Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment Tool: Solicitation of Comment-60-Day Notice Under Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 57949-57955 [2014-22956]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Verification Information System,
Document Verification Request, and
Document Verification Request
Supplement.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: Verification
Information System, G–845, and G–845
Supplement; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Federal Government
or State, Local Government. The
information collections allow for
agencies to verify the immigration status
of certain persons applying for benefits
under certain entitlement programs.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the Verification
Information System is 12,711,033 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 0.83 hours (5 minutes); G–845
Document Verification Request 260,406
at 0.83 hours (5 minutes); and G–845
Document Verification Request
Supplement 5,141 at 0.83 hours (5
minutes).
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 1,275,420 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $0.00.
If you need a copy of the information
collection instrument with instructions,
or additional information, please visit
the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
https://www.regulations.gov. We may
also be contacted at: USCIS, Office of
Policy and Strategy, Regulatory
Coordination Division, 20
Massachusetts Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20529–2140, telephone
number 202–272–8377.
19:14 Sep 25, 2014
Jkt 232001
[FR Doc. 2014–22967 Filed 9–25–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
Overview of This Information
Collection
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Dated: September 23, 2014.
Samantha Deshommes,
Acting Chief, Regulatory Coordination
Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services,
Department of Homeland Security.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Customs and Border Protection
Approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a
Commercial Gauger
U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of accreditation and
approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a
commercial gauger.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given,
pursuant to CBP regulations, that
Intertek USA, Inc., has been approved to
gauge petroleum and petroleum
products for customs purposes for the
next three years as of May 28, 2014.
DATES: Effective Dates: The
accreditation and approval of Intertek
USA, Inc., as commercial gauger became
effective on May 28, 2014. The next
triennial inspection date will be
scheduled for May 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Approved Gauger and Accredited
Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and
Scientific Services Directorate, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, 1300
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite
1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202–
344–1060.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.13,
that Intertek USA, Inc., 3741 Red Bluff
Road, Suite 105, Pasadena, TX 77503,
has been approved to gauge petroleum
and petroleum products for customs
purposes, in accordance with the
provisions of 19 CFR 151.13. Intertek
USA, Inc., is approved for the following
gauging procedures for petroleum and
certain petroleum products set forth by
the American Petroleum Institute (API):
57949
from the entity that it is accredited or
approved by the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection to conduct the
specific gauger service requested.
Alternatively, inquiries regarding the
specific gauger service this entity is
accredited or approved to perform may
be directed to the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection by calling (202) 344–
1060. The inquiry may also be sent to
cbp.labhq@dhs.gov. Please reference the
Web site listed below for a complete
listing of CBP approved gaugers and
accredited laboratories. https://
www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/gaulist_3.pdf.
Dated: September 16, 2014.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and
Scientific Services Directorate.
[FR Doc. 2014–22946 Filed 9–25–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
SUMMARY:
API
Chapters
3 ...............
7 ...............
8 ...............
12 .............
17 .............
Title
Tank gauging.
Temperature Determination.
Sampling.
Calculations.
Maritime Measurements.
Anyone wishing to employ this entity
to conduct gauger services should
request and receive written assurances
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5173–N–02]
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Assessment Tool: Solicitation of
Comment—60-Day Notice Under
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Office of General Call, HUD.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
On July19, 2013, HUD
published a proposed rule that would
provide HUD program participants with
a revised process to plan for fair housing
outcomes that will assist them in
meeting the statutory obligation to
affirmatively further fair housing. In the
proposed rule, HUD advised that it
would issue an ‘‘Assessment Tool’’ for
use by each program participant to
evaluate fair housing choice in its
jurisdiction, to identify barriers to fair
housing choice at the local and regional
levels, and to set and prioritize fair
housing goals to overcome such barriers
and advance fair housing choice.
This Notice solicits public comment
for a period of 60 days on the proposed
version of Assessment Tool that is
designed for use by entitlement
jurisdictions other than States and joint
submissions by entitlement jurisdictions
and public housing agencies (PHAs).
While the Assessment Tool that is the
subject of this notice is designed for
joint submissions by entitlement
jurisdictions and PHAs, it presents the
basic structure of the Assessment Tool
to be used by all program participants,
and is illustrative of the questions that
will be asked of all program
participants.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
57950
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
In seeking comment for a period of 60
days, this notice commences the process
for compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The PRA
requires two public comment periods—
a public comment period of 60 days and
a second comment period of 30 days.
After consideration of the public
comments submitted in response to this
notice, HUD will solicit a second round
of public comments for a period of 30
days.
DATES: Comment Due Date: November
25, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
this notice to the Regulations Division,
Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street, SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
Communications must refer to the above
docket number and title. There are two
methods for submitting public
comments. All submissions must refer
to the above docket number and title.
1. Submission of Comments by Mail.
Comments may be submitted by mail to
the Regulations Division, Office of
General Counsel, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street, SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
2. Electronic Submission of
Comments. Interested persons may
submit comments electronically through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly
encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic
submission of comments allows the
commenter maximum time to prepare
and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to
make them immediately available to the
public. Comments submitted
electronically through the
www.regulations.gov Web site can be
viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public.
Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to
submit comments electronically.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Note: To receive consideration as public
comments, comments must be submitted
through one of the two methods specified
above. Again, all submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the rule.
No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile
(FAX) comments are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Public
Comments. All properly submitted
comments and communications
submitted to HUD will be available for
public inspection and copying between
8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above
address. Due to security measures at the
HUD Headquarters building, an advance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:14 Sep 25, 2014
Jkt 232001
appointment to review the public
comments must be scheduled by calling
the Regulations Division at 202–708–
3055 (this is not a toll-free number).
Individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing and individuals with speech
impairments may access this number
via TTY by calling the Federal Relay
Service at 800–877–8339. Copies of all
comments submitted are available for
inspection and downloading at
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Camille E. Acevedo, Associate General
Counsel for Legislation and Regulations,
Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street, SW., Room 10282,
Washington, DC 20410–0500; telephone
number 202–708–1793 (this is not a tollfree number). Persons who are deaf or
hard of hearing and persons with speech
impairments may access this number
through TTY by calling the toll-free
Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On July 19, 2013, at 78 FR 43710,
HUD published, for public comment, a
proposed rule entitled ‘‘Affirmatively
Furthering Fair Housing.’’ The proposed
rule provided a new approach that will
enable program participants to more
fully incorporate fair housing
considerations into their existing
planning processes and assist them in
their efforts to comply with their duty
to affirmatively further fair housing as
required by the Fair Housing Act, which
is Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, and
other authorities. The Fair Housing Act
not only prohibits discrimination but, in
conjunction with other statutes, directs
HUD’s program participants to take
proactive steps to overcome historic
patterns of segregation, promote fair
housing choice, and foster inclusive
communities that are free from
discrimination.
The new approach proposed by HUD
would replace the current analysis of
impediments (AI) process. As provided
in the proposed rule, the new approach
is designed to assist program
participants in analyzing their fair
housing environment, identifying fair
housing issues and the related
determinants, setting and prioritizing
fair housing goals, and, ultimately,
taking meaningful actions to
affirmatively further fair housing. The
new approach builds upon and refines
the fair housing elements of the existing
planning processes that program
participants currently undertake.
To assist program participants in
improving planning for fair housing
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
outcomes, HUD advised in the proposed
rule that it would issue an ‘‘Assessment
Tool’’ for use in completing the
assessment of fair housing (AFH) that
program participants would undertake
in accordance with the proposed rule.
To further ease the burden on program
participants in carrying out their duties
under the proposed rule, HUD stated in
the proposed rule that it would provide
States, local governments, insular areas,
and public housing agencies (PHAs), as
well as the communities they serve,
with local and regional data on patterns
of integration and segregation; racially
and ethnically concentrated areas of
poverty (R/ECAPs); access to education,
employment, low-poverty
neighborhoods, transportation, and
environmental health, among other
critical community assets;
disproportionate housing needs; and
data on individuals with disabilities and
families with children. Using these data,
together with other available local data
and local knowledge, program
participants will evaluate their present
environment to assess fair housing
issues, identify significant determinants
that influence or contribute to those
issues, and set forth fair housing
priorities and goals to address fair
housing issues and determinants.
HUD submitted that the benefit of this
approach is that these priorities and
goals would better inform program
participants’ strategies and actions by
enabling program participants to
improve the integration of the fair
housing planning with current planning
exercises.
At the time of publication of the
proposed rule, HUD had not completed
work on the Assessment Tool and
therefore it was not published with the
proposed rule. Many commenters
advised that they welcome HUD’s
proposal to make such a tool available
but needed to see the tool and have the
opportunity for comment. This notice
provides HUD program participants and
other interested members of the public
with the opportunity to comment on the
draft Assessment Tool. Additionally, at
the time of publication of the proposed
rule, HUD posted a draft ‘‘Data
Documentation’’ paper online at
www.huduser.org/portal/affht_pt.html,
and requested public comments on the
categories, sources and format of data
that will be provided by HUD. Many
public comments were received on the
Data Documentation paper, and several
of the suggestions raised by commenters
are reflected in the proposed
Assessment Tool.
As noted in the Summary of this
document, the Assessment Tool that
HUD is submitting for public comment
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
is primarily designed for use by
entitlement jurisdictions other than
States and for entitlement jurisdictions
and public housing agencies that are
submitting a joint AFH. This
Assessment Tool is not the tool that will
be used by regionally collaborating
entitlement jurisdictions or PHAs that
will not be making a joint submission
nor will it be used by States and Insular
Areas. However, this Assessment Tool
that HUD is submitting for public
comment through this notice, although
primarily tailored for entitlement
jurisdictions and joint submissions by
entitlement jurisdictions and PHAs,
serves as HUD’s design for the
Assessment Tool to be used by all
program participants. HUD expects the
topics and analysis included in this
Assessment Tool to be very similar to
the content in Assessment Tools
designed for use by other entities.
Further, while HUD is releasing the
template in paper form for purposes of
public comment, ultimately program
participants will complete the
assessment via a web-based system that
will guide participants’ through the data
and required analysis. Instructions will
accompany each version of the
Assessment Tool. Additionally,
guidance on specific AFFH issues will
be issued.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
II. The Assessment Tool
A. Sources of Data and Information To
Complete the Assessment of Fair
Housing
HUD-Provided Data: As discussed in
the proposed rule, one of HUD’s major
considerations in formulating the new
AFFH planning process was to provide
for meaningful fair housing planning
while reducing the burden on program
participants by providing the
Assessment Tool and certain nationally
uniform data to program participants
that would be needed to complete an
AFH. While HUD will provide
nationally uniform data, there are other
important data sources that may be
available and relevant locally, including
data that are unavailable from a
nationally uniform source. HUD will
continue to explore the types of data
that may be available to assist program
participants in performing an AFH and
the feasibility of providing additional
data in the future.
Local Data and Local Knowledge: In
addition to the national uniform data
provided by HUD, program participants
will be required to use available local
data and local knowledge to inform
their assessments. While the AFH
process will not require program
participants to create or compile new
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:14 Sep 25, 2014
Jkt 232001
data, program participants must
consider existing local data and local
knowledge that is relevant in order to
answer questions in the Assessment
Tool. Available local data and local
knowledge include data and
information gained through the
community participation, consultation,
and coordination processes set out in
the proposed rule at § 5.158.
Available local data are existing data
pertaining to a respective jurisdiction or
region that are relevant to the AFH, that
are either known or become known to
the program participant or that can be
found through a reasonable amount of
searching, and that are readily available
at little or no cost.
Local knowledge, on the other hand,
is information relating to a respective
jurisdiction or region that is relevant to
the AFH and is known or becomes
known to the program participant.
A complete AFH includes an
assessment of available local data and
local knowledge that are relevant to fair
housing issues and determinants to
ensure that the AFFH priorities and
goals identified in the AFH are
consistent with evidence available to
the program participant Simply stated, a
program participant is expected to
respond to inquiries in the analysis
section of the Assessment Tool using
HUD-provided data, and available local
data, and local knowledge that are
relevant. To the extent that HUD does
not provide data for a program
participant to respond to a question or
questions in the Assessment Tool, and
local data and local knowledge that
would be responsive to a question or
questions in the Assessment Tool are
not readily available, the lack of data or
knowledge may be noted as an
acceptable and complete response to
that particular question. However, if
HUD finds that an AFH analysis is
materially inconsistent with data readily
available and relevant to one or more
questions in the Assessment Tool, or if
priorities or goals are found to be
materially inconsistent with available
local data or local knowledge, HUD may
find the AFH to be substantially
incomplete and therefore unacceptable.
Specific solicitation of public
comment: HUD specifically seeks public
comment on whether the above
description of available local data and
local knowledge helps program
participants understand how these
terms are being used in the Assessment
Tool and the extent of their obligations
to obtain and use data and other
information. HUD also seeks comment
on whether HUD has described clearly
the circumstances under which a
program participant may need to
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57951
respond to a question in which the
response would be that there are no
relevant data or local knowledge that
allows the program participant to
address the question asked.
B. Structure of the Assessment Tool
HUD designed the Assessment Tool
with three key objectives in mind. First,
the Assessment Tool must ask questions
that would be sufficient to enable
program participants to perform a
meaningful assessment of key fair
housing issues and determinants and set
meaningful fair housing goals and
priorities. Second, the Assessment Tool
must clearly convey the analysis of fair
housing issues and determinants that
program participants must undertake in
order for an AFH to be considered
acceptable to HUD. Third, the
Assessment Tool must be designed so
program participants would be able to
use it to prepare an acceptable AFH
without unnecessary burden. HUD
welcomes comments on the extent to
which the Assessment Tool meets each
of these objectives.
Section I of the Assessment Tool
(Cover Sheet and Certification)
addresses basic information applicable
to the program participant or program
participants (where there are joint
submissions), such as the name of the
entity making the submission, the type
of submission (e.g., whether it is a
submission by a single program
participant or is a regional submission),
the time period covered by the
assessment, and the certification that
the information provided in the
Assessment Tool fulfills the
requirements of HUD’s affirmatively
furthering fair housing regulations.
Section II. This section is an
Executive Summary to provide the
program participant the opportunity to
present a general overview of the AFH’s
findings and recommended actions.
Section III of the Assessment Tool
(Community Participation Process)
addresses the community participation
process and directs the program
participant to describe outreach
activities to encourage community
participation in the development and
review of the AFH, to describe how
successful its outreach efforts were in
obtaining community participation
related to the AFH, and to summarize
all comments obtained in the
community participation process,
including a summary of any comments
or views not accepted and the reasons
why. The Department is highlighting
this as an area for public comment.
Citizen participation is a vehicle for
obtaining important local information,
including available local data and local
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
57952
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
knowledge, from members of the public,
non-profit and other private
organizations, and other government
agencies. HUD is requesting comment
on the best way to clarify how program
participants should include relevant
information gathered in the public
participation process, including in the
analysis section of the AFH, in the
summary of comments received and
considered, or in appropriate
appendices or attachments in the case of
lengthier comments and proposed
additions to the AFH.
Specific solicitation of public
comment: The community participation
process is an important vehicle for
soliciting input and acquiring additional
information and knowledge that can be
used to improve a local AFH. Program
participants are responsible for
obtaining, evaluating, and deciding how
best to consider and respond to public
comments, including by incorporating
relevant and reliable information
obtained through public participation
into the analysis section of the AFH or
through inclusion of comments in the
section of the AFH reserved for
describing such input, including
discussion of public comments that are
rejected. Does the proposed Assessment
Tool make these options clear? If not,
how can the Assessment Tool be
improved or clarified?
Section IV of the Assessment
(Analysis) presents the core analysis to
be undertaken by the program
participant (or participants in the case
of regional collaboration). This section
of the Assessment Tool is structured to
help program participants identify the
fair housing issues in their jurisdiction
and region. The Assessment Tool
requires a geographic assessment
broader than the jurisdictional level
because fair housing issues are often not
constrained by political-geographic
boundaries. HUD will provide data on
the Core Based Statistical Area for the
regional assessment.
An effective assessment of certain key
fair housing issues—segregation,
racially or ethnically concentrated areas
of poverty, disproportionate housing
needs, and disparities in access to
housing or community assets—and their
determinants constitute a key part of
developing an appropriate affirmatively
furthering fair housing strategy. (See
§ 5.154(a) at 78 FR 43730.) The
Assessment Tool guides program
participants step-by-step through an
assessment of key fair housing issues
and determinants. The proposed
Assessment Tool includes the following
required elements:
Demographic Summary: This section
asks the program participant to review
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:14 Sep 25, 2014
Jkt 232001
HUD-provided data, consider available
local data and local knowledge, and
discern demographic patterns and
trends. This data and the accompanying
questions provide context for the rest of
the assessment and provide a starting
point for analyzing the following
sections on—segregation/integration,
racial and ethnic concentrated areas of
poverty (R/ECAPs), disproportionate
housing needs, disparities in access to
community assets and exposure to
adverse community factors, and
disability and access issues. Based on
this data, program participants should
be able to identify important trends
such as an increase in families with
children, or a change in racial/ethnic
population that may impact the
identification of fair housing issues and
determinants throughout the
assessment. Discerning these patterns
and trends is the first level of analysis,
which must be followed by an
assessment of policies, procedures, and
practices that may act as determinants
that influence or contribute to the
identified patterns and trends.
Segregation/Integration and R/ECAPs:
This section asks program participants
to identify areas within their
jurisdiction and region that have high
levels of segregation, including but not
limited to, racially or ethnically
concentrated areas of poverty, consider
which groups sharing characteristics
protected by the Fair Housing Act are
most affected by segregation, and
consider any common characteristics of
those areas. Additionally, program
participants are asked to consider the
unique issues faced by immigrant
populations, by analyzing the needs of
persons with limited English
proficiency (LEP) and national origin
groups.
Program participants are also asked to
analyze trends in integration/
segregation over time and any policies
or other factors, such as private
investments, market forces or
community attitudes (e.g. NIMBYism)
that may be driving these trends.
Program participants are then asked to
assess and rank possible determinants of
segregation. Key to the identification of
determinants is the program
participant’s assessment of its policies,
procedures and practices. The
determinants identified by the program
participant as significant will serve as a
basis for goal and priority setting.
Specific solicitation of comment: In
this section and throughout the
proposed Assessment Tool, program
participants are asked to identify and
rank determinants that influence or
contribute to fair housing issues. The
Assessment Tool is designed to elicit a
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
meaningful assessment of a program
participant’s fair housing environment
that would inform fair housing goal
setting and prioritization. HUD sought
to be clear and transparent in what it
believes is needed for meaningful fair
housing analysis and planning. One
means of HUD achieving this goal is to
ask questions specifically related to fair
housing issues. Another is providing a
list of determinants related to specific
fair housing issues that the program
participant will assess as potential
influences or contributing factors to fair
housing issues. Does the Assessment
Tool ask the right questions and provide
the right list of determinants to provoke
a meaningful assessment? Beyond
listing determinants in the Assessment
Tool, HUD anticipates issuing guidance
that may aid program participants in
identifying determinants. Is this a
reasonable approach?
Next, this section asks program
participants to examine issues related to
the location and demographic makeup
of residents of publicly supported
housing, as well as mobility patterns in
the jurisdiction and region. Using HUDprovided data, available local data, and
local knowledge, program participants
will answer a series of questions
designed to help them assess whether
there are fair housing considerations
with project locations or occupancy
overall as well as at specific projects
that may appear to be ‘‘outliers’’ (for
instance, buildings occupied primarily
by one racial/ethnic group as compared
to the public housing agency’s overall
assisted population). HUD has
determined that project level analysis is
legally necessary because statistics with
portfolio-wide averages or analysis at
the census tract level may not reveal
instances of localized segregation
patterns. Due to current limitations on
nationally uniform data, a list of LIHTC
projects is not available at this time;
however, program participants will be
asked to conduct the same analysis for
LIHTC projects as for other publicly
supported housing projects based on
available local data and local
knowledge.
From a fair housing perspective, the
assessment of the impact of project
siting and project occupancy of publicly
supported housing is critical to an
assessment of segregation, racially and
ethnically concentrated areas of poverty,
and their determinants. HUD believes
that it is a critical part of an AFH
submitted by a PHA and an assessment
submitted jointly by an entitlement
jurisdiction and PHA serving that
jurisdiction. However, in some
instances, entitlement jurisdictions and
PHAs may submit separate AFHs and
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
their submission of AFHs may be during
different timeframes. In such
circumstances, HUD seeks to ensure that
program participants give due
consideration to the siting and
occupancy of different types of publicly
supported housing when assessing
segregation and racially or ethnically
concentrated areas of poverty but does
not wish to unnecessarily burden
program participants. The proposed
Assessment Tool reflects a compromise
that balances the need for project level
analysis of publicly supported housing
with the need to avoid unnecessary
burdens on program participants. Data
provided by HUD for use in this
analysis is in tabular form.
Specific solicitation of comment: HUD
is specifically requesting comment on
the following aspects of the subsection
on Publicly Supported Housing.
Which types of program participants
should be required to include project
level data in tabular format for the
various categories of publicly supported
housing? Should these tables be
formatted differently than in the
proposed Assessment Tool (for example,
would they be better included in
appendices than in the body of the
Analysis section)? What are the most
effective ways of providing for
assessment of project level data in an
Assessment Tool used by States (for
example, in connection with a State
housing finance agency’s administration
of LIHTCs)?
Next, program participants are asked
to select and rank possible determinants
of both segregation and R/ECAPs for
publicly supported housing location
and occupancy and for assisted
households’ mobility.
Program participants are asked to
identify what factors might be
determinants of or contributing to
segregation in publicly supported
housing locations and occupancy
patterns, and to assess the level of
significance and influence of these
factors in order to help set goals and
inform their policy choices. Key to the
identification of determinants is an
assessment of the program participant’s
policies, procedures, and practices.
Addressing segregation and R/ECAPs
requires a balanced approach that not
only increases housing opportunities in
integrated areas but also promotes
integration by broadening housing
opportunities in segregated areas and
encouraging resident mobility.
Disproportionate Housing Needs: In
this subsection, program participants
would be required to assess
disproportionate housing needs on the
basis of characteristics protected by the
Fair Housing Act (i.e., race, color,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:14 Sep 25, 2014
Jkt 232001
national origin, religion, sex, familial
status, or disability). Program
participants are then asked to assess and
rank possible determinants of
disproportionate housing needs. As
noted earlier, key to the identification of
determinants is an assessment of the
program participant’s policies,
procedures, and practices. The
determinants identified by the program
participant as significant will serve as a
basis for goal and priority setting.
Disparities in Access to Community
Assets and Exposure to Adverse
Community Factors: This section asks
program participants to analyze how
residential location and the location of
community assets and the presence of
adverse community factors contribute to
fair housing issues on the basis of race/
ethnicity, national origin, and familial
status. The fair housing concerns
covered in the section include access to
public transportation, quality schools
and jobs, and exposure to poverty,
environmental health hazards and
deteriorated or abandoned properties.
The objective of the section is to assist
program participants in identifying
patterns and outliers in access to
community assets and exposure to
adverse community factors. Program
participants must also assess whether
policies, procedures, and practices are
determinants that influence or
contribute to these disparities.
An assessment of asset-rich areas
compared to those areas that lack access
to key community assets is critical to
informing a program participant’s policy
decisions. Addressing disparity in
access and exposure to adverse
conditions requires a balanced approach
that not only provides for strategic
investment in areas that lack key
community assets or are exposed to
adverse community factors, but also
opens up housing opportunities in asset
rich areas and provides for resident
mobility.
Disability and Access: This section
asks questions that enable program
participants to assess fair housing issues
faced by individuals with disabilities in
the jurisdiction and the region. While
individuals with disabilities may
experience the same fair housing
concerns as individuals without
disabilities, they also may experience
additional disability-related barriers that
are distinct from the barriers
experienced by individuals without
disabilities. For example, some
individuals with disabilities may need
specific accessibility features or
additional services in housing,
transportation, education, and other
programs in order to have equal
opportunity. Similarly, individuals with
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57953
disabilities have often been isolated
from their communities and housed in
institutions and other segregated
settings instead of being offered a range
of housing options, including those in a
more integrated setting, and services in
the community. For this reason, HUD is
proposing that issues unique to persons
with disabilities be specifically
addressed in this subsection.
The objective of this section is to help
program participants assess information
needed to establish goals for increased
accessibility, greater access to housing
and key community assets, increased
geographic mobility, and greater
residential integration of persons with
disabilities living in the jurisdiction and
region. Program participants are asked
to assess and rank possible determinants
of disability and access issues.
Ultimately, this information will assist
the program participant in establishing
fair housing goals and priorities that
they will use to inform and plan their
fair housing strategies relating to fair
housing issues faced by persons with
disabilities.
Specific solicitation of comment: HUD
specifically seeks comment on whether
the Assessment Tool, by addressing
Disability and Access Issues separately,
has inadvertently failed to consider any
key fair housing issues that relate to
individuals with disabilities.
Fair Housing Compliance and
Infrastructure: This section asks
program participants to describe
compliance with fair housing and civil
rights laws by listing and summarizing
the existence and status of any
unresolved administrative or judicial
proceedings related to fair housing,
nondiscrimination, or civil rights
generally, including an alleged failure to
affirmatively further fair housing. This
section also asks program participants to
identify fair housing or civil rights
agencies and organizations in the
jurisdiction and describe their capacity
to assist in fair housing analysis and
investigation. In addition, this section
provides the opportunity for program
participants to discuss the affirmative
steps they have taken to provide
resources to such agencies and
organizations. Finally, program
participants will identify and rank
determinants relating to fair housing
compliance and infrastructure by
selecting specific potential issues from a
menu of potential factors. The
determinants identified by the program
participant as significant will serve as a
basis for goal and priority setting. Key
to the identification of determinants is
an assessment of the program
participant’s policies, procedures, and
practices.
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
57954
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Specific solicitation of comment: The
Assessment Tool has been designed to
address many, but not all, of the most
common fair housing issues. In some
instances, a program participant may
have fair housing issues that the
Assessment Tool does not address. In
other instances, a program participant
may have no relevant local data or local
knowledge related to a particular
inquiry. Therefore, HUD asks whether
the Assessment Tool is sufficiently clear
that a program participant may address
additional fair housing issues that are
relevant or may reply that a particular
fair housing inquiry cannot be answered
due to lack of HUD-provided data,
available local data, and local
knowledge responsive to the inquiry.
What kinds of instructions would be
helpful to address both of these
concerns?
Section V (Fair Housing Goals and
Priorities) contains a summary table of
the fair housing determinants the
program participant has identified as
significant and the corresponding level
of significance or influence for each.
The table will be pre-populated based
on responses to the inquiries in Section
III regarding determinants. It is from this
table that program participants will
formulate goals to address significant
fair housing determinants and issues.
Each goal must identify one or more of
the particular determinants it is
designed to address, describe how the
goal relates to overcoming the identified
determinant(s) and related fair housing
issue(s), and identify the metrics and
milestones for evaluating the fair
housing results to be achieved. The
goals and priorities section within the
assessment enables the program
participant to begin to think about the
fair housing actions that they will
incorporate into subsequent HUD
required planning processes. While
actions and funding decisions are not a
requirement of this section, the
objective of the section is to concretely
think through how significant fair
housing determinants and fair housing
issues would be addressed. Program
participants are also asked to explain
their reasoning if any significant
determinants are not addressed by any
of the goals.
C. Completing the Assessment Tool
Program participants have asked HUD
to enable them to conduct assessments
of fair housing in a way that limits their
need to rely on costly outside
consultants. The Assessment Tool,
together with the HUD-provided data,
available local data, and local
knowledge, is intended and designed to
elicit a meaningful AFH in a program
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:14 Sep 25, 2014
Jkt 232001
participant’s area. Where there is no
available local data or local knowledge
responsive to a given question for which
HUD-data is not provided, a program
participant may respond that it has no
available local data or local knowledge
responsive to the question. While not
every question will automatically trigger
or require a long narrative response,
HUD is seeking an analysis that is both
qualitative and quantitative; that is,
HUD is seeking a comprehensive AFH
that reflects the program participant’s
review and consideration of fair housing
issued and determinants in their
particular jurisdiction and region.
D. Instructions To Accompany the
Assessment Tool
The instructions to accompany the
Assessment Tool, which are under
development within HUD, will guide
program participants in their
completion of the Assessment Tool. The
instructions will elaborate on how to
use the data, provide definitions where
definitions may be needed, especially
for terms that may have more than one
meaning, and provide illustrative
examples. The instructions to
accompany the Assessment Tool will be
made available not later than at the 30day notice required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. HUD remains
committed to providing guidance and
technical assistance to program
participants as the AFH process is
implemented, during both the initial
roll-out and at the time when program
participants are preparing their
Assessments of Fair Housing.
E. Program-Participant-Specific
Assessment Tools
As noted earlier, the Assessment Tool
provided for public comment under this
notice reflects the overall framework
that HUD will use for an Assessment
Tool to be used by all program
participants. The Assessment Tool
provides the core areas and key
questions to be covered. However,
similar to this Assessment Tool that is
largely tailored for entitlement
jurisdictions and joint submissions by
entitlement jurisdictions and PHAs,
HUD is considering developing
program-participant-specific
Assessment Tools, such as one
specifically for States and Insular Areas
and one specifically for regionally
collaborating PHAs or regionally
collaborating entitlement jurisdictions.
It is HUD’s intention to have any
program-participant-specific
Assessment Tools developed by HUD
available for public comment at the 30day notice required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
F. Solicitation of Comment on the
Assessment Tool Only
While the primary purpose of
comment under the Paperwork
Reduction Act is to determine the
burden of any information collection
requirement, HUD also solicits comment
on the content of the Assessment Tool,
the clarity of the questions presented
and whether there are areas of
information sought that program
participants believe are not necessary to
a meaningful AFH, or whether there are
important areas of information that HUD
may have overlooked. HUD also solicits
comments for the following questions:
(1) Can program participants complete
the Assessment Tool independently
(i.e., without assistance from consulting
firms or outside contractors)?
(2) What kinds of additional
instructions would be helpful for
program participants in completing the
Assessment Tool?
(3) What costs may be associated with
collecting and analyzing the available
local data and local knowledge
necessary to complete the Assessment
Tool?
(4) Do program participants expect to
use Federal funds to complete the
Assessment Tool?
(5) What strategies can program
participants use to reduce any burden
associated with completing the AFH,
including low-cost or no-cost strategies
for obtaining available local data and
local knowledge?
(6) How do program participants
envision joint participation in
completing this template?
Important Note: It is important, however,
that this solicitation of public comment is
solely on the Assessment Tool. This notice is
not reopening public comment on HUD’s July
19, 2013, proposed rule, and HUD will not
review or consider public comments that
address issues other than the Assessment
Tool.
III. Compliance With the Paperwork
Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) (PRA), an
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information, unless the
collection displays a valid control
number issued by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
Through this notice, HUD commences
the process for obtaining the requisite
approval by OMB under the PRA
process.
The public reporting burden for the
Assessment Tool is estimated to include
the time for reviewing the instructions,
searching existing data sources,
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
57955
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 187 / Friday, September 26, 2014 / Notices
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information.
As HUD is furnishing a significant
amount of data directly to the program
participants, the burden in completing
the Assessment Tool is reduced. Where
HUD is not providing data, as noted
earlier in this preamble, program
participants are required to consider
and in some cases utilize available local
data and local knowledge. This refers to
data already publicly available and
reasonably easy to access. This does not
refer to obscure data that may not be
known or easily found, that requires an
independent data or information
collection effort such as a local survey,
or that requires extensive analytical
expertise or staff effort for instance in
manipulating data sets or developing a
complex methodology for analyzing
complex data that may be available.
With the data that HUD provides for use
with the Assessment Tool
supplemented by available local data
and local knowledge, HUD does not
anticipate the need for any program
participant to turn to outside
consultants to collect data and conduct
the assessment.
In addition, local knowledge may be
supplemented with information
received through the public
participation process. In such cases,
program participants retain the
discretion to consider data or
information collected through this
process as well as the manner in which
it may be incorporated into the AFH,
whether in the Analysis section of the
Assessment or in Section III of the AFH
with an option to include extensive or
lengthy comments in appendices or
attachments. In short, the receipt of
extensive public comments may require
staff effort to review and consider input
but would not result in a mandate to
incur substantial additional costs and
staff hours to do so. To the contrary, the
public participation process should be
viewed as a tool to acquire additional
information to reduce burden.
The Assessment Tool is available at
https://www.huduser.org/portal/
affht_pt.html.
Information on the estimated public
reporting burden is provided in the
following table:
REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING BURDEN
Number of
respondents
CFR Section reference
Number of
responses per
respondent
§ 5.154(d) (Assessment of Fair Housing) .............
* 4,388
1
Total Burden ..................................................
........................
Frequency of response
........................
Estimated average time for
requirement
(in hours)
Estimated
annual burden
(in hours)
200
877,600
........................
877,600
With each Con Plan or
PHA Plan.
.......................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
* The number of respondents is based on the number of entities that will complete the version of the Assessment Tool that is the subject of
this notice and is designed for use by entitlement jurisdictions other than States and joint submissions by entitlement jurisdictions and public
housing agencies (PHAs) that are submitting a joint AFH. Entitlement jurisdictions that would use this template number 1,181. HUD is estimating
that half of the PHAs, which number in total 4053, would opt for a joint submission but this estimate, 2026, may be high.
In accordance with 5 CFR
1320.8(d)(1), HUD is specifically
soliciting comment from members of the
public and affected program
participants on the Assessment Tool on
the following:
(1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the
proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
HUD encourages not only program
participants but interested persons to
submit comments regarding the
information collection requirements in
this proposal. Comments must be
received by November 25, 2014 to
www.regulations.gov as provided under
the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Sep 25, 2014
Jkt 232001
Comments must refer to the proposal by
name and docket number (FR–5173–N–
02).
Following consideration of public
comments submitted in response to this
notice, HUD will submit for further
public comment, for a period of 30 days,
a version of the Assessment Tool that
reflects consideration of the public
comments received in response to this
notice.
Dated: September 22, 2014.
Camille E. Acevedo,
Associate General Counsel for Legislation and
Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2014–22956 Filed 9–25–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5417–N–02]
Administrative Guidelines; Subsidy
Layering Reviews for Section 8
Project-Based Voucher Housing
Assistance Payments Contracts and
Mixed-Finance Development
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, HUD.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ACTION:
Notice.
This document provides
Administrative Guidelines (Guidelines)
which qualified Housing Credit
Agencies (HCAs) must follow in
implementing subsidy layering reviews
in accordance with the requirements of
the Housing and Economic Recovery
Act of 2008 (HERA), in those cases
where the HCA elects to conduct the
review. In certain instances, described
in this notice, HUD will follow these
Guidelines in implementing subsidy
layering reviews to satisfy the
requirements of section 102(d) of the
Department of Housing and Urban
Development Reform Act of 1989 (HUD
Reform Act). The requirements in this
notice do not supersede the subsidy
layering requirements of other Federal
programs.
This notice sets forth the guidelines
for conducting subsidy layering reviews
for mixed-finance public housing
projects and for newly constructed and
rehabilitated structures combining other
forms of government assistance with
project-based voucher assistance under
section 8 of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (1937 Act).
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 187 (Friday, September 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57949-57955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22956]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-5173-N-02]
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment Tool:
Solicitation of Comment--60-Day Notice Under Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995
AGENCY: Office of General Call, HUD.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July19, 2013, HUD published a proposed rule that would
provide HUD program participants with a revised process to plan for
fair housing outcomes that will assist them in meeting the statutory
obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. In the proposed rule,
HUD advised that it would issue an ``Assessment Tool'' for use by each
program participant to evaluate fair housing choice in its
jurisdiction, to identify barriers to fair housing choice at the local
and regional levels, and to set and prioritize fair housing goals to
overcome such barriers and advance fair housing choice.
This Notice solicits public comment for a period of 60 days on the
proposed version of Assessment Tool that is designed for use by
entitlement jurisdictions other than States and joint submissions by
entitlement jurisdictions and public housing agencies (PHAs). While the
Assessment Tool that is the subject of this notice is designed for
joint submissions by entitlement jurisdictions and PHAs, it presents
the basic structure of the Assessment Tool to be used by all program
participants, and is illustrative of the questions that will be asked
of all program participants.
[[Page 57950]]
In seeking comment for a period of 60 days, this notice commences
the process for compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA). The PRA requires two public comment periods--a public comment
period of 60 days and a second comment period of 30 days. After
consideration of the public comments submitted in response to this
notice, HUD will solicit a second round of public comments for a period
of 30 days.
DATES: Comment Due Date: November 25, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding
this notice to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room
10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Communications must refer to the
above docket number and title. There are two methods for submitting
public comments. All submissions must refer to the above docket number
and title.
1. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by
mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410-0500.
2. Electronic Submission of Comments. Interested persons may submit
comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic submission of comments allows the
commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make them immediately available to
the public. Comments submitted electronically through the
www.regulations.gov Web site can be viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public. Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to submit comments electronically.
Note: To receive consideration as public comments, comments must
be submitted through one of the two methods specified above. Again,
all submissions must refer to the docket number and title of the
rule.
No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile (FAX) comments are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Public Comments. All properly submitted
comments and communications submitted to HUD will be available for
public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the
above address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters
building, an advance appointment to review the public comments must be
scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-3055 (this is
not a toll-free number). Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing
and individuals with speech impairments may access this number via TTY
by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339. Copies of all
comments submitted are available for inspection and downloading at
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Camille E. Acevedo, Associate General
Counsel for Legislation and Regulations, Office of General Counsel,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room
10282, Washington, DC 20410-0500; telephone number 202-708-1793 (this
is not a toll-free number). Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing and
persons with speech impairments may access this number through TTY by
calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On July 19, 2013, at 78 FR 43710, HUD published, for public
comment, a proposed rule entitled ``Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing.'' The proposed rule provided a new approach that will enable
program participants to more fully incorporate fair housing
considerations into their existing planning processes and assist them
in their efforts to comply with their duty to affirmatively further
fair housing as required by the Fair Housing Act, which is Title VIII
of the Civil Rights Act, and other authorities. The Fair Housing Act
not only prohibits discrimination but, in conjunction with other
statutes, directs HUD's program participants to take proactive steps to
overcome historic patterns of segregation, promote fair housing choice,
and foster inclusive communities that are free from discrimination.
The new approach proposed by HUD would replace the current analysis
of impediments (AI) process. As provided in the proposed rule, the new
approach is designed to assist program participants in analyzing their
fair housing environment, identifying fair housing issues and the
related determinants, setting and prioritizing fair housing goals, and,
ultimately, taking meaningful actions to affirmatively further fair
housing. The new approach builds upon and refines the fair housing
elements of the existing planning processes that program participants
currently undertake.
To assist program participants in improving planning for fair
housing outcomes, HUD advised in the proposed rule that it would issue
an ``Assessment Tool'' for use in completing the assessment of fair
housing (AFH) that program participants would undertake in accordance
with the proposed rule. To further ease the burden on program
participants in carrying out their duties under the proposed rule, HUD
stated in the proposed rule that it would provide States, local
governments, insular areas, and public housing agencies (PHAs), as well
as the communities they serve, with local and regional data on patterns
of integration and segregation; racially and ethnically concentrated
areas of poverty (R/ECAPs); access to education, employment, low-
poverty neighborhoods, transportation, and environmental health, among
other critical community assets; disproportionate housing needs; and
data on individuals with disabilities and families with children. Using
these data, together with other available local data and local
knowledge, program participants will evaluate their present environment
to assess fair housing issues, identify significant determinants that
influence or contribute to those issues, and set forth fair housing
priorities and goals to address fair housing issues and determinants.
HUD submitted that the benefit of this approach is that these
priorities and goals would better inform program participants'
strategies and actions by enabling program participants to improve the
integration of the fair housing planning with current planning
exercises.
At the time of publication of the proposed rule, HUD had not
completed work on the Assessment Tool and therefore it was not
published with the proposed rule. Many commenters advised that they
welcome HUD's proposal to make such a tool available but needed to see
the tool and have the opportunity for comment. This notice provides HUD
program participants and other interested members of the public with
the opportunity to comment on the draft Assessment Tool. Additionally,
at the time of publication of the proposed rule, HUD posted a draft
``Data Documentation'' paper online at www.huduser.org/portal/
affhtpt.html, and requested public comments on the categories,
sources and format of data that will be provided by HUD. Many public
comments were received on the Data Documentation paper, and several of
the suggestions raised by commenters are reflected in the proposed
Assessment Tool.
As noted in the Summary of this document, the Assessment Tool that
HUD is submitting for public comment
[[Page 57951]]
is primarily designed for use by entitlement jurisdictions other than
States and for entitlement jurisdictions and public housing agencies
that are submitting a joint AFH. This Assessment Tool is not the tool
that will be used by regionally collaborating entitlement jurisdictions
or PHAs that will not be making a joint submission nor will it be used
by States and Insular Areas. However, this Assessment Tool that HUD is
submitting for public comment through this notice, although primarily
tailored for entitlement jurisdictions and joint submissions by
entitlement jurisdictions and PHAs, serves as HUD's design for the
Assessment Tool to be used by all program participants. HUD expects the
topics and analysis included in this Assessment Tool to be very similar
to the content in Assessment Tools designed for use by other entities.
Further, while HUD is releasing the template in paper form for purposes
of public comment, ultimately program participants will complete the
assessment via a web-based system that will guide participants' through
the data and required analysis. Instructions will accompany each
version of the Assessment Tool. Additionally, guidance on specific AFFH
issues will be issued.
II. The Assessment Tool
A. Sources of Data and Information To Complete the Assessment of Fair
Housing
HUD-Provided Data: As discussed in the proposed rule, one of HUD's
major considerations in formulating the new AFFH planning process was
to provide for meaningful fair housing planning while reducing the
burden on program participants by providing the Assessment Tool and
certain nationally uniform data to program participants that would be
needed to complete an AFH. While HUD will provide nationally uniform
data, there are other important data sources that may be available and
relevant locally, including data that are unavailable from a nationally
uniform source. HUD will continue to explore the types of data that may
be available to assist program participants in performing an AFH and
the feasibility of providing additional data in the future.
Local Data and Local Knowledge: In addition to the national uniform
data provided by HUD, program participants will be required to use
available local data and local knowledge to inform their assessments.
While the AFH process will not require program participants to create
or compile new data, program participants must consider existing local
data and local knowledge that is relevant in order to answer questions
in the Assessment Tool. Available local data and local knowledge
include data and information gained through the community
participation, consultation, and coordination processes set out in the
proposed rule at Sec. 5.158.
Available local data are existing data pertaining to a respective
jurisdiction or region that are relevant to the AFH, that are either
known or become known to the program participant or that can be found
through a reasonable amount of searching, and that are readily
available at little or no cost.
Local knowledge, on the other hand, is information relating to a
respective jurisdiction or region that is relevant to the AFH and is
known or becomes known to the program participant.
A complete AFH includes an assessment of available local data and
local knowledge that are relevant to fair housing issues and
determinants to ensure that the AFFH priorities and goals identified in
the AFH are consistent with evidence available to the program
participant Simply stated, a program participant is expected to respond
to inquiries in the analysis section of the Assessment Tool using HUD-
provided data, and available local data, and local knowledge that are
relevant. To the extent that HUD does not provide data for a program
participant to respond to a question or questions in the Assessment
Tool, and local data and local knowledge that would be responsive to a
question or questions in the Assessment Tool are not readily available,
the lack of data or knowledge may be noted as an acceptable and
complete response to that particular question. However, if HUD finds
that an AFH analysis is materially inconsistent with data readily
available and relevant to one or more questions in the Assessment Tool,
or if priorities or goals are found to be materially inconsistent with
available local data or local knowledge, HUD may find the AFH to be
substantially incomplete and therefore unacceptable.
Specific solicitation of public comment: HUD specifically seeks
public comment on whether the above description of available local data
and local knowledge helps program participants understand how these
terms are being used in the Assessment Tool and the extent of their
obligations to obtain and use data and other information. HUD also
seeks comment on whether HUD has described clearly the circumstances
under which a program participant may need to respond to a question in
which the response would be that there are no relevant data or local
knowledge that allows the program participant to address the question
asked.
B. Structure of the Assessment Tool
HUD designed the Assessment Tool with three key objectives in mind.
First, the Assessment Tool must ask questions that would be sufficient
to enable program participants to perform a meaningful assessment of
key fair housing issues and determinants and set meaningful fair
housing goals and priorities. Second, the Assessment Tool must clearly
convey the analysis of fair housing issues and determinants that
program participants must undertake in order for an AFH to be
considered acceptable to HUD. Third, the Assessment Tool must be
designed so program participants would be able to use it to prepare an
acceptable AFH without unnecessary burden. HUD welcomes comments on the
extent to which the Assessment Tool meets each of these objectives.
Section I of the Assessment Tool (Cover Sheet and Certification)
addresses basic information applicable to the program participant or
program participants (where there are joint submissions), such as the
name of the entity making the submission, the type of submission (e.g.,
whether it is a submission by a single program participant or is a
regional submission), the time period covered by the assessment, and
the certification that the information provided in the Assessment Tool
fulfills the requirements of HUD's affirmatively furthering fair
housing regulations.
Section II. This section is an Executive Summary to provide the
program participant the opportunity to present a general overview of
the AFH's findings and recommended actions.
Section III of the Assessment Tool (Community Participation
Process) addresses the community participation process and directs the
program participant to describe outreach activities to encourage
community participation in the development and review of the AFH, to
describe how successful its outreach efforts were in obtaining
community participation related to the AFH, and to summarize all
comments obtained in the community participation process, including a
summary of any comments or views not accepted and the reasons why. The
Department is highlighting this as an area for public comment. Citizen
participation is a vehicle for obtaining important local information,
including available local data and local
[[Page 57952]]
knowledge, from members of the public, non-profit and other private
organizations, and other government agencies. HUD is requesting comment
on the best way to clarify how program participants should include
relevant information gathered in the public participation process,
including in the analysis section of the AFH, in the summary of
comments received and considered, or in appropriate appendices or
attachments in the case of lengthier comments and proposed additions to
the AFH.
Specific solicitation of public comment: The community
participation process is an important vehicle for soliciting input and
acquiring additional information and knowledge that can be used to
improve a local AFH. Program participants are responsible for
obtaining, evaluating, and deciding how best to consider and respond to
public comments, including by incorporating relevant and reliable
information obtained through public participation into the analysis
section of the AFH or through inclusion of comments in the section of
the AFH reserved for describing such input, including discussion of
public comments that are rejected. Does the proposed Assessment Tool
make these options clear? If not, how can the Assessment Tool be
improved or clarified?
Section IV of the Assessment (Analysis) presents the core analysis
to be undertaken by the program participant (or participants in the
case of regional collaboration). This section of the Assessment Tool is
structured to help program participants identify the fair housing
issues in their jurisdiction and region. The Assessment Tool requires a
geographic assessment broader than the jurisdictional level because
fair housing issues are often not constrained by political-geographic
boundaries. HUD will provide data on the Core Based Statistical Area
for the regional assessment.
An effective assessment of certain key fair housing issues--
segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty,
disproportionate housing needs, and disparities in access to housing or
community assets--and their determinants constitute a key part of
developing an appropriate affirmatively furthering fair housing
strategy. (See Sec. 5.154(a) at 78 FR 43730.) The Assessment Tool
guides program participants step-by-step through an assessment of key
fair housing issues and determinants. The proposed Assessment Tool
includes the following required elements:
Demographic Summary: This section asks the program participant to
review HUD-provided data, consider available local data and local
knowledge, and discern demographic patterns and trends. This data and
the accompanying questions provide context for the rest of the
assessment and provide a starting point for analyzing the following
sections on--segregation/integration, racial and ethnic concentrated
areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), disproportionate housing needs, disparities
in access to community assets and exposure to adverse community
factors, and disability and access issues. Based on this data, program
participants should be able to identify important trends such as an
increase in families with children, or a change in racial/ethnic
population that may impact the identification of fair housing issues
and determinants throughout the assessment. Discerning these patterns
and trends is the first level of analysis, which must be followed by an
assessment of policies, procedures, and practices that may act as
determinants that influence or contribute to the identified patterns
and trends.
Segregation/Integration and R/ECAPs: This section asks program
participants to identify areas within their jurisdiction and region
that have high levels of segregation, including but not limited to,
racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, consider which
groups sharing characteristics protected by the Fair Housing Act are
most affected by segregation, and consider any common characteristics
of those areas. Additionally, program participants are asked to
consider the unique issues faced by immigrant populations, by analyzing
the needs of persons with limited English proficiency (LEP) and
national origin groups.
Program participants are also asked to analyze trends in
integration/segregation over time and any policies or other factors,
such as private investments, market forces or community attitudes (e.g.
NIMBYism) that may be driving these trends. Program participants are
then asked to assess and rank possible determinants of segregation. Key
to the identification of determinants is the program participant's
assessment of its policies, procedures and practices. The determinants
identified by the program participant as significant will serve as a
basis for goal and priority setting.
Specific solicitation of comment: In this section and throughout
the proposed Assessment Tool, program participants are asked to
identify and rank determinants that influence or contribute to fair
housing issues. The Assessment Tool is designed to elicit a meaningful
assessment of a program participant's fair housing environment that
would inform fair housing goal setting and prioritization. HUD sought
to be clear and transparent in what it believes is needed for
meaningful fair housing analysis and planning. One means of HUD
achieving this goal is to ask questions specifically related to fair
housing issues. Another is providing a list of determinants related to
specific fair housing issues that the program participant will assess
as potential influences or contributing factors to fair housing issues.
Does the Assessment Tool ask the right questions and provide the right
list of determinants to provoke a meaningful assessment? Beyond listing
determinants in the Assessment Tool, HUD anticipates issuing guidance
that may aid program participants in identifying determinants. Is this
a reasonable approach?
Next, this section asks program participants to examine issues
related to the location and demographic makeup of residents of publicly
supported housing, as well as mobility patterns in the jurisdiction and
region. Using HUD-provided data, available local data, and local
knowledge, program participants will answer a series of questions
designed to help them assess whether there are fair housing
considerations with project locations or occupancy overall as well as
at specific projects that may appear to be ``outliers'' (for instance,
buildings occupied primarily by one racial/ethnic group as compared to
the public housing agency's overall assisted population). HUD has
determined that project level analysis is legally necessary because
statistics with portfolio-wide averages or analysis at the census tract
level may not reveal instances of localized segregation patterns. Due
to current limitations on nationally uniform data, a list of LIHTC
projects is not available at this time; however, program participants
will be asked to conduct the same analysis for LIHTC projects as for
other publicly supported housing projects based on available local data
and local knowledge.
From a fair housing perspective, the assessment of the impact of
project siting and project occupancy of publicly supported housing is
critical to an assessment of segregation, racially and ethnically
concentrated areas of poverty, and their determinants. HUD believes
that it is a critical part of an AFH submitted by a PHA and an
assessment submitted jointly by an entitlement jurisdiction and PHA
serving that jurisdiction. However, in some instances, entitlement
jurisdictions and PHAs may submit separate AFHs and
[[Page 57953]]
their submission of AFHs may be during different timeframes. In such
circumstances, HUD seeks to ensure that program participants give due
consideration to the siting and occupancy of different types of
publicly supported housing when assessing segregation and racially or
ethnically concentrated areas of poverty but does not wish to
unnecessarily burden program participants. The proposed Assessment Tool
reflects a compromise that balances the need for project level analysis
of publicly supported housing with the need to avoid unnecessary
burdens on program participants. Data provided by HUD for use in this
analysis is in tabular form.
Specific solicitation of comment: HUD is specifically requesting
comment on the following aspects of the subsection on Publicly
Supported Housing.
Which types of program participants should be required to include
project level data in tabular format for the various categories of
publicly supported housing? Should these tables be formatted
differently than in the proposed Assessment Tool (for example, would
they be better included in appendices than in the body of the Analysis
section)? What are the most effective ways of providing for assessment
of project level data in an Assessment Tool used by States (for
example, in connection with a State housing finance agency's
administration of LIHTCs)?
Next, program participants are asked to select and rank possible
determinants of both segregation and R/ECAPs for publicly supported
housing location and occupancy and for assisted households' mobility.
Program participants are asked to identify what factors might be
determinants of or contributing to segregation in publicly supported
housing locations and occupancy patterns, and to assess the level of
significance and influence of these factors in order to help set goals
and inform their policy choices. Key to the identification of
determinants is an assessment of the program participant's policies,
procedures, and practices. Addressing segregation and R/ECAPs requires
a balanced approach that not only increases housing opportunities in
integrated areas but also promotes integration by broadening housing
opportunities in segregated areas and encouraging resident mobility.
Disproportionate Housing Needs: In this subsection, program
participants would be required to assess disproportionate housing needs
on the basis of characteristics protected by the Fair Housing Act
(i.e., race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or
disability). Program participants are then asked to assess and rank
possible determinants of disproportionate housing needs. As noted
earlier, key to the identification of determinants is an assessment of
the program participant's policies, procedures, and practices. The
determinants identified by the program participant as significant will
serve as a basis for goal and priority setting.
Disparities in Access to Community Assets and Exposure to Adverse
Community Factors: This section asks program participants to analyze
how residential location and the location of community assets and the
presence of adverse community factors contribute to fair housing issues
on the basis of race/ethnicity, national origin, and familial status.
The fair housing concerns covered in the section include access to
public transportation, quality schools and jobs, and exposure to
poverty, environmental health hazards and deteriorated or abandoned
properties. The objective of the section is to assist program
participants in identifying patterns and outliers in access to
community assets and exposure to adverse community factors. Program
participants must also assess whether policies, procedures, and
practices are determinants that influence or contribute to these
disparities.
An assessment of asset-rich areas compared to those areas that lack
access to key community assets is critical to informing a program
participant's policy decisions. Addressing disparity in access and
exposure to adverse conditions requires a balanced approach that not
only provides for strategic investment in areas that lack key community
assets or are exposed to adverse community factors, but also opens up
housing opportunities in asset rich areas and provides for resident
mobility.
Disability and Access: This section asks questions that enable
program participants to assess fair housing issues faced by individuals
with disabilities in the jurisdiction and the region. While individuals
with disabilities may experience the same fair housing concerns as
individuals without disabilities, they also may experience additional
disability-related barriers that are distinct from the barriers
experienced by individuals without disabilities. For example, some
individuals with disabilities may need specific accessibility features
or additional services in housing, transportation, education, and other
programs in order to have equal opportunity. Similarly, individuals
with disabilities have often been isolated from their communities and
housed in institutions and other segregated settings instead of being
offered a range of housing options, including those in a more
integrated setting, and services in the community. For this reason, HUD
is proposing that issues unique to persons with disabilities be
specifically addressed in this subsection.
The objective of this section is to help program participants
assess information needed to establish goals for increased
accessibility, greater access to housing and key community assets,
increased geographic mobility, and greater residential integration of
persons with disabilities living in the jurisdiction and region.
Program participants are asked to assess and rank possible determinants
of disability and access issues. Ultimately, this information will
assist the program participant in establishing fair housing goals and
priorities that they will use to inform and plan their fair housing
strategies relating to fair housing issues faced by persons with
disabilities.
Specific solicitation of comment: HUD specifically seeks comment on
whether the Assessment Tool, by addressing Disability and Access Issues
separately, has inadvertently failed to consider any key fair housing
issues that relate to individuals with disabilities.
Fair Housing Compliance and Infrastructure: This section asks
program participants to describe compliance with fair housing and civil
rights laws by listing and summarizing the existence and status of any
unresolved administrative or judicial proceedings related to fair
housing, nondiscrimination, or civil rights generally, including an
alleged failure to affirmatively further fair housing. This section
also asks program participants to identify fair housing or civil rights
agencies and organizations in the jurisdiction and describe their
capacity to assist in fair housing analysis and investigation. In
addition, this section provides the opportunity for program
participants to discuss the affirmative steps they have taken to
provide resources to such agencies and organizations. Finally, program
participants will identify and rank determinants relating to fair
housing compliance and infrastructure by selecting specific potential
issues from a menu of potential factors. The determinants identified by
the program participant as significant will serve as a basis for goal
and priority setting. Key to the identification of determinants is an
assessment of the program participant's policies, procedures, and
practices.
[[Page 57954]]
Specific solicitation of comment: The Assessment Tool has been
designed to address many, but not all, of the most common fair housing
issues. In some instances, a program participant may have fair housing
issues that the Assessment Tool does not address. In other instances, a
program participant may have no relevant local data or local knowledge
related to a particular inquiry. Therefore, HUD asks whether the
Assessment Tool is sufficiently clear that a program participant may
address additional fair housing issues that are relevant or may reply
that a particular fair housing inquiry cannot be answered due to lack
of HUD-provided data, available local data, and local knowledge
responsive to the inquiry. What kinds of instructions would be helpful
to address both of these concerns?
Section V (Fair Housing Goals and Priorities) contains a summary
table of the fair housing determinants the program participant has
identified as significant and the corresponding level of significance
or influence for each. The table will be pre-populated based on
responses to the inquiries in Section III regarding determinants. It is
from this table that program participants will formulate goals to
address significant fair housing determinants and issues. Each goal
must identify one or more of the particular determinants it is designed
to address, describe how the goal relates to overcoming the identified
determinant(s) and related fair housing issue(s), and identify the
metrics and milestones for evaluating the fair housing results to be
achieved. The goals and priorities section within the assessment
enables the program participant to begin to think about the fair
housing actions that they will incorporate into subsequent HUD required
planning processes. While actions and funding decisions are not a
requirement of this section, the objective of the section is to
concretely think through how significant fair housing determinants and
fair housing issues would be addressed. Program participants are also
asked to explain their reasoning if any significant determinants are
not addressed by any of the goals.
C. Completing the Assessment Tool
Program participants have asked HUD to enable them to conduct
assessments of fair housing in a way that limits their need to rely on
costly outside consultants. The Assessment Tool, together with the HUD-
provided data, available local data, and local knowledge, is intended
and designed to elicit a meaningful AFH in a program participant's
area. Where there is no available local data or local knowledge
responsive to a given question for which HUD-data is not provided, a
program participant may respond that it has no available local data or
local knowledge responsive to the question. While not every question
will automatically trigger or require a long narrative response, HUD is
seeking an analysis that is both qualitative and quantitative; that is,
HUD is seeking a comprehensive AFH that reflects the program
participant's review and consideration of fair housing issued and
determinants in their particular jurisdiction and region.
D. Instructions To Accompany the Assessment Tool
The instructions to accompany the Assessment Tool, which are under
development within HUD, will guide program participants in their
completion of the Assessment Tool. The instructions will elaborate on
how to use the data, provide definitions where definitions may be
needed, especially for terms that may have more than one meaning, and
provide illustrative examples. The instructions to accompany the
Assessment Tool will be made available not later than at the 30-day
notice required under the Paperwork Reduction Act. HUD remains
committed to providing guidance and technical assistance to program
participants as the AFH process is implemented, during both the initial
roll-out and at the time when program participants are preparing their
Assessments of Fair Housing.
E. Program-Participant-Specific Assessment Tools
As noted earlier, the Assessment Tool provided for public comment
under this notice reflects the overall framework that HUD will use for
an Assessment Tool to be used by all program participants. The
Assessment Tool provides the core areas and key questions to be
covered. However, similar to this Assessment Tool that is largely
tailored for entitlement jurisdictions and joint submissions by
entitlement jurisdictions and PHAs, HUD is considering developing
program-participant-specific Assessment Tools, such as one specifically
for States and Insular Areas and one specifically for regionally
collaborating PHAs or regionally collaborating entitlement
jurisdictions. It is HUD's intention to have any program-participant-
specific Assessment Tools developed by HUD available for public comment
at the 30-day notice required under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
F. Solicitation of Comment on the Assessment Tool Only
While the primary purpose of comment under the Paperwork Reduction
Act is to determine the burden of any information collection
requirement, HUD also solicits comment on the content of the Assessment
Tool, the clarity of the questions presented and whether there are
areas of information sought that program participants believe are not
necessary to a meaningful AFH, or whether there are important areas of
information that HUD may have overlooked. HUD also solicits comments
for the following questions:
(1) Can program participants complete the Assessment Tool
independently (i.e., without assistance from consulting firms or
outside contractors)?
(2) What kinds of additional instructions would be helpful for
program participants in completing the Assessment Tool?
(3) What costs may be associated with collecting and analyzing the
available local data and local knowledge necessary to complete the
Assessment Tool?
(4) Do program participants expect to use Federal funds to complete
the Assessment Tool?
(5) What strategies can program participants use to reduce any
burden associated with completing the AFH, including low-cost or no-
cost strategies for obtaining available local data and local knowledge?
(6) How do program participants envision joint participation in
completing this template?
Important Note: It is important, however, that this
solicitation of public comment is solely on the Assessment Tool.
This notice is not reopening public comment on HUD's July 19, 2013,
proposed rule, and HUD will not review or consider public comments
that address issues other than the Assessment Tool.
III. Compliance With the Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520)
(PRA), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless the
collection displays a valid control number issued by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Through this notice, HUD commences the
process for obtaining the requisite approval by OMB under the PRA
process.
The public reporting burden for the Assessment Tool is estimated to
include the time for reviewing the instructions, searching existing
data sources,
[[Page 57955]]
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information.
As HUD is furnishing a significant amount of data directly to the
program participants, the burden in completing the Assessment Tool is
reduced. Where HUD is not providing data, as noted earlier in this
preamble, program participants are required to consider and in some
cases utilize available local data and local knowledge. This refers to
data already publicly available and reasonably easy to access. This
does not refer to obscure data that may not be known or easily found,
that requires an independent data or information collection effort such
as a local survey, or that requires extensive analytical expertise or
staff effort for instance in manipulating data sets or developing a
complex methodology for analyzing complex data that may be available.
With the data that HUD provides for use with the Assessment Tool
supplemented by available local data and local knowledge, HUD does not
anticipate the need for any program participant to turn to outside
consultants to collect data and conduct the assessment.
In addition, local knowledge may be supplemented with information
received through the public participation process. In such cases,
program participants retain the discretion to consider data or
information collected through this process as well as the manner in
which it may be incorporated into the AFH, whether in the Analysis
section of the Assessment or in Section III of the AFH with an option
to include extensive or lengthy comments in appendices or attachments.
In short, the receipt of extensive public comments may require staff
effort to review and consider input but would not result in a mandate
to incur substantial additional costs and staff hours to do so. To the
contrary, the public participation process should be viewed as a tool
to acquire additional information to reduce burden.
The Assessment Tool is available at https://www.huduser.org/portal/
affhtpt.html.
Information on the estimated public reporting burden is provided in
the following table:
Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
Number of average time Estimated
CFR Section reference Number of responses per Frequency of for annual burden
respondents respondent response requirement (in hours)
(in hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 5.154(d) (Assessment of * 4,388 1 With each Con 200 877,600
Fair Housing). Plan or PHA
Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Burden.............. .............. .............. ................ .............. 877,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The number of respondents is based on the number of entities that will complete the version of the Assessment
Tool that is the subject of this notice and is designed for use by entitlement jurisdictions other than States
and joint submissions by entitlement jurisdictions and public housing agencies (PHAs) that are submitting a
joint AFH. Entitlement jurisdictions that would use this template number 1,181. HUD is estimating that half of
the PHAs, which number in total 4053, would opt for a joint submission but this estimate, 2026, may be high.
In accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), HUD is specifically
soliciting comment from members of the public and affected program
participants on the Assessment Tool on the following:
(1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
HUD encourages not only program participants but interested persons
to submit comments regarding the information collection requirements in
this proposal. Comments must be received by November 25, 2014 to
www.regulations.gov as provided under the ADDRESSES section of this
notice. Comments must refer to the proposal by name and docket number
(FR-5173-N-02).
Following consideration of public comments submitted in response to
this notice, HUD will submit for further public comment, for a period
of 30 days, a version of the Assessment Tool that reflects
consideration of the public comments received in response to this
notice.
Dated: September 22, 2014.
Camille E. Acevedo,
Associate General Counsel for Legislation and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2014-22956 Filed 9-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
