[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 84 (Thursday, May 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23928-23937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-11272]



[[Page 23927]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part VI





Department of Housing and Urban Development





_______________________________________________________________________



Funding Availability (NOFA) for Fiscal Year 1997 for the Comprehensive 
Improvement Assistance Program (CIAP); Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 84 / Thursday, May 1, 1997 / 
Notices  

[[Page 23928]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-4186-N-01]


Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Fiscal Year 1997 for 
the Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program (CIAP)

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian 
Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of Funding Availability for Fiscal Year (FY) 1997.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice informs Public Housing Agencies and Indian Housing 
Authorities (herein referred to as HAs) that own or operate fewer than 
250 public housing units and, therefore, are eligible to apply and 
compete for CIAP funds, of the requirements and application deadline 
date for FY 1997 CIAP funding and the availability of CIAP funds. HAs 
with 250 or more public housing units are entitled to receive a formula 
grant under the Comprehensive Grant Program (CGP) and are not eligible 
to apply for CIAP funds. Entities other than HAs are not eligible to 
apply for CIAP funds.

DATES: The CIAP Application is due on or before 3 pm local time on June 
30, 1997 at the HUD Field Office with jurisdiction over the HA, 
Attention: Director, Office of Public Housing (OPH), or Administrator, 
Office of Native American Programs (ONAP). The term ``Field Office'' 
includes both the OPH and the ONAP.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: William J. Flood, Director, Office of 
Capital Improvements, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 
Seventh Street, S.W., Room 4134, Washington, D.C. 20410. Telephone 
(202) 708-1640. (This is not a toll free number.)
    IHAs may contact Deborah M. LaLancette, Director, Housing 
Management Division, Office of Native American Programs (ONAP), 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1999 Broadway, Suite 3390, 
Denver, CO 80202. Telephone (303) 675-1600. (This is not a toll free 
number.)
    Hearing or speech impaired individuals may call HUD's TTY number 
(202) 708-4595. (This is not a toll-free number.)

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    The information collection requirements contained in this NOFA have 
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 USC 3501-3520) and have been 
assigned OMB control number 2577-0044. 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.

Promoting Comprehensive Approaches to Housing and Community 
Development

    HUD is interested in promoting comprehensive, coordinated 
approaches to housing and community development. Economic development, 
community development, public housing revitalization, homeownership, 
assisted housing for special needs populations, supportive services, 
and welfare-to-work initiatives can work better if linked at the local 
level. Toward this end, the Department in recent years has developed 
the Consolidated Planning process designed to help communities 
undertake such approaches.
    In this spirit, it may be helpful for applicants under this NOFA to 
be aware of other related HUD NOFAs that have recently been published 
or are expected to be published in the near future. By reviewing these 
NOFAs with respect to their program purposes and the eligibility of 
applicants and activities, applicants may be able to relate the 
activities proposed for funding under this NOFA to the recent and 
upcoming NOFAs and to the community's Consolidated Plan.
    A NOFA related to housing revitalization that the Department has 
published is the NOFA for Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public 
Housing (HOPE VI). This NOFA was published on April 14, 1997 (61 FR 
18242). Other NOFAs related to housing revitalization that the 
Department expects to publish in the Federal Register within the next 
few weeks include: the Lead-based Paint Hazard Reduction NOFA; the 
Public Housing Demolition NOFA; and the NOFA for the Section 8 Rental 
Certificate and Voucher Programs.
    To foster comprehensive, coordinated approaches by communities, the 
Department intends for the remainder of FY 1997 to continue to alert 
applicants to upcoming and recent NOFAs as each NOFA is published. In 
addition, a complete schedule of NOFAs to be published during the 
fiscal year and those already published appears under the HUD Homepage 
on the Internet, which can be accessed at http://www.hud.gov/
nofas.html. Additional steps on NOFA coordination may be considered for 
FY 1998.
    For help in obtaining a copy of your community's Consolidated Plan, 
please contact the community development office of your municipal 
government.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Allocation Amounts

    (a) In FY 1997, $2,427,314,900 is available for the Modernization 
Program (CIAP and CGP).
    (1) Modernization funds are allocated between CIAP and CGP agencies 
based on the relative shares of backlog needs (weighted at 50%) and 
accrual needs (weighted at 50%), as determined by the field inspections 
conducted for the HUD-funded ABT study of modernization needs. This 
allocation results in CIAP agencies receiving approximately 12.15% or 
$305,361,070 and CGP agencies receiving approximately 87.85% or 
$2,121,953,830 of the total funds available.
    (i) Backlog needs are needed repairs and replacements of existing 
physical systems, items that must be added to meet the HUD 
modernization and energy conservation standards and State or local/
tribal codes, and items that are necessary for the long-term viability 
of a specific housing development.
    (ii) Accrual needs are needs that arise over time and include 
needed repairs and replacements of existing physical systems and items 
that must be added to meet the HUD modernization and energy 
conservation standards and State or local/tribal codes.
    (2) The modernization funds available to CIAP agencies are 
allocated between Public Housing at approximately 91.8505% or 
$280,475,670 and Indian Housing at approximately 8.1495% or 
$24,885,400. This allocation also is based on the relative shares of 
backlog needs (weighted at 50%) and accrual needs (weighted at 50%).
    (b) Assignment of Funds to Field Offices of Public Housing (OPH). 
In past years, the distribution of Public Housing CIAP funds for each 
Field OPH has been based solely on the relative shares of backlog and 
accrual needs for CIAP PHAs. In order to obtain a more equitable 
distribution of available funds relative to historical demand within 
each FO jurisdiction, Headquarters has determined that the FY 1997 
distribution of Public Housing CIAP funds for each Field OPH will be 
based on the relative shares of backlog and accrual needs for CIAP PHAs 
(weighted at 50%) and the relative demand for CIAP funds, as evidenced 
by the CIAP funds requested in FY 1996 (weighted at 50%). However, to 
ensure that the relative demand side of the allocation

[[Page 23929]]

formula does not give undue weight to FOs that were able to fund a 
higher percentage of funds requested in a prior year, each Field OPH 
will be capped by Headquarters, before FY 1997 funds are assigned, to 
an allocation amount which will fund no more than 30% of funds 
requested in FY 1996.
    (1) The Field OPH Director shall have authority to make Joint 
Review selections and CIAP funding decisions. However, the Secretary's 
Representative is responsible for scoring the technical review factor 
related to the degree of local/tribal government support for the 
proposed modernization (see section IV(c)(5) of this NOFA). The Field 
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) is responsible for 
scoring the technical review factor related to affirmatively furthering 
fair housing, which applies only to Public Housing.
    (2) If additional funds for Public Housing CIAP become available, 
Headquarters will allocate the funds to each Field OPH based on the 
table below.
    (3) If a Field OPH does not receive sufficient fundable 
applications to use its allocation, Headquarters will reallocate the 
remaining funds to one or more Field OPHs that have the highest 
unfunded demand, as evidenced by approvable applications.
    The following table shows the percentage distribution of CIAP funds 
for PHAs, excluding IHAs, assigned by Headquarters to each Field OPH. 
The percentage distributions for the Texas State and Houston Area 
Offices have been further broken down to indicate what percentage of 
their distribution will be allocated to HAs involved in the East Texas 
civil rights case (i.e., Young v. Cuomo) to meet the requirements of 
the settlement agreement, which is subject to judicial oversight, along 
with other modernization needs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Percent of
                                                                Public  
               Office of Public Housing (OPH)                   Housing 
                                                                 funds  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New England:                                                            
  Massachusetts State Office................................      2.4560
  Connecticut State Office..................................       .8107
  New Hampshire State Office................................      1.5676
  Rhode Island State Office.................................       .4361
New York/New Jersey:                                                    
  Buffalo Area Office.......................................      2.0783
  New Jersey State Office...................................      2.3160
  New York State Office.....................................      1.4892
Mid-Atlantic:                                                           
  Maryland State Office.....................................       .4214
  West Virginia State Office................................      1.3081
  Pennsylvania State Office.................................       .6837
  Pittsburgh Area Office....................................       .9155
  Virginia State Office.....................................       .4234
  District of Columbia Office...............................       .1672
Southeast:                                                              
  Georgia State Office......................................      8.2709
  Alabama State Office......................................      5.0915
  South Carolina State Office...............................      1.2749
  North Carolina State Office...............................      2.9244
  Mississippi State Office..................................      1.6542
  Jacksonville Area Office..................................      2.5183
  Knoxville Area Office.....................................      1.0628
  Kentucky State Office.....................................      4.7477
  Tennessee State Office....................................      2.7438
  Florida State Office......................................      1.0793
Midwest:                                                                
  Illinois State Office.....................................      3.9655
  Cincinnati Area Office....................................       .4645
  Cleveland Area Office.....................................       .5422
  Ohio State Office.........................................      1.1608
  Michigan State Office.....................................      1.8521
  Grand Rapids Area Office..................................      2.6617
  Indiana State Office......................................      1.1643
  Wisconsin State Office....................................      2.5429
  Minnesota State Office....................................      3.7183
Southwest:                                                              
  New Mexico State Office...................................      1.3046
  Texas State Office........................................      7.2209
    East Texas HAs..........................................         (1)
    Non-East Texas HAs......................................         (2)
  Houston Area Office.......................................      1.7024
    East Texas HAs..........................................         (3)
    Non-East Texas HAs......................................         (4)
  Arkansas State Office.....................................      2.1839
  Louisiana State Office....................................      3.9607
  Oklahoma State Office.....................................      2.3203
  San Antonio Area Office...................................      3.1643
Great Plains:                                                           
  Iowa State Office.........................................       .5858
  Kansas/Missouri State Office..............................      2.7413
  Nebraska State Office.....................................      1.0943
   St. Louis Area Office....................................      1.0715
Rocky Mountain:                                                         
  Colorado State Office.....................................      3.1227
Pacific/Hawaii:                                                         
  Los Angeles Area Office...................................       .2670
  Arizona State Office......................................       .9903
  Sacramento Area Office....................................       .0808
  California State Office...................................      1.7445
Northwest/Alaska:                                                       
  Oregon State Office.......................................       .6706
  Washington State Office...................................      1.2608
                                                             -----------
      Total.................................................   100.0000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ (0.361045 or 5% of 7.2209)                                          
\2\ (6.859855 or 95% of 7.2209)                                         
\3\ (0.817152 or 48% of 1.7024)                                         
\4\ (0.885248 or 52% of 1.7024)                                         

    (c) Assignment of Funds to Offices of Native American Programs 
(ONAP). Headquarters has determined the distribution of Indian Housing 
CIAP funds for each ONAP, based on the relative shares of backlog and 
accrual needs for CIAP IHAs, adjusted as necessary. The fund assignment 
will cover Indian Housing and any Public Housing owned and operated by 
IHAs.
    (1) The ONAP Administrator shall have authority to make Joint 
Review selections and CIAP funding decisions. However, the Secretary's 
Representative for the geographic area in which the IHA is located is 
responsible for scoring the technical review factor related to the 
degree of local/tribal government support for the proposed 
modernization (see section IV(c)(5) of this NOFA).
    (2) If additional funds for Indian Housing CIAP become available, 
Headquarters will allocate the funds to each ONAP based on the table 
below.
    (3) If an ONAP does not receive sufficient fundable applications to 
use its allocation, Headquarters will reallocate the remaining funds to 
one or more ONAPs that have the highest unfunded demand, as evidenced 
by approvable applications.
    The following table shows the percentage distribution of CIAP funds 
for IHAs, assigned by Headquarters to each ONAP:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Percent of
                                                                Indian  
         Office of Native American  Programs (ONAP)             Housing 
                                                                 funds  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern/Woodlands...........................................     14.8444
Southern Plains.............................................     12.3324
Northern Plains.............................................     13.3174
Southwest...................................................     29.9263
Northwest...................................................     24.4868
Alaska......................................................      5.0927
                                                             -----------
    Total...................................................    100.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Purpose and Substantive Description

    (a) Authority. Section 14, United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
U.S.C. 14371); Section 7(d) Department of Housing and Urban Development 
Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)). The CIAP regulation, 24 CFR part 968, subparts 
A and B, for PHAs and 24 CFR part 950, subpart I, for IHAs.
    (b) Program Highlights.
    (1) Departmental Priority. Improving Public and Indian Housing is 
one of the Department's major priorities. Accordingly, a review has 
been made of the entire Public and Indian Housing Program. 
Specifically, the Department is very concerned about several aspects of 
the Modernization Program, as follows:
    (i) Design. When identifying physical improvement needs to meet the 
modernization standards, HAs are encouraged to consider design which 
supports the integration of public housing into the broader community. 
Although high priority needs, such as those related to health and 
safety, vacant, substandard units, structural or system integrity, and 
compliance with statutory, regulatory or court-ordered deadlines, will 
receive funding priority, HAs should plan their modernization in a way 
which promotes good design, but maintains the modest nature of public 
housing. The HA should pay particular attention to design, which is 
sensitive to traditional cultural values, and be

[[Page 23930]]

receptive to creative, but cost-effective approaches suggested by 
architects, residents, HA staff, and other local entities. Such 
approaches may complement the planning for basic rehabilitation needs. 
It should be noted that there will be no increase in operating subsidy 
as a result of any modernization activities.
    (ii) Physical Accessibility and Visitability. In addition to the 
design considerations set forth in paragraph (b)(i) of this section, 
HAs must comply with accessibility requirements and are encouraged to 
provide units that are ``visitable'' by persons with mobility 
impairments. Visitability gets the person into the home, but does not 
require that all features be made accessible throughout the home.
    (A) Accessibility. An accessible home means that the home is 
located on an accessible route (36'' clear passage) and, when designed, 
constructed, altered or adapted, can be approached, entered, and used 
by an individual with physical disabilities.
    (B) Visitability. Visitability restricts itself to two areas of a 
home; i.e., at least one entrance is at grade (no-step); and all doors 
inside provide a 32'' clear passage. A visitable home serves not only 
persons with disabilities, but also persons without disabilities. (For 
example, a mother pushing a stroller; person delivering large 
appliances; person using a walker, etc.). One difference between 
``visitability'' and ``accessibility'' is that accessibility requires 
that all features of a dwelling unit be made accessible for mobility 
impaired persons. A visitable home provides less accessibility than an 
accessible home. Examples of actions that HAs may take to support 
visitability include:
    (1) When conducting a ``needs assessment,'' the HA may identify 25 
single family scattered site homes and make those units visitable.
    (2) When undertaking substantial alterations as defined in 24 CFR 
8.23(a), the HA may identify 50 units in an elderly development not 
subject to the new construction requirements of 24 CFR 8.22 and make 
those units visitable.
    (3) The HA may target the first floor of an existing 3-story family 
apartment complex and make those units visitable.
    (C) Requirements. In carrying out modernization work, HAs are 
required to comply with the requirements of 24 CFR 8.23(a) regarding 
substantial alterations and 24 CFR 8.23(b) regarding other alterations, 
as well as with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and 28 
CFR part 35. Title II is applicable to HAs established under State law. 
Also, the HA shall comply with the requirements of 24 CFR 8.22 and 24 
CFR 100.205 (the Fair Housing Act) regarding new construction.
    (iii) Provision of Community Space for Welfare-to-Work Initiatives. 
HAs are encouraged to provide community space for Welfare-to-Work 
initiatives, which include, but are not limited to services 
coordination/case management, training, child care, health care, 
transportation, and economic development. Where community space is not 
otherwise available, CIAP funds may be used to convert existing 
dwelling space, renovate existing nondwelling space, or construct or 
acquire nondwelling space for this purpose. Where CIAP funds will be 
used to provide community space, HAs are required to submit written 
evidence from a qualified local agency or provider that the agency or 
provider agrees to furnish, equip, operate and maintain the community 
space, as well as provide insurance coverage. Where HAs themselves 
intend to operate the community space, they must submit written 
evidence of the continuing funding sources to furnish, equip, operate, 
maintain and insure the community space.
    (iv) Resident Involvement and Economic Uplift. HAs are required to 
explore and implement through all feasible means the involvement of 
residents, including duly-elected resident councils, regardless of 
race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, and familial 
status, in every aspect of the CIAP, from planning through 
implementation. HAs shall use the provisions of Section 3 of the 
Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 to the maximum feasible 
extent. HAs are encouraged to seek ways to employ Section 3 residents 
in all aspects of the CIAP's operation and to develop means to promote 
contracting opportunities for businesses in Section 3 areas. Refer to 
24 CFR 85.36(e) regarding the provision of such opportunities.
    (v) Elimination of Vacant Units. HAs are encouraged to apply for 
CIAP funds to address vacant units where the work does not involve 
routine maintenance, but will result in reoccupancy.
    (vi) Expediting the Program. HAs are reminded that they are 
expected to obligate all funds within two years and to expend all funds 
within three years of program approval (Annual Contributions Contract 
(ACC) Amendment execution) unless a longer implementation schedule 
(Part III of the CIAP Budget) is approved by the Field Office due to 
the size or complexity of the program. Failure to obligate funds in a 
timely manner may result in the termination of the program and 
recapture of the funds.
    (2) Relationship to Technical Review Factors. The Departmental goal 
of improving Public and Indian Housing is reflected in the technical 
review factors, set forth in section IV(c)(5) of this NOFA, on which 
the Field Office scores each HA's CIAP Application. Based on the HA's 
total score, the Field Office then ranks each HA to determine selection 
for Joint Review. The technical review factors emphasize the following 
Departmental initiatives to improve Public and Indian Housing:
    (i) Restoration of vacant units to occupancy;
    (ii) Resident capacity-building and resident involvement in HA 
operations, including opportunities for resident management and 
homeownership;
    (iii) Job training and employment opportunities for residents, 
including Step-Up employment and training programs, and contracting 
opportunities for Section 3 businesses;
    (iv) Drug elimination initiatives;
    (v) Partnership with local government; and
    (vi) Provision of appropriate replacement housing, as described in 
paragraph (c) below.
    (c) Expansion of Eligible Activities. The FY 1997 Appropriations 
Act continued the expanded eligible activities that, with prior HUD 
approval, may be funded from FY 1997 and prior FY CIAP or CGP funds. 
These activities include: new construction or acquisition of additional 
public housing units, including replacement units (refer to Notice PIH 
96-56 (HA), dated July 29, 1996); modernization activities related to 
the public housing portion of housing developments held in partnership 
or cooperation with non-public housing entities; other activities 
related to public housing, including activities eligible under the 
Urban Revitalization Demonstration (HOPE VI), such as community 
services; and operating subsidy purposes (not to exceed 10 percent of 
the grant amount).

III. Application Preparation and Submission by HA.

    (a) Planning. In preparing its CIAP Application, the HA is 
encouraged to assess all its physical and management improvement needs. 
Physical improvement needs should be reviewed against the modernization 
standards as set forth in HUD Handbook 7485.2, as revised, physical 
accessibility requirements as set forth in 24 CFR part 8, and 28 CFR 
part 35, and any cost-effective energy conservation measures, 
identified in updated energy audits. The modernization standards 
include

[[Page 23931]]

development specific work to ensure the long-term viability of the 
developments, such as amenities and design changes to promote the 
integration of low-income housing into the broader community. See 
section II(b)(1)(i) of this NOFA. In addition, the HA is strongly 
encouraged to contact the Field Office to discuss its modernization 
needs and obtain information.
    (b) Resident Involvement and Local/Tribal Official Consultation 
Requirements.
    (1) Residents/Homebuyers. The CIAP regulations at Secs. 968.215 or 
950.632 require the HA to establish a Partnership Process to ensure 
full resident participation in the planning, implementation and 
monitoring of the modernization program, as follows:
    (i) Before submission of the CIAP Application, consultation with 
the residents, resident organization, and resident management 
corporation (herein referred to as residents) of the development(s) 
being proposed for modernization regarding its intent to submit an 
application and to solicit resident comments;
    (ii) Reasonable opportunity for residents to present their views on 
the proposed modernization and alternatives to it, and full and serious 
consideration of resident recommendations;
    (iii) Written response to residents indicating acceptance or 
rejection of resident recommendations, consistent with HUD requirements 
and the HA's own determination of efficiency, economy and need, with a 
copy to the Field Office at Joint Review. If the Joint Review is 
conducted off-site, a copy is mailed to the Field Office;
    (iv) After HUD funding decisions, notification to residents of the 
approval or disapproval and, where requested, provision to residents of 
a copy of the HUD-approved CIAP Budget; and
    (v) During implementation, periodic notification to residents of 
work status and progress and maximum feasible employment of residents 
in the modernization effort.
    (2) Local/Tribal Officials. Before submission of the CIAP 
Application, consultation with appropriate local/tribal officials 
regarding how the proposed modernization may be coordinated with any 
local plans for neighborhood revitalization, economic development, drug 
elimination and expenditure of local funds, such as Community 
Development Block Grant funds.
    (c) Contents of CIAP Application. Within the established deadline 
date, the HA shall submit the CIAP Application to the Field Office, 
with a copy to appropriate local/tribal officials. The HA may obtain 
the necessary forms from the Field Office. The CIAP Application is 
comprised of the following documents:
    (1) Form HUD-52822, CIAP Application, in an original and two 
copies, which includes:
    (i) A general description of HA development(s), in priority order, 
(including the current physical condition, for each development for 
which the HA is requesting funds, or for all developments in the HA's 
inventory) and physical and management improvement needs to meet the 
Secretary's standards in Sec. 968.115 or Sec. 950.610; description of 
work items required to correct identified deficiencies, including 
accessibility work; and the estimated cost. Where the HA has not 
included some of its developments in the CIAP Application, the Field 
Office may not consider funding any non-emergency work at excluded 
developments or subsequently approve use of leftover funds at excluded 
developments. Therefore, to provide maximum flexibility, the HA may 
wish to include all of its developments in the CIAP Application, even 
though there are no known current needs. Following is an example of the 
general description:
    Development 1-1: 50 units of low-rent; 25 years old; physical needs 
are: new roofs; storm windows and doors; and electrical upgrading at 
estimated cost of $150,000.
    Development 1-2: 40 units of low-rent; 20 years old; physical needs 
are: physical accessibility for kitchens, bathrooms and doors in 2 
units and common laundry room; visitability in 4 ground floor units; 
kitchen floors; shower/bathtub surrounds; fencing; and exterior 
lighting at estimated cost of $130,000.
    Development 1-3: 35 units of Turnkey III; 15 years old; physical 
needs are: physical accessibility in 3 units; and roof insulation at 
estimated cost of $50,000.
    Development 1-4: 20 units of low-rent; 5 years old; no physical 
needs; no funding requested.
    (ii) Where funding is being requested for management improvements, 
an identification of the deficiency, a description of the work required 
for correction, and estimated cost. Examples of management improvements 
include, but are not limited to the following areas:
    (A) The management, financial, and accounting control systems of 
the HA;
    (B) The adequacy and qualifications of personnel employed by the HA 
in the management and operation of its developments by category of 
employment; and
    (C) The adequacy and efficacy of resident programs and services, 
resident and development security, resident selection and eviction, 
occupancy and vacant unit turnaround, rent collection, routine and 
preventive maintenance, equal opportunity, and other HA policies and 
procedures.
    (iii) A certification that the HA has met the requirements for 
consultation with local/tribal officials and residents/homebuyers and 
that all developments included in the application have long-term 
physical and social viability, including prospects for full occupancy. 
If the HA cannot make this certification with respect to long-term 
viability, the HA shall attach a narrative, explaining its viability 
concerns.
    (2) A narrative statement, in an original and two copies, 
addressing each of the technical review factors in section IV(c)(5) of 
this NOFA and, where applicable, the bonus points in section IV(c)(6) 
of this NOFA. The affirmatively furthering fair housing technical 
review factor in section IV(c)(5) of this NOFA applies only to Public 
Housing; therefore, IHAs are not required to address this factor. In 
addressing the affirmatively furthering fair housing technical review 
factor, actions that the PHA has taken, or plans to take, to accomplish 
this objective may include, but are not limited to the following:
    (i) Actions that contribute toward the reduction of concentration 
of low-income-persons who are protected under the Fair Housing Act. 
Such actions may include housing programs/activities that provide 
information regarding housing opportunities outside of minority 
concentrated areas within the PHA's jurisdictional boundaries, or 
efforts that encourage landlords/owners to make available housing 
opportunities outside of minority concentrated areas. For example, the 
PHA may refer applicants to other available housing as part of an 
established housing counseling service or assist applicants in getting 
on other waiting lists.
    (ii) Actions that overcome the consequences of prior discriminatory 
practices or usage which may have tended to exclude persons of a 
particular race, color or national origin; or that overcome the effects 
of past discrimination against persons with disabilities. Such actions 
may include those actions taken without any kind of legally binding 
order, but which have changed previous discriminatory management, 
tenant selection and assignment or maintenance practices.
    (3) Form HUD-50071, Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans and

[[Page 23932]]

Cooperative Agreements, in an original only, required of HAs 
established under State law, applying for grants exceeding $100,000.
    (4) SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, in an original only, 
required of HAs established under State law, only where any funds, 
other than federally appropriated funds, will be or have been used to 
influence Federal workers, Members of Congress and their staff 
regarding specific grants or contracts. The HA determines if the 
submission of the SF-LLL form is applicable.
    (5) Form HUD-2880, Applicant/Recipient Update/Disclosure Report, in 
an original only, required of HAs established under State law.
    (6) At the option of the HA, photographs or video cassettes showing 
the physical condition of the developments.

IV. Application Processing by Field Office

    (a) Completeness Review (Corrections to Deficient Applications). To 
be eligible for processing, the CIAP Application must be physically 
received by the Field Office by the time and date specified in this 
NOFA. A facsimile application will not be accepted. The Field Office 
shall immediately perform a completeness review to determine whether an 
application is complete, responsive to the NOFA, and acceptable for 
technical processing.
    (1) If either Form HUD-52822, CIAP Application, or the narrative 
statement on the technical review factors ismissing, the HA's 
application will be considered substantially incomplete and, therefore, 
ineligible for further processing. The Field Office shall immediately 
notify the HA in writing.
    (2) If Form HUD-50071, Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, 
and Cooperative Agreements, or SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying 
Activities, are required, but missing, or Form HUD-2880, Applicant/
Recipient Update/Disclosure Form, is missing, or there is a technical 
mistake, such as no signature or no original signature on a submitted 
form or the HA failed to address all of the technical review factors, 
the Field Office shall immediately notify the HA in writing to submit 
or correct the deficiency within 14 calendar days from the date of 
HUD's written notification. This is not additional time to 
substantially revise the application. Deficiencies which may be 
corrected at this time are inadvertently omitted documents, as 
specified in this subparagraph, or clarifications of previously 
submitted material and other changes which are not of such a nature as 
to improve the competitive position of the application.
    (3) If the HA fails to submit or correct the items within the 
required time period, the HA's application will be ineligible for 
further processing. The Field Office shall immediately notify the HA in 
writing after this occurs.
    (4) The HA may submit a CIAP Application for Emergency 
Modernization whenever needed. See section IV(j) of this NOFA.
    (b) Eligibility Review. After the HA's CIAP Application is 
determined to be complete and accepted for review, the Field Office 
eligibility review shall determine if the application is eligible for 
full processing or processing on a reduced scope.
    (1) Eligibility for Full Processing. To be eligible for full 
processing:
    (i) Each eligible development for which work is proposed has 
reached the Date of Full Availability (DOFA) and is under ACC at the 
time of CIAP Application submission; and
    (ii) Where funded under Major Reconstruction of Obsolete Projects 
(MROP) after FY 1988, the development/building has reached DOFA or, 
where funded during FYs 1986-1988, all MROP funds for the development/
building have been expended.
    (2) Eligibility for Processing on Reduced Scope. When the following 
conditions exist, the HA's application will be reviewed on a reduced 
scope:
    (i) Section 504 Compliance. Where the HA has not completed all 
required structural changes to meet the need for accessible units and 
nondwelling facilities, as identified in the HA's Section 504 needs 
assessment, the HA is eligible for processing only for Emergency 
Modernization or physical work needed to meet the requirements of 
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
    (ii) Lead-Based Paint (LBP) Testing Compliance. Where the HA has 
not complied with the statutory requirement to complete LBP testing on 
all pre-1978 family units, the HA is eligible for processing only for 
Emergency Modernization or work needed to complete the testing.
    (iii) Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) Compliance. Where 
the HA has not complied with FHEO requirements as evidenced by an 
enforcement action, finding or determination, the HA is eligible for 
processing only for Emergency Modernization or work needed to remedy 
civil rights deficiencies--unless the HA is implementing a voluntary 
compliance agreement or settlement agreement designed to correct the 
area(s) of noncompliance. The enforcement actions, findings or 
determinations that trigger limited eligibility are described in 
paragraphs (A) through (E) below:
    (A) A pending proceeding against the HA based upon a Charge of 
Discrimination issued under the Fair Housing Act. A Charge of 
Discrimination is a charge under section 810(g)(2) of the Fair Housing 
Act, issued by the Department's Assistant Secretary for FHEO or legally 
authorized designee;
    (B) A pending civil rights suit against the HA, referred by the 
Department's Assistant Secretary for FHEO and instituted by the 
Department of Justice;
    (C) Outstanding HUD findings of HA noncompliance with civil rights 
statutes and executive orders under 24 CFR part 5 and 24 CFR 968.110 or 
24 CFR 950.115, or implementing regulations, as a result of formal 
administrative proceedings;
    (D) A deferral of the processing of applications from the HA 
imposed by HUD under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and HUD 
implementing regulations (24 CFR 1.8), the Attorney General's 
Guidelines (28 CFR 50.3), and procedures (HUD Handbook 8040.1), or 
under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and HUD 
implementing regulations (24 CFR 8.57); or
    (E) An adjudication of a violation under any of the authorities 
specified in 24 CFR part 5 and 24 CFR 968.110 or 24 CFR 950.115 in a 
civil action filed against the HA by a private individual.
    (c) Selection Criteria and Ranking Factors. After all CIAP 
Applications are reviewed for eligibility, the Field Office shall 
categorize the eligible HAs and their developments into two processing 
groups, as defined in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph: Group 1 for 
Emergency Modernization; and Group 2 for Other Modernization. HA 
developments may be included in both groups and the same development 
may be in each group. However, the HA is only required to submit one 
CIAP Application.
    (1) Grouping Modernization Types.
    (i) Group 1, Emergency Modernization. This is a type of 
modernization program for a development that is limited to physical 
work items of an emergency nature to correct conditions that pose an 
immediate threat to the health or safety of residents or are related to 
fire safety, and that must be corrected within one year of CIAP funding 
approval. Funding may not be used for management improvements. 
Emergency Modernization includes all LBP testing and abatement of units 
housing children under six years old with elevated blood

[[Page 23933]]

lead levels (EBLs) and all LBP testing and abatement of HA-owned day 
care facilities used by children under six years old with EBLs. Group 1 
developments are not subject to the technical review rating and ranking 
in subparagraphs (5), (6) and (7) of this paragraph and the long-term 
viability and reasonable cost determinations in section V(a) of this 
NOFA.
    (ii) Group 2, Other Modernization. This is a type of modernization 
program for a development that includes one or more physical work 
items, where the Field Office determines that the physical improvements 
are necessary and sufficient to extend substantially the useful life of 
the development, and/or one or more development specific or HA-wide 
management work items (including planning costs), and/or LBP testing, 
professional risk assessment, interim containment, and abatement. 
Therefore, eligibility of work under Other Modernization ranges from a 
single work item to the complete rehabilitation of a development. Refer 
to section II(b)(1)(i) of this NOFA regarding modest amenities and 
improved design. Group 2 developments are subject to the technical 
review rating and ranking in subparagraphs (5), (6) and (7) of this 
paragraph and the long-term viability and reasonable cost 
determinations in section V(a) of this NOFA.
    (2) Assessment of HA's Management Capability. As part of its 
technical review of the CIAP Application, the Field Office shall 
evaluate the HA's management capability. Particular attention shall be 
given to the adequacy of the HA's maintenance in determining the HA's 
management capability. This assessment shall be based on the compliance 
aspects of on-site monitoring, such as audits, reviews or surveys which 
are currently available within the Field Office, and on performance 
reviews, as follows:
    (i) Public Housing. A PHA has management capability if it is (A) 
not designated as Troubled under 24 CFR part 901, Public Housing 
Management Assessment Program (PHMAP), or (B) designated as Troubled, 
but has a reasonable prospect of acquiring management capability 
through CIAP-funded management improvements and administrative support. 
A Troubled PHA is eligible for Emergency Modernization only, unless it 
is making reasonable progress toward meeting the performance targets 
established in its memorandum of agreement or equivalent under 24 CFR 
901.140 or has obtained alternative oversight of its management 
functions.
    (ii) Indian Housing. An IHA has management capability if it is (A) 
not designated as High Risk under 24 CFR 950.135 or (B) designated as 
High Risk, but has a reasonable prospect of acquiring management 
capability through CIAP-funded management improvements and 
administrative support. A High Risk IHA is eligible for Emergency 
Modernization only, unless it is making reasonable progress toward 
meeting the performance targets established in its management 
improvement plan under 24 CFR 950.135 or has obtained alternative 
oversight of its management functions.
    (3) Assessment of HA's Modernization Capability. As part of its 
technical review of the CIAP Application, the Field Office shall 
evaluate the HA's modernization capability, including the progress of 
previously approved modernization and the status of any outstanding 
findings from CIAP monitoring visits, as follows:
    (i) Public Housing. A PHA has modernization capability if it is (A) 
not designated as Modernization Troubled under 24 CFR part 901, PHMAP, 
or (B) designated as Modernization Troubled, but has a reasonable 
prospect of acquiring modernization capability through CIAP-funded 
management improvements and administrative support, such as hiring 
staff or contracting for assistance. A Modernization Troubled PHA is 
eligible for Emergency Modernization only, unless it is making 
reasonable progress toward meeting the performance targets established 
in its memorandum of agreement or equivalent under 24 CFR 901.140 or 
has obtained alternative oversight of its modernization functions. 
Where a PHA does not have a funded modernization program in progress, 
the Field Office shall determine whether the PHA has a reasonable 
prospect of acquiring modernization capability through hiring staff or 
contracting for assistance.
    (ii) Indian Housing. An IHA has modernization capability if it is 
(A) not designated as High Risk under 24 CFR 950.135, or (B) designated 
as High Risk, but has a reasonable prospect of acquiring modernization 
capability through CIAP-funded management improvements and 
administrative support, such as hiring staff or contracting for 
assistance. An IHA that has been classified High Risk with regard to 
modernization is eligible for Emergency Modernization only, unless it 
is making reasonable progress toward meeting the performance targets 
established in its management improvement plan under 24 CFR 
950.135(f)(2) or has obtained alternative oversight of its 
modernization functions. Where an IHA does not have a funded 
modernization program in progress, the ONAP shall determine whether the 
IHA has a reasonable prospect of acquiring modernization capability 
through hiring staff or contracting for assistance.
    (4) Technical Processing. After categorizing the eligible HAs and 
their developments into Group 1 and Group 2, the Field Office shall 
forward a list of all HAs in Group 2 to the Secretary's Representative 
for scoring the technical review factor related to local/tribal 
government support of the proposed modernization, within an established 
time frame; the Field Office shall provide the Secretary's 
Representative with the portion of each HA's narrative statement, 
included in the CIAP Application, related to the technical review 
factor on local/tribal government support. In addition, the Field OPH 
shall forward a list of all PHAs in Group 2 to the Field Office of FHEO 
for scoring the technical review factor related to affirmatively 
furthering fair housing, within an established time frame; the Field 
OPH shall provide the Office of FHEO with the portion of each PHA's 
narrative statement, included in the CIAP Application, related to the 
technical review factor on affirmatively furthering fair housing. The 
Field OPH shall review and rate each Group 2 HA on each of the 
remaining technical review factors in subparagraph (5) of this 
paragraph. With the exception of the technical review factor of 
``extent and urgency of need,'' a Group 2 HA is rated on its overall HA 
application and not on each development. For the technical review 
factor of ``extent and urgency of need,'' each development for which 
funding is requested in the CIAP Application by a Group 2 HA is scored; 
the development with the highest priority needs is scored the highest 
number of points, which are then used for the overall HA score on that 
factor.
    (5) Technical Review Factors. The technical review factors for 
assistance are:

[[Page 23934]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Maximum  
                  Technical review factors                      points  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extent and urgency of need, based on high priority needs                
 (non-emergency health and safety; vacant, substandard                  
 units; structural or system integrity; or compliance with              
 statutory, regulatory or court-ordered deadlines), need to             
 complete previously funded modernization work, or need to              
 provide appropriate replacement housing for HUD-approved               
 demolition/disposition....................................           40
HA's modernization capability based on, for Public Housing,             
 its PHMAP score on the Modernization Indicator, and for                
 Indian Housing, its assessment under 24 CFR 950.135.......           15
HA's management capability based on, for Public Housing,                
 its overall PHMAP score, and for Indian Housing, its                   
 assessment under 24 CFR 950.135...........................           15
Extent of vacancies based on the HA-wide vacancy rate,                  
 where the vacancies are not due to insufficient demand....            5
Degree of resident involvement in HA operations based on FO             
 file evidence.............................................            2
Degree of HA activity in coordinating/providing resident                
 services related to Welfare-to-Work initiatives in                     
 community facilities at or near HA developments based on               
 FO file evidence. Such services include, but are not                   
 limited to services coordination/case management,                      
 training, child care, health care, transportation, and                 
 economic development......................................            4
Degree of HA activity in resident initiatives, including                
 resident management, economic development, homeownership,              
 and drug elimination efforts or other resident initiatives             
 for non-elderly based on FO file evidence, including, for              
 Public Housing, its PHMAP score on the Resident                        
 Initiatives Indicator.....................................            2
Degree of non-elderly resident employment through direct                
 hiring or contracting/subcontracting or job training                   
 initiatives based on FO file evidence.....................            2
Local/tribal government support for proposed modernization,             
 through either funding or in-kind contributions, over and              
 above what is required under the Cooperation Agreement for             
 municipal services, such as police and fire protection and             
 refuse collection, within the last 12 months, that will                
 directly benefit the Public/Indian housing or the                      
 neighborhood surrounding the Public/Indian housing........            5
Extent of actions that HA has taken, or plans to take to                
 Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (only applicable to                 
 Public Housing)...........................................           10
                                                            ------------
    Total Maximum Score for Public Housing.................          100
    Total Maximum Score for Indian Housing.................           90
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (6) Bonus points. The Field Office shall provide up to 5 bonus 
points for any HA that can demonstrate that it has, over the past 12 
months, displayed creative approaches for providing ``visitability'' 
throughout its housing inventory.
    (7) Rating and Ranking. After rating all Group 2 HAs/developments 
on each of the technical review factors and providing any bonus points 
as set forth in subparagraph (6) of this paragraph, the Field Office 
shall then rank each Group 2 HA based on its total score, list Group 2 
HAs in descending order, subject to confirmation of need and cost at 
Joint Review, and identify for Joint Review selection the highest 
ranking applications in Group 2 and other Group 2 HAs with lower 
ranking applications, but with high priority needs. High priority needs 
are non-emergency needs, but related to: health or safety; vacant, 
substandard units; structural or system integrity; or compliance with 
statutory, regulatory or court-ordered deadlines. All Group 1 
applications are automatically selected for Joint Review. The Field 
Office shall consult with Headquarters regarding any identified FHEO 
noncompliance.
    (d) Joint Review. The purpose of the Joint Review is for the Field 
Office to discuss with the HA the proposed modernization program, as 
set forth in the CIAP Application, review long-term viability and cost 
reasonableness determinations, and determine the size of the grant, if 
any, to be awarded.
    (1) The Field Office shall select HAs, including all Group 1 HAs, 
for Joint Review so that the total dollar value of all proposed 
modernization recommended for funding exceeds the Field Office's 
estimated funding amount by at least 15 percent. This preserves the 
Field Office's ability to adjust cost estimates and work items as a 
result of Joint Review.
    (2) The Field Office shall notify each HA whose application has 
been selected for further processing as to whether Joint Review will be 
conducted on-site or off-site (e.g., by telephone or in-office 
meeting).
    (3) The HA shall prepare for Joint Review by preparing a draft CIAP 
Budget and reviewing the other items to be covered during Joint Review, 
as prescribed by HUD, such as the need for professional services, 
method of accomplishment of physical work (contract or force account 
labor), HA compliance with various Federal statutes and regulations, 
etc. If conducted on-site, Joint Review will include an inspection of 
the proposed physical work.
    (4) The Field Office shall advise in writing each HA not selected 
for Joint Review of the reasons for non-selection.
    (e) Funding Decisions. After all Joint Reviews are completed, the 
Field Office shall adjust the HAs, developments, and work items to be 
funded and the amounts to be awarded, on the basis of information 
obtained from Joint Reviews, FHEO review, and environmental reviews 
(refer to paragraph (h) of this section) and make the funding 
decisions. Such adjustments are necessary where the Field Office 
determines that actual Group 1 emergencies and Group 2 high priority 
needs, HA priorities, or cost estimates vary from the HA's application. 
Such adjustments may preclude the Field Office from funding all of the 
applications selected for Joint Review in order to accommodate the 
funding of high priority needs. However, where the information obtained 
from Joint Reviews, FHEO review, and environmental reviews confirms the 
information used to establish the rankings before Joint Review, the 
Field Office shall make funding decisions in accordance with its 
rankings. Even if the information obtained from Joint Reviews, FHEO 
review, and environmental reviews does not confirm the information used 
to establish the rankings before Joint Review, only the funding awarded 
will be adjusted accordingly; the scores will not be affected. An HA 
will not be selected for Joint Review if there is a duplication of 
funding (refer to section V(c) of this NOFA). After Congressional 
notifications, the Field Office shall notify the HAs of their funding 
approval, subject to submission of the CIAP Budget, including an 
implementation schedule, and other required documents.
    (f) HA Submission of Additional Documents
    After Field Office funding decisions, the HA shall submit the 
following documents within the time frame prescribed by the Field 
Office:
    (1) Form HUD-52825, CIAP Budget/Progress Report, which includes the

[[Page 23935]]

implementation schedule(s), in an original and two copies.
    (2) Form HUD-50070, Certification for a Drug-Free Workplace, in an 
original only.
    (3) Form HUD-52820, HA Board Resolution Approving CIAP Budget, in 
an original only.
    (g) ACC Amendment
    After HUD approval of the CIAP Budget, the Field Office and the HA 
shall enter into an ACC amendment in order for the HA to draw down 
modernization funds. The ACC amendment shall require low-income use of 
the housing for not less than 20 years from the date of the ACC 
amendment (subject to sale of homeownership units in accordance with 
the terms of the ACC). The HA Executive Director, where authorized by 
the Board of Commissioners and permitted by State/tribal law, may sign 
the ACC amendment on behalf of the HA. HUD has the authority to 
condition an ACC amendment (e.g., to require an HA to hire a 
modernization coordinator or contract administrator to administer its 
modernization program).
    (h) Environmental review
    Under 24 CFR part 58, the responsible entity, as defined in 
Sec. 58.2(a)(7), must assume the environmental responsibilities for 
projects being funded under the CIAP. If the HA objects to the 
responsible entity conducting the environmental review, on the basis of 
performance, timing or compatibility of objectives, the Field OPH 
Director/ONAP Administrator will review the facts to determine who will 
perform the environmental review. At any time, the Field OPH Director/
ONAP Administrator may reject the use of a responsible entity to 
conduct the environmental review in a particular case on the basis of 
performance, timing or compatibility of objectives, or in accordance 
with Sec. 58.77(d)(1). If a responsible entity objects to performing an 
environmental review, or if the Field OPH Director/ONAP Administrator 
determines that the responsible entity should not perform the 
environmental review, the Field OPH Director/ONAP Administrator may 
designate another responsible entity to conduct the review or may 
itself conduct the environmental review in accordance with the 
provisions of 24 CFR part 50. After selection by the Field Office for 
Joint Review, the HA shall provide any documentation to the responsible 
entity (or Field Office, where applicable) that is needed to perform 
the environmental review.
    (1) Where the environmental review is completed before Field Office 
approval of the CIAP budget and the HA has submitted its request for 
release of funds (RROF), the budget approval letter shall state any 
conditions, modifications, prohibitions, etc. as a result of the 
environmental review.
    (2) Where the environmental review is not completed and/or the HA 
has not submitted the RROF before Field Office approval of the CIAP 
budget, the budget approval letter shall instruct the HA to refrain 
from undertaking, or obligating or expending funds on, physical 
activities or other choice-limiting actions, until the Field PH 
Director/ONAP Administrator approves the HA's RROF and the related 
certification of the responsible entity (or the Field Office has 
completed the environmental review). The budget approval letter also 
shall advise the HA that the approved budget may be modified on the 
basis of the results of the environmental review.
    (i) Declaration of Trust
    Where the Field Office determines that a Declaration of Trust is 
not in place or is not current, the HA shall execute and file for 
record a Declaration of Trust, as provided under the ACC, to protect 
the rights and interests of HUD throughout the 20-year period during 
which the HA is obligated to operate its developments in accordance 
with the ACC, the Act, and HUD regulations and requirements. HUD has 
determined that its interest in Mutual Help units is sufficiently 
protected without the further requirement of a Declaration of Trust; 
therefore, a Declaration of Trust is not required for Mutual Help 
units.
    (j) ``Fast Tracking'' Emergency Applications. Emergency 
applications do not have to be processed within the normal processing 
time allowed for other applications. Where an immediate hazard must be 
addressed, HA emergency applications may be submitted and processed at 
any time during the year when funds are available. The Field Office 
shall ``fast track'' the processing of these emergency applications so 
that fund reservation may occur as soon as possible. An emergency 
application is comprised of the following documents:
    (1) Form HUD-52825, CIAP Budget/Progress Report, which includes the 
implementation schedule(s), in an original and two copies.
    (2) Form HUD-52820, HA Board Resolution Approving CIAP Budget, in 
an original only.
    (3) Form HUD-50070, Certification for a Drug-Free Workplace, in an 
original only.
    (4) Form HUD-50071, Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans and 
Cooperative Agreements, in an original only.
    (5) SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, in an original only, 
where determined by the HA to be applicable.
    (6) Form HUD-2880, Applicant/Recipient Update/Disclosure Report, in 
an original only.
    (7) At the option of the HA, photographs or video cassettes showing 
the physical condition of the developments.

V. Other Program Items

    (a) Long-Term Viability and Reasonable Cost. On Form HUD-52822, 
CIAP Application, the HA certifies whether the developments proposed 
for modernization have long-term physical and social viability, 
including prospects for full occupancy. During Joint Review, the Field 
Office will review with the HA the determination of reasonable cost for 
the proposed modernization to ensure that unfunded hard costs do not 
exceed 90 percent of the computed total development cost (TDC) for a 
new development with the same structure type and number and size of 
units in the market area. The Field Office shall make a final viability 
determination. Where the estimated per unit unfunded hard cost is equal 
to or less than the per unit TDC for the smallest bedroom size at the 
development, no further computation of the TDC limit is required.
    (1) If the Field Office determines that completion of the 
improvements and replacements will not reasonably ensure the long-term 
physical and social viability of the development at a reasonable cost, 
the Field Office shall only approve Emergency Modernization or non-
emergency funding for essential non-routine maintenance needed to keep 
the property habitable until the demolition or disposition application 
is approved and residents are relocated.
    (2) Where the Field Office wishes to fund a development with hard 
costs exceeding 90 percent of computed TDC, the Field Office shall 
submit written justification to Headquarters for final decision. Such 
justification shall include:
    (i) Any special or unusual conditions have been adequately 
explained, all work has been justified as necessary to meet the 
modernization and energy conservation standards, including development 
specific work necessary to provide a modest, non-luxury development; 
and
    (ii) Reasonable cost estimates have been provided, and every effort 
has been made to reduce costs; and
    (iii) Rehabilitation of the existing development is more cost-
effective in the long-term than construction or acquisition of 
replacement housing; or

[[Page 23936]]

    (iv) There are no practical alternatives for replacement housing.
    (b) Use of Dwelling Units for Economic Self-Sufficiency Services 
and/or Drug Elimination Activities. CIAP funds may be used to convert 
dwelling units for purposes related to economic self-sufficiency 
services and/or drug elimination activities. Regarding the eligibility 
for funding under the Performance Funding System of dwelling units used 
for these purposes, refer to Sec. 990.108(b)(2) or Sec. 950.720(b)(2).
    (c) Duplication of Funding. The HA shall not receive duplicate 
funding for the same work item or activity under any circumstance and 
shall establish controls to assure that an activity, program, or 
project that is funded under any other HUD program shall not be funded 
by CIAP.

VI. Application Deadline Date and Summary of FY 1997 CIAP 
Processing Steps

    The deadline date for submission of the FY 1997 CIAP Application is 
[insert 60 calendar days after date of publication]. Dates for other 
processing steps will be established by each Field Office to reflect 
local workload issues.

Summary of Processing Steps

    1. HA submits CIAP Application.
    2. Field Office conducts completeness review and requests 
corrections to deficient applications or notifies HAs of ineligible 
applications.
    3. HA submits corrections to deficient applications within 14 
calendar days of notification from Field Office.
    4. Field Office conducts eligibility review and technical review 
(rating and ranking) and makes Joint Review selections.
    5. Field Office completes Joint Reviews and FHEO review; Field 
Office or responsible entity completes environmental reviews.
    6. Field Office makes funding decisions and forwards Congressional 
notifications to Headquarters.
    7. Congressional notification is completed and Field Office 
notifies HA of funding decisions.
    8. HA submits additional documents as required in section IV(f) of 
this NOFA.
    9. Field Office completes fund reservations and forwards ACC 
amendment to HA for signature and return.
    10. Field Office executes ACC amendment and HA begins 
implementation.

VII. Other Matters

    (a) Environmental Impact. A Finding of No Significant Impact with 
respect to the environment has been made in accordance with HUD 
regulations at 24 CFR part 50 implementing section 102(2)(C) of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 USC 4332). The Finding of 
No Significant Impact is available for public inspection and copying 
between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 pm weekdays at the Office of the Rules 
Docket Clerk, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410.
    (b) Federalism Impact. The General Counsel, as the Designated 
Official under section 6(a) of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has 
determined that the policies and procedures contained in this NOFA will 
not have substantial direct effects on States or their political 
subdivisions, or the relationship between the federal government and 
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government. As a result, the NOFA is not subject 
to review under the Order.
    (c) Impact on the Family. The General Counsel, as the Designated 
Official for Executive Order 12606, The Family, has determined that 
this NOFA does not have the potential for significant impact on family 
formation, maintenance, and general well-being, and thus, is not 
subject to review under the order. No significant change in existing 
HUD policies or programs would result from promulgation of this rule, 
as those policies and programs relate to family concerns.

Accountability in the Provision of HUD Assistance

    Section 102 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
Reform Act of 1989 (42 USC 3545) (HUD Reform Act) and the final rule 
codified at 24 CFR part 4, subpart A, published on April 1, 1996 (61 FR 
1448), contain a number of provisions that are designed to ensure 
greater accountability and integrity in the provision of certain types 
of assistance administered by HUD. On January 14, 1992, HUD published, 
at 57 FR 1942, a notice that also provides information on the 
implementation of section 102. The documentation, public access, and 
disclosure requirements of section 102 are applicable to assistance 
awarded under this NOFA as follows:
    Documentation and public access requirements. HUD will ensure that 
documentation and other information regarding each application 
submitted pursuant to this NOFA are sufficient to indicate the basis 
upon which assistance was provided or denied. This material, including 
any letters of support, will be made available for public inspection 
for a five-year period beginning not less than 30 days after the award 
of the assistance. Material will be made available in accordance with 
the Freedom of Information Act (5 USC 552) and HUD's implementing 
regulations at 24 CFR part 15. In addition, HUD will include the 
recipients of assistance pursuant to this NOFA in its Federal Register 
notice of all recipients of HUD assistance awarded on a competitive 
basis.
    Disclosures. HUD will make available to the public for five years 
all applicant disclosure reports (HUD Form 2880) submitted in 
connection with this NOFA. Update reports (also Form 2880) will be made 
available along with the applicant disclosure reports, but in no case 
for a period less than three years. All reports--both applicant 
disclosures and updates--will be made available in accordance with the 
Freedom of Information Act (5 USC 552) and HUD's implementing 
regulations at 24 CFR part 15.
    (e) Prohibition Against Advance Information on Funding Decisions. 
HUD's regulation implementing section 103 of the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989, codified as 24 CFR part 4, 
applies to the funding competition announced today. The requirements of 
the rule continue to apply until the announcement of the selection of 
successful applicants. HUD employees involved in the review of 
applications and in the making of funding decisions are limited by part 
4 from providing advance information to any person (other than an 
authorized employee of HUD) concerning funding decisions, or from 
otherwise giving any applicant an unfair competitive advantage. Persons 
who apply for assistance in this competition should confine their 
inquiries to the subject areas permitted under 24 CFR part 4.
    Applicants or employees who have ethics related questions should 
contact the HUD Ethics Law Division (202) 708-3815. (This is not a 
toll-free number.) For HUD employees who have specific program 
questions, the employee should contact the appropriate Field Office 
Counsel, or Headquarters counsel for the program to which the question 
pertains.
    (f) Prohibition Against Lobbying Activities. The use of funds 
awarded under this NOFA is subject to the disclosure requirements and 
prohibitions of Section 319 of the Department of Interior and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1990 (31 USC 1352) and the 
HUD implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 87. These authorities 
prohibit recipients of federal contracts, grants or loans from using 
appropriated funds for lobbying

[[Page 23937]]

the Executive or Legislative Branches of the Federal Government in 
connection with a specific contract, grant or loan. The prohibition 
also covers the awarding of contracts, grants, cooperative agreements 
or loans unless the recipient has made an acceptable certification 
regarding lobbying. Under 24 CFR part 87, applicants, recipients and 
subrecipients of assistance exceeding $100,000 must certify that no 
federal funds have been or will be spent on lobbying activities in 
connection with the assistance.
    IHAs established by an Indian tribe as a result of the exercise of 
the tribe's sovereign power are excluded from coverage of the Byrd 
Amendment, but IHAs established under State law are not excluded from 
the statute's coverage.
    If the amount applied for is greater than $100,000, the 
certification is required at the time application for funds is made 
that federally appropriated funds are not being or have not been used 
in violation of the Byrd Amendment. If the amount applied for is 
greater than $100,000 and the HA has made or has agreed to make any 
payment using nonappropriated funds for lobbying activity, as described 
in 24 CFR part 87 (Byrd Amendment), the submission also must include 
the SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. The HA determines if the 
submission of the SF-LLL is applicable.

VIII. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program

    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number is 
14.852.

    Dated: April 23, 1997.
Kevin Emanuel Marchman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.
[FR Doc. 97-11272 Filed 4-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-33-P