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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14 OR 15D-14 OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Sidney C. Hooper, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of
Sutron Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this quarterly report,
fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
quarterly report;

4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have: a) designed
such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period
in which this quarterly report is being prepared; b) evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing
date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures
based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrant
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions): a) all significant deficiencies in the design
or operation of internal controls which could adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for
the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal
controls; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal controls; and

6. The registrants other certifying officers and I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions
with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: August 6, 2004
By /s/ Sidney C. Hooper 		Sidney C. Hooper,
						Director and
						Chief Accounting
						Officer
# The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)

Implementation of the North American Free TradeAgreement (NAFTA) began on January 1, 1994. This agreement willremove most barriers to trade and investment among the UnitedStates, Canada, and Mexico. 

Under the NAFTA, all nontariff barriers toagricultural trade between the United States and Mexico wereeliminated. In addition, many tariffs were eliminatedimmediately, with others being phased out over periods of 5 to 15years. All agricultural provisions will be implemented by theyear 2008. For import-sensitive industries, long transitionperiods and special safeguards will allow for an orderlyadjustment to free trade with Mexico.

The agricultural provisions of the U.S.-CanadaFree Trade Agreement, in effect since 1989, were incorporatedinto the NAFTA. Under these provisions, all tariffs affectingagricultural trade between the United States and Canada, with afew exceptions for items covered by tariff-rate quotas, will beremoved by January 1, 1998.

Mexico and Canada reached a separate bilateralNAFTA agreement on market access for agricultural products. TheMexican-Canadian agreement eliminated most tariffs eitherimmediately or over 5, 10, or 15 years. Tariffs between the twocountries affecting trade in dairy, poultry, eggs, and sugar aremaintained.

|        | NAFTA Fact Sheet                                                                                                                                |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|        | NAFTA Agriculture        Fact Sheets: Commodities and Other Topics                                                                              |
|        | Text of NAFTA                                                                                                                                   |
|   | Text        of the Entire Agreement                                                                                                             |
|   | - Chapter 7(A):                Agriculture 
- Chapter 7(B):                Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
- Rules                of Origin |

|                                    |
|-----------------------------------------|
| *Last modified: Tuesday, June 02, 1998* |
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 6894** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. KENDALL R. JONES , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. James R. Spencer , District Judge. ( 3:04

- cr - 00392

- JRS

- 1; 3:11

- cv - 00226

- JRS )

Submitted : October 24, 2013 Decided: November 7, 2013

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, an d DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Kendall R. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Roderick Charles Young, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Kendall R. Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2013 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (B) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner sati sfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 ( 2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U .S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED