Notice of Certain Operating Cost Adjustment Factors for 2008, 60688-60690 [E7-21020]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
60688
ACTION:
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 206 / Thursday, October 25, 2007 / Notices
Notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUMMARY: The proposed information
collection requirement described below
has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act. The Department is
soliciting public comments on the
subject proposal.
A Public Housing Agency (PHA)
which is designated troubled or
substandard under the Public Housing
Assessment System (PHAS) must enter
into a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) with HUD to outline its planned
improvements. Similarly, a PHA which
is a standard performer, but receives a
total PHAS score of less than 70% but
not less than 60% is required to submit
an improvement Plan (IP). These plans
are designed to address deficiencies in
a PHA’s operations found through the
PHAS assessment process (management,
financial, physical, or resident related)
and any other deficiencies identified by
HUD through independent assessments
or other methods.
DATES: Comments Due Date: November
26, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
this proposal. Comments should refer to
the proposal by name and/or OMB
approval Number (2577–0237) and
should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer,
Office of Management and Budget, New
Executive Office Building, Washington,
DC 20503; fax: (202) 395–6974.
Lillian Deitzer, Departmental Reports
Management Officer, QDAM,
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20410; e-mail
Lillian_L._Deitzer@HUD.gov or
telephone (202) 402–8048. This is not a
toll-free number. Copies of available
documents submitted to OMB may be
obtained from Ms. Deitzer or from
HUD’s Web site at https://
www5.hud.gov:63001/po/i/icbts/
collectionsearch.cfm.
This
notice informs the public that the
Department of Housing and Urban
Development has submitted to OMB a
request for approval of the information
collection described below. This notice
is soliciting comments from members of
the public and affecting agencies
concerning the proposed collection of
information to: (1) Evaluate 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) Evaluate the
accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information; (3) Enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (4) Minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond; including
through the use of appropriate
automated collection techniques or
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Number of
respondents
Reporting Burden ......................................................................
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
This notice also lists the following
information:
Title of Proposal: Public Housing
Assessment System (PHAS)
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA),
MOA Monthly Report, and
Improvement Plan (IP).
OMB Approval Number: 2577–0237.
Form Numbers: Forms HUD–53336–
A, 53336–Bi, 53336–B, 53337, 53337i
and 53338.
Description of the Need for the
Information and Its Proposed Use: A
Public Housing Agency (PHA) which is
designated troubled or substandard
under the Public Housing Assessment
System (PHAS) must enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
with HUD to outline its planned
improvements. Similarly, a PHA which
is a standard performer, but receives a
total PHAS score of less than 70% but
not less than 60% is required to submit
an improvement Plan (IP). These plans
are designed to address deficiencies in
a PHA’s operations found through the
PHAS assessment process (management,
financial, physical, or resident related)
and any other deficiencies identified by
HUD through independent assessments
or other methods.
Frequency of Submission: Monthly,
Quarterly, Other When designated
troubled.
Annual
responses
×
375
Hours per
response
×
1
=
Burden hours
85.093
31,910
Total Estimated Burden Hours:
31,910.
Status: Extension of a currently
approved collection.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as
amended.
Notice of Certain Operating Cost
Adjustment Factors for 2008
DATES:
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Publication of the 2008
Operating Cost Adjustment Factors
(OCAFs) for in some instances adjusting
and in others establishing Section 8
rents under the Multifamily Assisted
Housing Reform and Affordability Act
of 1997 (MAHRA), as amended, and
under the Low-Income Housing
Preservation and Resident
Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA)
Projects assisted with Section 8 Housing
Assistance Payments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Judith May, Director, Office of
Evaluation, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20410; telephone
(202) 402–3239 (this is not a toll-free
number). Hearing or speech-impaired
individuals may access this number via
TTY by calling the toll-free Federal
Information Relay Service at (800) 877–
8339.
[Docket No. FR–5103-N–02]
Dated: October 18, 2007.
Lillian L. Deitzer,
Departmental Paperwork Reduction Act
Officer, Office of the Chief Information
Officer.
[FR Doc. E7–21023 Filed 10–24–07; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:26 Oct 24, 2007
Jkt 214001
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SUMMARY: This notice establishes annual
factors used in calculating renewal rents
and rent adjustments under certain
provisions of MAHRA and LIHPRHA.
Effective Date: February 11,
2008.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\25OCN1.SGM
25OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 206 / Thursday, October 25, 2007 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
I. Operating Cost Adjustment Factors
(OCAFs)
Section 514(e)(2) of MAHRA requires
HUD to establish guidelines for rent
adjustments based on an operating cost
adjustment factor (OCAF). The
legislation requiring HUD to establish
OCAFs for LIHPRHA projects and
projects with contract renewals or
adjustments under section 524 of
MAHRA is similar in wording and
intent. HUD has therefore developed a
single factor to be applied uniformly to
all projects utilizing OCAFs as the
method by which renewal rents are
established or adjusted.
Additionally, MAHRA gives HUD
broad discretion in setting OCAFs—
referring, for example, in sections
524(a)(4)(C)(i), 524(b)(1)(A), 524(b)(3)(A)
and 524(c)(1) simply to ‘‘an operating
cost adjustment factor established by the
Secretary.’’ The sole limitation to this
grant of authority is a specific
requirement in each of the foregoing
provisions that application of an OCAF
‘‘shall not result in a negative
adjustment.’’ OCAFs are to be applied
uniformly to all projects utilizing
OCAFs as the method by which rents
are established or adjusted. OCAFs are
applied to project contract rent less debt
service.
In prior years, HUD developed OCAFs
by combining price change indices for
nine categories of project operating costs
derived mostly from national data—only
three of the nine price change indices
were available at the state level.
Furthermore, several of the price indices
used to develop past OCAFs were
indirect measures of project operating
costs. For FY 2008, HUD has decided to
develop OCAFs from the most current
actual project operating cost data at the
state level, and this eliminates the need
to break the costs into categories and to
rely on national data which serve as
surrogate measures for project operating
costs.
Extensive research into the OCAF
methodology determined that HUD’s
administrative data provides the best
source of data detailing the operating
costs experienced by properties
submitting financial statement reports to
HUD. Therefore, in order to more
closely align OCAFs with actual
changes in operating expenses as
reported to HUD by those properties
filing Annual Financial Statement (AFS)
data, HUD is using the AFS information
as the basis for FY 2008 OCAFs.
Specifically, HUD calculated the
average, per unit, change in operating
costs (excluding debt service and bad
debt expense), by state, for all projects
submitting consecutive valid financial
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:26 Oct 24, 2007
Jkt 214001
statement reports with Fiscal Year end
dates between July 31, 2005 and July 31,
2007. The projects comprise all
multifamily properties excluding
nursing homes and hospitals.
Furthermore, data for projects with
unusually high or low expenses due to
unusual circumstances were deleted
from the analysis. These changes in
actual operating costs experienced by
properties within HUD’s portfolio have
become the FY 2008 OCAFs.
OCAFs continue to be published at
the state level. States are the lowest
level of geographical aggregation at
which there are enough projects to
permit statistically reliable analysis.
Additionally, no data were available for
the Western Pacific Islands. Data for
Hawaii was therefore used to generate
OCAFs for these areas.
II. MAHRA and LIHPRHA OCAF
Procedures
MAHRA, as amended, created the
Mark-to-Market Program to reduce the
cost of Federal housing assistance,
enhance HUD’s administration of such
assistance, and to ensure the continued
affordability of units in certain
multifamily housing projects. Section
524 of MAHRA authorizes renewal of
Section 8 project-based assistance
contracts for projects without
Restructuring Plans under the Mark-toMarket Program, including projects that
are not eligible for a Plan and those for
which the owner does not request a
Plan. Renewals must be at rents not
exceeding comparable market rents
except for certain projects. As an
example, for Section 8 Moderate
Rehabilitation projects, other than single
room occupancy projects (SROs) under
the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act (McKinney Act, 42
U.S.C. 11301 et seq.), that are eligible for
renewal under section 524(b)(3) of
MAHRA, the renewal rents are required
to be set at the lesser of: (1) The existing
rents under the expiring contract, as
adjusted by the OCAF; (2) fair market
rents (less any amounts allowed for
tenant-purchased utilities; or (3)
comparable market rents for the market
area.
LIHPRHA (see, in particular, section
222(a)(2)(G)(i), 12 U.S.C. 4112 (a)(2)(G)
and the regulations at 24 CFR
248.145(a)(9)) require that future rent
adjustments for LIHPRHA projects be
made by applying an annual factor to be
determined by the Secretary to the
portion of project rent attributable to
operating expenses for the project and,
where the owner is a priority purchaser,
to the portion of project rent attributable
to project oversight costs.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60689
III. Findings and Certifications
Environmental Impact
This issuance sets forth rate
determinations and related external
administrative requirements and
procedures that do not constitute a
development decision affecting the
physical condition of specific project
areas or building sites. Accordingly,
under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6), this notice is
categorically excluded from
environmental review under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
This final rule does not have
federalism implications and does not
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on state and local governments or
preempt state law within the meaning of
Executive Order 13132 (entitled
‘‘Federalism’’).
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Number
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Number for this program is
14.187.
Dated: October 17, 2007.
Brian D. Montgomery,
Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal
Housing Commissioner.
Appendix—Operating Cost Adjustment
Factors for 2008
Percent
ALABAMA ...................................
ALASKA ......................................
ARIZONA ....................................
ARKANSAS ................................
CALIFORNIA ..............................
COLORADO ...............................
CONNECTICUT ..........................
DELAWARE ................................
DIST. OF COLUMBIA ................
FLORIDA ....................................
GEORGIA ...................................
HAWAII .......................................
IDAHO ........................................
ILLINOIS .....................................
INDIANA .....................................
IOWA ..........................................
KANSAS .....................................
KENTUCKY ................................
LOUISIANA .................................
MAINE ........................................
MARYLAND ................................
MASSACHUSETTS ....................
MICHIGAN ..................................
MINNESOTA ..............................
MISSISSIPPI ..............................
MISSOURI ..................................
MONTANA ..................................
NEBRASKA ................................
NEVADA .....................................
NEW HAMPSHIRE .....................
NEW JERSEY ............................
NEW MEXICO ............................
NEW YORK ................................
E:\FR\FM\25OCN1.SGM
25OCN1
5.0
3.9
6.8
6.8
5.3
2.7
3.5
8.2
6.8
7.0
3.5
9.2
6.1
3.4
2.6
3.7
3.8
3.6
5.7
8.0
4.3
4.7
2.8
0.5
5.7
2.9
3.4
1.8
7.3
3.0
4.6
1.5
2.7
60690
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 206 / Thursday, October 25, 2007 / Notices
Percent
N. CAROLINA .............................
N. DAKOTA ................................
OHIO ...........................................
OKLAHOMA ...............................
OREGON ....................................
PENNSYLVANIA ........................
RHODE ISLAND .........................
S. CAROLINA .............................
S. DAKOTA ................................
TENNESSEE ..............................
TEXAS ........................................
UTAH ..........................................
VERMONT ..................................
VIRGINIA ....................................
WASHINGTON ...........................
W. VIRGINIA ..............................
WISCONSIN ...............................
WYOMING ..................................
PACIFIC ISLANDS .....................
PUERTO RICO ...........................
VIRGIN ISLANDS .......................
U.S. AVERAGE ..........................
4.8
1.6
2.6
4.2
3.3
3.6
3.2
5.5
2.2
3.7
5.1
2.2
0.9
5.3
6.0
3.1
3.2
5.2
9.2
7.4
6.6
4.1
[FR Doc. E7–21020 Filed 10–24–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Information Collection Sent to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for Approval; OMB Control
Number 1018–0070; Incidental Take of
Marine Mammals During Specified
Activities
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We (Fish and Wildlife
Service) have sent an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for
review and approval. The ICR, which is
summarized below, describes the nature
of the collection and the estimated
burden and cost. This ICR is scheduled
to expire on October 31, 2007. We may
not conduct or sponsor and a person is
not required to respond to a collection
of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
However, under OMB regulations, we
may continue to conduct or sponsor this
information collection while it is
pending at OMB.
DATES: You must submit comments on
or before November 26, 2007.
Number of annual
respondents
Activity
One-time application for procedural regulations .....................
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
LOA requests ...........................................................................
Onsite monitoring and observation reports .............................
Final monitoring report .............................................................
Totals ................................................................................
Abstract: The Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA) of 1972, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
imposed, with certain exceptions, a
moratorium on the taking of marine
mammals. Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the
MMPA directs the Secretary of the
Interior to allow, upon request by
citizens of the United States, the taking
of small numbers of marine mammals
incidental to specified activities (other
than commercial fishing) if the
Secretary makes certain findings and
prescribes specific regulations that,
among other things, establish
permissible methods of taking. Once we
issue specific regulations, applicants
seeking to conduct activities must
request a Letter of Authorization (LOA)
for the specific activity and submit
onsite monitoring reports and a final
report of the activity to the Secretary.
Regulations at 50 CFR 18.27 outline the
procedures and requirements for
submitting a request. Specific
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:26 Oct 24, 2007
Jkt 214001
Number of annual
responses
1 (per term of
regulations)
10
10
10
31
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Completion time
per response
Annual burden
hours
1
300 hours ........
300
12
72
12
97
regulations governing authorized
activities in the Beaufort Sea are in 50
CFR 18, subpart J.
Comments: On June 1, 2007, we
published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register (72 FR 30670) to
establish regulations on incidental take
of marine mammals in the Chukchi Sea.
Because activities and requirements are
nearly identical for the Beaufort and
Chukchi Seas, we planned to combine
the information collections in one ICR.
However, we do not expect the final
rule for the Chukchi Sea to publish prior
to the expiration date of the information
collection for the Beaufort Sea
requirements, and have separated the
requests for approval. This request for
approval includes requirements to cover
only activities in the Beaufort Sea. The
proposed rule for incidental take
regulations in the Chukchi Sea invited
interested members of the public and
affected agencies to comment on the
proposed information collection and
PO 00000
Send your comments and
suggestions on this ICR to the Desk
Officer for the Department of the
Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395–6566
(fax) or OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov
(e-mail). Please provide a copy of your
comments to Hope Grey, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS 222–ARLSQ, 4401
North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA
22203 (mail); (703) 358–2269 (fax); or
hope_grey@fws.gov (e-mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request additional information about
this IC, contact Hope Grey by mail, fax,
or e-mail (see ADDRESSES) or by
telephone at (703) 358–2482.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control Number: 1018–0070.
Title: Incidental Take of Marine
Mammals During Specified Activities,
50 CFR 18.27 and 50 CFR 18, Subpart
J.
Service Form Numbers: None.
Type of Request: Revision of currently
approved collection.
Affected Public: Oil and gas industry
companies.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: On occasion.
ADDRESSES:
24 hours ..........
1.5 hours .........
8 hours ............
.....................
288
108
96
792
recordkeeping activities for both the
Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. The
comment period was open for 60 days,
and we did not receive any comments
relating to the Beaufort Sea information
collection requirements.
We again invite comments concerning
this information collection on:
(1) whether or not the collection of
information is necessary, including
whether or not the information will
have practical utility;
(2) the accuracy of our estimate of the
burden for this 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
respondents.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of
public record. Before including your
address, phone number, e-mail address,
E:\FR\FM\25OCN1.SGM
25OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 206 (Thursday, October 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60688-60690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21020]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-5103-N-02]
Notice of Certain Operating Cost Adjustment Factors for 2008
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Publication of the 2008 Operating Cost Adjustment Factors
(OCAFs) for in some instances adjusting and in others establishing
Section 8 rents under the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and
Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA), as amended, and under the Low-Income
Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA)
Projects assisted with Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice establishes annual factors used in calculating
renewal rents and rent adjustments under certain provisions of MAHRA
and LIHPRHA.
DATES: Effective Date: February 11, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judith May, Director, Office of
Evaluation, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3239 (this is
not a toll-free number). Hearing or speech-impaired individuals may
access this number via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information
Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 60689]]
I. Operating Cost Adjustment Factors (OCAFs)
Section 514(e)(2) of MAHRA requires HUD to establish guidelines for
rent adjustments based on an operating cost adjustment factor (OCAF).
The legislation requiring HUD to establish OCAFs for LIHPRHA projects
and projects with contract renewals or adjustments under section 524 of
MAHRA is similar in wording and intent. HUD has therefore developed a
single factor to be applied uniformly to all projects utilizing OCAFs
as the method by which renewal rents are established or adjusted.
Additionally, MAHRA gives HUD broad discretion in setting OCAFs--
referring, for example, in sections 524(a)(4)(C)(i), 524(b)(1)(A),
524(b)(3)(A) and 524(c)(1) simply to ``an operating cost adjustment
factor established by the Secretary.'' The sole limitation to this
grant of authority is a specific requirement in each of the foregoing
provisions that application of an OCAF ``shall not result in a negative
adjustment.'' OCAFs are to be applied uniformly to all projects
utilizing OCAFs as the method by which rents are established or
adjusted. OCAFs are applied to project contract rent less debt service.
In prior years, HUD developed OCAFs by combining price change
indices for nine categories of project operating costs derived mostly
from national data--only three of the nine price change indices were
available at the state level. Furthermore, several of the price indices
used to develop past OCAFs were indirect measures of project operating
costs. For FY 2008, HUD has decided to develop OCAFs from the most
current actual project operating cost data at the state level, and this
eliminates the need to break the costs into categories and to rely on
national data which serve as surrogate measures for project operating
costs.
Extensive research into the OCAF methodology determined that HUD's
administrative data provides the best source of data detailing the
operating costs experienced by properties submitting financial
statement reports to HUD. Therefore, in order to more closely align
OCAFs with actual changes in operating expenses as reported to HUD by
those properties filing Annual Financial Statement (AFS) data, HUD is
using the AFS information as the basis for FY 2008 OCAFs.
Specifically, HUD calculated the average, per unit, change in
operating costs (excluding debt service and bad debt expense), by
state, for all projects submitting consecutive valid financial
statement reports with Fiscal Year end dates between July 31, 2005 and
July 31, 2007. The projects comprise all multifamily properties
excluding nursing homes and hospitals. Furthermore, data for projects
with unusually high or low expenses due to unusual circumstances were
deleted from the analysis. These changes in actual operating costs
experienced by properties within HUD's portfolio have become the FY
2008 OCAFs.
OCAFs continue to be published at the state level. States are the
lowest level of geographical aggregation at which there are enough
projects to permit statistically reliable analysis. Additionally, no
data were available for the Western Pacific Islands. Data for Hawaii
was therefore used to generate OCAFs for these areas.
II. MAHRA and LIHPRHA OCAF Procedures
MAHRA, as amended, created the Mark-to-Market Program to reduce the
cost of Federal housing assistance, enhance HUD's administration of
such assistance, and to ensure the continued affordability of units in
certain multifamily housing projects. Section 524 of MAHRA authorizes
renewal of Section 8 project-based assistance contracts for projects
without Restructuring Plans under the Mark-to-Market Program, including
projects that are not eligible for a Plan and those for which the owner
does not request a Plan. Renewals must be at rents not exceeding
comparable market rents except for certain projects. As an example, for
Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation projects, other than single room
occupancy projects (SROs) under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance
Act (McKinney Act, 42 U.S.C. 11301 et seq.), that are eligible for
renewal under section 524(b)(3) of MAHRA, the renewal rents are
required to be set at the lesser of: (1) The existing rents under the
expiring contract, as adjusted by the OCAF; (2) fair market rents (less
any amounts allowed for tenant-purchased utilities; or (3) comparable
market rents for the market area.
LIHPRHA (see, in particular, section 222(a)(2)(G)(i), 12 U.S.C.
4112 (a)(2)(G) and the regulations at 24 CFR 248.145(a)(9)) require
that future rent adjustments for LIHPRHA projects be made by applying
an annual factor to be determined by the Secretary to the portion of
project rent attributable to operating expenses for the project and,
where the owner is a priority purchaser, to the portion of project rent
attributable to project oversight costs.
III. Findings and Certifications
Environmental Impact
This issuance sets forth rate determinations and related external
administrative requirements and procedures that do not constitute a
development decision affecting the physical condition of specific
project areas or building sites. Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6),
this notice is categorically excluded from environmental review under
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
This final rule does not have federalism implications and does not
impose substantial direct compliance costs on state and local
governments or preempt state law within the meaning of Executive Order
13132 (entitled ``Federalism'').
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number for this program
is 14.187.
Dated: October 17, 2007.
Brian D. Montgomery,
Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing Commissioner.
Appendix--Operating Cost Adjustment Factors for 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA..................................................... 5.0
ALASKA...................................................... 3.9
ARIZONA..................................................... 6.8
ARKANSAS.................................................... 6.8
CALIFORNIA.................................................. 5.3
COLORADO.................................................... 2.7
CONNECTICUT................................................. 3.5
DELAWARE.................................................... 8.2
DIST. OF COLUMBIA........................................... 6.8
FLORIDA..................................................... 7.0
GEORGIA..................................................... 3.5
HAWAII...................................................... 9.2
IDAHO....................................................... 6.1
ILLINOIS.................................................... 3.4
INDIANA..................................................... 2.6
IOWA........................................................ 3.7
KANSAS...................................................... 3.8
KENTUCKY.................................................... 3.6
LOUISIANA................................................... 5.7
MAINE....................................................... 8.0
MARYLAND.................................................... 4.3
MASSACHUSETTS............................................... 4.7
MICHIGAN.................................................... 2.8
MINNESOTA................................................... 0.5
MISSISSIPPI................................................. 5.7
MISSOURI.................................................... 2.9
MONTANA..................................................... 3.4
NEBRASKA.................................................... 1.8
NEVADA...................................................... 7.3
NEW HAMPSHIRE............................................... 3.0
NEW JERSEY.................................................. 4.6
NEW MEXICO.................................................. 1.5
NEW YORK.................................................... 2.7
[[Page 60690]]
N. CAROLINA................................................. 4.8
N. DAKOTA................................................... 1.6
OHIO........................................................ 2.6
OKLAHOMA.................................................... 4.2
OREGON...................................................... 3.3
PENNSYLVANIA................................................ 3.6
RHODE ISLAND................................................ 3.2
S. CAROLINA................................................. 5.5
S. DAKOTA................................................... 2.2
TENNESSEE................................................... 3.7
TEXAS....................................................... 5.1
UTAH........................................................ 2.2
VERMONT..................................................... 0.9
VIRGINIA.................................................... 5.3
WASHINGTON.................................................. 6.0
W. VIRGINIA................................................. 3.1
WISCONSIN................................................... 3.2
WYOMING..................................................... 5.2
PACIFIC ISLANDS............................................. 9.2
PUERTO RICO................................................. 7.4
VIRGIN ISLANDS.............................................. 6.6
U.S. AVERAGE................................................ 4.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E7-21020 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
