[The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions]
[Department of Housing and Urban Development Regulatory Plan]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 231 / Friday, November 29, 1996 / The
                            Regulatory Plan

[[Page 62064]]

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD)
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
A New Direction for a New HUD
The regulatory plan of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
(HUD) for fiscal year 1997 reflects the new direction that HUD is 
taking under the leadership of Secretary Henry Cisneros. As the 
Department concludes its fourth year under the administration of 
Secretary Cisneros, there is much to be proud of in the regulatory 
changes that have been achieved to date, and there is much to look 
forward to in the regulatory changes contemplated for the future.
At the outset of his administration, Secretary Cisneros recognized 
that, all too frequently, regulations served as impediments rather than 
roadmaps to achieving successful results in Government programs, and he 
challenged HUD staff to look beyond tedious rules and eliminate those 
which are clearly useless and outdated.
The Secretary's regulatory challenge to HUD staff not only reflected 
President Clinton's regulatory philosophy, as outlined in Executive 
Order 12866, which holds that agencies should only issue regulations 
where necessary, but also complemented President Clinton's 
Governmentwide regulatory challenge announced in March 1995. In March 
1995, President Clinton directed all Government agencies to conduct a 
page-by-page review of all regulations and to eliminate obsolete and 
unnecessary regulations and reinvent existing regulations.
In response to the Secretary's challenge and the President's directive 
to cut obsolete and unnecessary regulations, HUD, to date, has cut 
approximately 2,000 pages out of a total of 4,300 pages of regulations. 
The regulations that were eliminated represent obsolete or unnecessary 
regulations or repetitive and duplicative provisions, whose presence in 
the Code of Federal Regulations, in many cases, simply ``cluttered'' 
HUD's regulations, made them confusing, and lent the appearance of 
over-regulation by HUD. Removal of approximately 800 additional CFR 
pages is planned in the next several months, which will result in an 
over 60 percent reduction in HUD regulations. The new streamlined 
regulations will focus on requirements that must be maintained in the 
CFR.
In reviewing its existing regulations to determine which regulations 
could be removed, consolidated, and streamlined, HUD recognized that 
situations and activities related to housing and community planning and 
development change rapidly and out-pace the revision of regulations. 
Using the Code of Federal Regulations as a self-contained, 
comprehensive source of all HUD statutory and regulatory requirements, 
policies and guidance for each program is of limited value.
The Code of Federal Regulations for each agency is revised only once 
each calendar year. Given statutory changes to programs, administrative 
changes to programs, and the changes in the housing market and in 
communities throughout the Nation, this once-a-year revision means that 
often the new CFR is already outdated when issued. To keep pace with 
the changes, to ensure that HUD's housing partners and clients have the 
most up-to-date information, HUD will use sources other than the CFR to 
relay program information, policies, and guidance and use sources that 
can be updated quickly and easily and that can better reach HUD's 
targeted audience.
HUD is already making use of the Internet to provide widespread 
immediate dissemination of information about HUD, its housing programs, 
and the related information HUD gathers. For example, on August 1, 
1996, Secretary Cisneros announced the new homeownership initiative, 
called ``Democratizing Data.'' The Democratizing Data initiative 
collects detailed information on home loa applications, approvals, and 
n denials from 9,500 lending institutions and makes it widely 
accessible to lenders, community groups, and others on the Internet's 
World Wide Web. The data show where loans were made in particular 
geographic areas by individual lenders and to different population 
groups identified by race, national origin, sex, and annual income. 
Community groups will be able to use the information to work with 
lenders on outreach programs to increase home loans to under-served 
groups and areas. The media can use the data to learn more about local 
lending practices. Lenders can use the data to assess their performance 
in meeting lending goals.
For those regulations that are determined necessary and remain in the 
CFR, HUD has undertaken significant consolidation and streamlining. HUD 
has consolidated definitions and requirements used in more than one 
program in a single regulatory part. Placing all common definitions and 
requirements in one part simplifies the structure of HUD's regulations 
and saves time for the user searching for definitions or requirements 
and trying to determine the programs to which the definitions or 
requirements apply. This consolidation also minimizes confusion 
resulting from duplicative or conflicting definitions of the same 
terms.
HUD has achieved significant regulatory streamlining through 
consolidation of overlapping and repetitious program requirements. Two 
decades of experience with HUD's Section 8 certificate and voucher 
programs have shown that tenant-based housing assistance is an 
extremely effective mechanism for meeting the urgent needs of low-
income renters. One of the weaknesses of the certificate and voucher 
programs, however, was the division of these two closely related 
programs into two separate tenant-based programs with two separate sets 
of regulations and procedures. To correct this weakness, HUD published 
a final rule that presents a unified statement of program requirements 
for the tenant-based certificate and voucher programs and eliminates 
all nonstatutory differences between the two programs. The rule further 
eliminated requirements that have impeded public housing agency 
administration of the program and landlord participation in the 
program. HUD also consolidated the three separate regulations for the 
supportive housing programs for the elderly and persons with 
disabilities, which were largely duplicative of each other with only 
minor differences. In addition, HUD consolidated into one part the 
separate regulations for the restrictions on assistance governing 
noncitizens. Again, the requirements were virtually identical for the 
programs subject to these restrictions with the exception of certain 
differences, which were maintained in the consolidated regulations.
These are only some examples of the improvements made to HUD's 
regulations. HUD is currently reviewing recommendations for further 
streamlining that have emerged from the empowerment zone experience as 
well as customer surveys. Depending on this reivew, HUD may recommend a 
series of statutory revisions that would augment the regulatory 
streamlining effort.
On February 1, 1996, Secretary Cisneros released a report detailing 
HUD's continued reinvention. The report has four core elements:

 Give Power to Communities by:

  -Merging over 20 duplicative programs into three funds;

[[Page 62065]]

  -Providing flexibility to local leaders and organizations;
  -Rewarding the best local performers; and
  -Planting the seeds to grow private-sector jobs and business in 
            distressed communities.

 Transform All Federal Housing Assistance by:

  -Demolishing the worst public housing and replacing it with livable 
            apartments;
  -Changing the incentives so people are encouraged to work;
  -Cracking down hard on gangs and drug dealers;
  -Evicting irresponsible tenants, suing corrupt owners, and seizing 
            mismanaged public housing authorities; and
  -Expanding the supply of affordable housing.

 Ensure Homeownership Opportunities for All Americans by:

  -Setting a goal of reaching the highest homeownership rate in U.S. 
            history;
  -Bringing down barriers to homeownership by lowering downpayments and 
            closing costs;
  -Cutting the time it takes to serve our customers;
  -Fighting rental and ownership discrimination;
  -Giving public housing and Section 8 residents the chance to buy 
            their own homes; and
  -Creating homeownership zones in inner cities;

 Build a Community-First, Right-Side-Up Cabinet Agency by:

  -Moving staff out of Washington and into communities;
  -Establishing local HUD Service Centers to trouble-shoot and solve 
            problems for local customers;
  -Retraining staff to meet new community challenges; and
  -Using technology to create a paperless HUD.
Much of this agenda is already underway--in administrative actions 
already taken or ongoing and in legislation now under consideration. 
HUD's regulations will support rather than impede this agenda for the 
future.
Regulatory Priorities
For fiscal year 1997, HUD will focus its resources on continued 
reinvention and streamlining in accordance with President Clinton's 
regulatory reform initiative and on the core principles enunciated by 
the Secretary on February 1, 1996. Although the following rules reflect 
essential elements of HUD's reinvention effort, other regulations 
described in HUD's semiannual agenda of regulations also reflect these 
efforts.
Priority: Giving Power to Communities
 By providing flexibility to local leaders and organizations.
Regulatory Action: Public Housing Development Regulations, Including 
Mixed-Finance Development
This rule finalizes a comprehensive revision of the public housing 
development and acquisition program regulation at 24 CFR 941. One of 
the two interim rules merged in this final rule redesigned the public 
housing development process to give housing authorities and localities 
maximum flexibility in developing public housing in their communities. 
The revised procedures shift responsibilities to public housing 
agencies (PHAs) wherever possible; reduce the number and depth of HUD 
reviews; and, in the case of ``high performing'' PHAs, eliminate most 
HUD reviews of development activities. HUD anticipates that these 
changes will reduce average development times by 6 to 9 months.
Priority: Transform All Federal Housing Assistance
 By ensuring proper management of federally subsidized housing 
            by cracking down hard on gangs and drug dealers, evicting 
            irresponsible tenants, suing corrupt owners, and seizing 
            mismanaged housing.
Regulatory Action: Reform of Public Housing Management
This rule proposes an extensive revision of the Public Housing 
Management Assessment Program (PHMAP), which contains the policies and 
procedures used by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to 
identify public housing authority (PHA) management capabilities and 
deficiencies; to designate high performing and troubled PHAs; and to 
enter into agreements and formulate plans to improve PHA management. 
Additionally, this rule adds a new security indicator which covers the 
provisions of the ``One Strike and You're Out'' policy for public 
housing residents and other anti-drug and/or anti-crime security 
initiatives for public housing.
On March 28, 1996, President Clinton announced a ``One Strike and and 
You're Out'' policy for public housing residents and signed into law 
the ``Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996,'' providing 
additional authority to PHAs in the areas of screening, lease 
enforcement, and eviction in order to help PHAs fight crime and drug-
related crime in public housing communities. The policy will enhance 
the ability and related efforts of PHAs to develop and enforce stricter 
screening and eviction policies as a part of their anti-drug and/or 
anti-crime initiatives. Under the rule, PHAs will be assessed under 
this new security indicator, which measures PHA performance in 
implementing effective screening and eviction policies and other anti-
crime strategies.

 By expanding the supply of affordable housing.
Regulatory Action: Public Housing Development Regulations, Including 
Mixed-Finance Development
This rule finalizes a comprehensive revision of the public housing 
development and acquisition program regulation at 24 CFR 941. One of 
the two interim rules merged in this final rule provides procedures to 
permit PHAs to enter a partnership with an entity to develop and own 
public housing properties in mixed-income developments using a 
combination of public and private financing mechanisms, which may 
include borrowing public housing development funds from the PHA and/or 
the sale of low-income housing tax credits. The rule includes 
requirements that 1) must be met by the proposed partnership before HUD 
will approve a mixed-finance proposal and 2) govern the development and 
operation of a project by the partnership.
Priority: Ensure Homeownership Opportunities for all Americans
 By cutting the time it takes to serve our customers.
Regulatory Action: Consolidation of Title I and Title II Regulations
This rule represents an important component of FHA's risk management 
effort to minimize loss to the insurance funds while giving lenders and 
mortgagees more flexibility to provide increased homeownership 
opportunities to low- and moderate-income homebuyers. The regulations 
provide consistent standards that are less subject to interpretation 
and that are understood by all approved lenders and the general public. 
The regulations also provide a strong enforceable basis for evaluating 
the financial and operational soundness of lenders.
This rule will serve to eliminate the differences which presently exist 
between the title I and the title II lender approval requirements. With 
many lending institutions seeking to

[[Page 62066]]

participate in both programs, these differences have caused confusion 
and, in some instances, additional reporting burdens. Additionally, the 
rule seeks to secure added protection to the title I insurance fund by 
assuring that those lenders actively participating in the program have 
the increased financial capacity necessary to maintain a trained, 
competent staff; implement an adequate quality control plan; and 
reimburse the Department in the event fraudulent loan origination 
activities are detected.

 By fighting rental and ownership discrimination.
Regulatory Action: Fair Housing Planning Performance Standard
This rule will assist communities in complying with the legal 
requirement to certify that they are affirmatively furthering fair 
housing. It will provide a performance standard rather than prescribing 
precisely what a community should do. Thus, communities will have a 
clear idea of what is expected of them and the standards HUD will use 
in reviewing their certification.
Other Priority Regulations
The following rule supports a specific legislative initiative.
Regulatory Action: Homeless Assistance Fund Regulation
This rule would implement legislation that consolidates McKinney Act 
homeless assistance funding into a formula-based flexible program as 
proposed in the President's FY 1997 Budget. The proposed legislation 
would totally reorganize the currently fragmented approach to HUD's 
homeless assistance efforts by streamlining program requirements and 
application processes. Cities and States, in partnership with non-
profit homeless providers and others, would be empowered to design and 
implement community-based continuum of care systems in their 
jurisdictions.
_______________________________________________________________________
HUD--Office of Housing (OH)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

41.  APPROVAL OF LENDING INSTITUTIONS AND MORTGAGEES (FR-4132)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 12 USC 1703(a); 12 USC 1709(b)(1); 12 USC 1715b


CFR Citation:


 24 CFR 202


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


Part 202 sets forth the requirements lending institutions must meet, to 
originate, service, hold or sell HUD insured Title I loans and Title II 
mortgages. This proposed rule will eliminate the differences between 
the Title I and Title II lender approval requirements and allow lending 
institutions to more easily participate in both programs.


Statement of Need:


This rule represents an important component of FHA's risk management 
effort to minimize loss to the insurance funds while giving lenders and 
mortgagees more flexibility to provide increased homeownership 
opportunities to low- and moderate-income homebuyers. The regulations 
provide consistent standards that are less subject to interpretation 
and that are understood by all approved lenders and the general public. 
The regulations also provide a strong enforceable basis for evaluating 
the financial and operational soundness of lenders.
This proposed rule will serve to eliminate the differences which 
presently exist between the Title I and the Title II lender approval 
requirements. With many lending institutions seeking to participate in 
both programs, these differences have caused confusion, and in some 
instances, additional reporting burdens. Additionally this proposed 
rule seeks to secure added protection to Title I insurance fund by 
assuring that those lenders actively participating in the program, have 
the increased financial capacity necessary to maintain a trained, 
competent staff, implement an adequate quality control plan, and 
reimburse the Department in the event fraudulent loan origination 
activities are detected.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


12 U.S.C. section 1709(b)(1) and section 203(b)(1) of the National 
Housing act requires that for a loan to be eligible for insurance, the 
mortgage shall, ``(h)ave been made to, and be held by, a mortgagee 
approved by the Secretary as responsible and able to service the 
mortgage property.''


Alternatives:


Alternatives have been considered, but in order to effect FHA's risk 
management program, assure program enforceability and consistency of 
program participants, those alternatives are not recommended.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


This rule will eliminate the variations in approval requirements for 
lenders participating in both the Title I and Title II programs. Thus, 
confusion over certain reporting requirements will be eliminated. The 
Department will benefit by increasing the approved lender base, thereby 
making homeownership and property improvement more readily available. 
Additionally, the increased adjusted net worth and liquid asset 
requirements for Title I lenders will provide added protection to the 
insurance fund by providing assurance of participants with sufficient 
capital and resources.
The elimination of the internal control and compliance reports from the 
required annual audited financial statement, submitted by Title I Loan 
Correspondent lenders, will reduce the cost of the audit by 
approximately 40%, for those lenders.


Risks:


A primary goal of this proposed rule is to reduce the risk to the FHA 
insurance fund, consequently, no additional risk is perceived.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           02/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Lynn Herbert
Acting Director, Lender Approval & Recertification Div.
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Housing
Phone: 202 708-3976
RIN: 2502-AG82

[[Page 62067]]

_______________________________________________________________________
HUD--Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

42.  HOMELESS ASSISTANCE FUND REGULATION (FR-4130)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 3535(d)


CFR Citation:


 24 CFR 000


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The proposed Homeless Assistance Fund legislation will reorganize six 
separate Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act grant programs 
into a single program that will be formula-based, flexible, and 
designed to help States and cities develop and implement community-
devised continuum of care systems. The specific details and timing of 
the regulations required to support the new Homeless Assistance Fund 
will be determined after enactment.


Statement of Need:


The Homeless Assistance Fund will address several key problems that 
plague community efforts to address homelessness. The current separate 
grant programs require providers of housing and services to apply 
discrete programs for particular needs. Each categorical program has 
its own funding cycle, application process, and program and reporting 
requirements, thereby increasing paperwork and hampering project 
development and implementation.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


Legislation to create the Homeless Assistance Fund is currently pending 
before Congress.


Alternatives:


There is no alternative. If the legislation is passed, a rule must be 
issued in order to implement the program and continue to provide 
communities with funding for homeless assistance.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Combining six separate categorical programs into one formula-based 
grant program will result in a significant reduction in paperwork for 
both grantees and HUD. Specific estimates of the cost savings involved 
cannot be determined until the details of the legislation become clear.


Risks:


This rule poses no threat to public safety, health, or the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           09/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local, Federal


Agency Contact:
Maggie H. Taylor
Director, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Community Planning and Development
Phone: 202 708-4300
RIN: 2506-AB88
_______________________________________________________________________
HUD--Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

43.  FAIR HOUSING PLANNING PERFORMANCE STANDARD (FR-4133)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 3535(d); 42 USC 3600 to 3620


CFR Citation:


 24 CFR 570.904(c); 24 CFR 570.900, subpart O Performance Review


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


This rule will assist communities in complying with the legal 
requirement to certify that they are affirmatively furthering fair 
housing. It will provide a performance (for accepting a certification) 
standard rather than prescribing precisely what a community should do. 
Thus, communities will have a clear idea of what is expected of them 
and the standards HUD will use in reviewing their certifications.


Statement of Need:


Currently, the CDBG regulation provides for HUD review and oversight. 
However, the regulation does not contain a performance standard for 
grantee actions to affirmatively further fair housing. Without such a 
performance standard, HUD cannot determine the acceptability of the 
affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) certification.
This revision to the existing CDBG regulation would provide a 
performance review for grantee actions to affirmatively further fair 
housing.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


24 CFR 570.900, subpart O - Performance Reviews.


Alternatives:


None.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Costs: None.
Benefit: The benefit is that there will be more certainty for grantees 
about the standards that HUD will use to review their certifications.


Risks:


None


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           12/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local


Agency Contact:
Deirdre Maguire-Zinni
Director
Entitlement Communities Division
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
Phone: 202 708-1577
RIN: 2529-AA81

[[Page 62068]]

_______________________________________________________________________
HUD--Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

44.  REPLACEMENT HOUSING FACTOR IN MODERNIZATION FUNDING (FR-
4125)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 1437l(k)(2)(B); 42 USC 3535(d)


CFR Citation:


 24 CFR 968


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The replacement housing factor would offset for five years the loss of 
formula share funding due to the reduction of units as a result of 
demolition, disposition, or conversion from October 1, 1996, as long as 
the reduced units are not in developments receiving MROP or HOPE IV 
implementation funding and as long as the funds conserved by the offset 
are used for approved replacement housing.


Statement of Need:


Drafters of the 1990 statutory requirement of a three year phase-down 
of funding for units reduced as a result of demolition, disposition, or 
conversion did not envision the drastic reduction in non-viable units 
that HUD and Congress are now implementing or the drastic reduction in 
new development funding that could be used to strategically restructure 
the public housing inventory. By allowing a Housing Authority with 
reduced units to stabilize its funding if it uses the offset portion of 
funding for replacement housing, the proposed rule will make more 
acceptable the reduction of non-viable units in downsizing Housing 
Authorities and their communities.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The enabling statute allows a proposed rule process for changes in the 
formula. The drafters of the statute realized that formulas have to 
adapt to changing conditions. The proposed rule process allows for 
comment.


Alternatives:


Legislation to authorize preservation of funding for housing 
authorities with significant demolition of units, or decreased 
production of replacement units for those now being demolished.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The proposed rule would have the benefit of speeding and making more 
rational the reduction and restructuring of the public housing 
inventory. Additional costs to PHA or to HUD would be negligible.


Risks:


The proposed rule poses no risk to public health, safety, or the 
environment. To the extent the new rule hastened the reduction of non-
viable units, it would improve public health and safety.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           01/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local


Agency Contact:
Rod J. Solomon
Director, Special Actions, Office of Policy Program & Legislative 
Initiataives
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Public and Indian Housing
Phone: 202 708-0713
RIN: 2577-AB71
_______________________________________________________________________
HUD--PIH
45. SECTION 8 RENTAL VOUCHER AND CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS--SECTION 8 
MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (SEMAP) (FR-3986)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 1437f; 42 USC 3535(d); 42 USC 1437a; 42 USC 1437c


CFR Citation:


 24 CFR 985; 24 CFR 000


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


Under the section 8 Management Assessment Program established by the 
rule, HUD assesses whether the Section 8 tenant-based assistance 
programs operate effectively to achieve the intended result of helping 
eligible families afford decent rental units at a reasonable subsidy 
cost. SEMAP establishes an objective system for HUD to measure HA 
performance in key Section 8 program areas to enable the Department to 
ensure program integrity and accountability. SEMAP provides procedures 
for HUD to identify housing agency management capabilities and 
deficiencies in order to target monitoring and program assistance more 
effectively. Housing agencies can use the SEMAP performance analysis to 
assess and improve their own program operations.


Statement of Need:


At a time of diminishing HUD staffing resources, use of SEMAP will 
enable the Department to improve its risk assessment and to effectively 
target monitoring and program assistance to housing agency programs 
needing most improvement and posing the greatest risk.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The Department of Housing and Urban Development Act charges HUD with 
achieving the best administration of the principal programs of the 
Federal Government which provide assistance for housing.


Alternatives:


None considered.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Costs: The SEMAP rule implementation will be minimal, as the Department 
has sought to assess performance using readily available data, without 
imposing substantial new or undue recordkeeping burdens on housing 
agencies. The systematic assessment of housing agency performance under 
the rule is expected to substantially improve HUD oversight of the 
Section 8 tenant-based programs and to help HUD target monitoring and 
assistance to programs that pose the greatest risk and to housing 
agencies needing most improvement.

[[Page 62069]]

Risks:


This rule does not address a risk to public health, safety, or the 
environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           11/00/96
NPRM Comment Period End                                        01/00/97
Final Action                                                   05/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Governmental Jurisdictions


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local


Agency Contact:
Gerald Benoit
Director, Operations Div.
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Public and Indian Housing
Phone: 202 708-0477
RIN: 2577-AB60
_______________________________________________________________________
HUD--PIH

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

46. REFORM OF PUBLIC HOUSING MANAGEMENT (FR-3447)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 3535(d); 42 USC 1437d(j)


CFR Citation:


 24 CFR 901


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


This rule proposes an extensive revision of the Public Housing 
Management Authority Program, (PHMAP), which contains the policies and 
procedures used by the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
(HUD) to identify public housing authority (PHA) management 
capabilities and deficiencies; to designate high performing and 
troubled PHAs; and to enter into agreements and formulate plans to 
improve PHA management.


Statement of Need:


A new, revised rule is needed to address the following issues 
concerning the current PHMAP regulation: PHMAP reporting and processing 
are time-consuming; information required from PHAs is not always 
available by HUD's deadline; PHA appeals of HUD decisions can extend 
the PHMAP process for months; the system should be a better measure of 
actual performance rather than ``paper'' performance; redundant and 
unnecessary procedures and paperwork need to be eliminated, and the 
volume of PHMAP-related correspondence needs to be reduced.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


PHMAP was promulgated under section 502 of the National Affordable 
Housing Act (NAHA) (approved November 28, 1990, Pub. L. 101-625), which 
requires HUD to establish, by rulemaking under 5 USC 553, indicators to 
evaluate the management performance of PHAs and procedures for 
designating troubled PHAs.


Alternatives:


In developing a new proposed rule, HUD considered adding or eliminating 
indicators, combining indicators and/or components, assigning different 
weights to existing indicators, varying the applicability of indicators 
by PHA size, and changing the reporting period for assessments.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Costs: Because the revised regulation would be a refinement or 
improvement of existing procedures, and should result in no additional, 
or a decrease in, monitoring or reporting burdens, additional costs to 
PHAs or to HUD are negligible.
Benefits: Increasing the objectivity of the assessment program, making 
the assessment program more performance-oriented rather than simply 
compliance-oriented, and reducing redundant and unnecessary procedures 
and paperwork requirements will make the assessment process itself less 
expensive, and result in the more efficient use of public housing 
funds.


Risks:


This rule does not address a risk to public health, safety, or the 
environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM            61 FR 20358                                    05/06/96
NPRM Comment Period End                                        07/05/96
Interim Final Rule                                             11/00/96
Final Action                                                   05/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local


Agency Contact:
MaryAnn Russ
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public & Assisted Housing Operations
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Public and Indian Housing
Phone: 202 708-1380
RIN: 2577-AB30
_______________________________________________________________________
HUD--PIH
47. PUBLIC HOUSING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (FR-3569)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 1437c


CFR Citation:


 24 CFR 941


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


This rule finalizes a comprehensive revision of the public housing 
development and acquisition program regulation at 24 CFR 941. This rule 
responds to comments received on two interim rules. The first of those 
rules redesigned the public housing development process to give housing 
authorities and localities maximum flexibility in developing public 
housing in their communities. The second of those rules (FR-3919, RIN 
2577-AB54) provided procedures to permit housing agencies to enter a 
partnership with an entity to develop and own public housing properties 
in mixed-income developments using a mixed-financed development method.

[[Page 62070]]

Statement of Need:


This action is necessary to respond to public comments, assuring that 
the development process is expedited, to save on financing and 
construction costs with the funds available for developing public 
housing units. An effective process is needed to respond to increased 
shortages of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for low-income persons.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The public housing development program is authorized by the U.S. 
Housing Act of 1937, and was the subject of substantive amendments and 
updates made in annual appropriations bills.


Alternatives:


HUD has considered amending its handbooks to address the many changes 
to the public housing development program before issuing revised 
regulations, but the type of comprehensive revision needed requires 
notice and comment rulemaking.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Costs: Because the revised regulations would streamline existing 
procedures, they result in few or no additional monitoring or reporting 
burdens. Additional costs to PHAs or to HUD are negligible.
Benefits: A complete revision of the 1980 regulation will provide PHAs 
and HUD Field Offices with the maximum flexibility to develop public 
housing that is oriented more to the needs of the community, and will 
eliminate much of the ``red tape'' currently associated with the 
development process. The reduction of burdensome requirements will 
result in an increased supply of public housing units for low-income 
persons.


Risks:


This rule poses no risk to public health, safety, or the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
Interim Final Ru61 FR 19708)                                   05/02/96
Interim Final Rule Effective (FR 3919)                         07/01/96
Interim Final Ru61 FR 38014                                    07/22/96
Interim Final Rule Effective                                   08/21/96
Interim Final Rule Comment Period End                          09/20/96
Final Action                                                   03/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local


Agency Contact:
William Flood
Director, Office of Capital Improvements
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Public and Indian Housing
Phone: 202 708-1640
RIN: 2577-AB37
BILLING CODE 4210-01-F