alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.3

Annual Certification

Re: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust 2004-NC6 (the "Trust"),
    Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-NC6, issued pursuant
    to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as July 1, 2004 (the
    "Pooling and Servicing Agreement"), by and among Morgan Stanley ABS
    Capital I Inc., as depositor (the "Depositor"), HomEq Servicing Corporation,
    as servicer (the "Servicer"), and NC Capital Corporation, as responsible
    party

I, Arthur Q. Lyon, certify to the Depositor and the Trustee, and their
officers, directors and affiliates, and with the knowledge and intent that
they will rely upon this certification, that:

A review of the activities of the Servicer during the 2004 calendar year
and the Servicer's performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement
has been made under my supervision, the Servicer has complied with the
Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all material respects and, to the best
of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has materially fulfilled
all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement throughout
such calendar year.

Date: March 14, 2005

HomEq Servicing Corporation
/s/: Arthur Lyon
Arthur Q. Lyon
President
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3

                                                                    PO Box 84013
                                                          Columbus GA 31908-40l3
                                                               Tel. 800.784.5566

                                                      [GREENPOINT MORTGAGE LOGO]

TO: RWT HOLDINGS, INC.

      Re: Annual Statement as to Compliance by the Seller

      Pursuant to Section 6.04 of the Mortgage Loan Flow Purchase, Sale, and
Servicing Agreement between GreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. as Seller (the
"Seller") and RWT Holdings, Inc. as Purchaser, dated as of August 1, 2002 (the
"Agreement"), the undersigned officer of the Seller, hereby certifies as to the
following:

            (i) a review of the activities of the Seller during the calendar
      year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Applicable Period") and of the Seller's
      performance under the Agreement has been made under the direct supervision
      of the undersigned officer; and

            (ii) to the best knowledge of the undersigned officer, based on such
      review, the Seller has fulfilled all of its obligations under the
      Agreement throughout the Applicable Period, and there has been no known
      default in the fulfillment of the Seller's obligations throughout such
      Applicable Period.

                                           Very Truly Yours

                                           GREENPOINT MORTGAGE
                                           FUNDING, INC.
                                           as Seller

                                           /s/ Roy Briggs
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Name: Roy Briggs
                                           Title: Vice President

                AVISO IMPORTANTE PARA LAS PERSONAS HABLA ESPANOL
      Si usted no entiendo el contenido de esta carta por favor obtonga uno
                            traduccion immediamente

                  2300 BROOKSTONC CENTRE PKWY COLUMBUS GA 31904
       CUSTOMER SERVICE HOURS: MONDAY - FRIDAY, 8:30 AM - 8:00 PM, EASTERN
                            WWW.GREENPOINTSERVICE.COM
U.S. Department of Justice 

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE 

FACT SHEET 06/27/01 

Operation Crossroads International Overview 

During the period June 4 -20, 2001, the Immigration and Naturalization Service 

(INS), in cooperation with law enforcement agencies of 13 foreign governments in the 

Western Hemisphere, conducted the largest anti-smuggling operation of its kind. 

Information in this fact sheet summarizes key measures of the success of the operation. 

Apprehensions 

Migrants: 7,891 

U.S. Citizens: 7 

Total: 7,898 

Smugglers/Document Vendors 

Total: 75 alien smugglers/document vendors, including 7 U.S. citizens, identified 

or arrested.

Detained for Prosecution: 52

Narcotics Seizures 

Costa Rica, Panama, Mexico, Peru, Guatemala and El Salvador: 13 incidents. 

Total: Cocaine, 277 lbs.; marijuana, 157 lbs.; heroin, 12 lbs. plus additional 72 vials. 

Training 

Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, El Salvador: Number of local law enforcement and 

airline carrier staff trained in fraudulent document detection: 560 

Passenger Screenings 

Ecuador, Colombia, Haiti and Panama: 1,182 aircraft and vehicles and 18,879 

passengers.

Mexico: 62 buses and 1,600 passengers.

(more) 

Prepared by the Office of Public Affairs (202) 514-2648 Internet: www.ins.gov 
Crossroads International Overview 

Page 2 

Nationality Total 

Honduras 2,531 

El Salvador 2,183 

Guatemala 1,962 

Nicaragua 378 

Ecuador 234 

Peru 120 

Dominican Republic 112 

Mexico 62 

Jamaica 55 

Colombia 53 

Haiti 45 

India 34 

Costa Rica 22 

China 22 

Cuba 14 

Guyana 9 

Panama 8 

Albania 7 

Sudan 6 

Bulgaria 5 

Fiji 4 

Israel 3 

Nigeria 3 

Barbados 2 

Canada 2 

United Kingdom 2 

New Zealand 1 

Bahamas 1 

Chile 1 

Egypt 1 

Germany 1 

Greece 1 

Grenada 1 

Iran 1 

Korea 1 

Lebanon 1 

Pakistan 1 

South Africa 1 

Spain 1 

Venezuela 1 

TOTAL 7,891 

Location of Operation Arrests 

Mexico 5,626 

Guatemala 809 

El Salvador 573 

Costa Rica 126 

Honduras 392 

Jamaica 90 

Panama 72 

Dominican Republic 90 

Ecuador 37 

Haiti 36 

Peru 28 

Columbia 12 

TOTAL 7,891 

Document Type Number 

Photo-substituted/Fraudulent Passport 276 

Imposter to Valid Passport 32 

Photo-substituted/Fraudulent Visa 90 

Imposter to Visa 4 

Photo-substituted/Fraudulent I-551 6 

Imposter to I-551s 22 

Counterfeit U.S. Birth Certificate 4 

Imposter to U.S. Birth Certificate 14 

False Claim to U.S. Citizenship 3 

Other (counterfeit/fraudulent document ) 195 

TOTAL 646
Matagorda: Corrected APCA excel file

Dick Karp to: Erik Snyder 03/27/2012 04:50 PM

Cc: "Zarena Post"

From: "Dick Karp" <Dick.Karp@tceq.texas.gov>

To: Erik Snyder/R6/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "Zarena Post" <Zarena.Post@tceq.texas.gov>

History: This message has been forwarded.

1 attachment

Erik:

As we discussed, I attached a 2nd version of the corrected excel file.

And as you surmised the correction reduced the maximum contribution from Matagorda to the 

Northwest Harris County monitor.

THANKS!!

best,

Dick
DRAFT 

# • RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 17 

### 0 Omnibus Provision

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. FEDERAL RCRA CITATION ANALOGOUS STATE CITATION WAC 173-303 STATE ANALOG IS: EQUIV- LESS MORE BI ALENT STRIN- STRIN·**I~** GENT GENT 

### PART 270 - EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAM: THE HAZARDOUS WASTE**PER~** 

### PROGRAM SUBPART C - PERMIT CONDITIONS ESTABLISHING PERMIT CONDITIONS permit conditions necessary 270.32(b) -810(19) 

### X 

# •

•

CL 17.16· Revise Print 

### JUly 15, 1985 - Page 5 of 27
### §926. Authority to recover reassigned frequencies

#### (a) Authority of President

Subsequent to the withdrawal of assignment to Federal Government stations pursuant to section 924 of this title, the President may reclaim reassigned frequencies for reassignment to Federal Government stations in accordance with this section.

#### (b) Procedure for reclaiming frequencies

#### (1) Unallocated frequencies

If the frequencies to be reclaimed have not been allocated or assigned by the Commission pursuant to the 1934 Act [47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.], the President shall follow the procedures for substitution of frequencies established by section 924(b) of this title.

#### (2) Allocated frequencies

If the frequencies to be reclaimed have been allocated or assigned by the Commission, the President shall follow the procedures for substitution of frequencies established by section 924(b) of this title, except that the statement required by section 924(b)(1)(B) of this title shall include—

(A) a timetable to accommodate an orderly transition for licensees to obtain new frequencies and equipment necessary for its utilization; and

(B) an estimate of the cost of displacing spectrum users licensed by the Commission.

#### (c) Costs of reclaiming frequencies

The Federal Government shall bear all costs of reclaiming frequencies pursuant to this section, including the cost of equipment which is rendered unusable, the cost of relocating operations to a different frequency, and any other costs that are directly attributable to the reclaiming of the frequency pursuant to this section, and there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this section.

#### (d) Effective date of reclaimed frequencies

The Commission shall not withdraw licenses for any reclaimed frequencies until the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which a statement under section 924(b)(1)(B) of this title pertaining to such frequencies is received by the Commission.

#### (e) Effect on other law

Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or otherwise affect the authority of the President under section 706 of the 1934 Act (47 U.S.C. 606).

(Pub. L. 102–538, title I, §116, as added Pub. L. 103–66, title VI, §6001(a)(3), Aug. 10, 1993, 107 Stat. 386.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

For definition of the 1934 Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), see section 921(3) of this title.
PDR NO. 1263-16

RECEIVED I*

IN THE

TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AT AUSTIN, TEXAS TM^ toatrl CJlSf'

DEC 23 2016

'MS

CARL ANTHONY WILSON, FILED IN APPELLANT-PETITIONER, ^uRT0F CR(M/j^^^ v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

APPELLEE-RESPONDENT nwdi ACOSta, Clerk

PETITIONER'S MOTION TO SUSPEND RULE 9.3(b)(1) OF TEX. R. APP. PRO.

UNDER RULE 2 OF TEX. R. APP. PRO.

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS:

COMES NOW, Carl Anthony Wilson, Appellant-Petitioner, pro se and files

this motion asking this Honorable Court to suspend Rule 9.3(b)(1) requiring

11 copies of a petition for discretionary review be filed, under Rule 2 of

Tex. R. App. Pro. for good cause.

According to Tex. R. App. Pro. 9.3(b)(1), a party must file the original

and 11 copies of a petition for discretionary review with this Honorable Cou

rt. Petitioner is an incarcerated, pro se litigant whom does not have access

to a copying machine in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

It would be unduly burdensome to require a petitioner incarcerated that

does not have access to a copying machine to file 11 copies of the petition.

Good cause exists for this Honorable Court to suspend the required 11 copies

of the petition.

Petitioner asks that this Honorable Court allow him to file only an ori1.
ginal of the petition, and a copy to each party as required by the rules.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Petitioner prays that this Honorable Court sus

pend Tex. R. App. Pro. 9.3(b)(1), allowing him to only file an original of the

petition with this Court. Petitioner also prays for any other relief that is

just and equitable.

Respectfully Submitted,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that the foregoing motion to suspend was delivered to prison

authorities for mailing by U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid, first-class to the

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals,,Clerk of the Court, P.O. Box 12308, Austin,

TX 78711-2308, State Prosecuting Attorney, P.O. Box 13046, Austin, TX 78711-

3046 and the Smith County District Attorney, 100 N. Broadway Ave., Tyler, TX

75702 on this the f(p day of December, 2016.

'/UL

2.
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.1600 Performance standard.

Operations to discover, develop, and produce sulphur in the OCS shall be in accordance with a BOEM-approved Exploration Plan or Development and Production Plan and shall be conducted in a manner to protect against harm or damage to life (including fish and other aquatic life), property, natural resources of the OCS including any mineral deposits (in areas leased or not leased), the National security or defense, and the marine, coastal, or human environment.
#### JOHNSON, Respondent v. NEW YORK & P. TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

January 13, 1903.)

Action by James G. Johnson against the New York & Pennsylvania Telephone & Telegraph Company.

No opinion. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs and disbursements. Motion for leave to go to the Court of Appeals denied.
#### § 35.305 Definitions and other general requirements.

Definitions and other general requirements that apply to this subpart are found in subpart B of this part.
#### Nels Olson, appellee, v. Jerry Sproull, appellant.

Gen. No. 7,094.

Suit for wages. Judgment for plaintiff in justice of the peace court for $100. On appeal to circuit court plaintiff obtained judgment for $126.25 and costs. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Grundy county; the Hon. Samuel C. Stough, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed August 13, 1923.

Cornelius Reardon, for appellant. J. W. Rausch, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Jones

delivered the opinion of the court.
OLEM/OSRTI

Washington, DC 20460

NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)

***Proposed Site*** April 2016 

RIVERSIDE GROUND WATER

CONTAMINATION

Indianapolis, Indiana 

Marion County

 Site Location:

The Riverside Ground Water Contamination site consists of a chlorinated solvent plume located at the northern sector of 

the Fall Creek/White River confluence in the city of Indianapolis, Marion County, Indiana. The plume is contaminating five

wells in two municipal well fields.

 Site History:

Site investigations in 2013 confirmed elevated levels of the chlorinated solvents vinyl chloride and trichloroethene at levels 

approaching the U.S. EPA Safe Drinking Water Act’s Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) in water at two municipal 

wells. The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) has identified more than 160 active and former 

facilitiesthat could be contributing to the contamination, 12 of which are known to have chlorinated solvent releases in the 

area. Investigation into the origin of the contaminants is ongoing. 

 Site Contamination/Contaminants:

The ground water plume consists of the chlorinated solvents vinyl chloride and trichloroethene.

 Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment: 

A municipal water supply distribution system provides area residents with drinking water. The contaminated well fields 

provide water to approximately 55,000 residents in Indianapolis. 

 Response Activities (to date):

Water from the contaminated wells is blended with other well sources to lower contamination levels below the MCLand is

tested before the drinking water is distributed. 

 Need for NPL Listing:

The state of Indiana referred the site to the EPA because the site requires further investigation and long-term cleanup of the 

ground water. Other federal and state cleanup programs were evaluated, but are not viable at this time. The EPA received a 

letter of support for placing this site on the NPL from the state.

[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may change 

as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]

For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these 

substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet 

at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737.
§ 1204.212 What if I took relief for which I was ineligible? If you took relief under this subpart for a period for which you were not eligible, you: ( a ) May owe additional royalties and late payment interest determined under § 1218.54 from the date your additional payments were due until the date ONRR receives them; and
( b ) May be subject to civil penalties.
109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3439

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 201 North 3rd Street in Smithfield, North 

Carolina, as the ‘‘Ava Gardner Post Office’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2

•HR 3439 EH 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 201 North 3rd Street in Smithfield, North Caro4 lina, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ava Gardner 

5 Post Office’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Ava Gardner Post Office’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 6, 

2005. 

Attest:

Clerk. 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3439

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office’’. Smithfield, North Carolina, as the ‘‘Ava Gardner al Service located at 201 North 3rd Street in
§ 570.205 Eligible planning, urban environmental design and policy-planning-management-capacity building activities. ( a ) Planning activities which consist of all costs of data gathering, studies, analysis, and preparation of plans and the identification of actions that will implement such plans, including, but not limited to: ( 1 ) Comprehensive plans; ( 2 ) Community development plans; ( 3 ) Functional plans, in areas such as: ( i ) Housing, including the development of a consolidated plan; ( ii ) Land use and urban environmental design; ( iii ) Economic development; ( iv ) Open space and recreation; ( v ) Energy use and conservation; ( vi ) Floodplain and wetlands management in accordance with the requirements of Executive Orders 11988 and 11990; ( vii ) Transportation; ( viii ) Utilities; and ( ix ) Historic preservation. ( 4 ) Other plans and studies such as: ( i ) Small area and neighborhood plans; ( ii ) Capital improvements programs; ( iii ) Individual project plans (but excluding engineering and design costs related to a specific activity which are eligible as part of the cost of such activity under §§ 570.201-570.204); ( iv ) The reasonable costs of general environmental, urban environmental design and historic preservation studies; and general environmental assessment- and remediation-oriented planning related to properties with known or suspected environmental contamination. However, costs necessary to comply with 24 CFR part 58, including project specific environmental assessments and clearances for activities eligible for assistance under this part, are eligible as part of the cost of such activities under §§ 570.201-570.204. Costs for such specific assessments and clearances may also be incurred under this paragraph but would then be considered planning costs for the purposes of § 570.200(g); ( v ) Strategies and action programs to implement plans, including the development of codes, ordinances and regulations; ( vi ) Support of clearinghouse functions, such as those specified in Executive Order 12372; and ( vii ) Developing an inventory of properties with known or suspected environmental contamination. ( 5 ) [Reserved] ( 6 ) Policy—planning—management—capacity building activities which will enable the recipient to: ( 1 ) Determine its needs; ( 2 ) Set long-term goals and short-term objectives, including those related to urban environmental design; ( 3 ) Devise programs and activities to meet these goals and objectives; ( 4 ) Evaluate the progress of such programs and activities in accomplishing these goals and objectives; and ( 5 ) Carry out management, coordination and monitoring of activities necessary for effective planning implementation, but excluding the costs necessary to implement such plans. [53 FR 34439, Sept. 6, 1988, as amended at 56 FR 56127, Oct. 31, 1991; 60 FR 1915, Jan. 5, 1995; 71 FR 30035, May 24, 2006; 80 FR 42366, July 16, 2015; 85 FR 47910, Aug. 7, 2020]
### SUBCHAPTER II—GOVERNANCE OF PUBLIC SAFETY SPECTRUM
#### SPRAGUE NAT. BANK, Appellant, v. ERIE R. CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

January 9, 1903.)

Action by the Sprague National Bank against the Erie Railroad Company.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. See 57 N. Y. Supp. 844.
EPA Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0927

The following information is located in the confidential ity files of the Director, Climate Change Division and the Director, Stratospheric Protectio n Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC. This information is conf idential pending final determination by the Administrator and is not available for public inspection.

Fluorinated Gas Production Threshold Analysis Background Dat a :

• 2007 and 2008 production of CFCs and HCFCs reported by U.S. producers to the Stratospheric Protection Division.

• 2006 production of HFCs, PFCs, SF 6 , and NF 3 voluntarily reported by U.S. producers (through the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy ) to the Climate Change

Division.

The spreadsheet notes contain information on the facil ity production data for fluorinated gas production processes, including fluorinated GHG production a nd CFC and HCFC production processes. The confidential material is comprised of 4 pa ges.
#### FRANK v. MERCANTILE NAT. BANK.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 17, 1905.)

Action by Lee Frank against the Mercantile National Bank. No opinion. Motion for leave to go to the Court of Appeals granted.
#### Shimon Vinokur, Respondent, v Angelina Balzaretti et al., Appellants.

In an action for specific performance of a contract to convey real property, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 15, 1977, which denied the motion of a "friend” of defendant (see CPLR 1202, subd [a], par 2) to vacate a stipulation of settlement and conduct a hearing to determine whether the defendant requires a guardian ad litem to protect her interests in the action, and, if so, whether he should be so appointed. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and action remanded to Special Term for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. In our opinion, it was an abuse of discretion for Special Term to have denied, without a hearing, the motion to determine defendant’s fitness to adequately defend her rights in the light of the strong allegations of senility presented in the moving affidavits. The fact that she was adequately represented by counsel in the proceedings is of no consequence (see *Anderson v Anderson,*164 App Div 812). The public policy of this State, and of this court, is one of rigorous protection of the rights of the mentally infirm (see CPLR 321, 1201). Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Titone and Rabin, JJ., concur.