Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Tenant Data Collection: Responses To Advance Solicitation of Comment on Data Collection Methodology, 9609-9611 [2010-4386]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Notices
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submissions
of responses.
Analysis
Agency: Department of Homeland
Security, National Protection and
Program Directorate.
Title: Technical Assistance Request
and Evaluation.
Form: Not Applicable.
OMB Number: 1670–NEW.
Frequency: Annual.
Affected Public: State, local, or tribal
government.
Number of Respondents: 350.
Estimated Time Per Respondent: 15
minutes.
Total Burden Hours: 175 annual
burden hours.
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):
$0.
Total Burden Cost (operating/
maintaining): $4,273.50.
Signed: February 12, 2010.
Thomas Chase Garwood, III,
Chief Information Officer, National Protection
and Programs Directorate, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2010–4345 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–9P–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5298–N–02]
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) Tenant Data Collection:
Responses To Advance Solicitation of
Comment on Data Collection
Methodology
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy Development and
Research, HUD.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This notice follows the
publication, on March 30, 2009, of an
advance notice soliciting public
comment on methodology for the
collection of data on low-income
housing tax credit housing, as required
by statute. HUD received public
comments on that advance notice, and,
after considering the public comment, is
now issuing the specific information
collection requirements. This notice
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:08 Mar 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
references the publication in the
Federal Register (75 FR 8392, February
24, 2010), of a notice of proposed
information collection. Copies of the
actual revised forms may be viewed by
contacting the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT listed in this notice. The
proposed information collection is
published pursuant to HUD’s
procedures for obtaining Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approval for information collections,
and, as such, there is a provision for
public comment. However, please be
advised that if you commented on the
March 30, 2009 notice, your comments
have already been considered and there
is no need to resubmit them.
DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions on LIHTC tenant data
collection, contact Michael K. Hollar,
Senior Economist, Economic
Development and Public Finance
Division, Office of Policy Development
and Research, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 7th Street,
SW., Room 8234, Washington, DC
20410–6000, telephone number 202–
402–5878, or send an e-mail to
Michael.K.Hollar@hud.gov. For specific
legal questions pertaining to Section 42
of the Internal Revenue Code, contact
Branch 5, Office of the Associate Chief
Counsel, Passthroughs and Special
Industries, Internal Revenue Service,
1111 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20224, telephone
number 202–622–3040, fax number
202–622–4451. Additional copies of this
notice are available through HUD User
at 800–245–2691 for a small fee to cover
duplication and mailing costs.
Copies Available Electronically: This
notice and additional information about
the LIHTC program are available
electronically on the Internet at https://
www.huduser.org/datasets/lihtc.html.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 2835(d) of the Housing and
Economic Reform Act of 2008 (Pub. L.
110–289, approved July 30, 2008)
(HERA) amends Title I of the U.S.
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et
seq.) (1937 Act) to add a new section 36
(to be codified as 42 U.S.C. 1437z–8)
that requires each State agency
administering tax credits under section
42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(low-income housing tax credits or
LIHTC) to furnish HUD, not less than
annually, information concerning the
race, ethnicity, family composition, age,
income, use of rental assistance under
section 8(o) of the 1937 Act or other
similar assistance, disability status, and
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9609
monthly rental payments of households
residing in each property receiving such
credits through such agency. New
section 36 of the 1937 Act further
provides that to the extent feasible,
collect such information through
existing reporting processes and in a
manner that minimizes burden on
property owners.
New section 36 requires HUD to
establish standards and definitions for
the information to be collected by State
agencies and to provide States with
technical assistance in establishing
systems to compile and submit such
information and, in coordination with
other Federal agencies administering
housing programs, establish procedures
to minimize duplicative reporting
requirements for properties assisted
under multiple housing programs.
On March 30, 2009, HUD published a
notice at 74 FR 14149 seeking early
input from State agencies and other
interested stakeholders on a
methodology or approach to meet the
statutory requirement to furnish HUD
the required information. HUD received
approximately 25 comments on this
notice by the comment due date of May
29, 2009, from entities including State
housing finance and tax credit agencies;
tax credit property managers; housing
trade associations; research institutes;
and nonprofit organizations. The
following summary of public comments
addresses the significant issues raised
and the approach HUD is taking in
response. Additionally, interested
members of the public may view and
respond to the notice of information
collection published in the Federal
Register (75 FR 8392); however, there is
no need to resubmit comments HUD
already received in connection with the
March 30, 2009 notice.
II. Public Comments
1. Tenant Data Collection
Comment: A number of commenters
supported the general idea of using the
National Council of State Housing
Agencies (NCSHA) Tenant Income
Certification (TIC) for tenant data
collection, but also suggested that States
retain flexibility to make modifications.
It was suggested that a separate page be
added to collect racial, ethnic, and
disability status data, along with a
statement that responding is voluntary.
Other commenters opposed the use of
these forms on various grounds. Other
commenters stated that Housing
Finance Agencies (HFAs) should be
given the flexibility to design their own
forms, but use the NCSHA TIC to obtain
uniform definitions of the required data,
which can be adapted. Some
E:\FR\FM\03MRN1.SGM
03MRN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
9610
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Notices
commenters stated that data should be
collected on the head of household only
or only in an aggregated form. Some
commenters stated that the disability
status questions were overly detailed
and intrusive. Some commenters
objected to the collection of social
security numbers (SSNs), citing privacy
concerns and lack of a secure way to
store the information. Other
commenters stated that data collected
should be limited to items specifically
identified by Congress. Some
commenters, on the other hand, asked
for additional data, such as zip codes.
Response: Generally, HUD will collect
the data required by the statute, along
with a minimal amount of additional
information needed to assist in
collection of the data while minimizing
the public burden. Accordingly, HUD
declines to add questions about zip
codes and additional breakdowns by
type of assistance. The statutory
direction to seek information about
‘‘disability status’’ seems in its plain
meaning to simply be seeking
information on whether a family has a
member with a disability, and HUD
accordingly is modifying that particular
request for information. However,
collecting data for only the head of
household or in the aggregate would not
enable HUD to report on family
composition, as required by statute.
As to forms, while HUD is submitting
forms for approval and use if desired,
HUD is not requiring the use of specific
forms. The forms are provided as a way
to convey the standards and definitions
of the required data. Thus, States may
incorporate the required data elements
into their existing forms, provided that
the definitions are consistent with those
put forth by HUD.
As to SSNs, HUD is balancing
legitimate privacy concerns against the
statutory direction to ‘‘establish
procedures to minimize duplicative
reporting requirements for properties
assisted under multiple housing
programs’’ and to minimize paperwork
burdens on funding recipients. HUD has
decided to request partial SSNs. In so
doing, HUD is protecting privacy but
also obtaining partial SSNs that will be
used for data matching with existing
HUD databases. Thus, HUD can obtain
information, for example about
assistance types, without adding to the
burden on funding recipients. HUD
plans to require reporting on projectbased assistance, HOME, HOPE VI,
Community Development Block Grant,
and Rural Housing Service assistance,
and use the partial SSNs to match data
from other assistance programs, to
obtain the needed data while
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:08 Mar 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
minimizing the burdens of data
collection.
Comment: Commenters asked that the
collection of information be limited in
frequency, such as at initial move-in
and annual updates. Racial, ethnic, and
disability status data should only be
collected at move-in. Some commenters
stated that all personal data should only
be collected once, as HFAs will learn of
updates at recertification or if a tenant’s
assistance is modified; conversely,
insofar as the Internal Revenue Service
no longer requires income
recertification, there is no need to
continue collecting this data after movein and it would not be third-party
verified.
Response: The tenant data will be
collected annually as required by
statute. HUD is taking steps to minimize
the compliance burden to the extent
possible given statutory requirements.
After the initial data collection, in
which data on all tenants is required,
only data on re-certifications and new
tenants will be required. Consistent
with statutory changes in HERA, tenants
residing in 100 percent low-income unit
properties are not subject to recertification. The racial and ethnic data
will only need to be collected once, but
since disability status can change, this
will need to be collected with recertification.
Comment: Some commenters asked
that information collected be limited in
scope. Some commenters asked that
HUD specify that data will not be
collected on tenants not residing in
LIHTC units. Some commenters asked
that the age information be limited to
the number of residents above and
below the age of 18.
Response: Pursuant to the statute,
which covers ‘‘State agencies
administering tax credits,’’ HUD will not
require the collection of data on tenants
in non-LIHTC units. The statutory
requirement to collect race and ethnicity
is not limited to head of household and
thus the best reading of the statute is
that the information must be collected
for all tenants. The statutory
requirement to collect household
composition and age does not indicate
a restriction to ‘‘the number of persons
over/under 18 years old,’’ but rather, the
plain language of the statute refers only
to ‘‘age.’’
Comment: Some commenters
addressed data elements on the forms
proposed by HUD. A commenter stated
that data elements should include
whether a project is ‘‘family,’’ ‘‘elderly,’’
or ‘‘other’’ in order to ‘‘assist in assessing
the role of exclusionary land use
requirements on LIHTC development.’’
One commenter generally had the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
following suggestions: (1) Full tenantlevel data on rental assistance are
provided except where a project has 100
percent project-based tenants; (2) the
project-level data are updated
periodically to show changes in subsidy
status; and (3) information on the
specific type of rental assistance is
available either on the form or through
data matching with other subsidy
programs.
Response: HUD’s proposed project
data collection form asks whether a
project is targeted to a particular group,
including families and elderly. The data
collection will be consistent with recertification changes in HERA, which
no longer requires re-certification for
properties consisting of 100 percent
low-income properties. While propertylevel data will not need to be updated
annually, HUD will ask States to update
any changes. HUD will match tenant
data to other HUD administrative
databases to identify assistance from
other subsidy programs.
Comment: Commenters suggested
alternate data transfer formats. Two
commenters stated that HUD should
adopt the State Housing Finance
Agency-LIHTC Data Transfer Standard
as the methodology for collecting data
because it is was created by affordable
housing owners and trade associations,
is open, accessible, and available to any
user, and less costly than using a nonstandard format.
Response: HUD agrees that the LIHTC
Data Transfer Standard is widely
adopted and accessible. HUD’s current
Tenant Rental Assistance Certification
System (TRACS) system, which is used
to collect data on Section 8 tenants, uses
this data transfer standard. HUD will be
using a system similar to, and based on,
TRACS.
Comment: A number of commenters
stated that data uploads in Extensible
Markup Language (XML) format should
be allowed, because XML files are easily
produced by common software and
most HFAs are familiar with XML.
Commenters stated specifically that the
National Affordable Housing
Management Association (NAHMA)
XML standard or a reasonable variation
should be adopted or used as a starting
point, as the industry has already
invested effort in this standard and it
has broad acceptance. One commenter
stated that data transmission should
flexibly allow Excel files or XML format
files, as some HFAs may have issues
and/or budget constraints in converting
data to XML. Some commenters favored
expanding the existing TRACS system,
or cross-referencing TRACS, to include
tax credit projects, but one commenter
stated that TRACS is not a workable
E:\FR\FM\03MRN1.SGM
03MRN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Notices
system as it is not used by many States,
unless it could be modified to allow
XML upload and aggregate-only data.
Response: XML is beneficial since it
is a commonly used method of
electronically encoding documents,
usable over the Internet, and compatible
with many programming interfaces that
can be used to extract data. HUD will be
using a system similar to TRACS to
accept data files from the State housing
finance agencies. This system accepts a
variety of file formats, including XML.
HUD plans to modify the system for this
data collection effort to ensure that it
accepts the requested file formats.
Comment: HUD should make clear
that responses to race, ethnicity, and
disability status data are voluntary;
whether the requirement to collect data
exists for the 15-year tax credit
compliance period or the extended
period as well, arguing that the data
collection should not apply after the
initial 15 year period; and that, since
there is no built-in enforcement
mechanism, a good-faith effort to collect
the data should suffice for compliance.
One commenter stated that HUD should
address how the data collection
methodology will be coordinated with
the authority HERA grants for State tax
credit agencies to waive annual
recertification requirements.
Response: Data collection will include
all low-income units monitored for
compliance as long as they remain in
the program, including those in the
extended-use period. Tying the
collection of information to the actual
technical use of the credit makes little
sense as most tax-credit owners actually
sell or syndicate their credits at the
outset. The key, rather, is that the units
have received the benefit of tax credits
and continue to remain in the program
as low-income units, and it is those
complying units that Congress seeks
information about.
Data collection will be consistent with
new HERA re-certification rules for 100
percent low-income unit properties. As
to the race, ethnicity, and disability
questions, a household cannot be forced
to provide this information. If the
household does not provide the
information, the State agency shall make
its best efforts to report the information
based on observation or derived from
other sources.
Comment: Commenters stated that
HUD should make available a
guidebook, procedures manual, or other
informational guidance.
Response: HUD is specifying the data
it is collecting in this notice and in the
paperwork approval request published
in the Federal Register. In addition, the
information contact listed in this rule
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:08 Mar 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
can provide copies of the actual revised
notices. HUD may publish additional
guidance in the near future.
Comment: HUD should make
development-level data available as
soon as possible after it is collected so
that it can be analyzed, for example, to
determine Fair Housing Act compliance
or whether families with incomes below
the poverty line are being served.
Response: The statute requires HUD
to compile and make the information
collected available ‘‘not less than
annually.’’ HUD plans to fulfill that
statutory requirement.
Comment: One commenter stated that
data elements should be precisely
defined so there is no variability from
State to State. For example, all States
should follow the same rounding rules.
Response: HUD believes that most of
the data being collected, such as age,
ethnicity, family composition, disability
status and age, is expressible in whole
integers and will not require rounding.
If it appears that rounding rules could
affect the data in a statistically
significant way, HUD may provide
further guidance as needed.
Comment: One commenter sought
additional data collections for civilrights related purposes. This commenter
stated that HUD should collect racial
and ethnic data on applicants for LIHTC
housing to better assess affirmative
marketing compliance. This commenter
also stated that when initial data is
released, HUD should contract with
‘‘reputable and independent research
organizations to analyze the civil rights
performance of LIHTC State agencies
and project managers/developers’’ to
identify possible patterns of civil rights
violations for further action by HUD’s
Office of Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity. This commenter states that
there has been a ‘‘longstanding failure’’
to collect racial and ethnic data in the
LIHTC program.
Response: HUD does not have
statutory authority to collect data on
applicants. While generally HUD
supports improved civil rights
performance in assisted housing, this
particular statute is limited to collecting
specified information. This information
includes race, ethnicity, and disability
status on households residing in
properties receiving credits under the
low-income housing tax credit program.
Congress has not currently provided
HUD with the authorization or funding
to conduct the study suggested.
Comment: Some commenters state
that there should be transition periods
of various times to give State agencies
time to launch their new systems.
Commenters also stated that compliance
costs would be significant and that HUD
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9611
should provide or petition Congress to
provide additional funding to cover the
extra costs.
Response: HUD understands that
States may encounter difficulty in
completing the data collection requests.
HUD will address on a State-by-State
basis the need for additional time and
is procuring services to assist States in
their transition. However, while
Congress has authorized funds for this
data collection, funds were not
appropriated for this specific purpose in
Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. The authorized
funding amounts are limited to
$2,500,000 for FY 2009 and $900,000 for
each of FYs 2010 through 2013. States
should be aware of this limited funding.
III. Information Collection
Parties interested in viewing and
commenting on the information
collection requirements may do so by
responding to the separate notice of
information collection published in the
Federal Register (75 FR 8392).
Dated: February 22, 2010.
Jean Lin Pao,
General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy
Development and Research.
[FR Doc. 2010–4386 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLMT926000–10–L19100000–BJ0000–
LRCM08RS4045]
Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey:
Montana
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of filing of plats of
survey.
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) will file the plat of
survey of the lands described below in
the BLM Montana State Office, Billings,
Montana, thirty (30) days from the date
of publication in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Toth, Cadastral Surveyor, Branch
of Cadastral Survey, Bureau of Land
Management, 5001 Southgate Drive,
Billings, Montana 59101–4669,
telephone (406) 896–5121 or (406) 896–
5009.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
survey was executed at the request of
the Superintendent, Fort Peck Agency,
through the Rocky Mountain Regional
Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and
was necessary to determine boundaries
of Trust or Tribal Interest lands.
E:\FR\FM\03MRN1.SGM
03MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9609-9611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4386]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-5298-N-02]
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Tenant Data Collection:
Responses To Advance Solicitation of Comment on Data Collection
Methodology
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and
Research, HUD.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice follows the publication, on March 30, 2009, of an
advance notice soliciting public comment on methodology for the
collection of data on low-income housing tax credit housing, as
required by statute. HUD received public comments on that advance
notice, and, after considering the public comment, is now issuing the
specific information collection requirements. This notice references
the publication in the Federal Register (75 FR 8392, February 24,
2010), of a notice of proposed information collection. Copies of the
actual revised forms may be viewed by contacting the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT listed in this notice. The proposed information
collection is published pursuant to HUD's procedures for obtaining
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for information
collections, and, as such, there is a provision for public comment.
However, please be advised that if you commented on the March 30, 2009
notice, your comments have already been considered and there is no need
to resubmit them.
DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on LIHTC tenant data
collection, contact Michael K. Hollar, Senior Economist, Economic
Development and Public Finance Division, Office of Policy Development
and Research, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th
Street, SW., Room 8234, Washington, DC 20410-6000, telephone number
202-402-5878, or send an e-mail to Michael.K.Hollar@hud.gov. For
specific legal questions pertaining to Section 42 of the Internal
Revenue Code, contact Branch 5, Office of the Associate Chief Counsel,
Passthroughs and Special Industries, Internal Revenue Service, 1111
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, telephone number 202-
622-3040, fax number 202-622-4451. Additional copies of this notice are
available through HUD User at 800-245-2691 for a small fee to cover
duplication and mailing costs.
Copies Available Electronically: This notice and additional
information about the LIHTC program are available electronically on the
Internet at https://www.huduser.org/datasets/lihtc.html.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 2835(d) of the Housing and Economic Reform Act of 2008
(Pub. L. 110-289, approved July 30, 2008) (HERA) amends Title I of the
U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) (1937 Act) to add a
new section 36 (to be codified as 42 U.S.C. 1437z-8) that requires each
State agency administering tax credits under section 42 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (low-income housing tax credits or LIHTC) to
furnish HUD, not less than annually, information concerning the race,
ethnicity, family composition, age, income, use of rental assistance
under section 8(o) of the 1937 Act or other similar assistance,
disability status, and monthly rental payments of households residing
in each property receiving such credits through such agency. New
section 36 of the 1937 Act further provides that to the extent
feasible, collect such information through existing reporting processes
and in a manner that minimizes burden on property owners.
New section 36 requires HUD to establish standards and definitions
for the information to be collected by State agencies and to provide
States with technical assistance in establishing systems to compile and
submit such information and, in coordination with other Federal
agencies administering housing programs, establish procedures to
minimize duplicative reporting requirements for properties assisted
under multiple housing programs.
On March 30, 2009, HUD published a notice at 74 FR 14149 seeking
early input from State agencies and other interested stakeholders on a
methodology or approach to meet the statutory requirement to furnish
HUD the required information. HUD received approximately 25 comments on
this notice by the comment due date of May 29, 2009, from entities
including State housing finance and tax credit agencies; tax credit
property managers; housing trade associations; research institutes; and
nonprofit organizations. The following summary of public comments
addresses the significant issues raised and the approach HUD is taking
in response. Additionally, interested members of the public may view
and respond to the notice of information collection published in the
Federal Register (75 FR 8392); however, there is no need to resubmit
comments HUD already received in connection with the March 30, 2009
notice.
II. Public Comments
1. Tenant Data Collection
Comment: A number of commenters supported the general idea of using
the National Council of State Housing Agencies (NCSHA) Tenant Income
Certification (TIC) for tenant data collection, but also suggested that
States retain flexibility to make modifications. It was suggested that
a separate page be added to collect racial, ethnic, and disability
status data, along with a statement that responding is voluntary. Other
commenters opposed the use of these forms on various grounds. Other
commenters stated that Housing Finance Agencies (HFAs) should be given
the flexibility to design their own forms, but use the NCSHA TIC to
obtain uniform definitions of the required data, which can be adapted.
Some
[[Page 9610]]
commenters stated that data should be collected on the head of
household only or only in an aggregated form. Some commenters stated
that the disability status questions were overly detailed and
intrusive. Some commenters objected to the collection of social
security numbers (SSNs), citing privacy concerns and lack of a secure
way to store the information. Other commenters stated that data
collected should be limited to items specifically identified by
Congress. Some commenters, on the other hand, asked for additional
data, such as zip codes.
Response: Generally, HUD will collect the data required by the
statute, along with a minimal amount of additional information needed
to assist in collection of the data while minimizing the public burden.
Accordingly, HUD declines to add questions about zip codes and
additional breakdowns by type of assistance. The statutory direction to
seek information about ``disability status'' seems in its plain meaning
to simply be seeking information on whether a family has a member with
a disability, and HUD accordingly is modifying that particular request
for information. However, collecting data for only the head of
household or in the aggregate would not enable HUD to report on family
composition, as required by statute.
As to forms, while HUD is submitting forms for approval and use if
desired, HUD is not requiring the use of specific forms. The forms are
provided as a way to convey the standards and definitions of the
required data. Thus, States may incorporate the required data elements
into their existing forms, provided that the definitions are consistent
with those put forth by HUD.
As to SSNs, HUD is balancing legitimate privacy concerns against
the statutory direction to ``establish procedures to minimize
duplicative reporting requirements for properties assisted under
multiple housing programs'' and to minimize paperwork burdens on
funding recipients. HUD has decided to request partial SSNs. In so
doing, HUD is protecting privacy but also obtaining partial SSNs that
will be used for data matching with existing HUD databases. Thus, HUD
can obtain information, for example about assistance types, without
adding to the burden on funding recipients. HUD plans to require
reporting on project-based assistance, HOME, HOPE VI, Community
Development Block Grant, and Rural Housing Service assistance, and use
the partial SSNs to match data from other assistance programs, to
obtain the needed data while minimizing the burdens of data collection.
Comment: Commenters asked that the collection of information be
limited in frequency, such as at initial move-in and annual updates.
Racial, ethnic, and disability status data should only be collected at
move-in. Some commenters stated that all personal data should only be
collected once, as HFAs will learn of updates at recertification or if
a tenant's assistance is modified; conversely, insofar as the Internal
Revenue Service no longer requires income recertification, there is no
need to continue collecting this data after move-in and it would not be
third-party verified.
Response: The tenant data will be collected annually as required by
statute. HUD is taking steps to minimize the compliance burden to the
extent possible given statutory requirements. After the initial data
collection, in which data on all tenants is required, only data on re-
certifications and new tenants will be required. Consistent with
statutory changes in HERA, tenants residing in 100 percent low-income
unit properties are not subject to re-certification. The racial and
ethnic data will only need to be collected once, but since disability
status can change, this will need to be collected with re-
certification.
Comment: Some commenters asked that information collected be
limited in scope. Some commenters asked that HUD specify that data will
not be collected on tenants not residing in LIHTC units. Some
commenters asked that the age information be limited to the number of
residents above and below the age of 18.
Response: Pursuant to the statute, which covers ``State agencies
administering tax credits,'' HUD will not require the collection of
data on tenants in non-LIHTC units. The statutory requirement to
collect race and ethnicity is not limited to head of household and thus
the best reading of the statute is that the information must be
collected for all tenants. The statutory requirement to collect
household composition and age does not indicate a restriction to ``the
number of persons over/under 18 years old,'' but rather, the plain
language of the statute refers only to ``age.''
Comment: Some commenters addressed data elements on the forms
proposed by HUD. A commenter stated that data elements should include
whether a project is ``family,'' ``elderly,'' or ``other'' in order to
``assist in assessing the role of exclusionary land use requirements on
LIHTC development.'' One commenter generally had the following
suggestions: (1) Full tenant-level data on rental assistance are
provided except where a project has 100 percent project-based tenants;
(2) the project-level data are updated periodically to show changes in
subsidy status; and (3) information on the specific type of rental
assistance is available either on the form or through data matching
with other subsidy programs.
Response: HUD's proposed project data collection form asks whether
a project is targeted to a particular group, including families and
elderly. The data collection will be consistent with re-certification
changes in HERA, which no longer requires re-certification for
properties consisting of 100 percent low-income properties. While
property-level data will not need to be updated annually, HUD will ask
States to update any changes. HUD will match tenant data to other HUD
administrative databases to identify assistance from other subsidy
programs.
Comment: Commenters suggested alternate data transfer formats. Two
commenters stated that HUD should adopt the State Housing Finance
Agency-LIHTC Data Transfer Standard as the methodology for collecting
data because it is was created by affordable housing owners and trade
associations, is open, accessible, and available to any user, and less
costly than using a non-standard format.
Response: HUD agrees that the LIHTC Data Transfer Standard is
widely adopted and accessible. HUD's current Tenant Rental Assistance
Certification System (TRACS) system, which is used to collect data on
Section 8 tenants, uses this data transfer standard. HUD will be using
a system similar to, and based on, TRACS.
Comment: A number of commenters stated that data uploads in
Extensible Markup Language (XML) format should be allowed, because XML
files are easily produced by common software and most HFAs are familiar
with XML. Commenters stated specifically that the National Affordable
Housing Management Association (NAHMA) XML standard or a reasonable
variation should be adopted or used as a starting point, as the
industry has already invested effort in this standard and it has broad
acceptance. One commenter stated that data transmission should flexibly
allow Excel files or XML format files, as some HFAs may have issues
and/or budget constraints in converting data to XML. Some commenters
favored expanding the existing TRACS system, or cross-referencing
TRACS, to include tax credit projects, but one commenter stated that
TRACS is not a workable
[[Page 9611]]
system as it is not used by many States, unless it could be modified to
allow XML upload and aggregate-only data.
Response: XML is beneficial since it is a commonly used method of
electronically encoding documents, usable over the Internet, and
compatible with many programming interfaces that can be used to extract
data. HUD will be using a system similar to TRACS to accept data files
from the State housing finance agencies. This system accepts a variety
of file formats, including XML. HUD plans to modify the system for this
data collection effort to ensure that it accepts the requested file
formats.
Comment: HUD should make clear that responses to race, ethnicity,
and disability status data are voluntary; whether the requirement to
collect data exists for the 15-year tax credit compliance period or the
extended period as well, arguing that the data collection should not
apply after the initial 15 year period; and that, since there is no
built-in enforcement mechanism, a good-faith effort to collect the data
should suffice for compliance. One commenter stated that HUD should
address how the data collection methodology will be coordinated with
the authority HERA grants for State tax credit agencies to waive annual
recertification requirements.
Response: Data collection will include all low-income units
monitored for compliance as long as they remain in the program,
including those in the extended-use period. Tying the collection of
information to the actual technical use of the credit makes little
sense as most tax-credit owners actually sell or syndicate their
credits at the outset. The key, rather, is that the units have received
the benefit of tax credits and continue to remain in the program as
low-income units, and it is those complying units that Congress seeks
information about.
Data collection will be consistent with new HERA re-certification
rules for 100 percent low-income unit properties. As to the race,
ethnicity, and disability questions, a household cannot be forced to
provide this information. If the household does not provide the
information, the State agency shall make its best efforts to report the
information based on observation or derived from other sources.
Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should make available a
guidebook, procedures manual, or other informational guidance.
Response: HUD is specifying the data it is collecting in this
notice and in the paperwork approval request published in the Federal
Register. In addition, the information contact listed in this rule can
provide copies of the actual revised notices. HUD may publish
additional guidance in the near future.
Comment: HUD should make development-level data available as soon
as possible after it is collected so that it can be analyzed, for
example, to determine Fair Housing Act compliance or whether families
with incomes below the poverty line are being served.
Response: The statute requires HUD to compile and make the
information collected available ``not less than annually.'' HUD plans
to fulfill that statutory requirement.
Comment: One commenter stated that data elements should be
precisely defined so there is no variability from State to State. For
example, all States should follow the same rounding rules.
Response: HUD believes that most of the data being collected, such
as age, ethnicity, family composition, disability status and age, is
expressible in whole integers and will not require rounding. If it
appears that rounding rules could affect the data in a statistically
significant way, HUD may provide further guidance as needed.
Comment: One commenter sought additional data collections for
civil-rights related purposes. This commenter stated that HUD should
collect racial and ethnic data on applicants for LIHTC housing to
better assess affirmative marketing compliance. This commenter also
stated that when initial data is released, HUD should contract with
``reputable and independent research organizations to analyze the civil
rights performance of LIHTC State agencies and project managers/
developers'' to identify possible patterns of civil rights violations
for further action by HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity. This commenter states that there has been a ``longstanding
failure'' to collect racial and ethnic data in the LIHTC program.
Response: HUD does not have statutory authority to collect data on
applicants. While generally HUD supports improved civil rights
performance in assisted housing, this particular statute is limited to
collecting specified information. This information includes race,
ethnicity, and disability status on households residing in properties
receiving credits under the low-income housing tax credit program.
Congress has not currently provided HUD with the authorization or
funding to conduct the study suggested.
Comment: Some commenters state that there should be transition
periods of various times to give State agencies time to launch their
new systems. Commenters also stated that compliance costs would be
significant and that HUD should provide or petition Congress to provide
additional funding to cover the extra costs.
Response: HUD understands that States may encounter difficulty in
completing the data collection requests. HUD will address on a State-
by-State basis the need for additional time and is procuring services
to assist States in their transition. However, while Congress has
authorized funds for this data collection, funds were not appropriated
for this specific purpose in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. The authorized
funding amounts are limited to $2,500,000 for FY 2009 and $900,000 for
each of FYs 2010 through 2013. States should be aware of this limited
funding.
III. Information Collection
Parties interested in viewing and commenting on the information
collection requirements may do so by responding to the separate notice
of information collection published in the Federal Register (75 FR
8392).
Dated: February 22, 2010.
Jean Lin Pao,
General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research.
[FR Doc. 2010-4386 Filed 3-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P