DATE TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: running head '6509.2 REV-7 CHG-7', footer date '11/2024'. This chapter carries the procedural spine of every CPD finding: the five required elements (condition, criteria, cause, effect, proposed corrective action) at 2-8.B.1; the monitoring letter within 60 days after the exit conference at 2-10; the 30-day window in which a program participant may contest a finding at 2-12.B.1; the 15-working-day / 30-calendar-day close-out loop at 2-12.B.4; and Exhibit 2-2, the sanction-authority table. NOTE: the page footers in this chapter read '24-8', '24-9', '24-12', '24-14' rather than '2-8' etc. - a numbering defect in HUD's own file, not a transcription error here.

DATE TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: word/header1.xml reads '6509.2 REV-7 Exhibit 10-1 Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) Program' and word/footer1.xml reads '02/2017'. The exhibit predates CHG-7 (11/2024) by seven years and was not reissued with it - the chapter list moved, the exhibit did not. Recorded as 2017-02-01 because the document gives month and year only. The exhibit's own NOTE is what makes it a violation taxonomy rather than a checklist: 'All questions that address requirements contain the citation for the source of the requirement (statute, regulation, NOFA, or grant agreement). If the requirement is not met, HUD must make a finding of noncompliance. All other questions ... may result in a "concern" being raised, but not a "finding."' Its instructions enumerate six sections: 'A) Grant Administration and Responsibilities; B) Client Eligibility and Assessment; C) Record Retention and Access; D) Reporting; E) Short-Term Rent, Mortgage and Utility (STRMU) Programs; and F) Rental Assistance Programs.'

DATE TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: word/header1.xml reads '6509.2 REV-7 Exhibit 10-2 Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) Program', word/footer1.xml reads '02/2017'. Served from a different directory and a different filename convention than the other Chapter 10 exhibits ('102.docx' under /sites/dfiles/OCHCO/documents/ rather than '65092e102.docx' under /sites/documents/), so a filename-pattern guess will 404 on this one. Its instructions state: 'This Exhibit is divided into three sections: Development; Facility Operations; and On-Site Review of a Facility.'

DATE TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: running head '6509.2 REV-7 CHG-7', footer 'Sanctions - 1 - 11/2024'. The table names the sanction authority per program: Continuum of Care (CoC) -> 24 CFR 578.107; Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) -> 24 CFR 574.500(c); HOME -> 24 CFR 92.551, 92.552; HTF -> 24 CFR 93.452, 93.453; Section 8 Mod. Rehab. SRO Program for Homeless Individuals -> 24 CFR 882.516(d). The Mod Rehab SRO entry is worth flagging: 24 CFR 882.516(d) is captioned 'PHA management' and reaches only the case where the PHA is itself managing the units under a HUD-approved management contract; the general owner-maintenance remedy is at 882.516(c) and the general HUD compliance review at 882.517.

DATE AND EDITION TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: word/header1.xml reads '6509.2 REV-6 CHG-2 Exhibit 29-1 Continuum of Care (CoC) Program' and word/footer1.xml reads '12/2015'. NOTE THE EDITION: this exhibit is still on REV-6 CHG-2 while the handbook's table of contents that links to it is REV-7 CHG-7 (11/2024) - HUD serves a nine-year-old exhibit from a current index. Its instructions call it 'a MANDATORY review for Continuum of Care Program (CoC) grants' and divide it into three sections: General Recordkeeping Requirements; Specific Recordkeeping Requirements for the Definition of Homeless; and Specific Recordkeeping Requirements for the Definition of At-Risk of Homelessness. The exhibit's own NOTE is what makes it a violation taxonomy rather than a checklist: 'All questions that address requirements contain the citation for the source of the requirement (statute, regulation, NOFA, or grant agreement). If the requirement is not met, HUD must select “NO” in response to the question and make a finding of noncompliance. All other questions ... may result in a "concern" being raised, but not a "finding."'

DATE AND EDITION TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: word/header1.xml reads '6509.2 REV-7 Exhibit 29-3 Continuum of Care (CoC) Program', word/footer2.xml reads '02/2017'. This is the closest thing the Continuum of Care Program has to a published categorised noncompliance list. Its instructions state: 'It is divided into twenty-three (23) sections: Overall Grant Management & Oversight; Subrecipient Management; Homeless Management Information System (HMIS); Financial and Internal Controls; Match; Program Income; Limitation on Use of Funds; Termination of Assistance; Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity; Displacement, Relocation, and Acquisition; Environmental Review; Program Oversight and Operations; Recordkeeping; Supportive Services; Drug-Free Workplace; Lobbying Restrictions; Conflict of Interest; Lead Hazard Abatement Requirements; Section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act; Transparency Act Reporting; Performance; Closeouts; and Expenditure Caps.' The lettered headings actually present in the document body run A through T (twenty), so the last three named sections - Performance, Closeouts and Expenditure Caps - are described in the instructions without carrying their own lettered heading. The exhibit's own NOTE is what makes it a violation taxonomy rather than a checklist: 'All questions that address requirements contain the citation for the source of the requirement (statute, regulation, NOFA, or grant agreement). If the requirement is not met, HUD must select “NO” in response to the question and make a finding of noncompliance. All other questions ... may result in a "concern" being raised, but not a "finding."'

DATE AND EDITION TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: word/header1.xml reads '6509.2 REV-6 CHG-2 Exhibit 29-7 Continuum of Care (CoC) Program', word/footer1.xml reads '12/2015'. Still on REV-6 CHG-2 while the index linking to it is REV-7 CHG-7. Its instructions state: 'The Exhibit is divided into four sections: Homeless Status and Eligibility Determination; Component-Specific Requirements; Eligible Costs; and Restrictions on Combining Funds.' The exhibit's own NOTE is what makes it a violation taxonomy rather than a checklist: 'All questions that address requirements contain the citation for the source of the requirement (statute, regulation, NOFA, or grant agreement). If the requirement is not met, HUD must select “NO” in response to the question and make a finding of noncompliance. All other questions ... may result in a "concern" being raised, but not a "finding."'

Nearly four years old and predates the 2022 final average income regulations taking full effect in practice. Refresh candidate.

Loosened the TIC signature window from 5 days to 120 days and set InspectCheck as the inspection report format from 1 September 2026.

Third HOTMA memo of 2026. CTCAC is mid-rollout; assume further memos.

Large single-PDF manual. CTCAC amends it by separate policy memo between editions, so the manual alone is not the current state of play.

DATE ESTABLISHED FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN COVER PAGE, which reads "CALIFORNIA TAX CREDIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE FEDERAL AND STATE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT LAWS / CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLE 4, DIVISION 17, CHAPTER 1 / December 10, 2025" - NOT from the URL, whose /2026-03/ segment is a Drupal upload directory and dates nothing. Worth recording that the PDF's embedded metadata disagrees with itself and with the face: CreationDate 19 December 2025, ModDate 1 July 2026. The face date is what the corpus uses; the July 2026 ModDate is a re-save of the same edition or an unannounced revision, and it is the reason this record carries a medium supersession risk rather than low. Cited for § 10317, the state-credit eligibility section - (b) requires a state credit recipient to have first been awarded federal credits or to qualify under section 42(h)(4)(B), with state farmworker credits exempt, and (c)(1) makes the federal 130 percent basis adjustment and the state credit alternatives - and for § 10337(a), which establishes that ONE regulatory agreement is recorded whether a project has federal credits only or both federal and state.

2 pages, 331,503 bytes, sha256 47f29b6b607eee8d9e7248c13a22ac9fb9d9e13a18e84b710f5c76d5bc242a1c, fetched 2026-08-29. 'Effective Date: May 15, 2026' is printed on its face; no publication date is printed, so 'published' is null. Carries the 115%-of-AMI column used as the absolute ceiling in the MFTE income recertification cap, and prints the operative annual increase cap on the face of page 2: 'MFTE P7 caps the amount that rent for an occupied MFTE unit can be increased annually. The current cap is 4.6 percent.' Also states the P7 band structure: 40/50/60/70/75/80/85/90% of AMI for an initial P7 agreement (years 1-12) and 35/45/55/65/70/75/80% for a P7 extension agreement (years 13-24).

2 pages, 269,741 bytes, sha256 db7eeab33910b61de2bc956a8fbe9524860583d071da79653831ee8e141df652, fetched 2026-08-29. The document prints 'Effective Date: May 15, 2026' on its face and no publication date, so 'published' is left null rather than taken from the PDF's CreationDate metadata. It states its own scope: these limits apply to any MILU agreement EXCEPT MFTE P7 and MFTE P6, examples given being MFTE P3, P4, P5, MHA, Incentive Zoning, MPC-Yesler Terrace, reduced minimum parking, religious lands and surplus property. Two notes on the face carry the encoded substance: 'Rent limits assume the affordable housing industry's standard average household size of 1.0 for 0-bedrooms and 1.5 per bedroom for larger units' and the rent table heading 'Maximum Rent, including fees and basic utilities (30% of monthly income)'. Income limits run 40% to 90% of AMI for household sizes 1 through 6; rent limits run the same bands for 0 through 4 bedrooms. NOT the HUD MTSP series WSHFC uses for LIHTC.

The widest protected-class list read for this pass: source of income, sealed eviction record, homeless status, place of residence or business, personal appearance, matriculation, political affiliation and family responsibilities are all named.

Retrieved 2026-08-24. Operative text of subsection (a): 'Before an owner of a housing accommodation may sell the housing accommodation or issue a notice to vacate for purposes of demolition or discontinuance of housing use, the owner shall give the tenant an opportunity to purchase the housing accommodation at a price and terms that represent a bona fide offer of sale.' Cited here for the District's TOPA regime, to which the DHCD 2025 QAP (pp. 19, 35) expressly subordinates every nonprofit right of first refusal granted in a District LIHTC project. TOPA applies to housing accommodations generally, not only to LIHTC properties; the state-layer LIHTC predicate used in this corpus therefore under-covers the statute, which is disclosed on the rule. The companion District Opportunity to Purchase Amendment Act of 2008, D.C. Law 17-286 (D.C. Official Code Sec. 42-3404.31 et seq.), is cited in the QAP alongside TOPA but was not separately fetched this pass.

THE CORPORATION'S OWN STATEMENT OF ITS PROGRAMME, AND IT CARRIES TWO FIGURES THAT ARE NOT IN THE ADOPTED PROGRAM STATEMENT. First, the unit split: '10% of the units reserved for families at or below 60% of the Area Median Income', '40% of the units reserved for families at or below 80% ... or "middle income" (deeper affordability may be feasible for certain projects)', '50% of the units at market rate' -- which is the Tex. Loc. Gov't Code 303.0421(b)(2) minimum and adds nothing to it, but which the adopted statement never states. Second, the term: 'Any public facility owned by a PFC is exempt from all property taxes for a minimum of 60 years (DPFC maximum of 75 years)' -- and 75 YEARS IS NOT DERIVABLE FROM CHAPTER 303, whose ladder is 30-then-30 for an acquired occupied development and 60-then-60 for anything else. The page also states the corporation's rent and income commitments (30 percent of the applicable AMI band as established by HUD and TDHCA, adjusted for family size, counting the income of all residents living in the unit, with deeper targeting where the exemption over-subsidises), its source-of-income and affirmative-marketing commitments, that 'A PFC may only operate in a Sponsor's boundaries', and that 'The City of Dallas housing department provides compliance oversight for all projects'. IT ALSO CONFLICTS WITH THE ADOPTED STATEMENT ON THE INCOME BANDS -- the page says 'at or below 80% ... and at or below 60%' where the adopted statement says only 'at or below 80% ... as well as ... non-income restricted units' -- and both are quoted in the rules rather than reconciled.

The only published statement of the DPFC transaction calendar and cost. Three numbers are load-bearing: applications are due '45 days before DPFC Board Meeting'; a $5,000.00 application fee accompanies the application, by cheque or money order, with two electronic copies on two flash drives sealed in an envelope; and step 9, 'DPFC Board Meeting for Final Approval', must be a 'Minimum of 30 days after Council Authorization'. The applicant also bears third-party underwriting cost 'regardless of the outcome of the proposed project', a rule the page attributes to the DPFC Bylaws approved by the Dallas City Council -- WHICH WERE NOT LOCATED. THE PAGE ALSO CARRIES A STALE POLICY REFERENCE: it says the application information is used to confirm the development 'is in furtherance of the City of Dallas Housing Policy 2033 (DHP33), as amended', and the City Council repealed DHP33 on 10 December 2025 by Resolution No. 25-1895.

Cited for one narrow but important fact: the corporation publishes per-project underwriting reports ('Project underwritings - Explore our project underwriting reports'), naming fourteen developments including Banyan Flats, Bishop 8th, Burnett Lofts, Cambridge at Bishop Ridge, three Co/Op properties, Ferguson Flats, Flats at Bishop Ridge, Mountain Creek Apartments and Oakhouse. That is how Tex. Loc. Gov't Code 303.0421(b)(6)(B) -- 'the corporation publishes on its Internet website a copy of the underwriting assessment' -- is discharged in Dallas. THE INDIVIDUAL UNDERWRITING REPORTS WERE NOT FETCHED and are the natural next acquisition: each should contain the per-deal rent-reduction arithmetic that the Public Benefit Analysis rule turns on. The page also carries a self-service AMI calculator whose output the site itself describes as 'hypothetical'.

The agency's own statement of the owner-facing compliance regime for the 1602 portfolio, and the closest thing American Samoa publishes to a compliance manual. States 'DBAS will NOT accept incomplete applications'; groups the Owner's Certificate of Continuing Compliance, Project Form and Tenant Form under the heading 'Annual Reporting Requirements' ('Annual reporting documents for project owners include the Owner's Certificate of Continuing Compliance and the project and tenant forms'); links a Utility Allowance Letter and Standard Residential Lease Agreement under 'Lease Agreements'; and lists eleven required tenant-application documents (Household Eligibility Questionnaire, TIC, employment/student/self-employment/zero-income/gift-income/unemployed verifications and affidavits, under-$5,000 asset certification, affidavit of estrangement). The Income & Rent Limits library stops at 2015 (2011-2015 tables only) - recorded as staleness on the rules, not repaired. dbas.as serves normally to curl with a browser User-Agent; WebFetch was 403'd.

1 page, 9,095 bytes, sha256 174ee055db725e3bb7ade610a98ac594b3fabc4d4bf537bf4fc32bf82d431239, fetched 2026-08-29. '(To be completed by all adult household members with no reported income)'. The member certifies no income of any kind with no expected change in twelve months; states how many years and months they have lived with zero income; certifies against eleven named sources (wages including commissions, tips and bonuses; business income; rental income from real or personal property; interest or dividends; social security, annuities, insurance policies, retirement funds, pensions or death benefits; unemployment or disability; public assistance; periodic allowances such as alimony, child support or gifts from persons outside the household; sales from self-employed resources; cash payments; any other source); states the reason for having no income; and identifies the source of funds paying for rent, utilities, food, clothing, transportation, internet/cable/phone, toiletries, and credit cards/loans/bills. Under penalty of perjury. Spectrum's American Samoa monitoring page lists this among four forms 'unique to American Samoa', which is why it is authored as a territorial requirement. The means-of-support schedule goes beyond what Section 42 or 26 CFR 1.42-5 requires. Cited by as.lihtc.certification_of_zero_income_by_every_adult_without_income.

3 pages, 138,941 bytes, sha256 a1e3683e367d8d5a01a6e8adb0f5ab30eefa5dfc28a6b584447374da56854a11, fetched 2026-08-29. The portfolio's eligibility instrument, and the closest thing DBAS publishes to an income determination procedure. 'Unless assistance is required, this form must be completed by the applicant/tenant' - the disclosure is the tenant's own statement, which is the foundation of the standard lease's fraud-termination clause. Marked for LIHTC or HOME and for initial certification, recertification or other. Section I household composition with a full-time student flag defined as 'currently enrolled, expects to become enrolled, or was previously enrolled for any part of 5 months in the calendar year' and expressly including grades K-12; asks whether household or student changes are expected in the next 12 months. Section II runs the student test and five exception questions plus a sixth on whether minors are claimed as a dependent by a parent. Section III income instructions: 'List gross amounts anticipated to be received in the 12 month period following move in or recertification', minors' unearned income included, every yes-no question answered, 'Do not leave any unanswered questions', with a management-completed Verified (Y/N) column on every line. THE HOME CHECKBOX is evidence either that the American Samoa portfolio includes HOME-assisted units or that this is Spectrum's multi-programme template; which was not established, and the corpus holds no HOME rules for American Samoa. Cited by as.lihtc.household_eligibility_questionnaire_anticipated_income_disclosure.

3 pages, 30,473 bytes, sha256 e4ef01cc5ee80330d810daf97e15404a48d87baa8131b60746c1d8ba3ee1face. The operative annual certification for American Samoa's Section 1602 (ARRA credit-exchange) portfolio, linked from the DBAS 'Section 1602 for Project Owners' page under 'Annual Reporting Requirements' beside a Project Form and Tenant Form. Addressed 'To: Development Bank of American Samoa C/O Spectrum Enterprises, Inc., 545 Shore Road, Cape Elizabeth, ME 04107' and defines DBAS as 'the Authority'. Thirteen numbered certifications over a January 1 - December 31 certification year, tracking the 1.42-5(c)(1) list (40-60 test, applicable fraction, annual income certification from each low-income tenant, rent restriction, general public use with Fair Housing finding disclosure, suitability for occupancy, eligible basis, comparable-basis facilities, vacant unit rule, extended use commitment, nontransient use, ownership/management changes, Rev. Rul. 2004-82 no-cause eviction protection). Two formality bars printed in bold: 'Failure to complete this form in its entirety will result in noncompliance with program requirements', and only an owner or general partner may sign unless the state agency permits otherwise. The signature block requires a notary AND a witness, and the certification is made under penalty of perjury. The 'published' date is the posting path date; the form itself is undated and no due date is printed on it.

1 page, 10,781 bytes, sha256 bebd2999c96bba162e13107656ab308e28eddc8fcfd22fc53318792cdc2b05ff, fetched 2026-08-29. THE ONLY DBAS DOCUMENT CARRYING A PUBLISHED DUE DATE. Its General Instructions print: 'Both sections of this form must be completed and sent to Spectrum (via DBAS) by no later than March 15th of the following calendar year. For example: Information collected at the end of the year 2013 must be submitted to Spectrum (via DBAS) by March 15, 2014.' That corrects the prior American Samoa pass's controlling open question, which recorded that no due date is published anywhere for the portfolio - true of the Owner's Certificate of Continuing Compliance, not true of this filing. The instructions also state the authority and purpose: 'Both parts of this form are required by HUD and are used to collect information to determine the occupancy status as well as the tenant demographic information for all household members residing in Tax Credit/1602 units in a project as of December 31st.' Part I captures project ID (AS-YYYY-NNN series), name, address, manager and owner contacts, building and unit counts, and each BIN (AS-YY-NNNNN series) with its address. The form carries no revision or edition date; the 2013/2014 worked example suggests a form of some age served unrevised. Cited by as.lihtc.annual_unit_history_report_due_march_15.

1 page (wide landscape grid), 35,600 bytes, sha256 7bf0d06c9b40e67378979d8e16bde6eff62596730692b790d541f346c4a9cf98, fetched 2026-08-29. 'Complete at least one Part II of this form for every 1602 unit including vacant units.' Per unit it records BIN and unit id, bedrooms, square footage, certification effective and move-in dates, certification type (Initial / Recertification / Other), and for a unit vacant on December 31 the prior tenant's move-out date. Per household member: name, relationship code (A adult co-tenant, C child, F foster, L live-in caretaker, O other family, S spouse, N none), race code 1-7, ethnicity, disability, date of birth, full-time student status and last four SSN digits. Then total household income from all sources against the current 1602 income limit for the family size; on a recertification, income and household size at initial move-in; tenant paid rent, utility allowance, other non-optional charges, current maximum rent limit and gross rent; federal and other rent assistance with a coded source (HUD PBRA, Section 8 Mod Rehab, public housing operating subsidy, HOME rental assistance and others); and a single student explanation code where all occupants are full-time students. THE STUDENT EXPLANATION CODE LIST RUNS 1 TANF, 2 job training programme, 3 single parent/dependent child, 4 married/joint return, 5 formerly in foster care, and 6 EXTENDED-USE PERIOD. Code 6 is evidence that a modified extended-use student rule exists for this portfolio of the kind Guam and the CNMI publish. No such policy is published anywhere by DBAS or Spectrum, and its content is deliberately not guessed - this is the sharpest identified gap in the American Samoa record. Cited by as.lihtc.annual_unit_history_report_due_march_15.

5 pages, 57,566 bytes, sha256 162c755903fa3cd4868656dd834c877da2129b7855a36dc2ba7c672c028031bb, fetched 2026-08-29. THE ONLY PUBLISHED TENANCY DOCUMENT IN THE AMERICAN SAMOA RECORD. Dated 2013 from the document's own face - the RENT clause reads 'starting ____________, 2013' - not from the 2023 posting path. Operative terms: certification precedes the lease ('Lessee has already been certified as a qualified low income Tenant in accordance with the Section 1602 program requirements and/or through Spectrum Enterprises, before the execution of this Lease'), with each household member listed by gender, nationality, age and student status; household composition frozen ('The number and persons in the Lessee's household will not change unless authorized by Section 1602 program requirements and there is prior approval by the Lessor'); rent capped ('The monthly rental payment by Lessee shall not exceed the monthly rent maximum amount allowed under the Section 1602 program'); a lessor right 'to adjust the rent and utility allowance (if applicable) should the local area Utility Allowance change', with the allowance itemised for water, electrical, sewer and gas; a non-discrimination covenant on race, national origin, age, gender and disability; subordination to the 1602 programme requirements, the 1602 Grant Agreement and the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants and Mortgage; a 30-day written-notice cure on default; termination if the premises are uninhabitable for more than three weeks; a pre-possession inventory checklist; and American Samoa governing law. TWO PROBLEMS RECORDED RATHER THAN RESOLVED: the TERM clause states no minimum ('The term of this lease shall be for ______ months') where Section 42(i)(3)(B)(i) supplies a six-month floor federally; and the termination clause directs immediate termination where the lessee 'is not qualified as a Tenant under Section 1602 requirements', which read literally would terminate an over-income household and sits against the no-cause-eviction protection of Rev. Rul. 2004-82 that the portfolio's own Owner's Certificate makes the owner certify. The lease's utility categories (water, electrical, sewer, gas) also do not match the 2013 ASPA schedule's (electricity, water, groundwater protection, solid waste) and DBAS has not reconciled them. Cited by as.lihtc.standard_residential_lease_required_terms.