alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 272/2015

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 272 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5816 October 2015 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 272

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5816 October 2015

---

| Contents | | I   Legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2015/1843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 2015 laying down Union procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Union’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organization | 1 |

Contents

I   Legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Regulation (EU) 2015/1843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 2015 laying down Union procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Union’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organization

1

| | | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 ( OJ L 303, 31.10.2012 ) | 14 |
| | * | Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international market for coach and bus services, and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 ( OJ L 300, 14.11.2009 ) | 15 |

Corrigenda

*

Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 ( OJ L 303, 31.10.2012 )

( OJ L 303, 31.10.2012 )

14

*

Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international market for coach and bus services, and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 ( OJ L 300, 14.11.2009 )

( OJ L 300, 14.11.2009 )

15

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Office of Personnel Management

Retirement and Insurance Service

1920 1954 1959 

 

1986 

Benefits Administration Letter

Number: 95-219 Date: July 25, 1995 

SUBJECT: Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance:

Revision of SF 2821, Agency Certification of Insurance Status

_________________________________________________________________

Date of Revision The revised form is dated May 1995.

_____________________________________________

Purpose of The form has been revised to add a place for

Revision the amount of Option A insurance, to include

certification of whether the employee elected

Living Benefits or assigned his/her

insurance, to add a place for any applicable

OWCP number, to update OFEGLI's address, and

to make minor language changes.

_____________________________________________

When Available The revised SF 2821 will be ready around

August 21, 1995, from GSA/FSS using the

normal FEDSTRIP/MILSTRIP procedures as

specified by your agency's procurement or

acquisitions office.

_____________________________________________

Previous Editions Previous editions are not usable.

_____________________________________________

Stock Number and The National Stock Number (NSN) for the SF

Cost 2821 is 7540-01-231-5587. The cost of the

revised SF 2821 is not available.

_________________________________________________________________

Abby L. Block, Chief

Insurance Policy 

 and Information Division
### UNITED STATES ENIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DOCKET NO.: CAA-08-201l-0018 

## 2DII//OV-3 AM 

## 9: 18

II 

### i R 

### IN TIlE MATTER 

### m': XTO ENERGY, INC.

RESPONDENT. ) ) 

### ) 

### ) ) ) 

### ORDER ON JOINT MOTION TO AMEND ADMINISTATIVE COMPLAINT AND CONSENT AGREEMENT

On November

### J. 2011, the Parties U1cd a Joint Motion to Amend Administrative Complaintand Consent Agreement. The Motion requests. pursuantto paragraphs D.l.a 

### .md 17.13 ofthe Agreement, that the Complaint and Consent Agreement be amended to include a Revised 

### Appendix Aand modification ofthe penaJty. The Revised Appendix A substitutes the original Appendix A

### by adding one sourceto TableA-3 and two sources to TableA-4. This amendment increases the numberofexist-jog emission sources from 21 to 24 and thereby, increases the penalty to $72.000 from $63,000 as contemplated 

### by paragraph E.l ofthe original Adminjstrative Complaint and Consent Agreement. The court hereby approves the MOlion to Amend to include the Revised Appendix t\ and the modification to paragraph E, l based on the terms ofthe Complaint and Consent Agreement for good cause shown, pursuant to 40 

### C.P.R. §§22.14(c), 22. 16(c) and 22.18(b)(2). The Respondent is hereby ORDERED to comply with aU ofthe terms ofthe Consent Agreement. which was effective on August 26, 

### 2011 by Fil1al Order.

2011.

Elyana R. utin Regional Judicial Officer 

### DAY OF

# ~V\,\oe..V SO OIun:RED Tms

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the original ofthe attached**ORl>El~** ON JOINT 

### MOTION TO AMEND AOMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT ANO CONSENT AGllEEMENT ill the 

### mallcr

### orXTO ENEReV; nOCKET NO.: AA-08-2011-0018 was fikd with thl.' Rcgiol1ulllc.trillg 

### Clerk on November

### 3,2011. 

### Funlll:r. the wldcrsigncd certifies Ihmntrueund correct copy ofthe documents \vt.:rc ddivcred to. Jmncs II. 

### Errers. Senior Enforccmellt Attorney. U. S. EPA

- Region 8. 1595 

### Wynkoop Street. l)cl1v<.'r. 

### 0 80202·1129. 

### True and correct copies orlbe 

### aforementioned dOr.:llI11CIHS were plm':lt.:d in the 

### Ul1itcd Stnll;S I11Hil 

### ccrtificeVrclllrn receipt 

### n.:qucslcd on November 

### 3.2011. 10: Christopher \V. Armstrong XTO Energy 

### 8I

## nIlauslOn Slrcci 

### Ft. Worth, 

### TX**76102-629~**



### November 3. 2011

# Ja£v~ Tina Artemis ParulcgulJRl:giollulllcaring Clt'rk
United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 04-309 Date: November 2, 2004 

Subject: New Option B Premiums

The purpose of this Benefit Administration Letter (BAL) is to transmit new premiums for the 

upper-age bands for Option B coverage under the Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance 

(FEGLI) Program. The new rates are effective with the first day of the first pay period 

beginning on or after January 1, 2005. 

The new Option B withholding rates, per $1,000 of coverage, are as follows: 

Age Band Biweekly Monthly 

65-69 $0.72 $1.560

70-74 $1.20 $2.600

75-79 $1.80 $3.900

80 and over $2.40 $5.200

These are the only FEGLI premiums changing at this time. 

If you have any questions about the matters discussed in this letter, we would prefer that you 

email them to us at finance@opm.gov. You may also call us on (202) 606-0606. 

 Robert A. Yuran, Manager 

Financial Policy Group 

Center for Financial Services
#### KANSAS-LIFE INS. CO. v. FIRST BANK OF TRUSCOTT.

No. 954.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.

Feb. 26, 1932.

Rehearing Denied March 25,1932.

Joiner & Cook, of Plainview, James A. Stephens, of Benjamin, and K. W. Halterman, of Topeka, Kan., for appellant.

D. J. Brookreson, of Benjamin, for ap-pellee.

FUNDERBURK, J.

In this case First Bank of Truscott as plaintiff below, suing in its name as an unincorporated banking association, recovered judgment against the Kansas Life Insurance Company, defendant below, for the sum of $2,500, with interest and attorney’s fees, upon an insurance policy issued by the defendant to Walter J. Burgess and insuring the life of the latter in favor of his estate as beneficiary. The plaintiff claimed as as-signee of the policy, the transfer from the insured having been made to secure certain indebtedness. In addition to a general denial the defendant pleaded a special defense, alleging fraud and collusion on the part of plaintiff and its own agent, who was vice president of plaintiff, together with the insured and medical examiner, which plea was stricken out upon the court’s sustaining a general demurrer to the answer and special exception (so styled) to the special plea.

The case is a companion case to cause No. 953 (Tex. Civ. App.) 47 S.W.(2d) 675, of the same style this day decided, and is in all essential respects the same as to the facts and questions presented upon this appeal, except that the date of the policy involved was September 11, 1929, and therefore at the death of the insured the incontestability provision of one year had not expired. Because of this difference the action of the court in sustaining the so-called special exception, which was but a speaking demurrer, was erroneous for two reasons. The special plea did not allege the incontestability provision and therefore it could not be taken as true upon the demurrer. Also, since it was possible for the defendant to have contested its liability within the year, and the special plea did not allege that, it had not done so, *679■the fact that it had not contested its liability within the year could not be treated as true upon the demurrer. Under these circumstances the special exception, amounting as it did to no more than a general demurrer, was not good.

But, as in the other case, the policy in evidence and upon which recovery was awarded did contain the one-year incontestability clause and it was not shown that any contest or 'liability under the policy was made within one year from the date of the policy, the error of the court in sustaining the exceptions and striking out the special plea was harmless. Our opinion in the other case is referred to for a fuller discussion of the same questions presented in this case, and for the reasons therein stated it is our opinion that the judgment herein should be affirmed, which is accordingly so ordered.
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





In
connection with the annual report of Nacel Energy Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brian Lavery,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to
the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of  2002,
that:





(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 result of operations of the Company.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, another
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.




/s/ Brian LaveryBrian
      LaveryChief
      Executive Officer





February
17, 2009
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.A
  CERTIFICATION
    PURSUANT TO
    18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
    OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  Form 10-Q
  /s/  Douglas
    L. Foshee
-,ED Sr,.

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

I c5 REGION IX

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

SEP 1 1 2014

Richard Corey, Executive Officer

California Air Resources Board

Post Office Bo 2815

Sacrarnento 95812

Dear Mr.Corey:

On August 7, 2014, CARB submitted revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). We

have reviewed materials submitted with the following rule and found that they fulfill the completeness

criteria in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V.

APCD/AQMD Rule # Rule Title

Feather River 2.0 Open Burning

This addresses all revisions in this submittal. In the coming months we will review the complete

revisions for action pursuant to Clean Air Act section 11 0(k).

Questions regarding our completeness review should be directed to Arnold Lazarus at (415) 972-3024.

Sincerely,

/7i/7L’1

Deborah Jordan

Director, Air Division

cc: Sent by e-mail

Mr. Christopher D. Brown,

Air Pollution Control Officer,

Feather River AQMD

Carol Sutkus

California Air Resources Board

Pnnred on Recycled Paper
#### FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASS’N v. J. R. IVY.

No. 3575.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Nov. 29, 1939.

H. C. Cunningham, of Beaumont, for plaintiff in error.

Baker & DeLee, of Port Arthur, for defendant in error.

WALKER, Chief Justice.

This appeal is on the docket of this court from the county court at law of Jefferson county. A reviewi of the record disclosed no error. The judgment of the lower court is affirmed without written opinion. Texas & N. O. R. Co. v. Futch, Tex.Civ.App., 127 S.W.2d 1040.
1

United States

Office of

Personnel Management

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Retirement and Insurance Service

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 01-201 Date: January 10, 2001

Subject: Federal Employees Health Benefits Program: Notification of Certain

Enrollment Changes

On August 6, 1999, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued FEHB Program Carrier

Letter 1999-034 to clarify who is responsible for notifying the plans of certain FEHB Program

enrollment changes.

In the letter, we stated that enrollees are responsible for telling plans about certain changes to self

and family enrollments that do not affect premium withholdings. These include:

• addition of certain dependents (such as natural children);

• addition of a spouse;

• removal of a spouse due to death or divorce.

The plans are to accept these changes and additions directly from the enrollees without a

completed SF 2809 Health Benefits Election Form or any other agency verification. We told the

plans that we support agency attempts to reduce their workload by not producing the

“information only” SF 2809s many plans requested.

At the recent Fall Festival of Training, employees of several agencies indicated that many plan

representatives are unaware of Carrier Letter 1999-034 and are still requesting agencies to

complete a SF 2809 to add family members in these situations.

 ________________________________________________________________________________________

Civil Service Federal Employees Federal Employees Federal Employees

Retirement Group Life Health Benefits Retirement

System Insurance Program System
2

Attached is a copy of Carrier Letter 1999-034 for your information. Please refer plans to the

Carrier Letter whenever they request an unnecessary “information only” SF 2809. In addition,

feel free to FAX a copy of the Carrier Letter if necessary. A copy of the Carrier Letter may

convince plan representatives to stop seeking these SF 2809s.

Abby L. Block, Chief

Insurance Policy

 and Information Division

Attachment
##### 



Date:
March 29, 2007/s/ Randy S. BayneRandy S. BayneChief Executive Officer/s/ D. Henry HoustonD. Henry HoustonChief Financial Officer
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 99-2358

___________ Roeles Ortiz, * * Appellant, *

* v. * * United States of America, * * Appellee. *

__________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern No. 99-2360 District of Iowa.

__________ [UNPUBLISHED] Sean Demarco Stone, * * Appellant, *

* v. * * United States of America, * * Appellee. *

__________ No. 99-2413

__________ Eric Gabriel Ortiz, *-2- * Appellant, *

* v. * * United States of America, * * Appellee. *

__________ No. 99-2462

__________ Ramon Ortiz, Jr., * * Appellant, *

* v. * * United States of America, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: January 10, 2000 Filed: February 3, 2000

___________ Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.-3-

Roeles Ortiz, Sean Demarco Stone, Eric Gabriel Ortiz, and Ramon Ortiz, Jr. (collectively Appellants) appeal the district court's adverse rulings on their motions for new trial and to vacate their sentences. We affirm.
TheAppellants raise several contentions in support of their claims for a new trial andfor correction of their sentences. Having reviewed the record, we reject their arguments. We agree with the district court's conclusions that, first, the newly discoveredexculpatory evidence the government failed to disclose would not likely produce an acquittal if a new trial were granted or provide a basis to correct the Appellants' sentences, and second, because the withheld evidence does not undermine confidencein the verdicts and the sentences, the evidence does not satisfy the materiality requirement under Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963). We also conclude the district court's sentence-related factual findings about drug quantities and roles in the offenses are not clearly erroneous, the district court properly imposed a weapons enhancement, and the district court neither violated nor misapplied the sentencing guidelines. We are satisfied the district court properly denied the Appellants' motions for a new trial and to vacate their sentences, the appeal simply involves the application of settled principles of law to unique facts, and the issues do not warrant a comprehensive opinion. We thus affirm the district court without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

**as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DJO Finance LLC (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 26, 2009, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Vickie L. Capps, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer andTreasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(i)                                    The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(ii)                                 The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  October 29, 2009                                     |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                             |   |
| /s/  VICKIE L. CAPPS                                             |   |
| Vickie  L. Capps                                                 |   |
| Executive  Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |   |

 

----
Civil Service Federal Employees Federal Employees Federal Employees

Retirement Group Life Health Benefits Retirement

System Insurance Program System

United States

Office of Personnel Management

Retirement and Insurance Service

Benefits Administration Letter

Number: 97-410 Date: November 7, 1997 

 Subject: 1997 Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program Open Season: 

Health Fairs 

As you know, we have long encouraged agencies to hold open season health fairs to permit

representatives of FEHB carriers to address groups of employees on their plans' benefits,

methods of obtaining services, and similar matters. 

Recently, a number of organizations have become involved in assessing health plan

performance. These include organizations such as the National Committee for Quality

Assurance (NCQA) and the Foundation for Accountability (FACCT), as well as various State

agencies established to help their citizens select health insurance plans.

We believe the qualitative analyses of health plans performed by these organizations can be of

great help in enabling Federal employees to choose high quality health plan coverage. 

Accordingly, we encourage you to make access at open season health fairs available to

recognized leaders in the health plan evaluation field who wish to participate in the health

fairs.

 Abby L. Block, Chief

 Insurance Policy

 and Information Division
Exhibit 31

SEMT 2012-3

EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d)
Certification.

I, Christopher J. Abate, 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 the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2012-3 (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 of a 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 Form 10-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 agreements in all material respects; and

5.    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related
attestation 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 an exhibit 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.

In giving the certifications above,
I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Corelogic Tax Services, LLC, Assurant, Inc., Cenlar, FSB as Servicer, First Republic Bank as Servicer, PHH Mortgage Corporation as Servicer, Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as Custodian and Master Servicer, and Citibank, N.A. as Securities Administrator and Paying Agent.



|                                                             
|-------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 31, 2017                                         
|                                                             
|/s/ Christopher J. Abate                                     
|Signature                                                    
|                                                             
|Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Financial Officer 
|(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)