Regulatory Reporting Requirements for the Indian Community Development Block Grant Program, 20269-20271 [2010-8924]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 74 / Monday, April 19, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
injectable anesthetic, to Teva Animal
Health, Inc., 3915 South 48th Street
Ter., St. Joseph, MO 64503.
Accordingly, the agency is amending
the regulations in 21 CFR 522.2005 to
reflect the transfer of ownership and a
current format.
This rule does not meet the definition
of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because
it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’
Therefore, it is not subject to the
congressional review requirements in 5
U.S.C. 801–808.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522
Animal drugs.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs and redelegated to
the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21
CFR part 522 is amended as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Propofol.
(a) Specifications. Each milliliter of
emulsion contains 10 milligrams (mg)
propofol.
(b) Sponsors. See sponsor numbers in
§ 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(1) No. 059130 for use as in paragraph
(c) of this section.
(2) No. 000074 for use as in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of
this section.
(c) Conditions of use in dogs and
cats—(1) Amount. The drug is
administered by intravenous injection
as follows:
(i) Dogs. For induction of general
anesthesia without the use of
preanesthetics the dosage is 5.5 to 7.0
mg per kilogram (mg/kg) (2.5 to 3.2 mg/
pound (lb)); for the maintenance of
general anesthesia without the use of
preanesthetics the dosage is 1.1 to 3.3
mg/kg (0.5 to 1.5 mg/lb). The use of
preanesthetic medication reduces
propofol dose requirements.
(ii) Cats. For induction of general
anesthesia without the use of
preanesthetics the dosage is 8.0 to 13.2
mg/kg (3.6 to 6.0 mg/lb). For the
maintenance of general anesthesia
without the use of preanesthetics the
dosage is 1.1 to 4.4 mg/kg (0.5 to 2.0 mg/
lb). The use of preanesthetic medication
reduces propofol dose requirements.
(2) Indications for use. As a single
injection to provide general anesthesia
Jkt 220001
I. Background
On October 23, 2009 (74 FR 54886),
HUD published for public comment a
proposed rule to revise the reporting
requirements for the Indian Community
Development Block Grant (ICDBG)
program. The purpose of the ICDBG
program is the development of viable
Indian and Alaska Native communities,
including the creation of decent
housing, suitable living environments,
and economic opportunities primarily
for persons with low and moderate
incomes.
HUD’s regulations implementing the
ICDBG program are located at 24 CFR
part 1003 (entitled ‘‘Community
Development Block Grants for Indian
Tribes and Alaska Native Villages’’).
Section 1003.506 of the ICDBG program
regulations establishes several reporting
requirements for ICDBG grantees.
Specifically, grantees are required to
submit an annual status and evaluation
report (ASER) on previously funded
open grants 45 days after the end of the
fiscal year (FY) and upon grant closeout
(§ 1003.506(a)). ICDBG grantees are also
required to report on minority-owned
business enterprises on a semiannual
basis, with reports being due to HUD on
April 10 and October 10 of each year
(§ 1003.506(b)). HUD requires
submission of these semiannual reports
to evaluate ICDBG grantee compliance
with the government-wide grant
requirements regarding contracting with
minority-owned business enterprises
codified at 24 CFR 85.36(e). HUD
believes that a single report would be
less burdensome for grantees to prepare
and would be enough for HUD to
monitor compliance with the part 85
minority business enterprise
requirements. Therefore, this final rule,
consistent with the October 23, 2009,
proposed rule, revises § 1003.506(b) to
provide for a single annual report to be
due each October 10.
Each year, HUD publishes NOFAs
that announce funding availability for
the majority of HUD’s competitive grant
programs, including the ICDBG
program. The FY 2004 NOFA process
introduced a planning form known as
the Logic Model (form HUD–96010).
Most grantees are required to submit a
Logic Model form that identifies the
problem or need the grant will address,
[FR Doc. 2010–8945 Filed 4–16–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 1003
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
2. Revise § 522.2005 to read as
follows:
■
15:30 Apr 16, 2010
Dated: April 13, 2010.
Elizabeth Rettie,
Deputy Director, Office of New Animal Drug
Evaluation, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
Regulatory Reporting Requirements
for the Indian Community Development
Block Grant Program
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 522 continues to read as follows:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Broadway, 23rd Floor, Denver, CO
80202, telephone number 301–675–1600
(this is not a toll-free number). Hearingor speech-impaired individuals may
access this number through TTY by
calling the Federal Information Relay
Service at 800–877–8339 (this is a tollfree number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 2577–AC79
■
§ 522.2005
for short procedures; for induction and
maintenance of general anesthesia using
incremental doses to effect; for
induction of general anesthesia where
maintenance is provided by inhalant
anesthetics.
(3) Limitations. Federal law restricts
this drug to use by or on the order of
a licensed veterinarian.
[Docket No. FR–5232–F–02]
PART 522—IMPLANTATION OR
INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW
ANIMAL DRUGS
20269
SUMMARY: This final rule revises the
reporting requirements for the Indian
Community Development Block Grants
(ICDBG) program. First, the rule
provides for submission of a single
annual report on the hiring of minority
business enterprises, due each October.
Currently, ICDBG grantees are required
to report on these activities on a
semiannual basis, with reports being
due to HUD on April 10 and October 10
of each year. Second, this rule requires
ICDBG grantees to use the Logic Model
form developed as part of HUD’s Notice
of Funding Availability (NOFA) process.
The required use of the Logic Model
will conform the ICDBG reporting
requirements to those of other HUD
competitive funding programs, and
enhance the evaluation of grantee
performance by ensuring uniformity in
the information provided by ICDBG
grantees on performance goals. This
final rule follows publication of an
October 23, 2009, proposed rule on
which HUD received two public
comments, both of which were
supportive of the rule.
DATES: Effective Date: May 19, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deborah Lalancette, Director, Office of
Grants Management, Office of Native
American Programs, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 1670
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19APR1.SGM
19APR1
20270
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 74 / Monday, April 19, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
the services or activities to be provided
with grant funding, and the reporting
tools that will be used to measure
results achieved. Indian tribes have not
been required to use the Logic Model
form. Nevertheless, several ICDBG
grantees have chosen to use the Logic
Model.
This exemption for Indian tribes was
based on HUD’s desire to consult with
Indian tribes before making the form
HUD–96010 a mandatory reporting
requirement for ICDBG grant funding.
As more fully described in section III of
the preamble to the October 23, 2009,
proposed rule, HUD consulted with
Indian tribes on the Logic Model form.
After considering the views and
opinions expressed during the
consultation process, HUD announced
its intent, through publication of the
October 23, 2009, proposed rule, to
require use of the Logic Model as an
ICDBG program requirement.
The proposed rule continued HUD’s
process of developing the regulatory
changes with active tribal participation,
by soliciting comments from the public
on the mandatory use of the Logic
Model in the ICDBG program. As noted,
several Indian tribes already use form
HUD–96010. The use of the Logic Model
form, as required by this final rule, will
help ensure uniformity in the
information provided by ICDBG
grantees on performance goals, and
thereby facilitate the evaluation of
grantee performance. The Logic Model
will be included as part of the ASER
requirement, which is codified at
§ 1003.506(a).
II. This Final Rule; Discussion of Public
Comments Received on the October 23,
2009, Proposed Rule
This final rule follows publication of
the October 23, 2009, proposed rule and
takes into consideration the public
comments received on the proposed
rule. After considering the comments,
HUD has decided to adopt the October
23, 2009, proposed rule without change.
The public comment period on the
proposed rule closed on December 22,
2009, and HUD received two comments
from an Indian tribal community
development agency and an individual
citizen. Both commenters expressed
support for the proposed rule. One
commenter stated that the new
requirement to provide HUD a single
annual report on the hiring of minority
business enterprises will reduce
redundant paperwork and eliminate
duplicative reporting. The second
commenter stated support for HUD’s
effort to conform the ICDBG reporting
requirements with those of other HUD
funding programs in order to ensure the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:30 Apr 16, 2010
Jkt 220001
uniformity of information provided by
grantees on performance goals.
III. Findings and Certifications
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements contained in this final rule
have been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) and assigned
OMB Control Number 2535–0114. In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, an agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information, unless the collection
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires an
agency to conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking
requirements, unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
This final rule would not impose any
economic burdens on small entities.
Rather, the regulatory amendments will
simplify and reduce the reporting
requirements for ICDBG program
grantees. As discussed above in this
preamble, the final rule will reduce the
number of required small business
enterprise reports from two to a single
report to be submitted each October.
The final rule will also require the use
of the Logic Model form in the
preparation of the ASER, which ICDBG
grantees are already required by
regulation to submit to HUD. As noted,
several grantees are already using the
Logic Model, which has been a familiar
part of the NOFA process since FY
2004. While the format of the Logic
Model is relatively new, the data
collection responsibility is not. The data
required is already recorded by the
tribes; it will merely be presented in a
new format. The required use of the
Logic Model will conform the ICDBG
reporting requirements to those of other
HUD competitive funding programs.
The change will also help ensure
uniformity in the information provided
by ICDBG grantees on performance
goals, and thereby facilitate the
evaluation of grantee performance.
For the above reasons, the
undersigned has determined that the
final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Environmental Impact
This final rule does not direct,
provide for assistance or loan and
mortgage insurance for, or otherwise
govern or regulate real property
acquisition, disposition, leasing,
rehabilitation, alteration, demolition, or
new construction; or establish, revise, or
provide for standards for construction or
construction materials, manufactured
housing, or occupancy. Accordingly,
under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1), this rule is
categorically excluded from
environmental review under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (entitled
‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits an agency from
publishing any rule that has federalism
implications if the rule either imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on
state and local governments and is not
required by statute, or the rule preempts
state law, unless the agency meets the
consultation and funding requirements
of section 6 of the Executive Order. This
final rule does not have federalism
implications and does not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
state and local governments nor
preempt state law within the meaning of
the Executive Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements
for federal agencies to assess the effects
of their regulatory actions on state,
local, and tribal governments, and on
the private sector. This final rule does
not impose any federal mandates on any
state, local, or tribal governments, or on
the private sector, within the meaning of
UMRA.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance number for the ICDBG
program is 14.862.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 1003
Alaska, Community development
block grants, Grant programs-housing
and community development, Grant
programs-Indians, Indians, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
HUD amends 24 CFR part 1003 as
follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\19APR1.SGM
19APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 74 / Monday, April 19, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PART 1003—COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS FOR
INDIAN TRIBES AND ALASKA NATIVE
VILLAGES
Amy C. White, Regulations and
Standards Branch, 703–787–1665.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. The authority citation for part 1003
continues to read as follows:
Background
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 5301 et
seq.
2. In § 1003.506, redesignate
paragraph (a)(3) as paragraph (a)(4), add
a new paragraph (a)(3) and revise
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 1003.506
Reports.
(a) * * *
(3) Program performance. Data on
program outputs and outcomes, in a
form prescribed by HUD.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Minority business enterprise
reports. Grantees shall submit to HUD,
by October 10, a report on contract and
subcontract activity during the fiscal
year.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 6, 2010.
Sandra Henriquez,
Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing.
[FR Doc. 2010–8924 Filed 4–16–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Minerals Management Service
30 CFR Part 250
[MMS–2008–OMM–0034]
RIN 1010–AD12
Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations in
the Outer Continental Shelf—Oil and
Gas Production Requirements
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
AGENCY: Minerals Management Service
(MMS), Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The MMS is amending the
regulations regarding oil and natural gas
production requirements. This is a
complete rewrite of these regulations,
addressing issues such as production
rates, burning oil, and venting and
flaring natural gas, to ensure appropriate
development of these natural resources.
The final rule eliminates most
restrictions on production rates and
clarifies limits on the amount of natural
gas that can be flared or vented. The
final rule is written using plain
language, so it is easier to read and
understand.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on May 19, 2010.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:30 Apr 16, 2010
Jkt 220001
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On March 6, 2007, the MMS
published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPR) in the Federal
Register (72 FR 9884). This NPR
requested comments on proposed
revisions to 30 CFR part 250, subpart K,
Oil and Gas Production Rates. The MMS
accepted comments on the NPR until
June 4, 2007 (90 days). We received
eight comments on the NPR. These
comments came from producers of oil
and natural gas in the Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS) and from the State of
Alaska. The MMS made revisions to the
proposed rule based on these comments.
Mandate of the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act
Under the OCS Lands Act (OCSLA),
MMS has the responsibility to issue
regulations governing oil and natural
gas production operations on the OCS.
Our regulations related to oil and
natural gas operations are primarily
based on three responsibilities given to
the MMS by the OCSLA, these include:
1. Safety;
2. Protection of the environment; and
3. Conservation of resources.
The primary purpose of the final rule
is to establish criteria for oil and natural
gas production to ensure conservation of
resources. These regulations help ensure
that the American people received the
maximum benefit from oil and natural
gas production by maximizing the
amount of oil and natural gas that is
produced and marketed. For example,
these regulations establish the criteria
for natural gas flaring and venting and
set limits on the time that natural gas
may be flared or vented. These
regulations are designed to work with
other MMS regulations related to safety
and protection of the environment and
our other responsibilities under other
Federal laws.
The MMS regulates air quality under
the authority of the Clear Air Act (CAA),
for areas in the Gulf of Mexico located
west of 87.5° longitude (western Gulf of
Mexico) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has authority
for air quality elsewhere on the OCS.
The MMS must coordinate with EPA to
implement the CAA requirements. The
EPA is responsible for setting National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS); MMS enforces those
standards for oil and natural gas
operations on the OCS. Our air quality
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20271
requirements are located at 30 CFR
subpart C—Pollution Prevention and
Control. In addition to the Subpart C
regulations, oil and gas operators must
submit projected air emissions for their
entire project as part of their
Development and Production Plan
(DPP) or their Development Operations
Coordination Document (DOCD) at 30
CFR 250.249. Requests to flare or vent
natural gas must not exceed the volume
approved by MMS in the DPP or DOCD.
The MMS also reviews the flaring and
venting requests to determine if they
trigger an air quality review under 30
CFR subpart C. However, the flaring and
venting limits set in these final
regulations are low enough that
additional air quality review is seldom
required.
With regards to greenhouse gas
emissions, MMS recognizes that this is
an important issue. The CAA requires
MMS to coordinate our air quality
regulations with EPA. If EPA establishes
a NAAQS for greenhouse gas emissions,
MMS would be responsible for
enforcing those standards in the western
Gulf of Mexico and we would develop
regulations to implement that authority
under the regulations at 30 CFR subpart
C, as appropriate.
Purpose of These Revisions
The MMS is revising subpart K to:
(1) Update the structure and
readability of the rule, bringing it into
compliance with the Department of the
Interior (DOI) plain language guidance;
(2) Eliminate unnecessary
requirements;
(3) Clarify limits on the amount of
natural gas that may be flared or vented
during certain situations;
(4) Improve collection of data on
flaring and venting; and
(5) Incorporate several existing
Notices to Lessees (NTLs).
The DOI requires agencies to write
regulations in plain language, that is in
a style that will ensure the regulations
are easy to read and clear. The MMS
follows DOI’s plain language guidelines
when creating new regulations or
updating existing regulations. These
regulations were originally written
before plain language standards were
required; we are updating the entire
subpart to comply with those standards.
Some requirements from the current
subpart K regulations are eliminated by
the final rule because they are
unnecessary in today’s petroleum
industry. For example, MMS required
operators to establish maximum
production rates (MPRs) for producing
well completions, and maximum
efficient rates (MERs) for producing
reservoirs, in OCS Order No. 11 in 1974,
E:\FR\FM\19APR1.SGM
19APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20269-20271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-8924]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 1003
[Docket No. FR-5232-F-02]
RIN 2577-AC79
Regulatory Reporting Requirements for the Indian Community
Development Block Grant Program
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule revises the reporting requirements for the
Indian Community Development Block Grants (ICDBG) program. First, the
rule provides for submission of a single annual report on the hiring of
minority business enterprises, due each October. Currently, ICDBG
grantees are required to report on these activities on a semiannual
basis, with reports being due to HUD on April 10 and October 10 of each
year. Second, this rule requires ICDBG grantees to use the Logic Model
form developed as part of HUD's Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)
process. The required use of the Logic Model will conform the ICDBG
reporting requirements to those of other HUD competitive funding
programs, and enhance the evaluation of grantee performance by ensuring
uniformity in the information provided by ICDBG grantees on performance
goals. This final rule follows publication of an October 23, 2009,
proposed rule on which HUD received two public comments, both of which
were supportive of the rule.
DATES: Effective Date: May 19, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Lalancette, Director, Office
of Grants Management, Office of Native American Programs, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 1670 Broadway, 23rd Floor, Denver, CO
80202, telephone number 301-675-1600 (this is not a toll-free number).
Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may access this number through
TTY by calling the Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339
(this is a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 23, 2009 (74 FR 54886), HUD published for public comment
a proposed rule to revise the reporting requirements for the Indian
Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) program. The purpose of the
ICDBG program is the development of viable Indian and Alaska Native
communities, including the creation of decent housing, suitable living
environments, and economic opportunities primarily for persons with low
and moderate incomes.
HUD's regulations implementing the ICDBG program are located at 24
CFR part 1003 (entitled ``Community Development Block Grants for Indian
Tribes and Alaska Native Villages''). Section 1003.506 of the ICDBG
program regulations establishes several reporting requirements for
ICDBG grantees. Specifically, grantees are required to submit an annual
status and evaluation report (ASER) on previously funded open grants 45
days after the end of the fiscal year (FY) and upon grant closeout
(Sec. 1003.506(a)). ICDBG grantees are also required to report on
minority-owned business enterprises on a semiannual basis, with reports
being due to HUD on April 10 and October 10 of each year (Sec.
1003.506(b)). HUD requires submission of these semiannual reports to
evaluate ICDBG grantee compliance with the government-wide grant
requirements regarding contracting with minority-owned business
enterprises codified at 24 CFR 85.36(e). HUD believes that a single
report would be less burdensome for grantees to prepare and would be
enough for HUD to monitor compliance with the part 85 minority business
enterprise requirements. Therefore, this final rule, consistent with
the October 23, 2009, proposed rule, revises Sec. 1003.506(b) to
provide for a single annual report to be due each October 10.
Each year, HUD publishes NOFAs that announce funding availability
for the majority of HUD's competitive grant programs, including the
ICDBG program. The FY 2004 NOFA process introduced a planning form
known as the Logic Model (form HUD-96010). Most grantees are required
to submit a Logic Model form that identifies the problem or need the
grant will address,
[[Page 20270]]
the services or activities to be provided with grant funding, and the
reporting tools that will be used to measure results achieved. Indian
tribes have not been required to use the Logic Model form.
Nevertheless, several ICDBG grantees have chosen to use the Logic
Model.
This exemption for Indian tribes was based on HUD's desire to
consult with Indian tribes before making the form HUD-96010 a mandatory
reporting requirement for ICDBG grant funding. As more fully described
in section III of the preamble to the October 23, 2009, proposed rule,
HUD consulted with Indian tribes on the Logic Model form. After
considering the views and opinions expressed during the consultation
process, HUD announced its intent, through publication of the October
23, 2009, proposed rule, to require use of the Logic Model as an ICDBG
program requirement.
The proposed rule continued HUD's process of developing the
regulatory changes with active tribal participation, by soliciting
comments from the public on the mandatory use of the Logic Model in the
ICDBG program. As noted, several Indian tribes already use form HUD-
96010. The use of the Logic Model form, as required by this final rule,
will help ensure uniformity in the information provided by ICDBG
grantees on performance goals, and thereby facilitate the evaluation of
grantee performance. The Logic Model will be included as part of the
ASER requirement, which is codified at Sec. 1003.506(a).
II. This Final Rule; Discussion of Public Comments Received on the
October 23, 2009, Proposed Rule
This final rule follows publication of the October 23, 2009,
proposed rule and takes into consideration the public comments received
on the proposed rule. After considering the comments, HUD has decided
to adopt the October 23, 2009, proposed rule without change.
The public comment period on the proposed rule closed on December
22, 2009, and HUD received two comments from an Indian tribal community
development agency and an individual citizen. Both commenters expressed
support for the proposed rule. One commenter stated that the new
requirement to provide HUD a single annual report on the hiring of
minority business enterprises will reduce redundant paperwork and
eliminate duplicative reporting. The second commenter stated support
for HUD's effort to conform the ICDBG reporting requirements with those
of other HUD funding programs in order to ensure the uniformity of
information provided by grantees on performance goals.
III. Findings and Certifications
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements contained in this final
rule have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and
assigned OMB Control Number 2535-0114. In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless the
collection displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally
requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the
agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule would not impose any economic burdens on small
entities. Rather, the regulatory amendments will simplify and reduce
the reporting requirements for ICDBG program grantees. As discussed
above in this preamble, the final rule will reduce the number of
required small business enterprise reports from two to a single report
to be submitted each October. The final rule will also require the use
of the Logic Model form in the preparation of the ASER, which ICDBG
grantees are already required by regulation to submit to HUD. As noted,
several grantees are already using the Logic Model, which has been a
familiar part of the NOFA process since FY 2004. While the format of
the Logic Model is relatively new, the data collection responsibility
is not. The data required is already recorded by the tribes; it will
merely be presented in a new format. The required use of the Logic
Model will conform the ICDBG reporting requirements to those of other
HUD competitive funding programs. The change will also help ensure
uniformity in the information provided by ICDBG grantees on performance
goals, and thereby facilitate the evaluation of grantee performance.
For the above reasons, the undersigned has determined that the
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Environmental Impact
This final rule does not direct, provide for assistance or loan and
mortgage insurance for, or otherwise govern or regulate real property
acquisition, disposition, leasing, rehabilitation, alteration,
demolition, or new construction; or establish, revise, or provide for
standards for construction or construction materials, manufactured
housing, or occupancy. Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1), this rule
is categorically excluded from environmental review under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (entitled ``Federalism'') prohibits an agency
from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule
either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state and local
governments and is not required by statute, or the rule preempts state
law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements
of section 6 of the Executive Order. This final rule does not have
federalism implications and does not impose substantial direct
compliance costs on state and local governments nor preempt state law
within the meaning of the Executive Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for federal agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and
tribal governments, and on the private sector. This final rule does not
impose any federal mandates on any state, local, or tribal governments,
or on the private sector, within the meaning of UMRA.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for the ICDBG
program is 14.862.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 1003
Alaska, Community development block grants, Grant programs-housing
and community development, Grant programs-Indians, Indians, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, HUD amends 24 CFR part 1003 as
follows:
[[Page 20271]]
PART 1003--COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS FOR INDIAN TRIBES AND
ALASKA NATIVE VILLAGES
0
1. The authority citation for part 1003 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 5301 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 1003.506, redesignate paragraph (a)(3) as paragraph (a)(4),
add a new paragraph (a)(3) and revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 1003.506 Reports.
(a) * * *
(3) Program performance. Data on program outputs and outcomes, in a
form prescribed by HUD.
* * * * *
(b) Minority business enterprise reports. Grantees shall submit to
HUD, by October 10, a report on contract and subcontract activity
during the fiscal year.
* * * * *
Dated: April 6, 2010.
Sandra Henriquez,
Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.
[FR Doc. 2010-8924 Filed 4-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P