Final Fair Market Rents for Fiscal Year 2010 for the Housing Choice Voucher Program and Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy Program, 50552-50664 [E9-23477]
Download as PDF
50552
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5328–N–02]
Final Fair Market Rents for Fiscal Year
2010 for the Housing Choice Voucher
Program and Moderate Rehabilitation
Single Room Occupancy Program
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy Development and
Research, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of Final Fair Market
Rents (FMRs) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2010.
SUMMARY: Section 8(c)(1) of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 (USHA)
requires the Secretary to publish FMRs
periodically, but not less than annually,
adjusted to be effective on October 1 of
each year. The primary uses of FMRs are
to determine payment standard amounts
for the Housing Choice Voucher
program, to determine initial renewal
rents for some expiring project-based
Section 8 contracts, to determine initial
rents for housing assistance payment
(HAP) contracts in the Moderate
Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy
program (Mod Rehab), and to serve as a
rent ceiling in the HOME rental
assistance program. Today’s notice
provides final FY 2010 FMRs for all
areas that reflect the estimated 40th and
50th percentile rent levels trended to
April 1, 2010. The FY 2010 FMRs are
based on 2000 Census data updated
with more current survey data. For FY
2010, FY 2009 FMRs are updated using
2007 American Community Survey
(ACS) data, and more recent Consumer
Price Index (CPI) rent and utility
indexes. HUD continues to use ACS
data in different ways according to how
many two-bedroom standard-quality
and recent-mover sample cases are
available in the FMR area or its CoreBased Statistical Area (CBSA). Revised
2007 FMRs based on Census and ACS
data have been updated with CPI data
through the end of 2008 and then
trended to April 2010, the mid-point of
FY 2010.
DATES: Effective Date: The FMRs
published in this notice are effective on
October 1, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical information on the
methodology used to develop FMRs or
a listing of all FMRs, please call the
HUD USER information line at (800)
245–2691 or access the information at
the following link on the HUD Web site:
https://www.huduser.org/datasets/
fmr.html. FMRs are listed at the 40th or
50th percentile in Schedule B. An
asterisk before the FMR area name
identifies a 50th percentile area. Any
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
questions related to use of FMRs or
voucher payment standards should be
directed to the respective local HUD
program staff. Questions on how to
conduct FMR surveys or further
methodological explanations may be
addressed to Marie L. Lihn or Lynn A.
Rodgers, Economic and Market Analysis
Division, Office of Economic Affairs,
Office of Policy Development and
Research, telephone number (202) 708–
0590. Persons with hearing or speech
impairments may access this number
through TTY by calling the toll-free
Federal Information Relay Service at
(800) 877–8339. (Other than the HUD
USER information line and TTY
numbers, telephone numbers are not
toll-free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 8 of the USHA (42 U.S.C.
1437f) authorizes housing assistance to
aid lower-income families in renting
safe and decent housing. Housing
assistance payments are limited by
FMRs established by HUD for different
areas. In the Housing Choice Voucher
program, the FMR is the basis for
determining the ‘‘payment standard
amount’’ used to calculate the
maximum monthly subsidy for an
assisted family (see 24 CFR 982.503). In
general, the FMR for an area is the
amount that would be needed to pay the
gross rent (shelter rent plus utilities) of
privately owned, decent, and safe rental
housing of a modest (non-luxury) nature
with suitable amenities. In addition, all
rents subsidized under the Housing
Choice Voucher program must meet
reasonable rent standards. The interim
rule published on October 2, 2000 (65
FR 58870), established 50th percentile
FMRs for certain areas.
Electronic Data Availability: This
Federal Register notice is available
electronically from the U.S. Government
Printing Office Web site, https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
Complete documentation of the
methodology and data used to compute
each area’s Final FY 2010 FMRs is
available at https://www.huduser.org/
datasets/fmr/fmrs/
index.asp?data=fmr10.
II. Procedures for the Development of
FMRs
Section 8(c) of the USHA requires the
Secretary of HUD to publish FMRs
periodically, but not less frequently
than annually. Section 8(c) states in
part, as follows:
Proposed fair market rentals for an area
shall be published in the Federal Register
with reasonable time for public comment and
shall become effective upon the date of
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
publication in final form in the Federal
Register. Each fair market rental in effect
under this subsection shall be adjusted to be
effective on October 1 of each year to reflect
changes—based on the most recent available
data trended so the rentals will be current for
the year to which they apply—of rents for
existing or newly constructed rental dwelling
units, as the case may be, of various sizes and
types in this section.
The Department’s regulations at 24 CFR
part 888 provide that HUD will develop
proposed FMRs, publish them for public
comment, provide a public comment
period of at least 30 days, analyze the
comments, and publish final FMRs (See
24 CFR 888.115).
In addition, HUD’s regulations at 24
CFR 888.113 set out procedures for HUD
to assess whether areas are eligible for
FMRs at the 50th percentile. Areas that
currently have 50th percentile FMRs are
evaluated for progress in voucher tenant
deconcentration after three years in the
program. Continued eligibility is
determined using HUD administrative
data that show levels of voucher tenant
concentration. The levels of voucher
holder concentration must be above 25
percent and show a decrease in
concentration since the last evaluation.
At least 85 percent of the voucher units
in the area must be used to make this
determination. For FY 2009, there were
14 areas that were designated as 50th
percentile areas. Ten current 50th
percentile FMR areas were not
evaluated this year because they have
not completed three years of program
participation. These 10 areas, listed
below, will complete their three-year
program period and be evaluated to
determine if they remain 50th percentile
FMR areas in the proposed FY 2012
FMR publication.
FY 2009 50TH-PERCENTILE FMR
AREAS NOT SLATED FOR ELIGIBILITY
EVALUATION AND CONTINUING WITH
50TH-PERCENTILE FMRS IN FY
2010
Albuquerque, NM MSA.
Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL MSA.
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL HMFA.
Denver-Aurora, CO MSA.
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT
HMFA.
Houston-Baytown-Sugar Land, TX HMFA.
Kansas City, MO-KS, HMFA.
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI MSA.
Richmond, VA HMFA.
Tacoma, WA HMFA.
The remaining four current 50th
percentile FMR areas had been in the
program for a three-year period and
were reviewed to determine if
deconcentration had occurred. A list of
these four areas is shown below.
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
FY 2009 50TH-PERCENTILE FMR
AREAS REVIEWED FOR ELIGIBILITY
AS FY 2010 50TH-PERCENTILE FMR
AREAS
Dallas, TX HMFA.
Fort Lauderdale, FL HMFA.
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA.
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL HMFA.
Two of the four current 50th
percentile areas eligible for review fail
to qualify for the 50th percentile FMR
program for FY 2010. One of these areas,
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA
MSA, no longer qualifies for the 50thpercentile FMR program because the
area no longer meets the voucher holder
concentration standards set out in the
50th percentile FMR program, at 24 CFR
888.113. Based on current tenant data,
less than 25 percent of the tenant-based
rental program participants reside in the
5 percent of census tracts in the
metropolitan area with the largest
number of program participants. This
area will be reviewed annually to see if
its concentration changes to above 25
percent so it can be reinstated as a 50th
percentile area. The San Diego-CarlsbadSan Marcos, CA MSA could re-qualify
as 50th percentile FMR areas as early as
the FY 2011 FMRs.
As noted in the publication of
proposed FY 2010 FMRs, the Dallas, TX
HMFA failed to deconcentrate over the
three-year period. Under current
regulations, the Dallas, TX HMFA is not
eligible for participation in the 50th
percentile FMR program until FY 2013.
The Dallas, TX HMFA will be reviewed
in time for the proposed FY 2013 FMRs
to determine if they can meet 50th
percentile FMR criteria.
Two of the four areas reviewed will
continue to use 50th percentile FMRs
for another three-year period. These two
areas will not be re-evaluated until FY
2013.
FY 2009 50TH-PERCENTILE FMR
AREAS EVALUATED AND CONTINUING
WITH 50TH-PERCENTILE FMRS IN
FY 2010
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Fort Lauderdale, FL HMFA.
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL HMFA.
For FY 2010, five areas that were not
designated as 50th percentile FMRs in
FY 2009 were evaluated to determine if
they met all of the qualifications for
designation this year. All five of these
areas are 50th percentile areas effective
October 1st for a three-year period
beginning with the FY 2010 FMRs.
These areas are listed in the table below.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
50553
AREAS REVIEWED FOR ELIGIBILITY AS Jackson, MO-IL MSA, Manhattan, KS
FY 2010 50TH-PERCENTILE FMR MSA, Mankato-North Mankato, MN
MSA. The area definitions based on
AREAS
Baltimore-Towson, MD MSA.
Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI HMFA.
New Haven-Meriden, CT HMFA.
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DEMD MSA.
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD
HMFA.
In total, 17 areas will have 50th
percentile FMRs in FY 2010, including
10 areas that will be evaluated for FY
2012, two areas that passed review and
will be re-evaluated for FY 2013, and
five areas that did not have 50th
percentile FMRs in FY 2009, and will
also be evaluated for FY 2013. Included
in these five newly-designated 50th
percentile FMR areas is Washington,
DC, which was not considered a 50th
percentile FMR area in the proposed
publication because the reporting rate
for the area was less than 85 percent.
Additional data was provided by the DC
Housing Authority, the analysis was
completed, and all 50th percentile
criteria were met.
III. Proposed FY 2010 FMRs
On August 4, 2009 (74 FR 38716),
HUD published proposed FY 2010
FMRs. As noted in the preamble to the
proposed FMRs, the FMRs for FY 2010
reflect the use of both one-year and
three-year 2007 ACS data to update June
2006 rent estimates for each area. In
addition, the FY 2010 FMRs include all
changes made to metropolitan area
definitions made by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), as of
November 2008.
During the comment period, which
ended September 2, 2009, HUD received
10 public comments on the proposed FY
2010 FMRs. None of the comments
received included the data needed to
support FMR changes. Several of these
comments expressed that proposed FY
2010 FMRs are incorrect for their
respective market areas. The comments
received are discussed in more detail
later in this notice.
IV. FMR Methodology
The FY 2010 FMRs are based on
current OMB metropolitan area
definitions that were first used in the FY
2006 FMRs. The changes OMB made to
the Metropolitan Area Definitions in
November 2008 are incorporated. This
means that there are five Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA) name changes
that reorder, add, or delete a primary
city name. Additionally, three
micropolitan areas were re-defined as
metropolitan areas: Cape Girardeau-
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
2000 Census data have the advantages of
providing more relevant commuting
interchange standards, and more current
measures of housing market
relationships than those based on 1990
Census data and used prior to the FY
2006 FMRs.
At HUD’s request, the Census Bureau
prepared a special publicly releasable
census file that permits almost exact
replication of HUD’s 2000 Base Rent
calculations, except for areas with few
rental units. This data set is located on
HUD’s HUD USER Web site at https://
www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/
CensusRentData/.
A. Data Sources—2000 Census and
American Community Survey
As in all post-FY 2006 FMR
publications, FY 2010 FMRs start with
base rents generated using Census 2000
long form survey data. They are updated
with American Community Survey
(ACS) data and Bureau of Labor
Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI)
data. FY 2010 FMRs are FY 2009 FMRs
updated by replacing the CPI data used
for FY 2009 FMRS with ACS 2007
survey data and updated CPI data.
Specifically, the FY 2009 rent (as of
date: April, 2009) is deflated to June
2006 by dividing it by 18 months of CPI
data representing June 2006 through
December 2007 inflation, and the usual
15 month trend factor. This June 2006
rent is the best and most recent rent
estimate available using only ACS
survey and eliminating all other update
data. It is this rent that is updated with
additional ACS data and new CPI data.
In order to preserve additional
information gathered by HUD through
random digit dialing (RDD) surveys,
areas surveyed after June 2007 are
updated separately, the details of which
can be found at the Web site listed
above.
B. Updates from 2006 to 2007—2007
ACS
ACS survey data continues to be
applied to areas based on the type of
area (CBSA, metropolitan sub-area, or
non-metropolitan county), the amount
of survey data available, and the
reliability of the survey estimates. Both
one- and three-year ACS 2007 data are
used to update June 2006 rents. All
areas are updated with the change from
2006 to 2007 in State or metropolitan
one-year standard quality median rents.
In a methodological update from
previous years’ estimates intended to
minimize fluctuations in rents due to
survey error, these rent changes are
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50554
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
Z=
EST1 − EST2
( SE
2
1
2
+ SE2
)
After all areas have been updated
with a standard quality median rent
change, local areas with estimates that
reflect more than 200 one-year recent
mover cases are evaluated further. If the
updated rent is outside the confidence
interval of the ACS recent mover
estimate, the updated rent is replaced
with the ACS recent mover rent
estimate. In areas without 200 or more
one-year ACS recent mover
observations, but with 200 or more
three-year ACS recent mover
observations, the three year estimate 2 is
used if it is statistically different from
the updated 2007 rent based on the
standard quality median rent change.
This process creates a June 2007 rent.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
C. Updates From 2007 to 2008
ACS 2007 data updates the June 2006
rents used in the FY 2009 FMRs forward
by 12 months to June 2007. Six months
of 2007 and 12 months of 2008 CPI rent
and utilities price index data are used
to update the June 2007 rents to the end
of 2008. Local CPI data are used for
FMR areas with at least 75 percent of
their population within Class A
metropolitan areas covered by local CPI
data. Census region CPI data are used
for FMR areas in Class B and C size
metropolitan areas and nonmetropolitan
areas without local CPI update factors.
1 The change is considered statistically significant
if Z > 1.645 where (see equation above) and EST1
= ACS 2007. Estimate, EST2 = ACS 2006 Estimate,
SE1 = Standard Error of Estimate 1 and SE2 =
Standard Error of Estimate 2.
2 The recent mover estimate from the three year
data includes all those who moved in the most
recent 24 month period. That means that no 2005
survey data are included in this three-year recent
mover classification and the likelihood of having a
valid (with 200 or more cases) three-year recent
mover rent is lower for these estimates.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
D. Updates From 2008 to 2010
The national 1990 to 2000 average
annual rent increase trend of 1.03 is
applied to end-of-2008 rents for 15
months, to derive the proposed FY 2010
FMRs.
The area-specific data and
computations used to calculate
proposed FY 2010 FMRs and FMR area
definitions can be found at https://
www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/
index.asp?data=fmr10.
E. Large Bedroom Rents
FMR estimates are calculated for twobedroom units. This generally is the
most common size of rental units, and
therefore the most reliable to survey and
analyze. After each decennial census,
rent relationships between two-bedroom
units and other unit sizes are calculated
and used to set FMRs for other units.
This is done because it is much easier
to update two-bedroom estimates and to
use pre-established cost relationships
with other bedroom sizes than it is to
develop independent FMR estimates for
each bedroom size. This was last done
using 2000 Census data. A publicly
releasable version of the data file used
that permits derivations of rent ratios is
available at https://www.huduser.org/
datasets/fmr/CensusRentData/
index.html. Rent ratio derivations are
also shown in the FMR documentation
system at https://www.huduser.org/
datasets/fmr/fmrs/
index.asp?data=fmr10.
The rents for three-bedroom and
larger units continue to reflect HUD’s
policy to set higher rents for these units
than would result from using normal
market rents. This adjustment is
intended to increase the likelihood that
the largest families, who have the most
difficulty in leasing units, will be
successful in finding eligible program
units. The adjustment adds bonuses of
8.7 percent to the unadjusted threebedroom FMR estimates and adds 7.7
percent to the unadjusted four-bedroom
FMR estimates. The FMRs for unit sizes
larger than four bedrooms are calculated
by adding 15 percent to the fourbedroom FMR for each extra bedroom.
For example, the FMR for a fivebedroom unit is 1.15 times the fourbedroom FMR, and the FMR for a sixbedroom unit is 1.30 times the fourbedroom FMR. FMRs for single-room
occupancy units are 0.75 times the zerobedroom (efficiency) FMR.
A further adjustment was made using
2000 Census data in establishing rent
ratios for areas with local bedroom-size
intervals above or below what are
considered to be reasonable ranges or
where sample sizes are inadequate to
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
accurately measure bedroom rent
differentials. HUD’s experience has
shown that highly unusual bedroom
ratios typically reflect inadequate
sample sizes or peculiar local
circumstances that HUD would not
want to utilize in setting FMRs (e.g.,
luxury efficiency apartments that rent
for more than typical one-bedroom
units). Bedroom interval ranges were
established based on an analysis of the
range of such intervals for all areas with
large enough samples to permit accurate
bedroom ratio determinations. The
ranges used were: Efficiency units are
constrained to fall between 0.65 and
0.83 of the two-bedroom FMR; onebedroom units must be between 0.76
and 0.90 of the two-bedroom unit; threebedroom units must be between 1.10
and 1.34 of the two-bedroom unit; and
four-bedroom units must be between
1.14 and 1.63 of the two-bedroom unit.
Bedroom rents for a given FMR area
were then adjusted if the differentials
between bedroom-size FMRs were
inconsistent with normally observed
patterns (i.e., efficiency rents were not
allowed to be higher than one-bedroom
rents and four-bedroom rents were not
allowed to be lower than three-bedroom
rents).
For low-population, nonmetropolitan
counties with small census recentmover rent samples, census-defined
county group data were used in
determining rents for each bedroom
size. This adjustment was made to
protect against unrealistically high or
low FMRs due to insufficient sample
sizes. The areas covered by this
estimation method had less than the
HUD standard of 200 two-bedroom
census-tabulated observations.
V. Public Comments
A total of 10 public comments were
received on the proposed FY 2010
FMRs. Two of the comments filed were
concerned with HUD’s presentation of
proposed FMR data. These comments
requested that HUD publish both the
current proposed and most recent final
FMRs together in a spreadsheet. The
concept of comparing proposed rents to
current effective rents is relevant so
HUD has added this comparison to its
on-line documentation system to
provide interested users with a
comparison of current year proposed
rents to final rents from the previous
year. This functionality will only be
available in the proposed FMR
documentation systems.
Several commenters expressed
concern with either increases or
decreases in their FMRs. HUD will
shortly be issuing guidance on costrelated issues in the housing voucher
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.063
tested for statistical significance 1 before
being applied to 2006 rents. Any state
or metropolitan level change that is not
statistically significant is not applied,
that is the updated 2007 rent is the same
as the 2006 rent. Metropolitan level rent
changes are used for CBSA areas and
sub-areas that have more than 200
standard quality cases in 2006 and 2007.
All other areas are updated with state
level rent changes. For sub-areas, State
and CBSA change factors continue to be
selected based on which factor brings
the sub-area rent closer to the CBSAwide rent. Sub-areas which have 200 or
more local standard quality survey
observations are updated with their
local area update factor.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
program including the setting of
payment standards. However, as a
reminder, whether there is a decrease or
an increase in the FY 2010 FMR, a PHA
is not required to decrease or increase
the dollar amount of their payment
standards unless the FMR results in the
payment standard being outside the
basic range of 90-to-110 percent of the
FMR.
A comment from the Housing
Authority of the City of Reno stated that
proposed FY 2010 FMRs are too high.
The Reno comment claims that no
increase in its FMR is needed and asks
HUD to hold its FMRs at the FY 2009
level. Reno includes an analysis that
states that the three-percent annual
trend factor is the cause of the increase
in Reno’s FMR from FY 2009 to FY
2010, and requests that HUD revise its
trend factor downward. However, the
actual source of the increase comes from
the nearly 6-percent increase in ACS
measured 2 bedroom rents between
2006 and 2007. No data were submitted
by the Housing Authority to support
their claim that FMRs are too high in the
area, but because the increase in the
FMR for Reno is based on an update
factor using standard quality, not recent
mover, ACS data between 2006 ACS and
2007 ACS HUD will conduct a RDD
survey in the area to see if more current
rents support a lower FMR.
A real estate management firm serving
customers in New Bedford, MA
commented that FMRs are too low for
their professionally managed and
maintained communities; therefore,
their communities will not be able to
accommodate voucher tenants. The
comment specifically requested that
HUD not conduct a RDD survey. Absent
sufficient data reflecting rent levels that
exist in the entire FMR area, HUD has
no mechanism for adjusting FMRs in
this area.
The Oklahoma City Housing
Authority commented that the proposed
3.5 percent decrease in FMRs for the
Oklahoma City, OK MSA is not
justified. They cite a 3-percent increase
in aggregate rental rates per square foot
between 2007 and 2008 as quoted from
a full-service commercial real estate
firm as the basis for the objection. The
decrease in the proposed FY 2010 FMR
for Oklahoma City, OK is driven by a 1year 2007 ACS recent-mover survey
result that measured a statistically
significant drop in two-bedroom unit
rents between 2006 and 2007. This 2007
ACS result qualifies as the new basis for
the Oklahoma City FMR. Activity in the
rental market subsequent to 2007 is
measured by 18 months of CPI rent and
utility indexes and the traditional trend
factor. These indexes lend credence to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
the quoted increases in rental rates.
From mid-2007 to the end of 2007 this
CPI measured increase was
approximately 2 percent and from the
end of 2007 to the end of 2008, this
increase was approximately 5 percent.
However, because the 2007 ACS survey
result indicates that the base rent in
Oklahoma City was too high in 2007,
this downward adjustment is necessary.
The Lafayette Housing Authority
disagrees with HUD’s decision to
increase FMRs for the Lafayette, IN HUD
Metro FMR Area ‘‘when funding for the
HCV program continues to lag so far
behind that we must continue to
decrease the number of households we
can assist.’’ The 1.4 percent increase in
the FMR for Lafayette is based on
measured increases in rent and utility
indexes in the CPI and is the most
current data available for the area.
The Minot Housing Authority serving
Ward County, North Dakota filed a
comment that FMRs are too low in the
area. The Minot area has experienced an
extremely low vacancy rate due to
increased energy exploration and
production in the area. Additionally, a
substantial expansion of personnel at
the Minot Air Force Base will place
additional strain on the housing market
of the area. Minot is currently using a
success rate payment standard to
increase its FY 2009 FMRs, but claims
that increased payment standards are
still needed. HUD will survey this area
and will publish a revision to the FMRs
once the study is completed and if
statistically different rent results are
obtained.
The Department of Housing for the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
submitted a comment stating that FMRs
throughout the entire Commonwealth
are too low. They base this assertion on
the claim that CPI measures of rent and
utility increases measured for the South
Census region do not accurately reflect
the price changes experienced in Puerto
Rico. Between 2000 and 2006, the
Department of Labor and Human
Resources of the Government of Puerto
Rico created a CPI measure for Puerto
Rico in consultation with officials from
the U.S. Department of Commerce’s
Bureau of Labor Statistics. HUD was not
aware of this activity so previous FMRs
have not included this Puerto Rico
specific CPI data. HUD will incorporate
consideration of this new CPI index into
its FMR Process Review.
The National Association of Housing
and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO)
submitted a general comment not
specific to any FMR area. In their
comment, NAHRO recommends
multiple topics for future improvement
of both the FMR and the Income Limit
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
50555
methodology. Briefly, these topics
include: (1) HUD’s implementation of
the OMB area definitions in FY 2006; (2)
use of tenant data when developing
Annual Adjustment Factors; (3)
continuation of HUD’s Hold Harmless
policy for Income Limits (Comments
referencing HUD’s Hold Harmless
policy should be referred to Docket No.
FR–5323–N–01 published on September
14th); (4) enhancements to the
methodology for identifying substandard housing units in the ACS; (5)
the relationship between quality of the
rental housing stock and FMRs, (6)
determination of 50th percentile FMR
areas; (7) improvements in HUD’s RDD
methodology; (8) the impact of HUD’s
definition of ‘‘recent movers’’ and
‘‘stayers’’ on FMRs; and (9) exception
payment standards. In the preamble to
the proposed FY 2010 FMR notice, HUD
solicited topics for inclusion in future
FMR notices regarding reforms and
changes to the FMR methodology. HUD
will incorporate this list of topics into
future discussions dealing with FMR
reform.
A comment filed by the National
Association of Home Builders (NAHB)
made four specific requests: (1) Conduct
RDD surveys in the areas with a
decrease of more than 5 percent; (2)
incorporate language into proposed and
final FMR notices concerning the
adjustments made by HUD to control for
the presence of inadequate and
subsidized units; (3) explain the way
that a particular area becomes eligible
for 50th percentile FMRs; and (4) the
loss of the 50th percentile FMR
designation in the Dallas, TX HUD
Metro FMR Area.
FY 2010 proposed FMRs include two
areas that experience more than a 5
percent decline in FMRs. One is San
Diego, CA, whose decline is a result of
the loss of the 50th percentile, and the
other is Ann Arbor, MI. HUD is required
by law to use the most recent, reliable
data available in estimating FMRs.
Limiting either increases or decreases
would be counter to the current law.
FMRs for both of these areas are based
on local ACS survey results; conducting
an RDD would use scarce resources to
produce less reliable data than that
available from the ACS. In addition, no
comments were filed by any party
within either of the two areas.
NAHB has requested additional
language be added to FMR publications
concerning adjustments made to source
data to account for sub-standard and
subsidized units. In response to a
similar comment from NAHB last year
HUD published a document outlining
the procedure for these adjustments. A
link to this document is available within
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50556
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
the FY 2010 on-line documentation
wherever the adjustments are made to
the underlying data distributions and
not just in determining the 2000 Census
Base rent as reported by NAHB. HUD
believes that the on-line documentation
system is the best venue for discussing
methodological details and believes that
interested parties will be able to find the
explanation at the appropriate location
within the on-line system.
HUD continues to provide specific
details regarding the 50th percentile
status for all areas meeting the eligibility
requirements for inclusion in this
program. In response to the NAHB
request that HUD include information
regarding ‘‘success rate payment
standards’’ HUD reiterates here that all
of the rules and conditions for becoming
eligible for and for maintaining
eligibility of 50th percentile status are
given in 24 CFR 888.113 and 24 CFR
982.503, including the rules applying to
the success rate payment standard.
Finally, with regard to the loss of 50th
percentile standing for the Dallas, TX
HUD Metro FMR area, NAHB
recommends that HUD ‘‘look further
into the circumstances of areas that
stand to lose the 50th percentile
designation because of failure to
materially deconcentrate in three
years.’’ Furthermore, NAHB suggests
that there may be instances where an
additional year is warranted. Current
program regulations do not allow for an
additional year of eligibility for areas
that do not deconcentrate over the threeyear period.
VI. Manufactured Home Space Surveys
The FMR used to establish payment
standard amounts for the rental of
manufactured home spaces in the
Housing Choice Voucher program is 40
percent of the FMR for a two-bedroom
unit. HUD will consider modification of
the manufactured home space FMRs
where public comments present
statistically valid survey data showing
the 40th percentile manufactured home
space rent (including the cost of
utilities) for the entire FMR area. For FY
2010, HUD received no comments or
data concerning manufactured home
space rents.
All approved exceptions to these rents
that were in effect in FY 2009 were
updated to FY 2010 using the same data
used to estimate the Housing Choice
Voucher program FMRs if the respective
FMR area’s definition remained the
same. If the result of this computation
was higher than 40 percent of the rebenchmarked two-bedroom rent, the
exception remains and is listed in
Schedule D. The FMR area definitions
used for the rental of manufactured
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
home spaces are the same as the area
definitions used for the other FMRs.
Areas with definitional changes that
previously had exceptions to their
manufactured housing space rental
FMRs are requested to submit new
surveys to justify higher-than-standard
space rental FMRs if they believe higher
space rental allowances are needed.
VII. HUD Rental Housing Survey
Guides
For the supporting data, HUD
recommends the use of professionally
conducted RDD telephone surveys to
test the accuracy of FMRs for areas
where there is a sufficient number of
Section 8 units to justify the survey cost
of approximately $35,000. Areas with
2,000 or more program units usually
meet this cost criterion, and areas with
fewer units may meet it if actual rents
for two-bedroom units are significantly
different from the FMRs proposed by
HUD. In addition, HUD has developed
a version of the RDD survey
methodology for smaller,
nonmetropolitan PHAs. This
methodology is designed to be simple
enough to be done by the PHA itself,
rather than by professional survey
organizations, at a cost of $5,000 or less.
PHAs in nonmetropolitan areas may,
in certain circumstances, conduct
surveys of groups of counties. HUD
must approve all county-grouped
surveys in advance. PHAs are cautioned
that the resulting FMRs will not be
identical for the counties surveyed.
Each individual FMR area will have a
separate FMR based on the relationship
of rents in that area to the combined
rents in the cluster of FMR areas. In
addition, PHAs are advised that
counties where FMRs are based on the
combined rents in the cluster of FMR
areas will not have their FMRs revised
unless the grouped survey results show
a revised FMR above the combined rent
level.
PHAs that plan to use the RDD survey
technique should obtain a copy of the
appropriate survey guide. Larger PHAs
should request HUD’s survey guide
entitled ‘‘Random Digit Dialing Surveys;
A Guide to Assist Larger Public Housing
Agencies in Preparing Fair Market Rent
Comments.’’ Smaller PHAs should
obtain the guide entitled ‘‘Rental
Housing Surveys: A Guide to Assist
Smaller Public Housing Agencies in
Preparing Fair Market Rent Comments.’’
These guides, in Microsoft Word format,
are available from HUD USER at HUD’s
Web site at the following address:
https://www.huduser.org/datasets/
fmr.html.
Other survey methodologies are
acceptable in providing data to support
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
comments, if the survey methodology
can provide statistically reliable,
unbiased estimates of the gross rent.
Survey samples should preferably be
randomly drawn from a complete list of
rental units for the FMR area. If this is
not feasible, the selected sample must
be drawn to be statistically
representative of the entire rental
housing stock of the FMR area. Surveys
must include units at all rent levels and
be representative by structure type
(including single-family, duplex, and
other small rental properties), age of
housing unit, and geographic location.
The decennial census should be used as
a means of verifying if a sample is
representative of the FMR area’s rental
housing stock.
Most surveys of FMR areas cover only
one- and two-bedroom units. If the
survey is statistically acceptable, HUD
will estimate FMRs for other bedroom
sizes using ratios based on the decennial
census. A PHA or contractor that cannot
obtain the recommended number of
sample responses after reasonable
efforts should consult with HUD before
abandoning its survey; in such
situations, HUD may find it appropriate
to relax normal sample size
requirements.
HUD will consider increasing
manufactured home space FMRs where
public comment demonstrates that 40
percent of the two-bedroom FMR is not
adequate. In order to be accepted as a
basis for revising the manufactured
home space FMRs, comments must
include a pad rental survey of the
mobile home parks in the area, identify
the utilities included in each park’s
rental fee, and provide a copy of the
applicable public housing authority’s
utility schedule.
Accordingly, the Fair Market Rent
Schedules, which will not be codified in
24 CFR Part 888, are amended as
follows:
Dated: September 23, 2009.
Raphael W. Bostic,
Assistant Secretary for Policy Development
and Research.
Fair Market Rents for the Housing
Choice Voucher Program
Schedules B and D—General
Explanatory Notes
1. Geographic Coverage
a. Metropolitan Areas—FMRs are
market-wide rent estimates that are
intended to provide housing
opportunities throughout the geographic
area in which rental-housing units are
in direct competition. The FY2010
FMRs reflect a change in metropolitan
area definitions. HUD is using the
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
metropolitan Core Based Statistical
Areas (CBSA), which are made up of
one or more counties, as defined by the
OMB, with some modifications. HUD is
generally assigning separate FMRs to the
component counties of CBSA
Micropolitan Areas.
b. Modifications to OMB Definitions—
Following OMB guidance, the
estimation procedure for the FY2010
FMRs incorporates the current OMB
definitions of metropolitan areas based
on the CBSA standards as implemented
with 2000 Census data, but makes
adjustments to the definitions to
separate subparts of these areas where
FMRs or median incomes would
otherwise change significantly if the
new area definitions were used without
modification. In CBSAs where sub-areas
are established, it is HUD’s view that the
geographic extent of the housing
markets are not yet the same as the
geographic extent of the CBSAs, but
may become so in the future as the
social and economic integration of the
CBSA component areas increases.
Modifications to metropolitan CBSA
definitions are made according to a
formula as described below.
Metropolitan area CBSAs (referred to
as Metropolitan Statistical Areas or
MSAs) may be modified to allow for
sub-area FMRs within MSAs based on
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
the boundaries of old FMR areas (OFAs)
within the boundaries of new MSAs.
(OFAs are the FMR areas defined for the
FY2005 FMRs. Collectively, they
include 1999 definition MSAs/PMSAs,
metropolitan counties deleted from
1999 definition MSAs/PMSAs by HUD
for FMR purposes, and counties and
county parts outside of 1999 definition
MSAs/PMSAs referred to as
nonmetropolitan counties.) Sub-areas of
MSAs are assigned their own FMRs
when the sub-area 2000 Census Base
Rent differs by at least 5 percent from
the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent (i.e., by
at most 95 percent or at least 105
percent), or when the 2000 Census
Median Family Income for the sub-area
differs by at least 5 percent from the
MSA 2000 Census Median Family
Income. MSA sub-areas, and the
remaining portions of MSAs after subareas have been determined, are referred
to as HUD Metro FMR Areas (HMFAs)
to distinguish these areas from OMB’s
official definition of MSAs.
The specific counties and New
England towns and cities within each
state in MSAs and HMFAs are listed in
Schedule B.
2. Bedroom Size Adjustments
Schedule B shows the FMRs for zerobedroom through four-bedroom units.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
50557
The FMRs for unit sizes larger than four
bedrooms are calculated by adding 15
percent to the four-bedroom FMR for
each extra bedroom. For example, the
FMR for a five-bedroom unit is 1.15
times the four-bedroom FMR, and the
FMR for a six-bedroom unit is 1.30
times the four-bedroom FMR. FMRs for
single-room-occupancy (SRO) units are
0.75 times the zero-bedroom FMR.
3. Arrangement of FMR Areas and
Identification of Constituent Parts
a. The FMR areas in Schedule B are
listed alphabetically by metropolitan
FMR area and by nonmetropolitan
county within each state. The exception
rents for manufactured home spaces
FMRs are listed alphabetically in
Schedule D.
b. The constituent counties (and New
England towns and cities) included in
each metropolitan FMR area are listed
immediately following the listings of the
FMR dollar amounts. All constituent
parts of a metropolitan FMR area that
are in more than one state can be
identified by consulting the listings for
each applicable state.
c. Two nonmetropolitan counties are
listed alphabetically on each line of the
nonmetropolitan county listings.
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.142
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50558
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50559
EN30SE09.143
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.144
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50560
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50561
EN30SE09.145
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.146
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50562
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50563
EN30SE09.147
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.148
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50564
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50565
EN30SE09.149
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.150
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50566
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50567
EN30SE09.151
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.152
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50568
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50569
EN30SE09.153
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.154
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50570
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50571
EN30SE09.155
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.156
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50572
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50573
EN30SE09.157
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.158
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50574
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50575
EN30SE09.159
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.160
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50576
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50577
EN30SE09.161
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.162
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50578
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50579
EN30SE09.163
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.164
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50580
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50581
EN30SE09.165
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.166
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50582
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50583
EN30SE09.167
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.168
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50584
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50585
EN30SE09.169
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.170
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50586
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50587
EN30SE09.171
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.172
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50588
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50589
EN30SE09.173
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.174
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50590
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50591
EN30SE09.175
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.176
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50592
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50593
EN30SE09.177
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.178
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50594
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50595
EN30SE09.179
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.180
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50596
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50597
EN30SE09.181
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.182
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50598
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50599
EN30SE09.183
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.184
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50600
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50601
EN30SE09.185
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.186
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50602
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50603
EN30SE09.187
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.188
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50604
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50605
EN30SE09.189
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.190
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50606
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50607
EN30SE09.191
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.192
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50608
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50609
EN30SE09.193
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.194
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50610
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50611
EN30SE09.195
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.196
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50612
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50613
EN30SE09.197
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.198
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50614
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50615
EN30SE09.199
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.200
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50616
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50617
EN30SE09.201
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.202
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50618
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50619
EN30SE09.203
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.204
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50620
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50621
EN30SE09.205
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.206
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50622
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50623
EN30SE09.207
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.208
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50624
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50625
EN30SE09.209
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.210
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50626
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50627
EN30SE09.211
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.212
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50628
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50629
EN30SE09.213
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.214
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50630
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50631
EN30SE09.215
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.216
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50632
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50633
EN30SE09.217
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.218
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50634
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50635
EN30SE09.219
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.220
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50636
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50637
EN30SE09.221
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.222
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50638
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50639
EN30SE09.223
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.224
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50640
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50641
EN30SE09.225
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.226
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50642
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50643
EN30SE09.227
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.228
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50644
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50645
EN30SE09.229
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.230
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50646
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50647
EN30SE09.231
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.232
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50648
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50649
EN30SE09.233
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.234
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50650
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50651
EN30SE09.235
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.236
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50652
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50653
EN30SE09.237
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.238
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50654
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50655
EN30SE09.239
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.240
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50656
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50657
EN30SE09.241
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.242
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50658
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50659
EN30SE09.243
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.244
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50660
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50661
EN30SE09.245
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.246
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50662
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
50663
EN30SE09.247
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
[FR Doc. E9–23477 Filed 9–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–C
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:22 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\30SEN2.SGM
30SEN2
EN30SE09.248
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
50664
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50552-50664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23477]
[[Page 50551]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Housing and Urban Development
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Fair Market Rents for Fiscal Year 2010 for the Housing Choice
Voucher Program and Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy
Program; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 74 , No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009
/ Notices
[[Page 50552]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-5328-N-02]
Final Fair Market Rents for Fiscal Year 2010 for the Housing
Choice Voucher Program and Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room
Occupancy Program
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and
Research, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of Final Fair Market Rents (FMRs) for Fiscal Year (FY)
2010.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 8(c)(1) of the United States Housing Act of 1937
(USHA) requires the Secretary to publish FMRs periodically, but not
less than annually, adjusted to be effective on October 1 of each year.
The primary uses of FMRs are to determine payment standard amounts for
the Housing Choice Voucher program, to determine initial renewal rents
for some expiring project-based Section 8 contracts, to determine
initial rents for housing assistance payment (HAP) contracts in the
Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy program (Mod Rehab), and
to serve as a rent ceiling in the HOME rental assistance program.
Today's notice provides final FY 2010 FMRs for all areas that reflect
the estimated 40th and 50th percentile rent levels trended to April 1,
2010. The FY 2010 FMRs are based on 2000 Census data updated with more
current survey data. For FY 2010, FY 2009 FMRs are updated using 2007
American Community Survey (ACS) data, and more recent Consumer Price
Index (CPI) rent and utility indexes. HUD continues to use ACS data in
different ways according to how many two-bedroom standard-quality and
recent-mover sample cases are available in the FMR area or its Core-
Based Statistical Area (CBSA). Revised 2007 FMRs based on Census and
ACS data have been updated with CPI data through the end of 2008 and
then trended to April 2010, the mid-point of FY 2010.
DATES: Effective Date: The FMRs published in this notice are effective
on October 1, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information on the
methodology used to develop FMRs or a listing of all FMRs, please call
the HUD USER information line at (800) 245-2691 or access the
information at the following link on the HUD Web site: https://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html. FMRs are listed at the 40th or 50th
percentile in Schedule B. An asterisk before the FMR area name
identifies a 50th percentile area. Any questions related to use of FMRs
or voucher payment standards should be directed to the respective local
HUD program staff. Questions on how to conduct FMR surveys or further
methodological explanations may be addressed to Marie L. Lihn or Lynn
A. Rodgers, Economic and Market Analysis Division, Office of Economic
Affairs, Office of Policy Development and Research, telephone number
(202) 708-0590. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access
this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information
Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. (Other than the HUD USER information
line and TTY numbers, telephone numbers are not toll-free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 8 of the USHA (42 U.S.C. 1437f) authorizes housing
assistance to aid lower-income families in renting safe and decent
housing. Housing assistance payments are limited by FMRs established by
HUD for different areas. In the Housing Choice Voucher program, the FMR
is the basis for determining the ``payment standard amount'' used to
calculate the maximum monthly subsidy for an assisted family (see 24
CFR 982.503). In general, the FMR for an area is the amount that would
be needed to pay the gross rent (shelter rent plus utilities) of
privately owned, decent, and safe rental housing of a modest (non-
luxury) nature with suitable amenities. In addition, all rents
subsidized under the Housing Choice Voucher program must meet
reasonable rent standards. The interim rule published on October 2,
2000 (65 FR 58870), established 50th percentile FMRs for certain areas.
Electronic Data Availability: This Federal Register notice is
available electronically from the U.S. Government Printing Office Web
site, https://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/. Complete documentation of
the methodology and data used to compute each area's Final FY 2010 FMRs
is available at https://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/index.asp?data=fmr10.
II. Procedures for the Development of FMRs
Section 8(c) of the USHA requires the Secretary of HUD to publish
FMRs periodically, but not less frequently than annually. Section 8(c)
states in part, as follows:
Proposed fair market rentals for an area shall be published in
the Federal Register with reasonable time for public comment and
shall become effective upon the date of publication in final form in
the Federal Register. Each fair market rental in effect under this
subsection shall be adjusted to be effective on October 1 of each
year to reflect changes--based on the most recent available data
trended so the rentals will be current for the year to which they
apply--of rents for existing or newly constructed rental dwelling
units, as the case may be, of various sizes and types in this
section.
The Department's regulations at 24 CFR part 888 provide that HUD will
develop proposed FMRs, publish them for public comment, provide a
public comment period of at least 30 days, analyze the comments, and
publish final FMRs (See 24 CFR 888.115).
In addition, HUD's regulations at 24 CFR 888.113 set out procedures
for HUD to assess whether areas are eligible for FMRs at the 50th
percentile. Areas that currently have 50th percentile FMRs are
evaluated for progress in voucher tenant deconcentration after three
years in the program. Continued eligibility is determined using HUD
administrative data that show levels of voucher tenant concentration.
The levels of voucher holder concentration must be above 25 percent and
show a decrease in concentration since the last evaluation. At least 85
percent of the voucher units in the area must be used to make this
determination. For FY 2009, there were 14 areas that were designated as
50th percentile areas. Ten current 50th percentile FMR areas were not
evaluated this year because they have not completed three years of
program participation. These 10 areas, listed below, will complete
their three-year program period and be evaluated to determine if they
remain 50th percentile FMR areas in the proposed FY 2012 FMR
publication.
FY 2009 50th-Percentile FMR Areas Not Slated for Eligibility Evaluation
and Continuing With 50th-Percentile FMRs in FY 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Albuquerque, NM MSA.
Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL MSA.
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL HMFA.
Denver-Aurora, CO MSA.
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT HMFA.
Houston-Baytown-Sugar Land, TX HMFA.
Kansas City, MO-KS, HMFA.
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI MSA.
Richmond, VA HMFA.
Tacoma, WA HMFA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remaining four current 50th percentile FMR areas had been in
the program for a three-year period and were reviewed to determine if
deconcentration had occurred. A list of these four areas is shown
below.
[[Page 50553]]
FY 2009 50th-Percentile FMR Areas Reviewed for Eligibility as FY 2010
50th-Percentile FMR Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dallas, TX HMFA.
Fort Lauderdale, FL HMFA.
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA.
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL HMFA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two of the four current 50th percentile areas eligible for review
fail to qualify for the 50th percentile FMR program for FY 2010. One of
these areas, San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA, no longer qualifies
for the 50th-percentile FMR program because the area no longer meets
the voucher holder concentration standards set out in the 50th
percentile FMR program, at 24 CFR 888.113. Based on current tenant
data, less than 25 percent of the tenant-based rental program
participants reside in the 5 percent of census tracts in the
metropolitan area with the largest number of program participants. This
area will be reviewed annually to see if its concentration changes to
above 25 percent so it can be reinstated as a 50th percentile area. The
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA could re-qualify as 50th
percentile FMR areas as early as the FY 2011 FMRs.
As noted in the publication of proposed FY 2010 FMRs, the Dallas,
TX HMFA failed to deconcentrate over the three-year period. Under
current regulations, the Dallas, TX HMFA is not eligible for
participation in the 50th percentile FMR program until FY 2013. The
Dallas, TX HMFA will be reviewed in time for the proposed FY 2013 FMRs
to determine if they can meet 50th percentile FMR criteria.
Two of the four areas reviewed will continue to use 50th percentile
FMRs for another three-year period. These two areas will not be re-
evaluated until FY 2013.
FY 2009 50th-Percentile FMR Areas Evaluated and Continuing With 50th-
Percentile FMRs in FY 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Lauderdale, FL HMFA.
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL HMFA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For FY 2010, five areas that were not designated as 50th percentile
FMRs in FY 2009 were evaluated to determine if they met all of the
qualifications for designation this year. All five of these areas are
50th percentile areas effective October 1st for a three-year period
beginning with the FY 2010 FMRs. These areas are listed in the table
below.
Areas Reviewed for Eligibility as FY 2010 50th-Percentile FMR Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore-Towson, MD MSA.
Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI HMFA.
New Haven-Meriden, CT HMFA.
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA.
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD HMFA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In total, 17 areas will have 50th percentile FMRs in FY 2010,
including 10 areas that will be evaluated for FY 2012, two areas that
passed review and will be re-evaluated for FY 2013, and five areas that
did not have 50th percentile FMRs in FY 2009, and will also be
evaluated for FY 2013. Included in these five newly-designated 50th
percentile FMR areas is Washington, DC, which was not considered a 50th
percentile FMR area in the proposed publication because the reporting
rate for the area was less than 85 percent. Additional data was
provided by the DC Housing Authority, the analysis was completed, and
all 50th percentile criteria were met.
III. Proposed FY 2010 FMRs
On August 4, 2009 (74 FR 38716), HUD published proposed FY 2010
FMRs. As noted in the preamble to the proposed FMRs, the FMRs for FY
2010 reflect the use of both one-year and three-year 2007 ACS data to
update June 2006 rent estimates for each area. In addition, the FY 2010
FMRs include all changes made to metropolitan area definitions made by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), as of November 2008.
During the comment period, which ended September 2, 2009, HUD
received 10 public comments on the proposed FY 2010 FMRs. None of the
comments received included the data needed to support FMR changes.
Several of these comments expressed that proposed FY 2010 FMRs are
incorrect for their respective market areas. The comments received are
discussed in more detail later in this notice.
IV. FMR Methodology
The FY 2010 FMRs are based on current OMB metropolitan area
definitions that were first used in the FY 2006 FMRs. The changes OMB
made to the Metropolitan Area Definitions in November 2008 are
incorporated. This means that there are five Metropolitan Statistical
Area (MSA) name changes that reorder, add, or delete a primary city
name. Additionally, three micropolitan areas were re-defined as
metropolitan areas: Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO-IL MSA, Manhattan, KS
MSA, Mankato-North Mankato, MN MSA. The area definitions based on 2000
Census data have the advantages of providing more relevant commuting
interchange standards, and more current measures of housing market
relationships than those based on 1990 Census data and used prior to
the FY 2006 FMRs.
At HUD's request, the Census Bureau prepared a special publicly
releasable census file that permits almost exact replication of HUD's
2000 Base Rent calculations, except for areas with few rental units.
This data set is located on HUD's HUD USER Web site at https://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/CensusRentData/.
A. Data Sources--2000 Census and American Community Survey
As in all post-FY 2006 FMR publications, FY 2010 FMRs start with
base rents generated using Census 2000 long form survey data. They are
updated with American Community Survey (ACS) data and Bureau of Labor
Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI) data. FY 2010 FMRs are FY 2009
FMRs updated by replacing the CPI data used for FY 2009 FMRS with ACS
2007 survey data and updated CPI data. Specifically, the FY 2009 rent
(as of date: April, 2009) is deflated to June 2006 by dividing it by 18
months of CPI data representing June 2006 through December 2007
inflation, and the usual 15 month trend factor. This June 2006 rent is
the best and most recent rent estimate available using only ACS survey
and eliminating all other update data. It is this rent that is updated
with additional ACS data and new CPI data.
In order to preserve additional information gathered by HUD through
random digit dialing (RDD) surveys, areas surveyed after June 2007 are
updated separately, the details of which can be found at the Web site
listed above.
B. Updates from 2006 to 2007--2007 ACS
ACS survey data continues to be applied to areas based on the type
of area (CBSA, metropolitan sub-area, or non-metropolitan county), the
amount of survey data available, and the reliability of the survey
estimates. Both one- and three-year ACS 2007 data are used to update
June 2006 rents. All areas are updated with the change from 2006 to
2007 in State or metropolitan one-year standard quality median rents.
In a methodological update from previous years' estimates intended to
minimize fluctuations in rents due to survey error, these rent changes
are
[[Page 50554]]
tested for statistical significance \1\ before being applied to 2006
rents. Any state or metropolitan level change that is not statistically
significant is not applied, that is the updated 2007 rent is the same
as the 2006 rent. Metropolitan level rent changes are used for CBSA
areas and sub-areas that have more than 200 standard quality cases in
2006 and 2007. All other areas are updated with state level rent
changes. For sub-areas, State and CBSA change factors continue to be
selected based on which factor brings the sub-area rent closer to the
CBSA-wide rent. Sub-areas which have 200 or more local standard quality
survey observations are updated with their local area update factor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The change is considered statistically significant if Z >
1.645 where (see equation above) and EST1 = ACS 2007.
Estimate, EST2 = ACS 2006 Estimate, SE1 =
Standard Error of Estimate 1 and SE2 = Standard Error of
Estimate 2.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.063
After all areas have been updated with a standard quality median
rent change, local areas with estimates that reflect more than 200 one-
year recent mover cases are evaluated further. If the updated rent is
outside the confidence interval of the ACS recent mover estimate, the
updated rent is replaced with the ACS recent mover rent estimate. In
areas without 200 or more one-year ACS recent mover observations, but
with 200 or more three-year ACS recent mover observations, the three
year estimate \2\ is used if it is statistically different from the
updated 2007 rent based on the standard quality median rent change.
This process creates a June 2007 rent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The recent mover estimate from the three year data includes
all those who moved in the most recent 24 month period. That means
that no 2005 survey data are included in this three-year recent
mover classification and the likelihood of having a valid (with 200
or more cases) three-year recent mover rent is lower for these
estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Updates From 2007 to 2008
ACS 2007 data updates the June 2006 rents used in the FY 2009 FMRs
forward by 12 months to June 2007. Six months of 2007 and 12 months of
2008 CPI rent and utilities price index data are used to update the
June 2007 rents to the end of 2008. Local CPI data are used for FMR
areas with at least 75 percent of their population within Class A
metropolitan areas covered by local CPI data. Census region CPI data
are used for FMR areas in Class B and C size metropolitan areas and
nonmetropolitan areas without local CPI update factors.
D. Updates From 2008 to 2010
The national 1990 to 2000 average annual rent increase trend of
1.03 is applied to end-of-2008 rents for 15 months, to derive the
proposed FY 2010 FMRs.
The area-specific data and computations used to calculate proposed
FY 2010 FMRs and FMR area definitions can be found at https://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/index.asp?data=fmr10.
E. Large Bedroom Rents
FMR estimates are calculated for two-bedroom units. This generally
is the most common size of rental units, and therefore the most
reliable to survey and analyze. After each decennial census, rent
relationships between two-bedroom units and other unit sizes are
calculated and used to set FMRs for other units. This is done because
it is much easier to update two-bedroom estimates and to use pre-
established cost relationships with other bedroom sizes than it is to
develop independent FMR estimates for each bedroom size. This was last
done using 2000 Census data. A publicly releasable version of the data
file used that permits derivations of rent ratios is available at
https://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/CensusRentData/. Rent
ratio derivations are also shown in the FMR documentation system at
https://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/index.asp?data=fmr10.
The rents for three-bedroom and larger units continue to reflect
HUD's policy to set higher rents for these units than would result from
using normal market rents. This adjustment is intended to increase the
likelihood that the largest families, who have the most difficulty in
leasing units, will be successful in finding eligible program units.
The adjustment adds bonuses of 8.7 percent to the unadjusted three-
bedroom FMR estimates and adds 7.7 percent to the unadjusted four-
bedroom FMR estimates. The FMRs for unit sizes larger than four
bedrooms are calculated by adding 15 percent to the four-bedroom FMR
for each extra bedroom. For example, the FMR for a five-bedroom unit is
1.15 times the four-bedroom FMR, and the FMR for a six-bedroom unit is
1.30 times the four-bedroom FMR. FMRs for single-room occupancy units
are 0.75 times the zero-bedroom (efficiency) FMR.
A further adjustment was made using 2000 Census data in
establishing rent ratios for areas with local bedroom-size intervals
above or below what are considered to be reasonable ranges or where
sample sizes are inadequate to accurately measure bedroom rent
differentials. HUD's experience has shown that highly unusual bedroom
ratios typically reflect inadequate sample sizes or peculiar local
circumstances that HUD would not want to utilize in setting FMRs (e.g.,
luxury efficiency apartments that rent for more than typical one-
bedroom units). Bedroom interval ranges were established based on an
analysis of the range of such intervals for all areas with large enough
samples to permit accurate bedroom ratio determinations. The ranges
used were: Efficiency units are constrained to fall between 0.65 and
0.83 of the two-bedroom FMR; one-bedroom units must be between 0.76 and
0.90 of the two-bedroom unit; three-bedroom units must be between 1.10
and 1.34 of the two-bedroom unit; and four-bedroom units must be
between 1.14 and 1.63 of the two-bedroom unit. Bedroom rents for a
given FMR area were then adjusted if the differentials between bedroom-
size FMRs were inconsistent with normally observed patterns (i.e.,
efficiency rents were not allowed to be higher than one-bedroom rents
and four-bedroom rents were not allowed to be lower than three-bedroom
rents).
For low-population, nonmetropolitan counties with small census
recent-mover rent samples, census-defined county group data were used
in determining rents for each bedroom size. This adjustment was made to
protect against unrealistically high or low FMRs due to insufficient
sample sizes. The areas covered by this estimation method had less than
the HUD standard of 200 two-bedroom census-tabulated observations.
V. Public Comments
A total of 10 public comments were received on the proposed FY 2010
FMRs. Two of the comments filed were concerned with HUD's presentation
of proposed FMR data. These comments requested that HUD publish both
the current proposed and most recent final FMRs together in a
spreadsheet. The concept of comparing proposed rents to current
effective rents is relevant so HUD has added this comparison to its on-
line documentation system to provide interested users with a comparison
of current year proposed rents to final rents from the previous year.
This functionality will only be available in the proposed FMR
documentation systems.
Several commenters expressed concern with either increases or
decreases in their FMRs. HUD will shortly be issuing guidance on cost-
related issues in the housing voucher
[[Page 50555]]
program including the setting of payment standards. However, as a
reminder, whether there is a decrease or an increase in the FY 2010
FMR, a PHA is not required to decrease or increase the dollar amount of
their payment standards unless the FMR results in the payment standard
being outside the basic range of 90-to-110 percent of the FMR.
A comment from the Housing Authority of the City of Reno stated
that proposed FY 2010 FMRs are too high. The Reno comment claims that
no increase in its FMR is needed and asks HUD to hold its FMRs at the
FY 2009 level. Reno includes an analysis that states that the three-
percent annual trend factor is the cause of the increase in Reno's FMR
from FY 2009 to FY 2010, and requests that HUD revise its trend factor
downward. However, the actual source of the increase comes from the
nearly 6-percent increase in ACS measured 2 bedroom rents between 2006
and 2007. No data were submitted by the Housing Authority to support
their claim that FMRs are too high in the area, but because the
increase in the FMR for Reno is based on an update factor using
standard quality, not recent mover, ACS data between 2006 ACS and 2007
ACS HUD will conduct a RDD survey in the area to see if more current
rents support a lower FMR.
A real estate management firm serving customers in New Bedford, MA
commented that FMRs are too low for their professionally managed and
maintained communities; therefore, their communities will not be able
to accommodate voucher tenants. The comment specifically requested that
HUD not conduct a RDD survey. Absent sufficient data reflecting rent
levels that exist in the entire FMR area, HUD has no mechanism for
adjusting FMRs in this area.
The Oklahoma City Housing Authority commented that the proposed 3.5
percent decrease in FMRs for the Oklahoma City, OK MSA is not
justified. They cite a 3-percent increase in aggregate rental rates per
square foot between 2007 and 2008 as quoted from a full-service
commercial real estate firm as the basis for the objection. The
decrease in the proposed FY 2010 FMR for Oklahoma City, OK is driven by
a 1-year 2007 ACS recent-mover survey result that measured a
statistically significant drop in two-bedroom unit rents between 2006
and 2007. This 2007 ACS result qualifies as the new basis for the
Oklahoma City FMR. Activity in the rental market subsequent to 2007 is
measured by 18 months of CPI rent and utility indexes and the
traditional trend factor. These indexes lend credence to the quoted
increases in rental rates. From mid-2007 to the end of 2007 this CPI
measured increase was approximately 2 percent and from the end of 2007
to the end of 2008, this increase was approximately 5 percent. However,
because the 2007 ACS survey result indicates that the base rent in
Oklahoma City was too high in 2007, this downward adjustment is
necessary.
The Lafayette Housing Authority disagrees with HUD's decision to
increase FMRs for the Lafayette, IN HUD Metro FMR Area ``when funding
for the HCV program continues to lag so far behind that we must
continue to decrease the number of households we can assist.'' The 1.4
percent increase in the FMR for Lafayette is based on measured
increases in rent and utility indexes in the CPI and is the most
current data available for the area.
The Minot Housing Authority serving Ward County, North Dakota filed
a comment that FMRs are too low in the area. The Minot area has
experienced an extremely low vacancy rate due to increased energy
exploration and production in the area. Additionally, a substantial
expansion of personnel at the Minot Air Force Base will place
additional strain on the housing market of the area. Minot is currently
using a success rate payment standard to increase its FY 2009 FMRs, but
claims that increased payment standards are still needed. HUD will
survey this area and will publish a revision to the FMRs once the study
is completed and if statistically different rent results are obtained.
The Department of Housing for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
submitted a comment stating that FMRs throughout the entire
Commonwealth are too low. They base this assertion on the claim that
CPI measures of rent and utility increases measured for the South
Census region do not accurately reflect the price changes experienced
in Puerto Rico. Between 2000 and 2006, the Department of Labor and
Human Resources of the Government of Puerto Rico created a CPI measure
for Puerto Rico in consultation with officials from the U.S. Department
of Commerce's Bureau of Labor Statistics. HUD was not aware of this
activity so previous FMRs have not included this Puerto Rico specific
CPI data. HUD will incorporate consideration of this new CPI index into
its FMR Process Review.
The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials
(NAHRO) submitted a general comment not specific to any FMR area. In
their comment, NAHRO recommends multiple topics for future improvement
of both the FMR and the Income Limit methodology. Briefly, these topics
include: (1) HUD's implementation of the OMB area definitions in FY
2006; (2) use of tenant data when developing Annual Adjustment Factors;
(3) continuation of HUD's Hold Harmless policy for Income Limits
(Comments referencing HUD's Hold Harmless policy should be referred to
Docket No. FR-5323-N-01 published on September 14th); (4) enhancements
to the methodology for identifying sub-standard housing units in the
ACS; (5) the relationship between quality of the rental housing stock
and FMRs, (6) determination of 50th percentile FMR areas; (7)
improvements in HUD's RDD methodology; (8) the impact of HUD's
definition of ``recent movers'' and ``stayers'' on FMRs; and (9)
exception payment standards. In the preamble to the proposed FY 2010
FMR notice, HUD solicited topics for inclusion in future FMR notices
regarding reforms and changes to the FMR methodology. HUD will
incorporate this list of topics into future discussions dealing with
FMR reform.
A comment filed by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)
made four specific requests: (1) Conduct RDD surveys in the areas with
a decrease of more than 5 percent; (2) incorporate language into
proposed and final FMR notices concerning the adjustments made by HUD
to control for the presence of inadequate and subsidized units; (3)
explain the way that a particular area becomes eligible for 50th
percentile FMRs; and (4) the loss of the 50th percentile FMR
designation in the Dallas, TX HUD Metro FMR Area.
FY 2010 proposed FMRs include two areas that experience more than a
5 percent decline in FMRs. One is San Diego, CA, whose decline is a
result of the loss of the 50th percentile, and the other is Ann Arbor,
MI. HUD is required by law to use the most recent, reliable data
available in estimating FMRs. Limiting either increases or decreases
would be counter to the current law. FMRs for both of these areas are
based on local ACS survey results; conducting an RDD would use scarce
resources to produce less reliable data than that available from the
ACS. In addition, no comments were filed by any party within either of
the two areas.
NAHB has requested additional language be added to FMR publications
concerning adjustments made to source data to account for sub-standard
and subsidized units. In response to a similar comment from NAHB last
year HUD published a document outlining the procedure for these
adjustments. A link to this document is available within
[[Page 50556]]
the FY 2010 on-line documentation wherever the adjustments are made to
the underlying data distributions and not just in determining the 2000
Census Base rent as reported by NAHB. HUD believes that the on-line
documentation system is the best venue for discussing methodological
details and believes that interested parties will be able to find the
explanation at the appropriate location within the on-line system.
HUD continues to provide specific details regarding the 50th
percentile status for all areas meeting the eligibility requirements
for inclusion in this program. In response to the NAHB request that HUD
include information regarding ``success rate payment standards'' HUD
reiterates here that all of the rules and conditions for becoming
eligible for and for maintaining eligibility of 50th percentile status
are given in 24 CFR 888.113 and 24 CFR 982.503, including the rules
applying to the success rate payment standard.
Finally, with regard to the loss of 50th percentile standing for
the Dallas, TX HUD Metro FMR area, NAHB recommends that HUD ``look
further into the circumstances of areas that stand to lose the 50th
percentile designation because of failure to materially deconcentrate
in three years.'' Furthermore, NAHB suggests that there may be
instances where an additional year is warranted. Current program
regulations do not allow for an additional year of eligibility for
areas that do not deconcentrate over the three-year period.
VI. Manufactured Home Space Surveys
The FMR used to establish payment standard amounts for the rental
of manufactured home spaces in the Housing Choice Voucher program is 40
percent of the FMR for a two-bedroom unit. HUD will consider
modification of the manufactured home space FMRs where public comments
present statistically valid survey data showing the 40th percentile
manufactured home space rent (including the cost of utilities) for the
entire FMR area. For FY 2010, HUD received no comments or data
concerning manufactured home space rents.
All approved exceptions to these rents that were in effect in FY
2009 were updated to FY 2010 using the same data used to estimate the
Housing Choice Voucher program FMRs if the respective FMR area's
definition remained the same. If the result of this computation was
higher than 40 percent of the re-benchmarked two-bedroom rent, the
exception remains and is listed in Schedule D. The FMR area definitions
used for the rental of manufactured home spaces are the same as the
area definitions used for the other FMRs. Areas with definitional
changes that previously had exceptions to their manufactured housing
space rental FMRs are requested to submit new surveys to justify
higher-than-standard space rental FMRs if they believe higher space
rental allowances are needed.
VII. HUD Rental Housing Survey Guides
For the supporting data, HUD recommends the use of professionally
conducted RDD telephone surveys to test the accuracy of FMRs for areas
where there is a sufficient number of Section 8 units to justify the
survey cost of approximately $35,000. Areas with 2,000 or more program
units usually meet this cost criterion, and areas with fewer units may
meet it if actual rents for two-bedroom units are significantly
different from the FMRs proposed by HUD. In addition, HUD has developed
a version of the RDD survey methodology for smaller, nonmetropolitan
PHAs. This methodology is designed to be simple enough to be done by
the PHA itself, rather than by professional survey organizations, at a
cost of $5,000 or less.
PHAs in nonmetropolitan areas may, in certain circumstances,
conduct surveys of groups of counties. HUD must approve all county-
grouped surveys in advance. PHAs are cautioned that the resulting FMRs
will not be identical for the counties surveyed. Each individual FMR
area will have a separate FMR based on the relationship of rents in
that area to the combined rents in the cluster of FMR areas. In
addition, PHAs are advised that counties where FMRs are based on the
combined rents in the cluster of FMR areas will not have their FMRs
revised unless the grouped survey results show a revised FMR above the
combined rent level.
PHAs that plan to use the RDD survey technique should obtain a copy
of the appropriate survey guide. Larger PHAs should request HUD's
survey guide entitled ``Random Digit Dialing Surveys; A Guide to Assist
Larger Public Housing Agencies in Preparing Fair Market Rent
Comments.'' Smaller PHAs should obtain the guide entitled ``Rental
Housing Surveys: A Guide to Assist Smaller Public Housing Agencies in
Preparing Fair Market Rent Comments.'' These guides, in Microsoft Word
format, are available from HUD USER at HUD's Web site at the following
address: https://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html.
Other survey methodologies are acceptable in providing data to
support comments, if the survey methodology can provide statistically
reliable, unbiased estimates of the gross rent. Survey samples should
preferably be randomly drawn from a complete list of rental units for
the FMR area. If this is not feasible, the selected sample must be
drawn to be statistically representative of the entire rental housing
stock of the FMR area. Surveys must include units at all rent levels
and be representative by structure type (including single-family,
duplex, and other small rental properties), age of housing unit, and
geographic location. The decennial census should be used as a means of
verifying if a sample is representative of the FMR area's rental
housing stock.
Most surveys of FMR areas cover only one- and two-bedroom units. If
the survey is statistically acceptable, HUD will estimate FMRs for
other bedroom sizes using ratios based on the decennial census. A PHA
or contractor that cannot obtain the recommended number of sample
responses after reasonable efforts should consult with HUD before
abandoning its survey; in such situations, HUD may find it appropriate
to relax normal sample size requirements.
HUD will consider increasing manufactured home space FMRs where
public comment demonstrates that 40 percent of the two-bedroom FMR is
not adequate. In order to be accepted as a basis for revising the
manufactured home space FMRs, comments must include a pad rental survey
of the mobile home parks in the area, identify the utilities included
in each park's rental fee, and provide a copy of the applicable public
housing authority's utility schedule.
Accordingly, the Fair Market Rent Schedules, which will not be
codified in 24 CFR Part 888, are amended as follows:
Dated: September 23, 2009.
Raphael W. Bostic,
Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research.
Fair Market Rents for the Housing Choice Voucher Program
Schedules B and D--General Explanatory Notes
1. Geographic Coverage
a. Metropolitan Areas--FMRs are market-wide rent estimates that are
intended to provide housing opportunities throughout the geographic
area in which rental-housing units are in direct competition. The
FY2010 FMRs reflect a change in metropolitan area definitions. HUD is
using the
[[Page 50557]]
metropolitan Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA), which are made up of
one or more counties, as defined by the OMB, with some modifications.
HUD is generally assigning separate FMRs to the component counties of
CBSA Micropolitan Areas.
b. Modifications to OMB Definitions--Following OMB guidance, the
estimation procedure for the FY2010 FMRs incorporates the current OMB
definitions of metropolitan areas based on the CBSA standards as
implemented with 2000 Census data, but makes adjustments to the
definitions to separate subparts of these areas where FMRs or median
incomes would otherwise change significantly if the new area
definitions were used without modification. In CBSAs where sub-areas
are established, it is HUD's view that the geographic extent of the
housing markets are not yet the same as the geographic extent of the
CBSAs, but may become so in the future as the social and economic
integration of the CBSA component areas increases. Modifications to
metropolitan CBSA definitions are made according to a formula as
described below.
Metropolitan area CBSAs (referred to as Metropolitan Statistical
Areas or MSAs) may be modified to allow for sub-area FMRs within MSAs
based on the boundaries of old FMR areas (OFAs) within the boundaries
of new MSAs. (OFAs are the FMR areas defined for the FY2005 FMRs.
Collectively, they include 1999 definition MSAs/PMSAs, metropolitan
counties deleted from 1999 definition MSAs/PMSAs by HUD for FMR
purposes, and counties and county parts outside of 1999 definition
MSAs/PMSAs referred to as nonmetropolitan counties.) Sub-areas of MSAs
are assigned their own FMRs when the sub-area 2000 Census Base Rent
differs by at least 5 percent from the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent (i.e.,
by at most 95 percent or at least 105 percent), or when the 2000 Census
Median Family Income for the sub-area differs by at least 5 percent
from the MSA 2000 Census Median Family Income. MSA sub-areas, and the
remaining portions of MSAs after sub-areas have been determined, are
referred to as HUD Metro FMR Areas (HMFAs) to distinguish these areas
from OMB's official definition of MSAs.
The specific counties and New England towns and cities within each
state in MSAs and HMFAs are listed in Schedule B.
2. Bedroom Size Adjustments
Schedule B shows the FMRs for zero-bedroom through four-bedroom
units. The FMRs for unit sizes larger than four bedrooms are calculated
by adding 15 percent to the four-bedroom FMR for each extra bedroom.
For example, the FMR for a five-bedroom unit is 1.15 times the four-
bedroom FMR, and the FMR for a six-bedroom unit is 1.30 times the four-
bedroom FMR. FMRs for single-room-occupancy (SRO) units are 0.75 times
the zero-bedroom FMR.
3. Arrangement of FMR Areas and Identification of Constituent Parts
a. The FMR areas in Schedule B are listed alphabetically by
metropolitan FMR area and by nonmetropolitan county within each state.
The exception rents for manufactured home spaces FMRs are listed
alphabetically in Schedule D.
b. The constituent counties (and New England towns and cities)
included in each metropolitan FMR area are listed immediately following
the listings of the FMR dollar amounts. All constituent parts of a
metropolitan FMR area that are in more than one state can be identified
by consulting the listings for each applicable state.
c. Two nonmetropolitan counties are listed alphabetically on each
line of the nonmetropolitan county listings.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 50558]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.142
[[Page 50559]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.143
[[Page 50560]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.144
[[Page 50561]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.145
[[Page 50562]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.146
[[Page 50563]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.147
[[Page 50564]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.148
[[Page 50565]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.149
[[Page 50566]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.150
[[Page 50567]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.151
[[Page 50568]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.152
[[Page 50569]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.153
[[Page 50570]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.154
[[Page 50571]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.155
[[Page 50572]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.156
[[Page 50573]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.157
[[Page 50574]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.158
[[Page 50575]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.159
[[Page 50576]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.160
[[Page 50577]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.161
[[Page 50578]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.162
[[Page 50579]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.163
[[Page 50580]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.164
[[Page 50581]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.165
[[Page 50582]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.166
[[Page 50583]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.167
[[Page 50584]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.168
[[Page 50585]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.169
[[Page 50586]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.170
[[Page 50587]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.171
[[Page 50588]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.172
[[Page 50589]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.173
[[Page 50590]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.174
[[Page 50591]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.175
[[Page 50592]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.176
[[Page 50593]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.177
[[Page 50594]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.178
[[Page 50595]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.179
[[Page 50596]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.180
[[Page 50597]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.181
[[Page 50598]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.182
[[Page 50599]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.183
[[Page 50600]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.184
[[Page 50601]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.185
[[Page 50602]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.186
[[Page 50603]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.187
[[Page 50604]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.188
[[Page 50605]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.189
[[Page 50606]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.190
[[Page 50607]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.191
[[Page 50608]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.192
[[Page 50609]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.193
[[Page 50610]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.194
[[Page 50611]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.195
[[Page 50612]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.196
[[Page 50613]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.197
[[Page 50614]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.198
[[Page 50615]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.199
[[Page 50616]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.200
[[Page 50617]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.201
[[Page 50618]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.202
[[Page 50619]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.203
[[Page 50620]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.204
[[Page 50621]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.205
[[Page 50622]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.206
[[Page 50623]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.207
[[Page 50624]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.208
[[Page 50625]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.209
[[Page 50626]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.210
[[Page 50627]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.211
[[Page 50628]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.212
[[Page 50629]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.213
[[Page 50630]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.214
[[Page 50631]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.215
[[Page 50632]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.216
[[Page 50633]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.217
[[Page 50634]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.218
[[Page 50635]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.219
[[Page 50636]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.220
[[Page 50637]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.221
[[Page 50638]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.222
[[Page 50639]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.223
[[Page 50640]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.224
[[Page 50641]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.225
[[Page 50642]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.226
[[Page 50643]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.227
[[Page 50644]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.228
[[Page 50645]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.229
[[Page 50646]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.230
[[Page 50647]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.231
[[Page 50648]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.232
[[Page 50649]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.233
[[Page 50650]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.234
[[Page 50651]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.235
[[Page 50652]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.236
[[Page 50653]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.237
[[Page 50654]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.238
[[Page 50655]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.239
[[Page 50656]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.240
[[Page 50657]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.241
[[Page 50658]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.242
[[Page 50659]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.243
[[Page 50660]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.244
[[Page 50661]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.245
[[Page 50662]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.246
[[Page 50663]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.247
[[Page 50664]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30SE09.248
[FR Doc. E9-23477 Filed 9-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-C