alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**WAMU ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORP.**

** **

**RESTATED OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

 

I, Thomas G. Lehmann, certify that:

 

1.         I have reviewed this report on Form 10–K and all reports on Form 10–D required to be filed in respect of theperiod covered by this report on Form 10–K of WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR11 Trust (the ‘‘Exchange Act periodic reports’’);

 

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

 

3.         Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form10–D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.         Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB,and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material respects; and

 

5.         All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their relatedattestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a–18 and 15d–18 have been included as anexhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10–K. 

 

 

Date:  As of March 15,2007

|   |   | /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann                                                                        |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Name:  ThomasG. Lehmann                                                                 |
|   |   | Title:   President and Senior Officer in Charge of Securitization of the Depositor |
§ 305.66 Notice, corrective action year, and imposition of penalty. ( a ) If a State is found by the Secretary to be subject to a penalty as described in § 305.61, the OCSE will notify the State, in a record, of such finding.
( b ) The notice will: ( 1 ) Explain the deficiency or deficiencies which result in the State being subject to a penalty, indicate the amount of the potential penalty, and give reasons for the finding; and
( 2 ) Specify that the penalty will be assessed in accordance with the provisions of 45 CFR 262.1(b) through (e) and 262.7 if the State is found to have failed to correct the deficiency or deficiencies cited in the notice during the automatic corrective action year (i.e., the succeeding fiscal year following the year with respect to which the deficiency occurred.)
( c ) The penalty under § 305.61 of this part will be assessed if the Secretary determines that the State has not corrected the deficiency or deficiencies cited in the notice by the end of the corrective action year.
( d ) Only one corrective action period is provided to a State with respect to a given deficiency where consecutive findings of noncompliance are made with respect to that deficiency. In the case of a State against which the penalty is assessed and which failed to correct the deficiency or deficiencies cited in the notice by the end of the corrective action year, the penalty will be effective for any quarter after the end of the corrective action year and ends for the first full quarter throughout which the State IV-D program is determined to have corrected the deficiency or deficiencies cited in the notice.
( e ) A consecutive finding occurs only when the State does not meet the same criterion or criteria cited in the notice in paragraph (a) of this section.
[65 FR 82208, Dec. 27, 2000, as amended at 81 FR 93568, Dec. 20, 2016]
§ 1156.15 Complaints. ( a ) Any person, individually or as a member of a class or on behalf of others, may file a complaint with the Endowment, alleging discrimination prohibited by the Act and the regulations in this part based on an action occurring on or after July 1, 1979. A complainant shall file a complaint within 180 days from the date that the complainant first had knowledge of the alleged act of discrimination. However, for good cause, the Endowment may extend this time limit. The Endowment will consider the date a complaint is filed to be the date upon which the complaint is sufficient to be processed.
( b ) Complaints must include a written statement identifying the parties involved, describing the alleged violation, and stating the date on which the complainant first had knowledge of the alleged violation. Complaints must be signed by the complainant. The Endowment will return any complaint that does not contain the necessary information, that is not signed by the complainant, or that is not within the Endowment's jurisdiction for any other reason. The Endowment will provide an explanation for all such returned complaints.
( c ) The Endowment will attempt to facilitate the filing of complaints wherever possible, including taking the following measures: ( 1 ) Widely disseminating information regarding the obligations of recipients under the Act and the regulations in this part.
( 2 ) Notifying the complainant and the recipient of their rights and obligations under the complaint procedure, including the right to have a representative at all stages of the complaint procedure.
( 3 ) Notifying the complainant and the recipient (or their representatives) of their right to contact the Endowment for information and assistance regarding the complaint resolution process.
###### Editorial Note on Part 302

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 64 FR 6247, Feb. 9, 1999.

#### § 302.40 [Reserved]
§ 2522.235 Is there a limit on the number of terms an individual may serve in an AmeriCorps State and National program? Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 46034 , May 28, 2024.
( a ) *General limitation.* An individual may receive the benefits described in § 2522.240 through § 2522.250 for no more than four terms of service in an AmeriCorps State and National program, regardless of whether those terms were served on a full-, part-, or reduced part-time basis, consistent with the limitations in § 2526.50.
( b ) *Early release.* Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, a term of service from which an individual is released for compelling personal circumstances or for cause counts as one of the terms of service for which an individual may receive the benefits described in § 2522.240 through § 2522.250.
( c ) *Release prior to serving fifteen percent of a term.* If a person is released for reasons other than misconduct prior to completing fifteen percent of a term of service, the term will not be considered one of the terms of service for which an individual may receive the benefits described in §§ 2522.240 through 2522.250.
[75 FR 51410, Aug. 20, 2010]
#### § 1801.60 Renewal of scholarship.

It is the intent of the Foundation to provide scholarship awards for a period not to exceed a total of four academic years, only in accordance with the regulations established by its Board of Trustees, and subject to an annual review for compliance with the requirements of this part.
#### George C. Rankin, as Receiver of the City National Bank of Buffalo, Appellant, *v.*Sarah J. Clement, as Executrix of James W. Clement, Deceased, Respondent.

*Sankin v. Glement,*123 App. Div. 916, affirmed.

(Argued December 18, 1908;

decided January 12, 1909.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered February 13, 1908, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a decision of the court ón trial at an Equity Term in an action to compel specific performance of an alleged contract of sale.

*James O. Moore*and *Fred D. Corey*for appellant.

*William D. Van Pelt*and *John E. Selkirk*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Werner, Hiscook and Chase, JJ.
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In the Matter of 

Audit Division Recommendation 

Memorandum on the National Council of 

Farmer Cooperative Co-op/PAC (NCFC) 

(All-26) 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Shawn Woodhead Werth, Secretary and Clerk of the Federal Blection 

Conunission, do hereby certify that on June 18,2012, the Commission decided 

by a vote of 6-0 to approve the Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum 

on the National Council of Farmer Cooperative Co-op/PAC (NCFC) (Al 1-26), 

as recommended in the Memorandum &om the Chief Compliance Officer and 

Audit Division dated May 16,2012. 

Commissioners Bauerly, Hunter, McGahn II, Petersen, Walther, and 

Weintraub voted affirmatively for the decision. 

Attest: 

Date' Shawn Woodhead Werth 

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission
EXHIBIT 35.2

         Annual Servicer's Statement as to Compliance for the year ended
                                December 31, 2006
                         (The Huntington National Bank)


                   SERVICER ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

I, Timothy Barber certify that I am a duly elected senior vice president of The
Huntington National Bank, a national banking association (the "Bank"),
authorized to execute and deliver this certificate in the name and on behalf of
the Bank, as required by Section 6.02 of the Servicing Agreement, dated as of
August 2, 2006 (the "Servicing Agreement"), among the Bank, as servicer (in such
capacity, the "Servicer"), and Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, as master
servicer, and further certify in the name of and behalf of the Servicer, that:

         1. A review of the activities of the Servicer and of the performance of
its obligations under the Servicing Agreement during the period from August 2,
2006 to and including December 31, 2006 (the "Review Period") was conducted
under the supervision of the undersigned.

         2. Based on my knowledge and such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
its obligations under the Servicing Agreement during the applicable Review
Period and there is no significant deficiency known by the undersigned with
respect to the applicable Review Period which has not been disclosed herein.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name.

Dated: March 23, 2007                               By: /s/ Timothy Barber
                                                        ------------------
                                                    Name:  Timothy Barber
                                                    Title: Senior Vice President
The Latest Earthquakes application supports most recent browsers,            view supported browsers.          

            If the application does not load, try our             legacy Latest Earthquakes application.          

        Javascript must be enabled to view our earthquake maps. To access USGS earthquake        information without using javascript, use our                  Magnitude 2.5+ Earthquakes, Past Day ATOM Feed                or our other earthquake feeds.
§ 160.420 Notice of proposed determination. ( a ) If a penalty is proposed in accordance with this part, the Secretary must deliver, or send by certified mail with return receipt requested, to the respondent, written notice of the Secretary's intent to impose a penalty. This notice of proposed determination must include— ( 1 ) Reference to the statutory basis for the penalty;
( 2 ) A description of the findings of fact regarding the violations with respect to which the penalty is proposed (except that, in any case where the Secretary is relying upon a statistical sampling study in accordance with § 160.536 of this part, the notice must provide a copy of the study relied upon by the Secretary);
( 3 ) The reason(s) why the violation(s) subject(s) the respondent to a penalty;
( 4 ) The amount of the proposed penalty and a reference to the subparagraph of § 160.404 upon which it is based.
( 5 ) Any circumstances described in § 160.408 that were considered in determining the amount of the proposed penalty; and
( 6 ) Instructions for responding to the notice, including a statement of the respondent's right to a hearing, a statement that failure to request a hearing within 90 days permits the imposition of the proposed penalty without the right to a hearing under § 160.504 or a right of appeal under § 160.548 of this part, and the address to which the hearing request must be sent.
( b ) The respondent may request a hearing before an ALJ on the proposed penalty by filing a request in accordance with § 160.504 of this part.
[71 FR 8426, Feb. 16, 2006, as amended at 74 FR 56131, Oct. 30, 2009]
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

March 1, 2023 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: Patricia C. Orrock 

Chief Compliance Officer 

Joshua Blume 

Attorney 

Jessica Selinkoff 

Assistant General Counsel 

Compliance Advice 

FROM: Neven F. Stipanovic 

Associate General Counsel 

Policy Division 

Dayna C. Brown 

Assistant Staff Director 

Audit Division 

SUBJECT: Draft Final Audit Report on the Communications Workers of America – 

COPE Political Contributions Committee (LRA 1162) 

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed the proposed Draft Final Audit Report 

(“DFAR”) on the Communications Workers of America – COPE Political Contributions 

Committee. The DFAR contains two findings: Misstatement of Financial Activity (Finding 1) 

and Disclosure of Occupation and Name of Employer (Finding 2). We concur with the findings. 

If you have any questions, please contact Joshua Blume, the attorney assigned to this audit.
Sanitized Version

of EHS
§ 30.21 Scope and application. ( a ) *Scope.* The standards set forth in this subpart apply to the compromise of debts pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3711. The Secretary may exercise such compromise authority for debts arising out of activities of, or referred or transferred for collection services to, the Department when the amount of the debt then due, exclusive of interest, penalties, and administrative costs, does not exceed $100,000, or any higher amount authorized by the Attorney General.
( b ) *Application.* Unless otherwise provided by law, when the principal balance of a debt, exclusive of interest, penalties, and administrative costs, exceeds $100,000 or any higher amount authorized by the Attorney General, the authority to accept a compromise rests with Justice. The Secretary shall evaluate the compromise offer, using the factors set forth in this subpart. If an offer to compromise any debt in excess of $100,000 is acceptable to the Department, the Secretary shall refer the debt to the Civil Division or other appropriate litigating division in Justice using a Claims Collection Litigation Report (CCLR), which may be obtained from Justice's National Central Intake Facility. The referral shall include appropriate financial information and a recommendation for the acceptance of the compromise offer. Justice approval is not required if the Secretary rejects a compromise offer.
Exhibit 11


                            SalesRepCentral.com, Inc.
                  Schedule of Computation of Earnings Per Share

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                         Nine Months ended             Three Months Ended
                                                             March 31,                      March 31,
                                                         2001          2000            2001           2000
                                                     -----------    ----------     -----------    ------------
<S>                                                  <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
Net Earnings (Loss) Available
  for Common Stockholders                            $   101,069    $ (404,567)    $   223,558    $   (719,676)
                                                     ===========    ==========     ===========    ============

Basic EPS - Weighted Average Shares Outstanding       15,117,512    15,114,848      15,117,512      13,045,331
                                                     ===========    ==========     ===========    ============

Basic Earnings (Loss) Per Share                      $      0.01    $    (0.03)    $      0.01    $      (0.06)
                                                     ===========    ==========     ===========    ============

Basic EPS - Weighted Average Shares Outstanding       15,117,512    15,114,848      15,117,512      13,045,331

Effect of Diluted Securities:
  Convertible Preferred Stock (1)                     14,525,000            --      14,525,000              --
                                                     -----------    ----------     -----------    ------------

Diluted EPS - Weighted Average Shares Outstanding     29,642,512    15,114,848      29,642,512      13,045,331
                                                     ===========    ==========     ===========    ============

Diluted Earnings (Loss) Per Share                    $      0.00    $    (0.03)    $      0.01    $      (0.06)
                                                     ===========    ==========     ===========    ============
</TABLE>

(1)  The Company's  outstanding  convertible preferred stock has an antidilutive
     effect on net loss per share for the  three and nine  month  periods  ended
     March 31,  2000.  As a result,  such amounts  have been  excluded  from the
     computations of diluted loss per share.
#### Sadie Brennan, Appellant, *v.*The City of New York, Respondent.

*Brennan*v. *City of Sew Torh,*130 App. Div. 267, affirmed.

(Argued December 15, 1909;

decided January *4,*1910.).

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered January 21, 1909, which affirmed a judgment entered upon an order of the court at a Trial Term setting aside a verdict in favor of- plaintiff and dismissing the complaint in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through defendant’s negligence.

*Robert Stewart*for appellant.

*Francis K.*Pendleton, *Corporation Counsel (James D. Bell*and *James W. Covert*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Yann, Willard Bartlett, Hisoook and Chase, JJ.
EX-35 (a)

(logo) imb
IndymacBank


REG AB 1123 Statement of Compliance


I am an authorized officer for IndyMac Bank, F.S.B, the servicer for the
transactions listed on the attached schedule and I certify:

a) A review of IndyMac Bank's activities during the reporting period and of its
performance under the applicable servicing agreement has been made under my
supervision.

b) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, except as set forth below
IndyMac Bank has fulfilled all of its obligations under the agreement in all
material respects throughout the reporting period.

c) None


By: /s/ Robert M. Abramian
Robert M. Abramian
First Vice President
Home Loan Servicing
Investor Reporting
Indymac Bank


By: /s/ Bart Vincent
Bart Vincent
First Vice President
HLS-Finance
Financial
Indymac Bank


Prepared for: Wells Fargo Bank

Date: February 28, 2007

Ref: EXHIBIT A


www.indymacbank.com

7700 W. Parmer Lane, Bldg D, Austin, TX 78729
Tel: 512.250.2700


(page)


EXHIBIT A

849 GSR 2006-1F 1/30/06
902 BSALTA 2006-1 1/30/06
840 DBALT 2006-AR1 1/31/06
918 BAYVIEW 2006-A 02/08/06
213 GSR 2006-2F
214 GSR 2006-3F 03-30-06
159 GSR 2006-0A1 8/24/06
229 MASTR 2006-1 03-29-06
223 DBALT 2006-AF1 03-31-06
231 HARBORVIEW 2006-2
233 LUMINENT 2006-3 (4-28-06)
287 LUMINENT 2006-5 (6-29-06)
454 LUMINENT CONDUIT 12MAT WLS 11/27/06
5001 LUMINENT 12MAT CONDUIT WLS 12/27/06
235 BAFC 2006-D 04/28/06
219 GSR 2006-5F 5/26/06
809 GSR 2006-6F (GS) 6/30/06
808 HARBORVIEW 2006-6 6/30/06
807 DBALTA 2006-AR 2 6/30/06
921 BSALTA 2006-4 6/30/06
285 MALT 2006-3 (6-30-06)
141 BSALTA 2006-5 7/28/06
278 GSAMP 2006-S4 (6-9-06)
199 HARBORVIEW 2006-8 (GW) 8/30/06
430 LUMINENT 2006-6 092806
432 MLMI 2006-F1 (ML) 09/29/06
379 CSMC 2006-8 09/29/06
378 BAFC 2006-H 9/29/06
178 MARM 2006-0A2 11/15/06
296 GSAA 2006-17 10/30/06
297 DBALT 2006-AR5 10/30/06
442 CSMC 2006-9 10/30/2006
440 ITF CSAB 2006-3 10/31/2006
456 JPALT 2006-S4 11/29/06
457 BCAP 2006-AA2 11/30/2006
458 ACE 2006-SD3 11/30/06
4101 DBALT 2006-AR6 12/15/06
4102 HARBORVIEW 2006-14 12/22/06
4103 MSM 2006-17XS 12/28/06
4104 GSR 2006-10F 12/29/06
4110 LUMINENT 2006-7 12/14/2006
4105 JPMMT 2006-S4 12/21/06
4106 GSAA 2006-20 12/29/06
4111 BSALTA 2006-8 12/28/06
Additional Resources 1

Tacoma

- Pierce County PM 2.5 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan 

# Appendix E . Additional Resources

Websites

 Ecology’s Tacoma

- Pierce County Nonattainment Area Website

 Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Nonattainment Area Website

 Tacoma

- Pierce county Clean Air Task Force Website

 Tacoma

- Pierce County Clean Air Task Force Final Report & Recommendations

o Recommendations Overview : more detail of the three primary recommendations

o Full Report : 82 pages, including appendixes

o Executive Summary : 10 pages



## Washington and PSCAA Laws and Rules

 PSCAA Regulation 1

- 13, Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards

 Ch. 173

- 433 WAC, Solid Fuel Burning Devices

 Substitute House Bill 2326 Chapter 219, Laws of 2012



## Washington State Implementation Plan Revisions

 Clean Data Determination Letter to EPA , May 22, 2012 77 FR 53772 , Sept. 4, 2012

 State Implementation Plan Revision: Tacoma

- Pierce County Nona ttainment Area , Nov. 28, 2012, Publication 12

- 02

- 016 78 FR 32131 , May 29, 2013

 Motor Vehicle Emission Budget Letter to EPA , Nov. 28, 2012 78 FR 57503 , Sept. 19, 2013

 Updates to Solid Fuel Burning Devices Regulation, Chapter 173

- 433 WAC , January 30, 2014, Publication 13

- 02

- 038 79 FR 26628 , May 9, 2014Additional Resources 2

Tacoma

- Pierce County PM 2.5 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan 

## EPA Rules and Policy Guidance

 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter (2006), 71 FR 61144

, Oct. 17, 2006

 Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24

- Hour Fine Particle NAAQS, 74 FR 58688

, November 13, 2009

 Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule, 72 FR 20586 , April 25, 2007, See 40 CFR Part 51 Subpart Z

– Provisions for Implementation of PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards

 Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of SIP Provisions, 78 FR 69806 , November 21, 2013

 Procedures for Processing Request to Redesignate Areas to Attainment , U.S. EPA, Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Manageme nt Division, September 4, 1992

 Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment , U.S. EPA, Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14 1994

 Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards

, U.S. EPA, Memo from Stephen D. Page, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Dec. 14, 2004



## Additional Technical Information

 Summary Technical Report in Support of PM 2.5 Clean Air Performance Commitment (CAPC) Process for Tacoma Washington , Oct. 14, 2010

 Sources of Fine Particles in the Wapato Hills

- Puyallup River Valley PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area , Washington Dept. of Ecology, April 2010, Publication 10

- 02

- 009