67336 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

[Docket No. FR–7070–N–60] 

30-Day Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection: Manufactured Home 

Construction and Safety Standards Act 

Reporting Requirements, OMB Control 

No.: 2502–0253 

AGENCY: Office of Policy Development 

and Research, Chief Data Officer, HUD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: HUD is seeking approval from 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for the information collection 

described below. In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is 

requesting comment from all interested 

parties on the proposed collection of 

information. The purpose of this notice 

is to allow for an additional 30 days of 

public comment. 

DATES: Comments Due Date: October 30, 

2023. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit comments regarding 

this proposal. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Interested persons are 

also invited to submit comments 

regarding this proposal and comments 

should refer to the proposal by name 

and/or OMB Control Number and 

should be sent to: Colette Pollard, 

Clearance Officer, REE, Department of 

Housing and Urban Development, 451 

7th Street SW, Room 8210, Washington, 

DC 20410–5000; email 

PaperworkReductionActOffice@

hud.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Colette Pollard, Reports Management 

Officer, REE, Department of Housing 

and Urban Development, 451 7th Street 

SW, Washington, DC 20410; email 

Colette.Pollard@hud.gov or telephone 

202–402–3400. This is not a toll-free 

number. HUD welcomes and is prepared 

to receive calls from individuals who 

are deaf or hard of hearing, as well as 

individuals with speech or 

communication disabilities. To learn 

more about how to make an accessible 

telephone call, please visit: https://

www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/ 

telecommunications-relay-service-trs. 

Copies of available documents 

submitted to OMB may be obtained 

from Ms. Pollard. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice informs the public that HUD is 

seeking approval from OMB for the 

information collection described in 

Section A. 

The Federal Register notice that 

solicited public comment on the 

information collection for a period of 60 

days was published on July 14, 2023 at 

88 FR 45237. 

A. Overview of Information Collection 

Title of Information Collection: 

Manufactured Home Construction and 

Safety Standards Act Reporting 

Requirements. 

OMB Approval Number: 2502–0253. 

OMB Expiration Date: January 31, 

2024. 

Type of Request: Revision of a 

currently approved collection. 

Form Number: None. 

Description of the need for the 

information and proposed use: To carry 

out its responsibilities under the 

Manufactured Housing Construction 

and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (the 

Act), HUD issued the Federal 

Manufactured Home Construction and 

Safety Standards (the Standards), 24 

CFR 3280. The Department has also 

issued the Manufactured Home 

Procedural and Enforcement 

Regulations (the Regulations), 24 CFR 

3282, to enforce the Standards. OMB 

Collection 2502–0253 covers the 

majority of the information collection 

and recordkeeping requirements for the 

Standards and Regulations that support 

the programs administered by HUD’s 

Office of Manufactured Housing 

Programs. 

Respondents: Business or other forprofit; State, Local or Tribal 

Government; Individuals or 

Households. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

196. 

Estimated Number of Responses: 

197,326. 

Frequency of Response: 1,007. 

Average Hours per Response: 1.21. 

Total Estimated Burden: 239,537. 

B. Solicitation of Public Comment 

This notice is soliciting comments 

from members of the public and affected 

parties concerning the collection of 

information described in Section A on 

the following: 

(1) Whether the proposed collection 

of information is necessary for the 

proper performance of the functions of 

the agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) The accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information; 

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and 

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on those 

who are to respond; including through 

the use of appropriate automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. 

(5) ways to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on those 

who are to respond, including the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

HUD encourages interested parties to 

submit comments in response to these 

questions. 

C. Authority 

Section 3507 of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35. 

Colette Pollard, 

Department Reports Management Officer, 

Office of Policy Development and Research, 

Chief Data Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2023–21491 Filed 9–28–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

[Docket No. FR–7075–N–12] 

60-Day Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection: Assessing CDBG–DR and 

Disaster Recovery Outcomes of Renter 

Households, OMB Control No.: 2528– 

NEW 

AGENCY: Office of Policy Development 

and Research, HUD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: HUD is seeking approval from 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for the information collection 

described below. In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is 

requesting comment from all interested 

parties on the proposed collection of 

information. The purpose of this notice 

is to allow for 60 days of public 

comment. 

DATES: Comments Due Date: November 

28, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit comments regarding 

this proposal. 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection can be submitted 

within 60 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting, 

‘‘Currently under 60-day Review—Open 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 67337 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Interested persons are 

also invited to submit comments 

regarding this proposal by name and/or 

OMB Control Number and can be sent 

to: Anna Guido, Reports Management 

Officer, REE, Department of Housing 

and Urban Development, 451 7th Street 

SW, Room 8210, Washington, DC 

20410–5000 or email at 

PaperworkReductionActOffice@

hud.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anna Guido, Reports Management 

Officer, Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20410; email Anna 

Guido at Anna.P.Guido@hud.gov, 

telephone 202–402–5535 (this is not a 

toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is 

prepared to receive calls from 

individuals who are deaf or hard of 

hearing, as well as individuals with 

speech or communication disabilities. 

To learn more about how to make an 

accessible telephone call, please visit 

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/ 

telecommunications-relay-service-trs. 

Copies of available documents 

submitted to OMB may be obtained 

from Ms. Guido. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice informs the public that HUD is 

seeking approval from OMB for the 

information collection described in 

Section A. 

A. Overview of Information Collection 

Title of Information Collection: 

Assessing CDBG–DR and Disaster 

Recovery Outcomes of Renter 

Households. 

OMB Approval Number: 2528–XXXX. 

Type of Request: New data collection. 

Form Number: N/A. 

Description of the need for the 

information and proposed use: The 

Office of Policy Development and 

Research (PD&R), at the U.S. 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD), is proposing the 

collection of information for the HUDRD 

CDBG Disaster Recovery Outcomes of 

Renter Households Cooperative 

Agreement. 

The goal of this research is to improve 

disaster recovery effectiveness for renter 

households by examining the disaster 

recovery outcomes of renter households 

and rental housing stock in places that 

received Community Development 

Block Grant-Disaster Recovery grants 

(CDBG–DR). This research is expected 

to help the Federal government, states, 

and communities throughout the United 

States improve disaster recovery 

effectiveness for renter households by 

providing information about how 

disaster recovery programs funded 

through CDBG–DR have different 

impacts on renters and homeowners, 

and how disasters impact affordable 

rental housing stock over time. This 

research will be used to assess renter 

outcomes, barriers to accessing recovery 

resources, and mechanisms of Federal 

and local implementation of CDBG–DR 

grants. Results from this study will 

support HUD in identifying 

opportunities for changes to legislation, 

policy and program implementation in 

disaster recovery to improve outcomes 

for renters. 

This Federal Register Notice provides 

an opportunity to comment on the 

information collection for this study 

titled HUDRD CDBG Disaster Recovery 

Outcomes of Renter Households. The 

information collection is designed to 

support the study of disaster outcomes 

on renters, including to better 

understand CDBG–DR allocations across 

housing tenure, specifically for renters, 

identify successful processes with 

corresponding outcomes for rental 

housing recovery aid programs and 

translate this research into actionable 

programmatic recommendations with 

appropriate timelines, policy making 

and implementation changes to improve 

these outcomes. The study includes a 

survey, interviews and focus groups in 

communities that have received CDBG– 

DR funding. 

Respondents: CDBG–DR grantee 

representatives and administrators; 

elected and appointed government 

officials in CDBG–DR grantee 

jurisdictions and municipalities; 

landlords and developers in CDBG–DR 

grantee jurisdictions; representatives 

from housing and tenant advocacy 

organizations; and renters living in 

CDBG–DR grantee jurisdictions. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

This information collection will affect 

approximately 435 respondents. This 

includes: (1) 150 individual qualitative 

interviews with renters, rental property 

developers and landlords within the 

study area; (2) 185 responses to a renter 

focused survey; (3); (4) 50 focus group 

participants in 5 focus groups; and (5) 

50 responses to a survey of CDBG–DR 

recipients. 

Estimated Time per Response: 

Interviews are expected to take one hour 

each, surveys of renters are expected to 

take 30 minutes each, surveys of CDBG– 

DR recipients are expected to take up to 

one hour each, and renter focus groups 

are expected to take four hours and will 

meet twice. The total estimated time is 

692.5 hours. 

Frequency of Response: One time for 

each interview and survey. Focus 

groups will meet twice. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$30,576.48 for all individual document/ 

information solicited for related 

research activities covered under 

approval for researchers conducting 

primary (interview, survey, focus group) 

data collection and research 

participants. 

The Table below provides the 

estimated burden hours for in-person 

focus groups, interviews, and survey 

data collection. These estimates assume 

the maximum targeted number of study 

participants and are calculated as the 

time needed to complete individual 

surveys and interviews or participate in 

focus groups. 

Calculating the annual total cost 

burden to respondents, the project team 

utilized Occupational Employment 

Statistics from the U.S. Department of 

Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics to 

identify the median hourly wages (as 

classified by Standard Occupational 

Classification, SOC, codes) for 

potentially relevant occupations for 

interview and focus group participants. 

ANNUALIZED BURDEN TABLE

Information collection Number of 

respondents 

Frequency 

of response 

Responses 

per annum 

Burden hour 

per 

response 

Annual 

burden 

hours 

Hourly cost 

per 

response 

Cost 

Interviews with renters, developers, landlords. ......................... 150 1 1 1 150 $43.07 $6,460.5 

Surveys of Renters ................................................................... 185 1 1 0.5 92.5 43.07 3,983.98 

Renter focus groups .................................................................. 50 1 2 4 400 43.07 17,228.00 

Survey of CDBG–DR recipients ................................................ 50 1 1 1 50 58.08 2,904.00 

Total ................................................................................... 435 .................... .................... .................... 692.5 .................... 30,576.48 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
67338 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 

Respondent’s Obligation: 

Participation is voluntary. 

B. Solicitation of Public Comment 

This notice is soliciting comments 

from members of the public and affected 

parties concerning the collection of 

information described in Section A on 

the following: 

(1) Whether the proposed collection 

of information is necessary for the 

proper performance of the functions of 

the agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) The accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information; 

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected, and 

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on those 

who are to respond; including through 

the use of appropriate automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. 

HUD encourages interested parties to 

submit comments in response to these 

questions. 

C. Authority 

Section 3507 of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507. 

Kurt G. Usowski, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic 

Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2023–21438 Filed 9–28–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

[234A2100DD/AAKC001030/ 

A0A501010.999900] 

HEARTH Act Approval of Prairie Band 

Potawatomi Nation Residential Leasing 

Ordinance Leasing Ordinance 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Indian Affairs 

(BIA) approved the Prairie Band 

Potawatomi Nation Leasing Ordinance 

under the Helping Expedite and 

Advance Responsible Tribal 

Homeownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH 

Act). With this approval, the Tribe is 

authorized to enter into residential 

leases without further BIA approval. 

DATES: BIA issued the approval on 

September 21, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Carla Clark, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Division of Real Estate Services, 1001 

Indian School Road NW, Albuquerque, 

NM 87104, carla.clark@bia.gov, (702) 

484–3233. 

I. Summary of the HEARTH Act 

The HEARTH Act makes a voluntary, 

alternative land leasing process 

available to Tribes, by amending the 

Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 1955, 

25 U.S.C. 415. The HEARTH Act 

authorizes Tribes to negotiate and enter 

into business leases of Tribal trust lands 

with a primary term of 25 years, and up 

to two renewal terms of 25 years each, 

without the approval of the Secretary of 

the Interior (Secretary). The HEARTH 

Act also authorizes Tribes to enter into 

leases for residential, recreational, 

religious or educational purposes for a 

primary term of up to 75 years without 

the approval of the Secretary. 

Participating Tribes develop Tribal 

Leasing regulations, including an 

environmental review process, and then 

must obtain the Secretary’s approval of 

those regulations prior to entering into 

leases. The HEARTH Act requires the 

Secretary to approve Tribal regulations 

if the Tribal regulations are consistent 

with the Department of the Interior’s 

(Department) leasing regulations at 25 

CFR part 162 and provide for an 

environmental review process that 

meets requirements set forth in the 

HEARTH Act. This notice announces 

that the Secretary, through the Assistant 

Secretary—Indian Affairs, has approved 

the Tribal regulations for the Prairie 

Band Potawatomi Nation. 

II. Federal Preemption of State and 

Local Taxes 

The Department’s regulations 

governing the surface leasing of trust 

and restricted Indian lands specify that, 

subject to applicable Federal law, 

permanent improvements on leased 

land, leasehold or possessory interests, 

and activities under the lease are not 

subject to State and local taxation and 

may be subject to taxation by the Indian 

Tribe with jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 

162.017. As explained further in the 

preamble to the final regulations, the 

Federal government has a strong interest 

in promoting economic development, 

self-determination, and Tribal 

sovereignty. 77 FR 72440, 72447–48 

(December 5, 2012). The principles 

supporting the Federal preemption of 

State law in the field of Indian leasing 

and the taxation of lease-related 

interests and activities applies with 

equal force to leases entered into under 

Tribal leasing regulations approved by 

the Federal government pursuant to the 

HEARTH Act. Section 5 of the Indian 

Reorganization Act (IRA), 25 U.S.C. 

5108, preempts State and local taxation 

of permanent improvements on trust 

land. Confederated Tribes of the 

Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston 

County, 724 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 

2013) (citing Mescalero Apache Tribe v. 

Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). Similarly, 

section 5108 of the IRA preempts State 

taxation of rent payments by a lessee for 

leased trust lands, because ‘‘tax on the 

payment of rent is indistinguishable 

from an impermissible tax on the land.’’ 

See Seminole Tribe of Florida v. 

Stranburg, 799 F.3d 1324, 1331, n.8 

(11th Cir. 2015). In addition, as 

explained in the preamble to the revised 

leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162, 

Federal courts have applied a balancing 

test to determine whether State and 

local taxation of non-Indians on the 

reservation is preempted. White 

Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 

U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker 

balancing test, which is conducted 

against a backdrop of ‘‘traditional 

notions of Indian self- government,’’ 

requires a particularized examination of 

the relevant State, Federal, and Tribal 

interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker 

analysis from the preamble to the 

surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at 

72447–48, as supplemented by the 

analysis below. 

The strong Federal and Tribal 

interests against State and local taxation 

of improvements, leaseholds, and 

activities on land leased under the 

Department’s leasing regulations apply 

equally to improvements, leaseholds, 

and activities on land leased pursuant to 

Tribal leasing regulations approved 

under the HEARTH Act. Congress’s 

overarching intent was to ‘‘allow Tribes 

to exercise greater control over their 

own land, support self-determination, 

and eliminate bureaucratic delays that 

stand in the way of homeownership and 

economic development in Tribal 

communities.’’ 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 

(May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was 

intended to afford Tribes ‘‘flexibility to 

adapt lease terms to suit [their] business 

and cultural needs’’ and to ‘‘enable 

[Tribes] to approve leases quickly and 

efficiently.’’ H. Rep. 112–427 at 6 

(2012). 

Assessment of State and local taxes 

would obstruct these express Federal 

policies supporting Tribal economic 

development and self-determination, 

and also threaten substantial Tribal 

interests in effective Tribal government, 

economic self-sufficiency, and territorial 

autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills 

Indian Community, 572 U.S. 782, 810 

(2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) 

(determining that ‘‘[a] key goal of the 

Federal Government is to render Tribes 

more self-sufficient, and better 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1