if BIA identifies that property was incorrectly included in a decedent's inventory? If, after issuance of a decision, BIA identifies certain trust or restricted property or an interest therein that was incorrectly included in a decedent's inventory, then BIA will submit a petition to OHA for an order notifying all heirs or devisees of the correction and addressing any changes in distribution of property resulting from the correction. ( a ) The petition must identify the property that BIA removed from the estate and explain why the property should not have been included, and must include the following: ( 1 ) A newly issued certified inventory describing the trust or restricted land remaining in decedent's estate, if applicable;
( 2 ) A copy of the decision, or modification or distribution order and corresponding inventory issued in the probate case from which BIA discovered that the property was incorrectly included in the decedent's estate, if applicable;
( 3 ) A statement identifying each property in the decedent's estate that decreased the total share of the ownership of the allotment to less than 5 percent as a result of the removal of property from the estate; and
( 4 ) A certification that all interested parties have been associated to the case and their names and addresses are current.
( b ) BIA may submit the petition at any time after issuance of the decision.
( c ) BIA must send a copy of the petition and all supporting documentation to each interested party at the time of filing and include certification of service.
[86 FR 72082, Dec. 20, 2021, as amended at 88 FR 39769, June 20, 2023]
## **EXHIBIT 31.2**

## ** **

## **CERTIFICATION**

## ** **

I, David A. Chaput, ChiefFinancial Officer, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Doe RunResources Corporation;

 

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

 

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

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)          Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)         Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

 

(c)          Disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

 

(a)          Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)         Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: June 14, 2005 |
|--------------------------|
|                     |
|                     |
| By:                      | /s/ David A. Chaput |   |
| David A. Chaput          |
| Chief Financial Officer  |

 

----