alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 34.2**

**REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Board of Directors and ShareholderWashington Mutual Bank

We have examined management’sassertion, included in the accompanying Servicer’s Report on Assessment ofCompliance, that Washington Mutual Bank and subsidiaries (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) Regulation AB for the securitizations of poolsof mortgage loans that were completed on or after January 1, 2006, and prior to January 1, 2007, for which the Company performed servicing functions set forth in Item 1122(d), that included one or more classes of publicly offered securities registered withthe SEC pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, and for which the Company has an obligation to deliver an Assessment of Compliance pursuant to Item 1122 (the “Platform”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii) and 1122 (d)(3)(i)(C-D), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Ourresponsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities related to the Platform,determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria during the specified period and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were limited to selectedservicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report and, accordingly, such samples may not have included servicing activities related to each specific asset-backed transaction included in the Platform. Further, an examination is notdesigned to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that ourexamination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006, for thePlatform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

March 14, 2007
§ 52.1007 Uniformity of size. ( a ) *General.* The factor of uniformity of size applies only to whole and pitted styles. The factor of uniformity of size in the styles of date pieces and macerated dates is not based on any detailed requirements and is not scored; the other three factors (color, absence of defects, and character is applicable) are scored and the total is multiplied by 100 and divided by 90, dropping any fractions to determine the total score.
( b ) (*A*) *classification.* Whole or pitted dates that are practically uniform in size may be given a score of 9 or 10 points. “Practically uniform in size” means that not more than a total of 10 percent, by weight, of the whole or pitted dates may be conspicuously larger or smaller than the approximate average size of the dates in the container.
( c ) (*B*) *classification.* If the whole or pitted dates or whole dry dates for processing are reasonably uniform in size, a score of 8 points may be given. Dates that fall into this classification shall not be graded above U.S. Grade B or U.S. Choice or U.S. Grade B (Dry) or U.S. Choice (Dry), whichever is applicable, regardless of the total score for the product (this is a limiting rule). “Reasonably uniform in size” means that not more than a total of 15 percent, by weight, of the whole or pitted dates may be conspicuously larger or smaller than the approximate average size of the dates in the container.
( d ) (*C*) *classification.* If the whole or pitted dates or whole dry dates for processing are fairly uniform in size, a score of 7 points may be given. Dates that fall into this classification shall not be graded above U.S. Grade C or U.S. Standard or U.S. Grade C (Dry) or U.S. Standard (Dry), whichever is applicable, regardless of the total score for the product (this is a limiting rule). “Fairly uniform in size” means that not more than a total of 20 percent, by weight, of the whole or pitted dates may be conspicuously larger or smaller than the approximate average size of the dates in the container.
( e ) (*SStd*) *classification.* Whole or pitted dates or whole dry dates for processing that fail to meet the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section may be given a score of 0 to 6 points and shall not be graded above Substandard, regardless of the total score for the product (this is a limiting rule).
35.014 Government property and title.

(a) The requirements in part 45 for establishing and maintaining control over Government property

apply to all R&D contracts.

(b) In implementing 31 U.S.C.6306, and unless an agency head provides otherwise, the policies in

paragraphs (1) through (4) following, regarding title to equipment (and other tangible personal

property) purchased by the contractor using Government funds provided for the conduct of basic or

applied scientific research, apply to contracts with nonprofit institutions of higher education and

nonprofit organizations whose primary purpose is the conduct of scientific research:

(1) If the contractor obtains the contracting officer’s advance approval, the contractor shall

automatically acquire and retain title to any item of equipment costing less than $5,000 (or a lesser

amount established by agency regulations) acquired on a reimbursable basis.

(2) If purchased equipment costs $5,000 (or a lesser amount established by agency regulations) or

more, and as the parties specifically agree in the contract, title may-

(i) Vest in the contractor upon acquisition without further obligation to the Government;

(ii) Vest in the contractor, subject to the Government’s right to direct transfer of the title to the

Government or to a third party within 12 months after the contract’s completion or termination

(transfer of title to the Government or third party shall not be the basis for any claim by the

contractor); or

(iii) Vest in the Government, if the contracting officer determines that vesting of title in the

contractor would not further the objectives of the agency’s research program.

(3) If title to equipment is vested in the contractor, depreciation, amortization, or use charges are

not allowable with respect to that equipment under any existing or future Government contract or

subcontract.

(4) If the contract is performed at a Government installation and there is a continuing need for the

equipment following contract completion, title need not be transferred to the contractor.

(c) The absence of an agreement covering title to equipment acquired by the contractor with

Government funds that cost $1,000 or more does not limit an agency’s right to act to vest title in a

contractor as authorized by 31 U.S.C.6306.

(d)

(1) Vesting title under paragraph (b) of this section is subject to civil rights legislation,

42 U.S.C.2000d. Before title is vested, the contractor must agree thatNo person in the United States or its outlying areas shall, on the ground of race, color, or national

origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to

discrimination under this contemplated financial assistance (title to equipment).

(2) By signing the contract, the contractor accepts and agrees to comply with this requirement.
(e) The policies in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) and paragraph (d) of this section are

implemented in the Government Property clauses.

Parent topic: Part 35 - Research and Development Contracting
#### § 4284.507 Eligibility for grant assistance.

Grants may be made to Nonprofit corporations and institutions of higher education. Grants may not be made to Public bodies.
FSA Response to Comments

Carol Lindsey Vice President Policy and Compliance Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation

P.O. Box 83100 Round Rock, TX 78683 Carol.lindsey@tgslc.com

Dear Ms. Lindsey,

Thanks you for your comment regarding the information collection associated with the Personal Authentication Service (PAS) for the FSA ID. Below please find a response to the comments identified in your submission.

Comment Summary: Recommendation to delete the opt ion to create a “limited FSA ID” FSA has removed the option to create a limited FSA ID.

Sincerely,

Catherine Metcalf Project Manager

Becky Pribyl

Aberdeen, SD 57401

Becky.pribyl@northern.edu

Dear Ms. P ribyl,

Thank you for your comments regarding the information collection associated with the Personal Authentication Service (PAS) for the FSA ID. Below please find responses to the summary comments identified in your submission.Comment Summary: New pr ocess is confusing and a barrier to completing the FAFSA

The new process mirrors industry best practices and was developed to minimize barriers while maintaining security. FSA is required to safeguard a user’s personal information. Without the changes

we are implementing, information could be vulnerable to an external attack.

Comment Summary: Request for number of Forgot PINs to be published on FSA’s website

FSA has referred this question to the appropriate business unit for review.

Comment Summary: Password should be valid for more than 15 months

User passwords are valid for 18 months.

Comment Summary: Duplication with FAFSA which asks for a password

To eliminate confusion, the FAFSA on the Web transaction password field will change to “Save Key.”

Sincerely,

Catherine Metcalf

Project Manager

Deanne Loonin

National Consumer Law Center (NCLC)

7 Winthrop Square

Boston, MA 02110

- 1245

dloonin@nclc.org

Dear Ms. Loonin,Thank you for your comments regarding the information collection associated with the Personal Authentication Service (PAS) for the FSA ID on behalf of the clients of the NCLC. Below please find responses to the comments identified in your submission.

Comment Summary: Balance of Security and Access

It is important to balance security and access for users. Specifically, the FSA ID password will be valid for 18 months before requiring it to be reset. Thank you for your recommendation to notify servicers when a password requires resetting. Thi s recommendation will be considered as part of future releases.

Comment Summary: Curbing Improper Third Party Access to Borrower Identification Information

FSA has referred this recommendation to the appropriate business unit for review.

Thank you again for taking the time to provide comment on the information collection associated with the new FSA ID, Person Authentication Service.

Sincerely,

Catherine Metcalf

Project Manager
EX-34 (c)
(logo) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers Center
300 Madison Avenue
New York NY 10017
Telephone (646) 471 3000
Facsimile (813) 286 6000

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Stockholder of Chase Home Finance LLC:


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing
Criteria, that Chase Home Finance LLC (the "Company") complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Regulation AB, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the
"Reporting Period"), for asset-backed securities transactions backed by prime
residential mortgages serviced on the Real Estate ("RE") servicing system where
the related asset-backed securities were outstanding during the Reporting Period
(the "Platform"), excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(i),
1122(d)(4)(ii) and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are not
applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform.
Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing
criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion
based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected
asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected
activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures
were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by
the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not
designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred
prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2006 for the asset-backed securities transactions backed by prime
residential mortgages serviced on the real estate ("RE") servicing system where
the related asset-backed securities were outstanding during the Reporting Period
is fairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

February 26, 2007
#### In the Matter of Mary Constantine, Petitioner, v Barbara Blum, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent State commissioner, dated January 12, 1979 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency which ordered the reduction of petitioner’s assistance, to recover certain overpayments of assistance. Petition granted, determination annulled, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and respondents are directed to return to petitioner any moneys already recouped pursuant to the January 12, 1979 determination. We find that there is insufficient evidence in the record as a whole to support the determination that petitioner willfully withheld information from the local agency regarding the receipt of income from unemployment insurance benefits and from employment (cf. *Matter of De Pietto v Toia,*67 AD2d 663). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
Second Department,

January, 1980

(January 7, 1980)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Solomon Klein, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, rendered November 13, 1978, convicting him of willful violation of the health laws, upon his guilty plea, and imposing a sentence of a fine of $2,000 and ordering him to make restitution of $156.50 to the patient fund of Silver Lake Nursing Home. Judgment affirmed (see *People vDeutsch,*71 AD2d 1029). We note that the defendant agreed, on the record, to "contribute” the sum of $156.50 to the patient fund at the nursing home in question. Therefore, the court’s use of the word "restitution” constituted a mere technical error which did not affect the defendant’s substantive rights (see CPL 470.50, subd 1). Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Titone and Mangano, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                          12,776
<SECURITIES>                                    54,428
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,147
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,469
<INVENTORY>                                        625
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                79,186
<PP&E>                                          18,084
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,909
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  88,944
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,310
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           135
<OTHER-SE>                                      66,753
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    88,944
<SALES>                                         22,617
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,819
<CGS>                                            4,589
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,351
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,151
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   328
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,120
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,448
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,672
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,672
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.27
        

</TABLE>
#### Nelson C. Reid et al., Respondents, *v.*The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, Appellant.

(Argued June 18, 1884 ;

decided June 27, 1884.)

*Charles B. Alexander*for appellant.

*F. J. Buypignac*for respondents.

Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

AdolescentsCase StudiesCitizen ParticipationCitizenshipCitizenship EducationComparative EducationEducational ResearchPolitical AttitudesSecondary EducationSocial StudiesStudent AttitudesStudent SurveysTeacher Surveys

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
52.223-8 [Reserved]

Parent topic: 52.223 [Reserved]
**Exhibit 35.2**

** **

**WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.**

** **

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATEANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

 

            I, Barbara Campbell, an authorized officer of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. (the “AdministrativeAgent”), do hereby certify to WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. (the “Depositor”) and Washington Mutual Bank (the “Servicer”), pursuant to the Amended and Restated Administrative Agent Agreement dated as of February 1, 2005 (the“Servicing Agreement”) by and between Washington Mutual Bank, as servicer, and the Administrative Agent the following with respect to WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2006-AR14 for the 2006 fiscal year (the “RelevantYear”):

 

1.        A review of the activities of the Servicer during the Relevant Year and of performance under the ServicingAgreement has been made under my supervision.

2.        To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theServicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Relevant Year.

 

Dated as of February 22, 2007.

 
|  

__/s/ Barbara Campbell________________

Name:  Barbara Campbell

Title:    First Vice President |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### § 60.104 Consumer package.

*Consumer package* means any container or wrapping in which a covered commodity is enclosed for the delivery and/or display of such commodity to retail purchasers.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2778 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2778

              To suspend temporarily the duty on ethanol.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 10, 2006

Mr. Schumer (for himself and Mr. Gregg) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
              To suspend temporarily the duty on ethanol.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Ethanol Fuel Supply Act of 2006''.

SEC. 2. ETHANOL.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.05.36      Ethyl alcohol       Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (provided for in                                                   31/2006
                         subheadings
                         2207.10.60 and
                         2207.20) or any
                         mixture
                         containing such
                         ethyl alcohol
                         (provided for in
                         heading 2710 or
                         3824) if such
                         ethyl alcohol or
                         mixture is to be
                         used as a fuel or
                         in producing a
                         mixture of
                         gasoline and
                         alcohol, a
                         mixture of a
                         special fuel and
                         alcohol, or any
                         other mixture to
                         be used as fuel
                         (including motor
                         fuel provided for
                         in subheading
                         2710.11.15,
                         2710.19.15 or
                         2710.19.21), or
                         is suitable for
                         any such uses....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
    (c) Effect on Heading 9901.00.50.--Heading 9901.00.50 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended in the 
effective period column, by inserting ``or during any period during 
which heading 9902.05.36 is in effect'' after ``is not in effect''.
                                 <all>
```