16438 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices 

management improvements as well as 

demolition and new construction. In 

addition, these funds can be used on a 

limited basis (and combined with other 

funding) for improvements to the 

surrounding community, public 

services, facilities, assets and supportive 

services. Choice Neighborhoods grant 

funds are intended to catalyze other 

investments that will be directed toward 

necessary community improvements. 

The leveraging of other sources will be 

necessary to address other key 

neighborhood assets and achieve the 

program’s core goals. HUD is working 

with other Federal agencies to integrate 

Choice Neighborhoods with other 

Federal place-based programs. 

Agency Form Number: Pending. 

Members of Affected Public: Local 

governments, public housing 

authorities, nonprofits, and for-project 

developers that apply jointly with a 

public entity. 

Estimation of the total numbers of 

hours needed to prepare the information 

collection including number of 

respondents, frequency of responses, 

and hours of responses: For Choice 

Neighborhoods burden hours per 

response total to 68.09 for 

Implementation Grant applications and 

34.59 for Planning Grant applications. 

The total burden hours, estimating 150 

respondents for both application is 

6,864. 

Status of the proposed information 

collection: This is a new information 

Collection. 

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. 

Dated: March 15, 2011. 

Merrie Nichols-Dixon, 

Deputy Director for Office of Policy, Programs 

and Legislative Initiatives. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6764 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

[Docket No. FR–5498–N–01] 

Reallocation of American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act Capital Funds— 

Capital Fund Grant Program Under the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Public and Indian 

Housing, HUD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Recovery 

Act) included a $4 billion appropriation 

of Capital Funds for public housing 

agencies (PHAs) to carry out capital and 

management activities, as authorized 

under section 9 of the United States 

Housing Act of 1937 (the 1937 Act). The 

Recovery Act required that $3 billion of 

these funds be distributed as formula 

funds and the remaining $1 billion be 

distributed through a competitive 

process. HUD obligated approximately 

$2.985 million in formula funds to 

PHAs on March 18, 2009. On May 7, 

2009, HUD posted on its Web site its 

Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA), 

which launched the competitive 

distribution of Capital Funds. In 

September 2009, HUD announced the 

award of $995 million in Capital Fund 

Recovery Competition (CFRC) Grants. In 

accordance with the Recovery Act, HUD 

was required to reallocate any Recovery 

Act Capital Funds that were returned 

prior to the initial obligation deadline 

and/or recaptured. 

After award, a number of grantees 

were subsequently unable to meet the 

NOFA and Recovery Act criteria and 

approximately $14 million in CFRC 

funds were recaptured. Additionally, 

another $3.2 million in Capital Fund 

Recovery Grant (CFRG) funds that were 

unable to meet the obligation deadline 

were recaptured. Since the Act required 

that HUD redistribute any grant funds 

that were not in compliance, 

$17,161,649.00 was awarded to pending 

Recovery Act PHA applicants who had 

applied for funding under Category 4, 

Option 2 of the NOFA Creation of 

Energy Efficient, Green Communities, 

consistent with the Department’s 

objective of promoting energy 

efficiency. This notice announces the 

grantees that received the reallocated 

funds. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dominique G. Blom, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary for Public Housing 

Investments, Office of Public Housing 

Investments, Office of Public and Indian 

Housing, Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, 451 7th Street, 

SW., Room 4130, Washington, DC, 

20410–400, telephone number 202–402– 

8500 (this is not a toll-free number). 

Persons with hearing or speech 

impairments may access this number 

through the TTY by calling the toll-free 

Federal Information Relay Service at 

800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

NOFA for HUD’s CFRC Grants program 

made available $995 million to PHAs for 

capital and management activities as 

authorized under section 9 of the 1937 

Act in accordance with four funding 

categories: (1) Improvements addressing 

the needs of the elderly and/or persons 

with disabilities; (2) public housing 

transformation; (3) gap financing for 

projects that are stalled due to financing 

issues; and (4) creation of energy 

efficient, green communities. 

In accordance with the Recovery Act 

(Pub. L. 111–5, approved February 17, 

2009), PHAs had to give priority to 

capital projects that could award 

contracts based on bids within 120 days 

from the date the funds were made 

available to the PHAs and had to 

prioritize capital projects that were 

already underway or included in the 

5-year Capital Fund plans required by 

the 1937 Act. Additionally, funds had to 

supplement and not supplant 

expenditures from other Federal, State, 

or local sources or funds independently 

generated by the grantee. Finally, the 

Recovery Act provided for alternate 

obligation and expenditure deadlines 

(and penalties) as follows: 

(1) HUD must obligate the CFRC grant 

funding to grantees by September 30, 

2009. 

(2) PHAs must obligate 100 percent of 

the grant funds awarded under this 

NOFA within 1 year of the date on 

which funds become available to the 

PHA for obligation (which is the 

effective date of the Annual 

Contributions Contract (ACC) 

amendment). If a PHA fails to comply 

with the 1-year obligation requirement, 

the Recovery Act required HUD to 

recapture all remaining unobligated 

funds awarded to the PHA, and to 

reallocate the recaptured funds to PHAs 

that are in compliance with the 

Recovery Act’s obligation requirement. 

(3) PHAs must expend at least 60 

percent of the grant funds within 2 years 

of the date on which funds become 

available to the PHA for obligation 

(which is the effective date of the ACC 

amendment). If a PHA fails to comply 

with the 2-year expenditure 

requirement, the Recovery Act required 

HUD to recapture the balance of the 

funds awarded to the PHA, and to 

reallocate the recaptured funds to PHAs 

that are in compliance with the 

Recovery Act’s 2-year expenditure 

requirement. 

(4) PHAs must expend 100 percent of 

the grant funds within 3 years of the 

date on which funds become available 

to the PHA for obligation (which is the 

effective date of the ACC amendment). 

If a PHA fails to comply with the 3-year 

expenditure requirement, the Recovery 

Act required HUD to recapture the 

balance of the funds awarded to the 

PHA, and to reallocate the recaptured 

funds to PHAs that are in compliance 

with the Recovery Act’s 3-year 

expenditure requirement. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices 16439 

Extensions of the obligation deadlines 

are not permitted under the Recovery 

Act. 

Reallocation 

After award, a number of grantees 

were subsequently unable to meet the 

Recovery Act and NOFA criteria and 

their funds were recaptured—$3.2 

million in CFRG funds and 

approximately $14 million in CFRC 

funds. HUD was required to reallocate 

funds that were recaptured prior to July 

21, 2010. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act 

(Pub. L. 111–2003, approved July 21, 

2010) (Dodd-Frank Act) amended the 

Recovery Act to provide that Recovery 

Act funds recaptured on or after July 21, 

2010, must be returned to the Treasury. 

(See section 1613 of the Dodd-Frank 

Act.) As a result, $17,161,649.00 was 

awarded to existing eligible Recovery 

Act PHA applicants who had applied 

for funding under Category 4, Option 2 

of the NOFA Creation of Energy 

Efficient, Green Communities, 

consistent with the Department’s 

objective of promoting energy 

efficiency. The next eligible 

applications in Category 4, Option 2 that 

had been scored but had not been 

funded earlier (because grant funding 

had been exhausted) were awarded 

grants as follows: 

PHA Name Amount 

Cambridge Housing Authority, Cambridge, MA .......................................................................................................................... $2,189,470.00 

New York City Housing Authority, New York, NY ....................................................................................................................... 650,000.00 

Housing Authority of Pleasantville, Pleasantville, NJ .................................................................................................................. 621,000.00 

County of Marin Housing Authority, San Raphael, CA ............................................................................................................... 637,500.00 

Housing Authority of the City of Columbus, Columbus, GA ....................................................................................................... 1,344,400.00 

Housing Authority of the City of Columbus, Columbus, GA ....................................................................................................... 550,000.00 

Housing Authority of Charleston, Charleston, SC ....................................................................................................................... 1,990,528.00 

Rockford Housing Authority, Rockford, IL ................................................................................................................................... 2,100,000.00 

Rockford Housing Authority, Rockford, IL ................................................................................................................................... 1,700,000.00 

Housing Authority of Monroe, Monroe, LA .................................................................................................................................. 2,635,149.00 

Housing Authority of the City of St. Louis, St. Louis, MO ........................................................................................................... 536,102.00 

Southern Nevada Regional Housing Agency, Las Vegas, NV ................................................................................................... 2,207,500.00 

Total of Funded Applications ................................................................................................................................................ 17,161,649.00 

Dated: March 11, 2011. 

Sandra B. Henriquez, 

Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian 

Housing. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6762 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R4–ES–2011–N007; 40120–1113– 

0000–C2] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Notice of Availability of a 

Technical/Agency Draft Recovery Plan 

for Gentian Pinkroot 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability and 

request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service, announce the availability of the 

technical/agency draft recovery plan for 

the endangered gentian pinkroot 

(Spigelia gentianoides). The draft 

recovery plan includes specific recovery 

objectives and criteria the species would 

have to meet in order for us to downlist 

it to threatened status under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). We request review and 

comment on this draft recovery plan 

from local, State, and Federal agencies, 

and the public. 

DATES: In order to be considered, we 

must receive comments on the draft 

recovery plan on or before May 23, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: If you wish to review this 

technical/agency draft recovery plan, 

you may obtain a copy by contacting Dr. 

Vivian Negron-Ortiz, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Panama City Field 

Office, 1601 Balboa Ave, Panama City, 

FL 32405; tel. (850) 769–0552; or by 

visiting either the Service’s recovery 

plan Web site at http:// 

endangered.fws.gov/recovery/ 

index.html#plans or the Panama City 

Field Office Web site at http:// 

www.fws.gov/panamacity/. If you wish 

to comment, you may submit your 

comments by one of the following 

methods: 

1. You may submit written comments 

and materials to Dr. Negron-Ortiz, at the 

above address. 

2. You may hand-deliver written 

comments to our Panama City Field 

Office, at the above address, or fax them 

to (850) 763–2177. 

3. You may send comments by e-mail 

to vivian_negronortiz@fws.gov. 

For additional information about 

submitting comments, see the ‘‘Request 

for Public Comments’’ section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Negron-Ortiz at the above addresses or 

by telephone: (850) 769–0552, ext. 231. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Spigelia gentianoides was listed as 

endangered under the Act (16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) on November 26, 1990 (55 

FR 49046). A plant, S. gentianoides, 

comprises two varieties: Var. 

gentianoides is restricted to five 

locations within three counties in the 

Florida Panhandle and southern 

Alabama, and var. alabamensis is a 

narrow endemic limited to the Bibb 

County Glades in Alabama. The loss or 

alteration of habitat is thought to be the 

primary reason for the species’ decline. 

The extant plants of var. gentianoides 

are located in fire-dependent longleaf 

pine–wiregrass and pine-oak-hickory 

ecosystems. Much of this habitat has 

been reduced in its range, converted to 

pine plantation, and managed without 

fire. Some of the glades in which var. 

alabamensis is located are owned and 

protected by The Nature Conservancy. 

This variety is threatened by potential 

development of privately owned glades 

(open, almost treeless areas within 

woodlands). 

Restoring an endangered or 

threatened animal or plant to the point 

where it is again a secure, selfsustaining member of its ecosystem is a 

primary goal of our endangered species 

program. To help guide the recovery 

effort, we prepare recovery plans for 

most listed species. Recovery plans 

describe actions considered necessary 

for conservation of the species, establish 

criteria for downlisting or delisting, and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES