alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 SLM Student Loan Trust 2012-7 (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 servicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement and administration agreement, as applicable, 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 party: Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as indenture trustee.
 
   
  
 
 /s/ SOMSAK CHIVAVIBUL
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


  I, John Isbrandtsen, 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 2012-5 (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:
    Cenlar, FSB as Servicer, First Republic Bank as Servicer, PHH Mortgage
    Corporation as Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian and Wells
    Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator.

    Dated:   March 29, 2013


    /s/ John Isbrandtsen
    Signature

    Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
    (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         October 2, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on September 23, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 380 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-736, K2024-29.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-22677 Filed 10-1-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# L_2011159DE.01011503.xml

| 17.6.2011 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 159/115 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2011

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 159/115

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsrichtlinie 2011/54/EU der Kommission vom 20. April 2011 zur Änderung der Richtlinie 91/414/EWG des Rates zwecks Aufnahme des Wirkstoffs Metaldehyd und zur Änderung der Entscheidung 2008/934/EG

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 105 vom 21. April 2011
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 105 vom 21. April 2011

In der Inhaltsübersicht auf der Titelseite und auf Seite 28, im Titel der Richtlinie:

anstatt:

muss es heißen:

---
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3615 

To delay enforcement and establishment of certain water quality standards 

within the Great Bay Estuary, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2015 

Mr. GUINTA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To delay enforcement and establishment of certain water 

quality standards within the Great Bay Estuary, and 

for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Great Bay Regulatory 

5 Improvement Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. GREAT BAY ESTUARY. 

7 (a) DELAY OF ENFORCEMENT AND ESTABLISH8 MENT.—During the 5-year period beginning on the date 

9 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Envi10 ronmental Protection Agency may not— 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3615 IH

1 (1) require a covered treatment works to com2 mence construction on any upgrade of a facility for 

3 the purpose of enforcing water quality standards or 

4 effluent limitations with regard to nitrogen under 

5 section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control 

6 Act (33 U.S.C. 1342); or 

7 (2) establish any water quality standard or ef8 fluent limitation with regard to nitrogen in the 

9 Great Bay Estuary under title III of such Act (33 

10 U.S.C. 1311 et seq.). 

11 (b) STUDY REQUIRED.— 

12 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 5 years after 

13 the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator 

14 shall conduct, and make available to the public the 

15 results of, a peer-reviewed study regarding eelgrass 

16 levels, and the causes of any loss of eelgrass habitat, 

17 in the Great Bay Estuary. 

18 (2) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—The Adminis19 trator shall allow for public participation in the de20 velopment of the study conducted under this sub21 section. 

22 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

23 (1) COVERED TREATMENT WORKS.—The term 

24 ‘‘covered treatment works’’ means a publicly owned 

25 treatment works, as that term is defined in section 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3615 IH

1 212 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 

2 U.S.C. 1292), that contributes nitrogen loadings to 

3 the Great Bay Estuary. 

4 (2) GREAT BAY ESTUARY.—The term ‘‘Great 

5 Bay Estuary’’ means the estuarine zone that extends 

6 from the mouth of Portsmouth Harbor, in the vicin7 ity of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to the head-of8 tide for the 8 rivers (including the tributaries of 

9 those rivers) that flow into Great Bay, Little Bay, 

10 and the Piscataqua River. 

11 (3) ESTUARINE ZONE.—The term ‘‘estuarine 

12 zone’’ has the meaning given that term in section 

13 320(k) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 

14 (33 U.S.C. 1330(k)). 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### MORRIS v. RIDENOUR.

No. 10872.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.

Oct. 24, 1931.

A. H. Mount, of Dallas, for appellant.

William Henry Clark, Jr., and John Perei-val Rice, both of Dallas, for appellee.

LOONEY, J.

J. W. Ridenour recovered judgment against M. Morris in the county court of Dallas county, on appeal from the justice court, for $150 damages to an automobile, that resulted from a collision with a car belonging to defendant.

The appeal is without a statement of facts, and the only question presented for review is as to the excessiveness of the judgment, which contention is based upon the following situation: In answer to proper issues submitted, the jury found that the difference in the value of plaintiff’s car just before and just after the injury was $250; the jury also found, in response to'an issue submitted, that $51.40, reasonably expended, would have repaired plaintiff’s car and restored it to as good condition as it was just before the collision.

Plaintiff having sued for only $150, the court rendered judgment in his favor for that amount, over the insistence of defendant, however, that the judgment should not have exceeded the sum of $51.40, the amount the jury found, if reasonably expended, would have restored the car to its aforetime condition.

The same contention was urged in the case óf Chicago, etc., Co. v. Zumwalt, 226 S. W. 1080, 1083, and was overruled by the Amarillo Court of Civil Appeals in the following language : “In answer to subdivision (a) of special issue No. 5, the jury found that the difference between the market value of plaintiff’s truck at Vega, immediately before and immediately after the collision, was $1,500. This issue submitted the proper measure of damages. The court,, however, submitted special issue No. 10, instructing the jury to find what would be the reasonable cost of necessary new parts and of repairing other broken or damaged parts of the truck to restore the same to its former condition, and the answer is $1,000. These findings are made the basis of the first assignment of error, appellant insisting that the verdict is contradictory, inconsistent, and does not afford a basis for any judgment at all. The latter finding is upon an immaterial issue. The cost of repairing the machine is not the measure of appellee’s damages. P. & N.T. Ry. Co. v. McMeans [Tex. Civ. App] 188 S. W. 692, and authorities cited. The court therefore did not err in ignoring the finding of the jury in reply to the tenth issue.”

The rule announced in the above case is decisive of this controversy, therefore the judgment below is affirmed.

Affirmed.
# L_2011066EN.01001101.xml

| 12.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 66/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 66/11

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 239/2011

of 11 March 2011

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Tekovský salámový syr (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Slovakia’s application to register the name ‘Tekovský salámový syr’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Slovakia’s application to register the name ‘Tekovský salámový syr’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20eth day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 11 March 2011.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Dacian CIOLOŞ

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 202, 24.7.2010, p. 8.

2

---

ANNEX

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.3.   Cheeses

SLOVAKIA

Tekovský salámový syr (PGI)

---
# L_2017149DE.01009802.xml

| 13.6.2017 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 149/98 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2017

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 149/98

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1178/2011 der Kommission vom 3. November 2011 zur Festlegung technischer Vorschriften und von Verwaltungsverfahren in Bezug auf das fliegende Personal in der Zivilluftfahrt gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 216/2008 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 311 vom 25. November 2011
  )

Seite 20, Anhang I Abschnitt B Kapitel 5 Punkt FCL.130.B Überschrift:

Anstatt:

„
  LAPL(B) — Erweiterung der Rechte auf Fesselballone
  “

muss es heißen:

„
  LAPL(B) — Erweiterung der Rechte für Fesselaufstiege in Freiballonen
  “.

Seite 20, Anhang I Abschnitt B Kapitel 5 Punkt FCL.130.B Buchstabe a Satz 2:

Anstatt:

„Diese Beschränkung kann aufgehoben werden, wenn der Pilot mindestens 3 Ausbildungaufstiege in Fesselballonen absolviert hat.“

muss es heißen:

„Diese Beschränkung kann aufgehoben werden, wenn der Pilot mindestens 3 Fesselaufstiege in Freiballonen zu Schulungszwecken absolviert hat.“

Seite 20, Anhang I Abschnitt B Kapitel 5 Punkt FCL.130.B Buchstabe c:

Anstatt:

„Zur Aufrechterhaltung dieses Rechts müssen Piloten während der letzten 24 Monate mindestens 2 Flüge in Fesselballonen absolviert haben.“

muss es heißen:

„Zur Aufrechterhaltung dieses Rechts müssen Piloten während der letzten 24 Monate mindestens 2 Fesselaufstiege in Freiballonen absolviert haben.“

Seite 20, Anhang I Abschnitt B Kapitel 5 Punkt FCL.130.B Buchstabe d:

Anstatt:

„Wenn der Pilot die Anforderung gemäß Buchstabe c nicht erfüllt, muss er die zusätzliche Zahl der Flüge in Fesselballonen in einem Flug mit Fluglehrer oder alleine unter der Aufsicht eines Lehrberechtigten absolvieren, um die Rechte zu erneuern.“

muss es heißen:

„Wenn der Pilot die Anforderung gemäß Buchstabe c nicht erfüllt, muss er die zusätzliche Zahl der Fesselaufstiege in Freiballonen mit Fluglehrer oder alleine unter der Aufsicht eines Lehrberechtigten absolvieren, um die Rechte zu erneuern.“

Seite 26, Anhang I Abschnitt C Kapitel 6 Punkt FCL.220.B Überschrift:

Anstatt:

„
  BPL — Erweiterung der Rechte auf Fesselballone
  “

muss es heißen:

„
  BPL — Erweiterung der Rechte für Fesselaufstiege in Freiballonen
  “.

Seite 26, Anhang I Abschnitt C Kapitel 6 Punkt FCL.220.B Satz 1:

Anstatt:

„Die Rechte der BPL sind auf Nicht-Fesselballone beschränkt.“

muss es heißen:

„Die Rechte der BPL sind auf ungefesselte Flüge beschränkt.“

Seite 36, Anhang I Abschnitt H Kapitel 2 Punkt FCL.720.A Buchstabe g Satz 2:

Anstatt:

„Die Flugstunden unter Aufsicht müssen in das Bordbuch des Piloten oder ein gleichwertiges Dokument eingetragen und vom Lehrberechtigten unterzeichnet werden.“

muss es heißen:

„Die Flugstunden unter Aufsicht müssen in das Flugbuch des Piloten oder ein gleichwertiges Dokument eingetragen und vom Lehrberechtigten unterzeichnet werden.“

---
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 134484 & (25)(26) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 134484 COA: 276403 Baraga CC: 03-000821-FH ERIC J. MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motions fo r immediate consideration and release on bond are DENIED. The application for leave to appeal the June 15, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing en titlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

d1119 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2007

Clerk
##### 



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): November 2, 2007
 
 EXTERRAN PARTNERS, L.P.
  Delaware
    
    001-33078
    
    22-3935108(State or other jurisdiction 
of incorporation)
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (IRS Employer
Identification No.)
 4444 Brittmoore Road 
Houston, Texas
    
    77041(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (713) 335-7000
 N/A
 
  o
 o
 o
 o




---



##### 



Item 2.02. Results of Operations and Financial Condition.
   Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.
 (d)
    
    Exhibits.
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1
    
    Press release of the Partnership, dated November 2, 2007.
 2




---



##### 



SIGNATURE
  EXTERRAN PARTNERS, L.P.By:
    
    UCO General Partner, LP, its
general partnerBy:
    
    UCO GP, LLC, its general partner(Registrant)Date: November 2, 2007
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Daniel K. SchlangerDaniel K. SchlangerSenior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
 
 3




---



##### 



EXHIBIT INDEX
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1
    
    Press release of the Partnership, dated November 2, 2007.
 4
Description 

The Irradiated Fuels Examination Laboratory (IFEL), Building 3525, 

was designed and constructed in 1963 to permit the safe handling 

of increasing levels of radiation in the chemical, physical, and 

metallurgical examination of nuclear reactor fuel elements and 

reactor parts. A two-story building with a partial basement, the IFEL 

is classified a Category 2 nuclear facility. 

Capabilities

• Receipt and handling of irradiated materials

 (fuel or nonfuel in shielded casks)

• Capsule disassembly

• Nondestructive and destructive testing of irradiated materials

• Full-length light water reactor fuel post-irradiation examination

• Repackaging of spent nuclear fuel

• Packaging and shipment of irradiated materials

 (on site and off site)

• Examination and testing activities such as metrology;

 metallographic sample preparation by sectioning, grinding, 

 and polishing; optical and electron microscopy; gamma

 spectrometry; and other physical and mechanical properties

 evaluations as needed

• Safety testing of high temperature gas reactor (HTGR) fuel

• Automated sorting and analysis of HTGR fuel particles using

 gamma spectrometry

• Testing grid pinching and lateral constraint effects on spent

 nuclear fuel during transportation

 

Hot Cell Facility

Irradiated Fuels Examination Laboratory

ORNL is managed by UT-Battelle for the US Department of Energy

Specifications

3 main hot cell banks with a 

total of 13 workstations and 15 

pairs of manipulators

Metallography cell

Irradiated Microsphere 

Gamma Analyzer cell

Decontamination cell with 

an in-cell crane and 4 pairs 

of manipulators

Hot equipment storage area

4-6 glove boxes, 3 radiological 

laboratory hoods and 1 

non-radiological hood for 

sample preparations

Viewing windows of lead glass 

filled with mineral oil

High-density concrete used for 

front, rear, and top walls, lined 

with stainless steel

Core Conduction Cool-down 

Test Facility can test/monitor 

radioactive samples under 

controlled thermal conditions 

Two small-diameter horizontal 

transfer stations are used for 

small objects, while larger items 

are transferred through the 

shielded airlock door system

Master-slave manipulators

3-ton crane with a remote 

manipulator capable of 

traveling the length of the cell

Mark Delph

Facility Manager 

865-574-3471 

delphmm@ornl.gov