alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Fiscal Year 2021 Agency Report

1. Please provide a summary of your agency’s activities undertaken to carry out the provisions of 

OMB Circular A-119, “Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus 

Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities” and the National Technology Transfer and 

Advance Act (NTTAA). The summary should contain a link to the agency’s standards-specific 

website(s) where information about your agency’s standards and conformity assessment related 

activities are available.

Standards are used to guide the work of the grantees and other HUD supported agencies in providing 

quality housing and improvements in America's communities. Standards support the achievement of the 

HUD mission by our state and local partners. In most cases, HUD and our partners use standards 

developed by or in conjunction with other related users, such as model building codes developed for 

and adopted by communities nationwide. Because there are virtually no differences between HUDassisted and market-based construction and development, use of standards such as building codes that 

are developed through a public process for the entire design and construction industry are relevant and 

appropriate. Because of the way HUD supports local housing efforts, the communities use the building 

codes that have been adopted at the state or local level for both the HUD-assisted projects as well as 

the broader construction market. In rare cases, HUD is responsible for the standards, as it is the case 

with the Government Standard: 24 CFR 3280 – Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards. 

As mandated in legislation, HUD publishes and enforces the construction standard for manufactured 

housing, which is being converted to a consensus standard.

2. Please list the government-unique standards (GUS) your agency began using in lieu of voluntary 

consensus standards during FY 2021. Please note that GUS which are still in effect from previous years 

should continue to be listed, thus the total number in your agency's report will include all GUS 

currently in use (previous years and new as of this FY): 1

Table 1: Current Government Unique Standards FY2021

(1) Government Unique Standard

24 CFR 3280 – Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards [Incorporated: 2000]

Voluntary Standard

ANSI A119.1 – Recreation Vehicles and NFPA 501C – Standard on Recreational Vehicles

Rationale

HUD-Unique Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards. HUD was required by legislation 

to “establish Federal construction and safety standards for manufactured homes and to authorize 

manufactured home safety research and development”. 

Updated FY2021: In 2021, HUD published a final rule updating the Manufactured Home Construction 

and Safety Standards on January 12, 2021. HUD continues working with the Home Innovation Research 

Lab to support the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee in its work for providing 

recommendations to HUD for future updates to the standards.
**Exhibit31.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF1934

 

I, Jeffrey J. Fox,certify that:

 

1.   Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Willamette ValleyVineyards, Inc.;

 

2.   Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.   Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.   Thesmall business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the small business issuer andhave:

a)  Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to thesmall business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;

b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the smallbusiness issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

c)  Disclosed in this report any change in thesmall business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the smallbusiness issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.   Thesmall business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the smallbusiness issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

a)  All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in the smallbusiness issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: November 14, 2007                             |
|-----------------------------------------------------|
| /s/  Jeffrey  J. Fox                      |   |
|       Jeffrey  J. Fox |
|       Controller      |

 

1

----
#### Nicholas Ochsner *v.*Commonwealth.

Intoxicating Liquors — Sale to Minor — Proof.

In a prosecution for unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor, accused can not prove facts tending to show that he had reason to believe the minor to he over 21 years of age.

APPEAL FROM KENTON- CIRCUIT COURT.

December 30, 1872.

*180
      *Ellis, for appellant.*

*Attorney General, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The court did not err in refusing to permit appellant to prove facts conducing to show that he had reason to believe the minor to whom the liquor was sold to be over the age of twenty-one years. 6 Bush 400. Nor was it error to overrule the motion to exclude the testimony of the father as to the age of the minor. If such testimony was not competent, it would be impossible to prove the age of any one.

This court can not reverse for error of the court below in refusing to sustain a demurrer to' an indictment charging a person with a misdemeanor. Sec. 349, Crim. Code. It is unnecessary therefore to criticise the indictment in this case.

Judgment *affirmed.*
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meetings will be held Thursday, January 15, 2015 and Friday, January 16, 2015.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donna Powers at 1-888-912-1227 or (954) 423-7977.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project Committee will be held Thursday, January 15, 2015, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday, January 16, 2015, from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Notification of intent to participate must be made with Ms. Powers. For more information please contact Ms. Powers at 1-888-912-1227 or (954) 423-7977 or write: TAP Office, 1000 S. Pine Island Road, Plantation, FL 33324 or contact us at the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The committee will be discussing various issues related to Tax Forms and Publications and public input is welcomed.

Dated: December 3, 2014.

Otis Simpson,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2014-28853 Filed 12-9-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 10.1


 


	
  FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

  	
   

  	
  CONTACT: 937-224-5940

  



 


DP&L EMPLOYEES RATIFY NEW
THREE YEAR LABOR COMPACT


 


DAYTON,
Ohio, December 2, 2005 – DPL Inc. (NYSE: DPL) announced today that
employees of The Dayton Power and Light Company (DP&L) ratified a new 3-year
labor agreement.  The employees are
represented by Local 175 Utility Workers Union of America.


 


“I
am very proud of the professionalism that was exhibited throughout these
negotiations,” said Jim Mahoney, Dayton Power and Light President and Chief
Executive Officer.  “We listened to our
employees’ concerns, went back to the bargaining table and worked out a deal
that benefits customers, shareholders and employees alike.”


 


Measurable
productivity and service improvements enabled the Company to provide
market-based increases in wages and benefits. 
The package contains 3%, 2%, 2.5% wage increases, improvements to the
pension and 401(k) programs, increases in the Company’s contribution to
employees’ healthcare costs, and employment security for the next three years.


 


DP&L
received work rule changes at power generating stations to increase
productivity, an emergency response program that will further strengthen
customer service, and changes in the Company’s illness benefits to encourage
better attendance.


 


About DPL


DPL
Inc. (NYSE: DPL) is a regional electric energy and utility company.  DPL’s principal subsidiaries include The
Dayton Power and Light Company (DP&L); DPL Energy, LLC (DPLE); and DPL
Energy Resources, Inc. (DPLER). 
DP&L, a regulated electric utility, provides service to over 500,000
retail customers in West Central Ohio; DPLE engages in the operation of
merchant peaking generation facilities; and DPLER is a competitive retail
electric supplier in Ohio, selling to major governmental, industrial, and
commercial customers.  DPL, through its
subsidiaries, owns and operates approximately 4,400 megawatts of generation
capacity, of which 2,800 megawatts are low cost coal-fired units and 1,600
megawatts are natural gas fired peaking units. 
Further information can be found at www.dplinc.com.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CAPITAL GROWTH, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             819
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   819
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     819
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           35,708
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,500
<OTHER-SE>                                    (39,389)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       819
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   559
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (559)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (559)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (559)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

                 STRATFORD AMERICAN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
      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 Quarterly Report of Stratford American Corporation and
Subsidiaries ("the Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), we, Mel L. Shultz, President and Director of the Company, David H.
Eaton, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of the Company, and
Daniel E. Matthews, Controller, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


/s/  Mel L. Shultz
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mel L. Shultz, President and Director
May 14, 2004


/s/  David H. Eaton
-----------------------------------------------------------------
David H. Eaton, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
May 14, 2004


/s/  Daniel E. Matthews
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel E. Matthews, Controller, Secretary and Treasurer
May 14, 2004
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4745 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Diresul Brown GN Liquid Crude. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2004 

Mrs. MYRICK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Diresul Brown GN 

Liquid Crude. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON DIRESUL BROWN GN 

4 LIQUID CRUDE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.35.04 Diresul Brown GN Liquid 

Crude (leuco sulfur dye) 

(provided for in subheading 

3204.19.50) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 
2 

•HR 4745 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13 - 7156
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee , v. KEMUEL CORNELIUS MINGO , Defendant

- Appellant
.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Richard L. Voorhees , Senior District Judge. ( 3:03

- cr - 00014

- RLV

- CH

- 1 ; 3:12

- cv - 00235

- RLV ; 3:09

- cv - 00056

- RLV )
Submitted : June 23, 2017 Decided: January 11, 2018
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KING , Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by un published per curiam opinion
. Kemuel Cornelius Mingo, Appellant Pro Se. Robert John Gleason, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STAT ES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Kemuel Cornelius Mingo sought relief from his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241, 2255 (2012), and through petitions for writ of error coram nobis and audita querela. The district court denied relief, and Mingo appeals. To the extent that Mingo seeks to appeal th at portion of the district c ourt’s order denying relief under § 2255 , t he order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing o f the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of th e 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 d ispositive 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 Mingo has not made the requisite showi ng. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss this portion of the appeal. With respect to the remaining grounds for relief, we have reviewed the record and found no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Mingo , Nos. 3:03

- cr - 00014

- RLV

- CH

- 1; 3:12

- cv - 00235

- RLV; 3:09

- cv - 00056

- RLV (W.D.N.C. May 30, 2013).3 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNIT E D ST AT E S CO URT O F APPE AL S FO R T H E NINT H CIRCUIT
RE E NA RAUT ,

Pe t i tione r,
v. L O RE T T A E . L YNCH , Attor ne y G e ne r al, R e sponde nt. No. 14-71430 Age n c y No. A089-673-165
M E M O RANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d De c e m

be r 14, 2016 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : K O Z INSKI , B YB E E and N.R. SM IT H , C irc uit Judge s . 1. Pe titione r R e e na

R a ut a rgue s tha t the Im m igrat ion Judge(IJ) an d the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a l s (B IA) im p rope rly re lie d on the a sy lum

offic e r’ s note s in the ir a dve rse c re dibility de te rm inat ions. Theoffic e r took de ta ile d note s



# FIL ED D EC 16 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).pa ge 2

and te stifie d a

bout theproc e dure s he use d to e n sure tha t R a ut unde rstood his que stions a

nd tha t he a c c urate ly

re c orde d the inte rvie w. The B IA re a sona bly
c onc lude d tha

t the offic e r “ w a s a

re l ia ble im pe a c hm e nt sourc e . ” Li v. Ashc roft, 378 F.3d 959, 963 (9th C ir. 2004). R a ut m a de inc onsiste nt sta

te m e n ts a b out he r pe rse c ution. He r varie d e xpla nations we re not pe rsua sive . Thus, thea ge n c y ’ s a dve rse c re dibility

finding is supporte d

by substa ntia l e vide nc e . 2. A pe titione r m

ust sa tisfy the Loz a da

e le m e nts to m ake an

ine ffe c tive
a ssista nc e of c ounse l c la im . Se e Tam ang v. Holde r, 598 F.3d 1083, 1089–90 (9th C ir. 2010); M a tte r of Loz a da , 19 I. & N. De c . 637 (B IA 1988). Stric t c o m plia nc e with Loz a da

is not re quire d

whe n c ounse l’ s ine ffe c t ive ne ss is plai n on the fa c e of the re c ord. Ta

m ang, 598 F.3d a

t 1090. Ra

ut a rgue s tha t he r c ounse l e rre d

by not la y ing a founda tion for he r supporting docum e nts. B ut R a ut’ s c ounse l did a sk
som e founda

tiona l que s tions, a

nd a ll doc um e nts we re a d m i tte d for the IJ’ s c onside ra tion. Thus, the

re wa s no pla in e rror warranting a wa ive r of Loz a da ’ s proc e d ura l re quire m e nts.
DE NIE D.