60 Day FR Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Verification Information System,
Document Verification Request, and
Document Verification Request
Supplement.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: Verification
Information System, G–845, and G–845
Supplement; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Federal Government
or State, Local Government. The
information collections allow for
agencies to verify the immigration status
of certain persons applying for benefits
under certain entitlement programs.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the Verification
Information System is 12,711,033 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 0.83 hours (5 minutes); G–845
Document Verification Request 260,406
at 0.83 hours (5 minutes); and G–845
Document Verification Request
Supplement 5,141 at 0.83 hours (5
minutes).
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 1,275,420 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $0.00.
If you need a copy of the information
collection instrument with instructions,
or additional information, please visit
the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
http://www.regulations.gov. We may
also be contacted at: USCIS, Office of
Policy and Strategy, Regulatory
Coordination Division, 20
Massachusetts Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20529–2140, telephone
number 202–272–8377.

19:14 Sep 25, 2014

Jkt 232001

[FR Doc. 2014–22967 Filed 9–25–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P

Overview of This Information
Collection

VerDate Sep<11>2014

Dated: September 23, 2014.
Samantha Deshommes,
Acting Chief, Regulatory Coordination
Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services,
Department of Homeland Security.

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Customs and Border Protection
Approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a
Commercial Gauger
U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of accreditation and
approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a
commercial gauger.
AGENCY:

Notice is hereby given,
pursuant to CBP regulations, that
Intertek USA, Inc., has been approved to
gauge petroleum and petroleum
products for customs purposes for the
next three years as of May 28, 2014.
DATES: Effective Dates: The
accreditation and approval of Intertek
USA, Inc., as commercial gauger became
effective on May 28, 2014. The next
triennial inspection date will be
scheduled for May 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Approved Gauger and Accredited
Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and
Scientific Services Directorate, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, 1300
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite
1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202–
344–1060.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.13,
that Intertek USA, Inc., 3741 Red Bluff
Road, Suite 105, Pasadena, TX 77503,
has been approved to gauge petroleum
and petroleum products for customs
purposes, in accordance with the
provisions of 19 CFR 151.13. Intertek
USA, Inc., is approved for the following
gauging procedures for petroleum and
certain petroleum products set forth by
the American Petroleum Institute (API):

57949

from the entity that it is accredited or
approved by the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection to conduct the
specific gauger service requested.
Alternatively, inquiries regarding the
specific gauger service this entity is
accredited or approved to perform may
be directed to the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection by calling (202) 344–
1060. The inquiry may also be sent to
cbp.labhq@dhs.gov. Please reference the
Web site listed below for a complete
listing of CBP approved gaugers and
accredited laboratories. http://
www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/gaulist_3.pdf.
Dated: September 16, 2014.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and
Scientific Services Directorate.
[FR Doc. 2014–22946 Filed 9–25–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P

SUMMARY:

API
Chapters
3 ...............
7 ...............
8 ...............
12 .............
17 .............

Title
Tank gauging.
Temperature Determination.
Sampling.
Calculations.
Maritime Measurements.

Anyone wishing to employ this entity
to conduct gauger services should
request and receive written assurances

PO 00000

Frm 00081

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5173–N–02]

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Assessment Tool: Solicitation of
Comment—60-Day Notice Under
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Office of General Call, HUD.
Notice.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

On July19, 2013, HUD
published a proposed rule that would
provide HUD program participants with
a revised process to plan for fair housing
outcomes that will assist them in
meeting the statutory obligation to
affirmatively further fair housing. In the
proposed rule, HUD advised that it
would issue an ‘‘Assessment Tool’’ for
use by each program participant to
evaluate fair housing choice in its
jurisdiction, to identify barriers to fair
housing choice at the local and regional
levels, and to set and prioritize fair
housing goals to overcome such barriers
and advance fair housing choice.
This Notice solicits public comment
for a period of 60 days on the proposed
version of Assessment Tool that is
designed for use by entitlement
jurisdictions other than States and joint
submissions by entitlement jurisdictions
and public housing agencies (PHAs).
While the Assessment Tool that is the
subject of this notice is designed for
joint submissions by entitlement
jurisdictions and PHAs, it presents the
basic structure of the Assessment Tool
to be used by all program participants,
and is illustrative of the questions that
will be asked of all program
participants.

SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM

26SEN1

57950

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices

In seeking comment for a period of 60
days, this notice commences the process
for compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The PRA
requires two public comment periods—
a public comment period of 60 days and
a second comment period of 30 days.
After consideration of the public
comments submitted in response to this
notice, HUD will solicit a second round
of public comments for a period of 30
days.
DATES: Comment Due Date: November
25, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
this notice to the Regulations Division,
Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street, SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
Communications must refer to the above
docket number and title. There are two
methods for submitting public
comments. All submissions must refer
to the above docket number and title.
1. Submission of Comments by Mail.
Comments may be submitted by mail to
the Regulations Division, Office of
General Counsel, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street, SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
2. Electronic Submission of
Comments. Interested persons may
submit comments electronically through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly
encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic
submission of comments allows the
commenter maximum time to prepare
and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to
make them immediately available to the
public. Comments submitted
electronically through the
www.regulations.gov Web site can be
viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public.
Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to
submit comments electronically.

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Note: To receive consideration as public
comments, comments must be submitted
through one of the two methods specified
above. Again, all submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the rule.

No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile
(FAX) comments are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Public
Comments. All properly submitted
comments and communications
submitted to HUD will be available for
public inspection and copying between
8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above
address. Due to security measures at the
HUD Headquarters building, an advance

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:14 Sep 25, 2014

Jkt 232001

appointment to review the public
comments must be scheduled by calling
the Regulations Division at 202–708–
3055 (this is not a toll-free number).
Individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing and individuals with speech
impairments may access this number
via TTY by calling the Federal Relay
Service at 800–877–8339. Copies of all
comments submitted are available for
inspection and downloading at
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Camille E. Acevedo, Associate General
Counsel for Legislation and Regulations,
Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street, SW., Room 10282,
Washington, DC 20410–0500; telephone
number 202–708–1793 (this is not a tollfree number). Persons who are deaf or
hard of hearing and persons with speech
impairments may access this number
through TTY by calling the toll-free
Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On July 19, 2013, at 78 FR 43710,
HUD published, for public comment, a
proposed rule entitled ‘‘Affirmatively
Furthering Fair Housing.’’ The proposed
rule provided a new approach that will
enable program participants to more
fully incorporate fair housing
considerations into their existing
planning processes and assist them in
their efforts to comply with their duty
to affirmatively further fair housing as
required by the Fair Housing Act, which
is Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, and
other authorities. The Fair Housing Act
not only prohibits discrimination but, in
conjunction with other statutes, directs
HUD’s program participants to take
proactive steps to overcome historic
patterns of segregation, promote fair
housing choice, and foster inclusive
communities that are free from
discrimination.
The new approach proposed by HUD
would replace the current analysis of
impediments (AI) process. As provided
in the proposed rule, the new approach
is designed to assist program
participants in analyzing their fair
housing environment, identifying fair
housing issues and the related
determinants, setting and prioritizing
fair housing goals, and, ultimately,
taking meaningful actions to
affirmatively further fair housing. The
new approach builds upon and refines
the fair housing elements of the existing
planning processes that program
participants currently undertake.
To assist program participants in
improving planning for fair housing

PO 00000

Frm 00082

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

outcomes, HUD advised in the proposed
rule that it would issue an ‘‘Assessment
Tool’’ for use in completing the
assessment of fair housing (AFH) that
program participants would undertake
in accordance with the proposed rule.
To further ease the burden on program
participants in carrying out their duties
under the proposed rule, HUD stated in
the proposed rule that it would provide
States, local governments, insular areas,
and public housing agencies (PHAs), as
well as the communities they serve,
with local and regional data on patterns
of integration and segregation; racially
and ethnically concentrated areas of
poverty (R/ECAPs); access to education,
employment, low-poverty
neighborhoods, transportation, and
environmental health, among other
critical community assets;
disproportionate housing needs; and
data on individuals with disabilities and
families with children. Using these data,
together with other available local data
and local knowledge, program
participants will evaluate their present
environment to assess fair housing
issues, identify significant determinants
that influence or contribute to those
issues, and set forth fair housing
priorities and goals to address fair
housing issues and determinants.
HUD submitted that the benefit of this
approach is that these priorities and
goals would better inform program
participants’ strategies and actions by
enabling program participants to
improve the integration of the fair
housing planning with current planning
exercises.
At the time of publication of the
proposed rule, HUD had not completed
work on the Assessment Tool and
therefore it was not published with the
proposed rule. Many commenters
advised that they welcome HUD’s
proposal to make such a tool available
but needed to see the tool and have the
opportunity for comment. This notice
provides HUD program participants and
other interested members of the public
with the opportunity to comment on the
draft Assessment Tool. Additionally, at
the time of publication of the proposed
rule, HUD posted a draft ‘‘Data
Documentation’’ paper online at
www.huduser.org/portal/affht_pt.html,
and requested public comments on the
categories, sources and format of data
that will be provided by HUD. Many
public comments were received on the
Data Documentation paper, and several
of the suggestions raised by commenters
are reflected in the proposed
Assessment Tool.
As noted in the Summary of this
document, the Assessment Tool that
HUD is submitting for public comment

E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM

26SEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
is primarily designed for use by
entitlement jurisdictions other than
States and for entitlement jurisdictions
and public housing agencies that are
submitting a joint AFH. This
Assessment Tool is not the tool that will
be used by regionally collaborating
entitlement jurisdictions or PHAs that
will not be making a joint submission
nor will it be used by States and Insular
Areas. However, this Assessment Tool
that HUD is submitting for public
comment through this notice, although
primarily tailored for entitlement
jurisdictions and joint submissions by
entitlement jurisdictions and PHAs,
serves as HUD’s design for the
Assessment Tool to be used by all
program participants. HUD expects the
topics and analysis included in this
Assessment Tool to be very similar to
the content in Assessment Tools
designed for use by other entities.
Further, while HUD is releasing the
template in paper form for purposes of
public comment, ultimately program
participants will complete the
assessment via a web-based system that
will guide participants’ through the data
and required analysis. Instructions will
accompany each version of the
Assessment Tool. Additionally,
guidance on specific AFFH issues will
be issued.

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

II. The Assessment Tool
A. Sources of Data and Information To
Complete the Assessment of Fair
Housing
HUD-Provided Data: As discussed in
the proposed rule, one of HUD’s major
considerations in formulating the new
AFFH planning process was to provide
for meaningful fair housing planning
while reducing the burden on program
participants by providing the
Assessment Tool and certain nationally
uniform data to program participants
that would be needed to complete an
AFH. While HUD will provide
nationally uniform data, there are other
important data sources that may be
available and relevant locally, including
data that are unavailable from a
nationally uniform source. HUD will
continue to explore the types of data
that may be available to assist program
participants in performing an AFH and
the feasibility of providing additional
data in the future.
Local Data and Local Knowledge: In
addition to the national uniform data
provided by HUD, program participants
will be required to use available local
data and local knowledge to inform
their assessments. While the AFH
process will not require program
participants to create or compile new

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:14 Sep 25, 2014

Jkt 232001

data, program participants must
consider existing local data and local
knowledge that is relevant in order to
answer questions in the Assessment
Tool. Available local data and local
knowledge include data and
information gained through the
community participation, consultation,
and coordination processes set out in
the proposed rule at § 5.158.
Available local data are existing data
pertaining to a respective jurisdiction or
region that are relevant to the AFH, that
are either known or become known to
the program participant or that can be
found through a reasonable amount of
searching, and that are readily available
at little or no cost.
Local knowledge, on the other hand,
is information relating to a respective
jurisdiction or region that is relevant to
the AFH and is known or becomes
known to the program participant.
A complete AFH includes an
assessment of available local data and
local knowledge that are relevant to fair
housing issues and determinants to
ensure that the AFFH priorities and
goals identified in the AFH are
consistent with evidence available to
the program participant Simply stated, a
program participant is expected to
respond to inquiries in the analysis
section of the Assessment Tool using
HUD-provided data, and available local
data, and local knowledge that are
relevant. To the extent that HUD does
not provide data for a program
participant to respond to a question or
questions in the Assessment Tool, and
local data and local knowledge that
would be responsive to a question or
questions in the Assessment Tool are
not readily available, the lack of data or
knowledge may be noted as an
acceptable and complete response to
that particular question. However, if
HUD finds that an AFH analysis is
materially inconsistent with data readily
available and relevant to one or more
questions in the Assessment Tool, or if
priorities or goals are found to be
materially inconsistent with available
local data or local knowledge, HUD may
find the AFH to be substantially
incomplete and therefore unacceptable.
Specific solicitation of public
comment: HUD specifically seeks public
comment on whether the above
description of available local data and
local knowledge helps program
participants understand how these
terms are being used in the Assessment
Tool and the extent of their obligations
to obtain and use data and other
information. HUD also seeks comment
on whether HUD has described clearly
the circumstances under which a
program participant may need to

PO 00000

Frm 00083

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

57951

respond to a question in which the
response would be that there are no
relevant data or local knowledge that
allows the program participant to
address the question asked.
B. Structure of the Assessment Tool
HUD designed the Assessment Tool
with three key objectives in mind. First,
the Assessment Tool must ask questions
that would be sufficient to enable
program participants to perform a
meaningful assessment of key fair
housing issues and determinants and set
meaningful fair housing goals and
priorities. Second, the Assessment Tool
must clearly convey the analysis of fair
housing issues and determinants that
program participants must undertake in
order for an AFH to be considered
acceptable to HUD. Third, the
Assessment Tool must be designed so
program participants would be able to
use it to prepare an acceptable AFH
without unnecessary burden. HUD
welcomes comments on the extent to
which the Assessment Tool meets each
of these objectives.
Section I of the Assessment Tool
(Cover Sheet and Certification)
addresses basic information applicable
to the program participant or program
participants (where there are joint
submissions), such as the name of the
entity making the submission, the type
of submission (e.g., whether it is a
submission by a single program
participant or is a regional submission),
the time period covered by the
assessment, and the certification that
the information provided in the
Assessment Tool fulfills the
requirements of HUD’s affirmatively
furthering fair housing regulations.
Section II. This section is an
Executive Summary to provide the
program participant the opportunity to
present a general overview of the AFH’s
findings and recommended actions.
Section III of the Assessment Tool
(Community Participation Process)
addresses the community participation
process and directs the program
participant to describe outreach
activities to encourage community
participation in the development and
review of the AFH, to describe how
successful its outreach efforts were in
obtaining community participation
related to the AFH, and to summarize
all comments obtained in the
community participation process,
including a summary of any comments
or views not accepted and the reasons
why. The Department is highlighting
this as an area for public comment.
Citizen participation is a vehicle for
obtaining important local information,
including available local data and local

E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM

26SEN1

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

57952

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices

knowledge, from members of the public,
non-profit and other private
organizations, and other government
agencies. HUD is requesting comment
on the best way to clarify how program
participants should include relevant
information gathered in the public
participation process, including in the
analysis section of the AFH, in the
summary of comments received and
considered, or in appropriate
appendices or attachments in the case of
lengthier comments and proposed
additions to the AFH.
Specific solicitation of public
comment: The community participation
process is an important vehicle for
soliciting input and acquiring additional
information and knowledge that can be
used to improve a local AFH. Program
participants are responsible for
obtaining, evaluating, and deciding how
best to consider and respond to public
comments, including by incorporating
relevant and reliable information
obtained through public participation
into the analysis section of the AFH or
through inclusion of comments in the
section of the AFH reserved for
describing such input, including
discussion of public comments that are
rejected. Does the proposed Assessment
Tool make these options clear? If not,
how can the Assessment Tool be
improved or clarified?
Section IV of the Assessment
(Analysis) presents the core analysis to
be undertaken by the program
participant (or participants in the case
of regional collaboration). This section
of the Assessment Tool is structured to
help program participants identify the
fair housing issues in their jurisdiction
and region. The Assessment Tool
requires a geographic assessment
broader than the jurisdictional level
because fair housing issues are often not
constrained by political-geographic
boundaries. HUD will provide data on
the Core Based Statistical Area for the
regional assessment.
An effective assessment of certain key
fair housing issues—segregation,
racially or ethnically concentrated areas
of poverty, disproportionate housing
needs, and disparities in access to
housing or community assets—and their
determinants constitute a key part of
developing an appropriate affirmatively
furthering fair housing strategy. (See
§ 5.154(a) at 78 FR 43730.) The
Assessment Tool guides program
participants step-by-step through an
assessment of key fair housing issues
and determinants. The proposed
Assessment Tool includes the following
required elements:
Demographic Summary: This section
asks the program participant to review

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:14 Sep 25, 2014

Jkt 232001

HUD-provided data, consider available
local data and local knowledge, and
discern demographic patterns and
trends. This data and the accompanying
questions provide context for the rest of
the assessment and provide a starting
point for analyzing the following
sections on—segregation/integration,
racial and ethnic concentrated areas of
poverty (R/ECAPs), disproportionate
housing needs, disparities in access to
community assets and exposure to
adverse community factors, and
disability and access issues. Based on
this data, program participants should
be able to identify important trends
such as an increase in families with
children, or a change in racial/ethnic
population that may impact the
identification of fair housing issues and
determinants throughout the
assessment. Discerning these patterns
and trends is the first level of analysis,
which must be followed by an
assessment of policies, procedures, and
practices that may act as determinants
that influence or contribute to the
identified patterns and trends.
Segregation/Integration and R/ECAPs:
This section asks program participants
to identify areas within their
jurisdiction and region that have high
levels of segregation, including but not
limited to, racially or ethnically
concentrated areas of poverty, consider
which groups sharing characteristics
protected by the Fair Housing Act are
most affected by segregation, and
consider any common characteristics of
those areas. Additionally, program
participants are asked to consider the
unique issues faced by immigrant
populations, by analyzing the needs of
persons with limited English
proficiency (LEP) and national origin
groups.
Program participants are also asked to
analyze trends in integration/
segregation over time and any policies
or other factors, such as private
investments, market forces or
community attitudes (e.g. NIMBYism)
that may be driving these trends.
Program participants are then asked to
assess and rank possible determinants of
segregation. Key to the identification of
determinants is the program
participant’s assessment of its policies,
procedures and practices. The
determinants identified by the program
participant as significant will serve as a
basis for goal and priority setting.
Specific solicitation of comment: In
this section and throughout the
proposed Assessment Tool, program
participants are asked to identify and
rank determinants that influence or
contribute to fair housing issues. The
Assessment Tool is designed to elicit a

PO 00000

Frm 00084

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

meaningful assessment of a program
participant’s fair housing environment
that would inform fair housing goal
setting and prioritization. HUD sought
to be clear and transparent in what it
believes is needed for meaningful fair
housing analysis and planning. One
means of HUD achieving this goal is to
ask questions specifically related to fair
housing issues. Another is providing a
list of determinants related to specific
fair housing issues that the program
participant will assess as potential
influences or contributing factors to fair
housing issues. Does the Assessment
Tool ask the right questions and provide
the right list of determinants to provoke
a meaningful assessment? Beyond
listing determinants in the Assessment
Tool, HUD anticipates issuing guidance
that may aid program participants in
identifying determinants. Is this a
reasonable approach?
Next, this section asks program
participants to examine issues related to
the location and demographic makeup
of residents of publicly supported
housing, as well as mobility patterns in
the jurisdiction and region. Using HUDprovided data, available local data, and
local knowledge, program participants
will answer a series of questions
designed to help them assess whether
there are fair housing considerations
with project locations or occupancy
overall as well as at specific projects
that may appear to be ‘‘outliers’’ (for
instance, buildings occupied primarily
by one racial/ethnic group as compared
to the public housing agency’s overall
assisted population). HUD has
determined that project level analysis is
legally necessary because statistics with
portfolio-wide averages or analysis at
the census tract level may not reveal
instances of localized segregation
patterns. Due to current limitations on
nationally uniform data, a list of LIHTC
projects is not available at this time;
however, program participants will be
asked to conduct the same analysis for
LIHTC projects as for other publicly
supported housing projects based on
available local data and local
knowledge.
From a fair housing perspective, the
assessment of the impact of project
siting and project occupancy of publicly
supported housing is critical to an
assessment of segregation, racially and
ethnically concentrated areas of poverty,
and their determinants. HUD believes
that it is a critical part of an AFH
submitted by a PHA and an assessment
submitted jointly by an entitlement
jurisdiction and PHA serving that
jurisdiction. However, in some
instances, entitlement jurisdictions and
PHAs may submit separate AFHs and

E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM

26SEN1

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
their submission of AFHs may be during
different timeframes. In such
circumstances, HUD seeks to ensure that
program participants give due
consideration to the siting and
occupancy of different types of publicly
supported housing when assessing
segregation and racially or ethnically
concentrated areas of poverty but does
not wish to unnecessarily burden
program participants. The proposed
Assessment Tool reflects a compromise
that balances the need for project level
analysis of publicly supported housing
with the need to avoid unnecessary
burdens on program participants. Data
provided by HUD for use in this
analysis is in tabular form.
Specific solicitation of comment: HUD
is specifically requesting comment on
the following aspects of the subsection
on Publicly Supported Housing.
Which types of program participants
should be required to include project
level data in tabular format for the
various categories of publicly supported
housing? Should these tables be
formatted differently than in the
proposed Assessment Tool (for example,
would they be better included in
appendices than in the body of the
Analysis section)? What are the most
effective ways of providing for
assessment of project level data in an
Assessment Tool used by States (for
example, in connection with a State
housing finance agency’s administration
of LIHTCs)?
Next, program participants are asked
to select and rank possible determinants
of both segregation and R/ECAPs for
publicly supported housing location
and occupancy and for assisted
households’ mobility.
Program participants are asked to
identify what factors might be
determinants of or contributing to
segregation in publicly supported
housing locations and occupancy
patterns, and to assess the level of
significance and influence of these
factors in order to help set goals and
inform their policy choices. Key to the
identification of determinants is an
assessment of the program participant’s
policies, procedures, and practices.
Addressing segregation and R/ECAPs
requires a balanced approach that not
only increases housing opportunities in
integrated areas but also promotes
integration by broadening housing
opportunities in segregated areas and
encouraging resident mobility.
Disproportionate Housing Needs: In
this subsection, program participants
would be required to assess
disproportionate housing needs on the
basis of characteristics protected by the
Fair Housing Act (i.e., race, color,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:14 Sep 25, 2014

Jkt 232001

national origin, religion, sex, familial
status, or disability). Program
participants are then asked to assess and
rank possible determinants of
disproportionate housing needs. As
noted earlier, key to the identification of
determinants is an assessment of the
program participant’s policies,
procedures, and practices. The
determinants identified by the program
participant as significant will serve as a
basis for goal and priority setting.
Disparities in Access to Community
Assets and Exposure to Adverse
Community Factors: This section asks
program participants to analyze how
residential location and the location of
community assets and the presence of
adverse community factors contribute to
fair housing issues on the basis of race/
ethnicity, national origin, and familial
status. The fair housing concerns
covered in the section include access to
public transportation, quality schools
and jobs, and exposure to poverty,
environmental health hazards and
deteriorated or abandoned properties.
The objective of the section is to assist
program participants in identifying
patterns and outliers in access to
community assets and exposure to
adverse community factors. Program
participants must also assess whether
policies, procedures, and practices are
determinants that influence or
contribute to these disparities.
An assessment of asset-rich areas
compared to those areas that lack access
to key community assets is critical to
informing a program participant’s policy
decisions. Addressing disparity in
access and exposure to adverse
conditions requires a balanced approach
that not only provides for strategic
investment in areas that lack key
community assets or are exposed to
adverse community factors, but also
opens up housing opportunities in asset
rich areas and provides for resident
mobility.
Disability and Access: This section
asks questions that enable program
participants to assess fair housing issues
faced by individuals with disabilities in
the jurisdiction and the region. While
individuals with disabilities may
experience the same fair housing
concerns as individuals without
disabilities, they also may experience
additional disability-related barriers that
are distinct from the barriers
experienced by individuals without
disabilities. For example, some
individuals with disabilities may need
specific accessibility features or
additional services in housing,
transportation, education, and other
programs in order to have equal
opportunity. Similarly, individuals with

PO 00000

Frm 00085

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

57953

disabilities have often been isolated
from their communities and housed in
institutions and other segregated
settings instead of being offered a range
of housing options, including those in a
more integrated setting, and services in
the community. For this reason, HUD is
proposing that issues unique to persons
with disabilities be specifically
addressed in this subsection.
The objective of this section is to help
program participants assess information
needed to establish goals for increased
accessibility, greater access to housing
and key community assets, increased
geographic mobility, and greater
residential integration of persons with
disabilities living in the jurisdiction and
region. Program participants are asked
to assess and rank possible determinants
of disability and access issues.
Ultimately, this information will assist
the program participant in establishing
fair housing goals and priorities that
they will use to inform and plan their
fair housing strategies relating to fair
housing issues faced by persons with
disabilities.
Specific solicitation of comment: HUD
specifically seeks comment on whether
the Assessment Tool, by addressing
Disability and Access Issues separately,
has inadvertently failed to consider any
key fair housing issues that relate to
individuals with disabilities.
Fair Housing Compliance and
Infrastructure: This section asks
program participants to describe
compliance with fair housing and civil
rights laws by listing and summarizing
the existence and status of any
unresolved administrative or judicial
proceedings related to fair housing,
nondiscrimination, or civil rights
generally, including an alleged failure to
affirmatively further fair housing. This
section also asks program participants to
identify fair housing or civil rights
agencies and organizations in the
jurisdiction and describe their capacity
to assist in fair housing analysis and
investigation. In addition, this section
provides the opportunity for program
participants to discuss the affirmative
steps they have taken to provide
resources to such agencies and
organizations. Finally, program
participants will identify and rank
determinants relating to fair housing
compliance and infrastructure by
selecting specific potential issues from a
menu of potential factors. The
determinants identified by the program
participant as significant will serve as a
basis for goal and priority setting. Key
to the identification of determinants is
an assessment of the program
participant’s policies, procedures, and
practices.

E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM

26SEN1

57954

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Specific solicitation of comment: The
Assessment Tool has been designed to
address many, but not all, of the most
common fair housing issues. In some
instances, a program participant may
have fair housing issues that the
Assessment Tool does not address. In
other instances, a program participant
may have no relevant local data or local
knowledge related to a particular
inquiry. Therefore, HUD asks whether
the Assessment Tool is sufficiently clear
that a program participant may address
additional fair housing issues that are
relevant or may reply that a particular
fair housing inquiry cannot be answered
due to lack of HUD-provided data,
available local data, and local
knowledge responsive to the inquiry.
What kinds of instructions would be
helpful to address both of these
concerns?
Section V (Fair Housing Goals and
Priorities) contains a summary table of
the fair housing determinants the
program participant has identified as
significant and the corresponding level
of significance or influence for each.
The table will be pre-populated based
on responses to the inquiries in Section
III regarding determinants. It is from this
table that program participants will
formulate goals to address significant
fair housing determinants and issues.
Each goal must identify one or more of
the particular determinants it is
designed to address, describe how the
goal relates to overcoming the identified
determinant(s) and related fair housing
issue(s), and identify the metrics and
milestones for evaluating the fair
housing results to be achieved. The
goals and priorities section within the
assessment enables the program
participant to begin to think about the
fair housing actions that they will
incorporate into subsequent HUD
required planning processes. While
actions and funding decisions are not a
requirement of this section, the
objective of the section is to concretely
think through how significant fair
housing determinants and fair housing
issues would be addressed. Program
participants are also asked to explain
their reasoning if any significant
determinants are not addressed by any
of the goals.
C. Completing the Assessment Tool
Program participants have asked HUD
to enable them to conduct assessments
of fair housing in a way that limits their
need to rely on costly outside
consultants. The Assessment Tool,
together with the HUD-provided data,
available local data, and local
knowledge, is intended and designed to
elicit a meaningful AFH in a program

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:14 Sep 25, 2014

Jkt 232001

participant’s area. Where there is no
available local data or local knowledge
responsive to a given question for which
HUD-data is not provided, a program
participant may respond that it has no
available local data or local knowledge
responsive to the question. While not
every question will automatically trigger
or require a long narrative response,
HUD is seeking an analysis that is both
qualitative and quantitative; that is,
HUD is seeking a comprehensive AFH
that reflects the program participant’s
review and consideration of fair housing
issued and determinants in their
particular jurisdiction and region.
D. Instructions To Accompany the
Assessment Tool
The instructions to accompany the
Assessment Tool, which are under
development within HUD, will guide
program participants in their
completion of the Assessment Tool. The
instructions will elaborate on how to
use the data, provide definitions where
definitions may be needed, especially
for terms that may have more than one
meaning, and provide illustrative
examples. The instructions to
accompany the Assessment Tool will be
made available not later than at the 30day notice required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. HUD remains
committed to providing guidance and
technical assistance to program
participants as the AFH process is
implemented, during both the initial
roll-out and at the time when program
participants are preparing their
Assessments of Fair Housing.
E. Program-Participant-Specific
Assessment Tools
As noted earlier, the Assessment Tool
provided for public comment under this
notice reflects the overall framework
that HUD will use for an Assessment
Tool to be used by all program
participants. The Assessment Tool
provides the core areas and key
questions to be covered. However,
similar to this Assessment Tool that is
largely tailored for entitlement
jurisdictions and joint submissions by
entitlement jurisdictions and PHAs,
HUD is considering developing
program-participant-specific
Assessment Tools, such as one
specifically for States and Insular Areas
and one specifically for regionally
collaborating PHAs or regionally
collaborating entitlement jurisdictions.
It is HUD’s intention to have any
program-participant-specific
Assessment Tools developed by HUD
available for public comment at the 30day notice required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.

PO 00000

Frm 00086

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

F. Solicitation of Comment on the
Assessment Tool Only
While the primary purpose of
comment under the Paperwork
Reduction Act is to determine the
burden of any information collection
requirement, HUD also solicits comment
on the content of the Assessment Tool,
the clarity of the questions presented
and whether there are areas of
information sought that program
participants believe are not necessary to
a meaningful AFH, or whether there are
important areas of information that HUD
may have overlooked. HUD also solicits
comments for the following questions:
(1) Can program participants complete
the Assessment Tool independently
(i.e., without assistance from consulting
firms or outside contractors)?
(2) What kinds of additional
instructions would be helpful for
program participants in completing the
Assessment Tool?
(3) What costs may be associated with
collecting and analyzing the available
local data and local knowledge
necessary to complete the Assessment
Tool?
(4) Do program participants expect to
use Federal funds to complete the
Assessment Tool?
(5) What strategies can program
participants use to reduce any burden
associated with completing the AFH,
including low-cost or no-cost strategies
for obtaining available local data and
local knowledge?
(6) How do program participants
envision joint participation in
completing this template?
Important Note: It is important, however,
that this solicitation of public comment is
solely on the Assessment Tool. This notice is
not reopening public comment on HUD’s July
19, 2013, proposed rule, and HUD will not
review or consider public comments that
address issues other than the Assessment
Tool.

III. Compliance With the Paperwork
Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) (PRA), an
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information, unless the
collection displays a valid control
number issued by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
Through this notice, HUD commences
the process for obtaining the requisite
approval by OMB under the PRA
process.
The public reporting burden for the
Assessment Tool is estimated to include
the time for reviewing the instructions,
searching existing data sources,

E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM

26SEN1

57955

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information.
As HUD is furnishing a significant
amount of data directly to the program
participants, the burden in completing
the Assessment Tool is reduced. Where
HUD is not providing data, as noted
earlier in this preamble, program
participants are required to consider
and in some cases utilize available local
data and local knowledge. This refers to
data already publicly available and
reasonably easy to access. This does not
refer to obscure data that may not be
known or easily found, that requires an
independent data or information
collection effort such as a local survey,
or that requires extensive analytical
expertise or staff effort for instance in

manipulating data sets or developing a
complex methodology for analyzing
complex data that may be available.
With the data that HUD provides for use
with the Assessment Tool
supplemented by available local data
and local knowledge, HUD does not
anticipate the need for any program
participant to turn to outside
consultants to collect data and conduct
the assessment.
In addition, local knowledge may be
supplemented with information
received through the public
participation process. In such cases,
program participants retain the
discretion to consider data or
information collected through this
process as well as the manner in which
it may be incorporated into the AFH,

whether in the Analysis section of the
Assessment or in Section III of the AFH
with an option to include extensive or
lengthy comments in appendices or
attachments. In short, the receipt of
extensive public comments may require
staff effort to review and consider input
but would not result in a mandate to
incur substantial additional costs and
staff hours to do so. To the contrary, the
public participation process should be
viewed as a tool to acquire additional
information to reduce burden.
The Assessment Tool is available at
http://www.huduser.org/portal/
affht_pt.html.
Information on the estimated public
reporting burden is provided in the
following table:

REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING BURDEN
Number of
respondents

CFR Section reference

Number of
responses per
respondent

§ 5.154(d) (Assessment of Fair Housing) .............

* 4,388

1

Total Burden ..................................................

........................

........................

Frequency of response

Estimated average time for
requirement
(in hours)

Estimated
annual burden
(in hours)

200

877,600

........................

877,600

With each Con Plan or
PHA Plan.
.......................................

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

* The number of respondents is based on the number of entities that will complete the version of the Assessment Tool that is the subject of
this notice and is designed for use by entitlement jurisdictions other than States and joint submissions by entitlement jurisdictions and public
housing agencies (PHAs) that are submitting a joint AFH. Entitlement jurisdictions that would use this template number 1,181. HUD is estimating
that half of the PHAs, which number in total 4053, would opt for a joint submission but this estimate, 2026, may be high.

In accordance with 5 CFR
1320.8(d)(1), HUD is specifically
soliciting comment from members of the
public and affected program
participants on the Assessment Tool on
the following:
(1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the
proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
HUD encourages not only program
participants but interested persons to
submit comments regarding the
information collection requirements in
this proposal. Comments must be
received by November 25, 2014 to
www.regulations.gov as provided under
the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:25 Sep 25, 2014

Jkt 232001

Comments must refer to the proposal by
name and docket number (FR–5173–N–
02).
Following consideration of public
comments submitted in response to this
notice, HUD will submit for further
public comment, for a period of 30 days,
a version of the Assessment Tool that
reflects consideration of the public
comments received in response to this
notice.
Dated: September 22, 2014.
Camille E. Acevedo,
Associate General Counsel for Legislation and
Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2014–22956 Filed 9–25–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5417–N–02]

Administrative Guidelines; Subsidy
Layering Reviews for Section 8
Project-Based Voucher Housing
Assistance Payments Contracts and
Mixed-Finance Development
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, HUD.

AGENCY:

PO 00000

Frm 00087

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

ACTION:

Notice.

This document provides
Administrative Guidelines (Guidelines)
which qualified Housing Credit
Agencies (HCAs) must follow in
implementing subsidy layering reviews
in accordance with the requirements of
the Housing and Economic Recovery
Act of 2008 (HERA), in those cases
where the HCA elects to conduct the
review. In certain instances, described
in this notice, HUD will follow these
Guidelines in implementing subsidy
layering reviews to satisfy the
requirements of section 102(d) of the
Department of Housing and Urban
Development Reform Act of 1989 (HUD
Reform Act). The requirements in this
notice do not supersede the subsidy
layering requirements of other Federal
programs.
This notice sets forth the guidelines
for conducting subsidy layering reviews
for mixed-finance public housing
projects and for newly constructed and
rehabilitated structures combining other
forms of government assistance with
project-based voucher assistance under
section 8 of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (1937 Act).

SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM

26SEN1