[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 3 (Thursday, January 5, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1878-1919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-32150]




[[Page 1877]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part VI





Department of Housing and Urban Development





_______________________________________________________________________



Office of the Secretary



_______________________________________________________________________



24 CFR Part 91, et al.



Consolidated Submission for Community Planning and Development 
Programs; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 1994 / Rules 
and Regulations
=======================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 1878]] 


DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Secretary

24 CFR Parts 91, 92, 570, 574, 576, and 968

[Docket No. R-94-1731; FR-3611-F-02]
RIN 2501-AB72


Consolidated Submission for Community Planning and Development 
Programs

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends the Department's existing regulations to 
completely replace the current regulations for Comprehensive Housing 
Affordability Strategies (CHAS) with a rule that consolidates into a 
single consolidated submission the planning and application aspects of 
the Department's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency 
Shelter Grant (ESG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Housing 
Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) formula programs with the 
requirements for the CHAS. This new consolidated submission will 
replace the current CHAS, the HOME program description, the Community 
Development plan and the CDBG final statement, and the ESG and HOPWA 
applications. The rule also consolidates the reporting requirements for 
these programs, replacing five general performance reports with one 
performance report. Thus, in total, the consolidated plan and 
consolidated report will replace 12 documents.
    Although this rule does not incorporate the public housing 
Comprehensive Grant process into the consolidated planning and 
application process, it makes a modification to the Comprehensive 
Grants rule to encourage cooperation in the development of the 
Comprehensive Grant plan and the consolidated plan. The changes are 
intended to ensure that the needs and resources of public housing 
authorities are included in a comprehensive planning effort to 
revitalize distressed neighborhoods and help low-income residents 
locally.
    In addition, the rule amends the separate regulations for the CDBG, 
HOME, ESG, and HOPWA programs to remove some duplicative provisions, 
cross-reference the new provisions, and to conform terminology to that 
used in the consolidated plan rule (revised part 91).

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 6, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph F. Smith, Director, Policy 
Coordination, Office of Community Planning and Development, 451 Seventh 
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410-7000, telephone (202) 708-1283 (voice) 
or (202) 708-2565 (TDD). (These are not toll-free telephone numbers.) 
Copies of this rule will be made available on tape or large print for 
those with impaired vision that request them. They may be obtained at 
the above address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information Collections

    The information collection requirements for the planning process, 
the application process, and the reporting process contained in this 
rule have been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned 
approval number 2506-0117, which expires on March 31, 1995.

II. Background

    This final rule providing for a consolidated plan and a single 
performance report for all HUD community planning and development 
formula grant programs reflects the Department's view that the purpose 
to be served by the submissions is to enable States and localities to 
examine their needs and design ways to address those needs that are 
appropriate to their circumstances. The planning activities embodied in 
the rule are those of the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy 
(CHAS) requirements, enacted by the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
Affordable Housing Act (NAHA, at 42 U.S.C. 12701), and of the Community 
Development Plan requirements, added to the CDBG program by NAHA (42 
U.S.C. 5304).
    The consolidated plan was a result of discussions with local 
jurisdictions and community groups all over the United States 
representing many different viewpoints. The intent of this rule is to 
(1) promote citizen participation and the development of local priority 
needs and objectives by providing comprehensive information on the 
jurisdiction that is easy to understand; (2) coordinate these statutory 
requirements in such a manner as to achieve the purposes of the Acts in 
a comprehensive way, while reducing paperwork and minimizing the 
federal intrusion into State and local planning activities and to 
simplify the process of requesting and obtaining federal funds 
available to the jurisdictions on a formula basis; (3) promote the 
development of an action plan that provides the basis for assessing 
performance; and (4) encourage consultation with public and private 
agencies, including those outside a single jurisdiction, to identify 
shared needs and solutions. In addition, HUD is providing software for 
jurisdictions to facilitate meeting the planning, application and 
reporting requirements, helping to move us into the 21st century.
    In keeping with this approach, the rule emphasizes the role 
citizens and community groups should play in identifying their needs 
and recommending actions government should take in addressing those 
needs. Thus, the outcome is determined at the level of government 
closest to the affected persons. However, to assure that a jurisdiction 
does not ignore identified needs, the rule includes the language from 
the CHAS instructions to require that the consolidated plan contain a 
comparative analysis of the needs identified, and explain how the 
jurisdiction determined priority needs and include proposed actions 
that address the identified needs.
    The proposed rule for the consolidated plan was published on August 
5, 1994 (59 FR 40129). During the process of developing both the 
proposed and final rule, the Department has indicated its intent to 
apply the new rule to Federal Fiscal Year 1995 funding. Therefore, 
affected jurisdictions have been in contact with HUD about the 
expectations for speedy publication of a final rule that would permit 
them to start preparation of this new consolidated plan in time to make 
the projected deadlines.
    Another proposed rule was published in August of 1994 that would 
affect some of the provisions dealing with the CDBG program that are 
covered by this rule. That rule, ``Community Development Block Grant 
Program: Miscellaneous Amendments to Correct Identified Deficiencies'' 
(59 FR 41196, August 10, 1994), proposed changes to the citizen 
participation process and in treatment of CDBG ``float-funded 
activities,'' for example. This rule makes changes covering both of 
these topics (discussed below) but leaves other provisions of that 
``CDBG miscellaneous amendments'' rule untouched, for final disposition 
through that separate rulemaking. In fact, the performance standards 
for the certification found in this rule that a jurisdiction is 
``following'' its HUD-approved consolidated plan will be included in 
that final rule. In light of the emphasis on economic development in 
the CDBG program, HUD will shortly issue a final [[Page 1879]] rule on 
economic development guidelines for the CDBG program.
    A proposed rule on citizen participation for the CDBG Entitlement 
program was published on March 28, 1990 (55 FR 11556). This rule 
reflects consideration of the public comments on that rule, and 
constitutes the final rule for that rulemaking.

III. Public Comments

    The proposed rule drew 138 public comments from 38 local 
governments or groups representing their interests, 19 States or groups 
representing State interests, 62 groups advocating for the interests of 
low-income persons, 15 groups advocating for the interests of persons 
with disabilities, three professional organizations with no apparent 
client constituency, and one individual.
    In addition, the Department officials have talked by telephone to 
representatives of 19 national groups that had submitted written 
comments, to more fully understand their views. These groups are: 
National Association for County Community and Economic Development, 
Council Of State Community Development Agencies, National Community 
Development Association, Local Initiatives Support Corporation, 
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials, Housing 
Assistance Council, AIDS Council, National Coalition for the Homeless, 
Center for Community Change, National Low Income Housing Coalition, 
National Alliance to End Homelessness, National Council of State 
Housing Agencies, Corporation for Supportive Housing, Enterprise 
Foundation, United Cerebral Palsy, Coalition for Low Income Community 
Development, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights under Law, National 
Association for Developmental Disabilities, and the National Housing 
Law Project. Low-income advocates, cities and States often had 
diametrically opposing views on the rule.
    The general views of the low-income and disability advocacy groups 
were that data requirements concerning needs had been removed from the 
CHAS to produce the consolidated plan; a stronger linkage between need, 
strategy, and action should be required to be stated in the plan; 
``worst case'' needs should be addressed on the basis of a ``fair 
share'' of the funds to be made available from HUD; the citizen 
participation process should be augmented and adequate notice should be 
provided for hearings. Many of these concerns apply equally to the CHAS 
process as to the consolidated plan. Many low-income advocates also 
expressed concern about the requirement making the consolidated plan 
applicable for Fiscal Year 1995 funding of the formula programs, with 
the short deadlines that this will require for jurisdictions--and the 
impact it would have on their clients.
    To respond to these concerns, the Department has added a clearer 
statement of specific data requirements on needs (including a specific 
description of the needs of non-homeless persons with disabilities), a 
statement on how the priorities in the strategic plan relate to the 
statement of needs, and a clearer statement on how the activities 
proposed in the action plan relate to the strategic plan. Citizen 
participation has been strengthened in a number of places, including 
improved guidelines for providing adequate notice.
    The Entitlement communities responded to the rule with diverse 
concerns. Some objected to the use of and reporting on ``extremely low-
income'' category particularly with regard to CDBG. Many expressed 
concern about the usefulness of estimating needs for community 
development facilities in terms of the dollars to address those needs.
    Although the term ``extremely low-income'' (0-30 percent) was 
retained in the plan, since this category was familiar in the CHAS, the 
reporting burden for CDBG has been reduced by requiring reporting on 
beneficiaries by income only where income data is required for CDBG 
eligibility. Language has been added codifying the field office 
authority to grant exceptions and extensions for FY 1995 for good 
cause. To meet concerns of these communities that the rule has gone 
beyond the statute and become too prescriptive, suggestions for 
revisions that would have added significant detail to the plan were 
rejected. Other changes to accommodate entitlement community concerns 
are to require that the basis be assigned for relative priority to each 
category of needs in the strategic plan rather than each separate need; 
that flexibility be provided for consortia; that more flexible 
amendment language be provided; and that the time period for comments 
on performance reports be reduced to 15 days.
    A number of States had a particular concern about being required to 
implement the plan in FY 1995, particularly those with early program 
years. Other States wanted specific guidance on citizen participation 
specifically for the States because of their unique situation. They 
felt that it was inappropriate to offer technical assistance directly 
to low-income groups under the citizen participation plan at the State 
level. Several States suggested that HUD and the Department of Health 
and Human Services should get together with regard to making estimates 
of homeless needs. Several States said that the priority needs tables, 
goals, and target dates for completion are too detailed for the States 
since they have less degree of control over what actions are taken than 
entitlement jurisdictions do. Other States felt that it was unrealistic 
that States show how funds were distributed geographically since most 
States distributed funds by competition for different categories of 
assistance and cannot control geographical distribution.
    Most States have been in contact with the appropriate HUD field 
office about the timing and content of their submissions for FY 1995. 
In most cases, agreement has already been reached on both matters. With 
respect to tables, the States are expected to complete the information 
to the extent that they are able to do so. The requirement for 
information about geographic distribution is included because it is a 
CHAS statutory requirement. To the extent that funds are distributed by 
competition and a prediction of the ultimate geographic distribution 
cannot be made, the State should so indicate. A separate section on 
citizen participation has been added that applies just to States. The 
Department believes that it is responsive to the comments of the 
States, including the request to remove the technical assistance 
provision.
    In order to provide technical assistance, HUD intends to issue 
supplemental guidance on effective ways to undertake consolidated 
planning, prepare adequate submissions, and implement subsequent 
projects and activities. In addition, the Department will issue 
supplemental guidance on various cross-cutting concerns. These include 
historic preservation, the role of community based organizations, urban 
design and strategic planning, environmental justice, viable 
communities and sustainable development.
    One comment that was made by both low-income advocates and local 
governments was that the status of the guidelines should be clarified. 
The commenters noted that the regulations specify the requirements for 
the consolidated plan, and the guidelines appear to state the 
recommendations for the plan. They asked, ``How closely will grantees 
be held to the `recommendations'?''
    The Department agrees that this subject needs clarification. The 
[[Page 1880]] regulations state the requirements. The guidelines 
contain the tables and instructions for data submissions, which 
constitute the ``required format'' referenced in the regulations. 
Therefore, these tables and instructions are required, but the specific 
format may be modified with HUD approval. Other suggestions or 
recommendations included in the guidelines are to assist jurisdictions 
in the preparation of the plan.
    A county and a State complained about the Department's Federalism 
Impact discussion. They stated that the rule requires duplication of 
effort by State and local governments, since both will be preparing 
consolidated plans for their jurisdiction. They argued that 
consolidation has resulted in overregulation of previously less 
regulated programs. They suggested that the Department seek legislative 
change to really streamline the requirements.
    The Department believes that there is not much duplication of 
effort between State and local consolidated plans, since the State 
plans focus on the nonentitlement areas of the State that are not 
covered by the consolidated plan of a locality. In creating a new 
framework for submissions for the CPD formula grant programs covered, a 
few requirements, such as the more detailed citizen participation 
requirements, have been applied to programs not previously covered. 
However, the consolidation will give governments and citizens the 
advantage of looking at the needs to be addressed by HUD programs all 
at once. Legislative changes have been sought to combine the McKinney 
Act programs, but those changes have not been enacted. Statutory change 
is not necessary just to coordinate the submissions for the different 
programs.
    The following is a section by section summary of comments received 
and HUD responses.

Section 91.1  Purpose

    This section states the goals of the community development and 
planning programs covered by the part and the function of the 
consolidated plan. There were four primary areas of comment on the 
goals portion (Sec. 91.1(a)) of this section.
    First, a low-income advocacy group and the State of Florida took 
stands on the Department's attempt to restate and consolidate the 
statutory goals of the various programs covered. The low-income 
advocacy group praised the broad discussion of goals, while the State 
criticized the language as confusing and failing to reflect all the 
goals of the covered programs. For example, the State said that the 
CDBG goal of eliminating slum and blight is not included. It also 
stated that the NAHA goal of increasing the supply of decent housing 
that is accessible to job opportunities has been converted to 
``provision of jobs accessible to housing affordable to low-income 
persons.'' Obviously, the low-income advocacy group recommended 
preserving the language, while the State advocated citing the specific 
legislative language of goals to be served by the specific programs.
    The Department believes that this statement of broad goals is 
useful. The language concerning job accessibility mirroring the NAHA 
statutory language is included in the paragraph on decent housing, 
while the economic development language of the CDBG statute is 
reflected in the paragraph on expansion of economic opportunity. 
Elimination of slum and blight is implicit in the language of the goals 
provision pertaining to improving the safety and livability of 
neighborhoods.
    Second, several disabilities groups objected to the phrasing of the 
goals section on supportive housing, stating that it is potentially 
stigmatizing, because it assumes that all persons with special needs 
require housing with special features, unlike other housing that exists 
in the community. The potentially offending section reads ``* * * 
Decent housing also includes increasing the supply of supportive 
housing, which combines structural features and services needed to 
enable persons with special needs to live with dignity and 
independence.'' These commenters suggested modifying the sentence to 
read ``* * * Decent housing also includes increasing the supply of 
housing, which may or may not require certain unique structural 
features and which can be linked to on-site or community based services 
desired by persons with special needs.''
    The Department does not disagree with the point that many disabled 
persons may require housing which does not need structural 
modifications. Jurisdictions are free to provide such housing for 
persons with disabilities. However, the statement of purpose on this 
item was taken directly from purposes section of the National 
Affordability Housing Act, and it is not necessary to change this 
statement.
    Third, several disability groups advocated changing the language 
about ``assisting homeless persons to obtain appropriate housing'' to 
include the concept of ``permanent housing.'' The Department agrees 
that among the actions taken to address the needs of homeless persons 
is providing permanent housing (along with providing emergency and 
transitional shelter). Such an approach is part of a total homeless 
strategy laid out in the strategic plan. However, to carry out this 
plan, it is not necessary to change the statement of purpose to focus 
on only one element of this approach. Therefore, the final rule 
contains no change in response to this request.
    Fourth, several States objected to the impact on them of the 
expanded definition of ``suitable living environment'' and ``economic 
opportunity'' found in the goals section. They indicated that the 
requirement that the State's short and long term goals ``must be 
developed in accordance with the statutory goals described in 
Sec. 91.1'' puts greater emphasis on these goals than is desirable, 
from their point of view. They also note that the goals emphasize low-
income housing and the effort to tie public facility and economic 
development activities to low income and public housing, while 
objectives set forth in the CDBG statute are missing. States indicated 
that the emphasis on expanding economic opportunity including job 
creation creates a linkage to community development that is often made 
at the local level rather than being imposed from the State. States 
will explore these new linkages in community building, but where such 
linkages are not appropriate or possible, neither the State nor its 
grantees should be penalized.
    The description of what is meant by expanded economic opportunity 
is consistent with the current CDBG program requirements for States at 
Sec. 570.483(b)(4). This language should not limit grantees' 
flexibility, and therefore, it is not being changed in the final rule.

Section 91.5  Definitions

a. Income Categories
    The proposed rule used the terms ``very low-income household'' and 
``low-income household'' for the households traditionally identified in 
the CDBG program as ``low-income households'' and ``moderate-income 
households.'' This change drew two types of comments. First, a State 
pointed out that a CDBG proposed rule published on August 10, 1994 used 
the traditional CDBG terms, and the two rules should be consistent. 
Second, a city, county, and a professional organization of government 
CDBG administrators, recommended that the consolidated plan rule should 
use the terms traditionally used in the CDBG program. They argued that 
to do otherwise is damaging to the perception of the program in cities 
that are [[Page 1881]] struggling to keep income balance in their 
community, whose citizens are more willing to see CDBG funds devoted to 
income groups that appear to be more inclusive of average families.
    The Department believes that the consolidated plan must use uniform 
definitions of income categories for all programs covered by the plan. 
The terms chosen in the proposed rule (as in the CHAS) were drawn from 
the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, which created 
the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (that is applicable to 
all the CPD formula grant programs) and the HOME program. However, we 
believe that the comments have merit. Therefore, this final rule 
returns to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 terms: 
``low-income'' (does not exceed 50 percent of median income) and 
``moderate-income'' (does not exceed 80 percent of median income). This 
rule adds a new term ``middle income'' to encompass the group described 
as ``moderate income'' in the proposed rule, to fulfill the 
responsibility under the CHAS statute to consider affordable housing 
needs for this category of families and to include impact on them in 
the performance report.
    The ``extremely low-income'' category of 0-30 percent of median 
income was praised by low-income advocacy groups and some States, while 
local jurisdictions and some States took issue with its addition to the 
evaluation of needs and performance reports as not statutorily required 
and too burdensome.
    The purpose of including this income category is to assure that 
jurisdictions consider the needs of the households that have the least 
ability to improve their access to affordable housing on their own. It 
is a category that was addressed in the CHAS tables and there was much 
support from low-income advocates for its use in the consolidated plan.
    The data for the needs assessment is census data provided by HUD 
that has been used under the CHAS rule. The data for the performance 
report is similarly available. To accommodate the concern about data 
availability, the language has been changed to require reporting on the 
number of extremely-low, low-, moderate-income, and middle-income 
persons served by each activity only where information on income by 
family size is required to determine the eligibility of the activity.
b. Definitions of Terms That Were in the CHAS
    Two local jurisdictions stated that the rule should contain 
definitions for terms that are used in Sec. 91.205(b) of the rule--
moderate income, elderly, large family, cost burden, and severe cost 
burden--and which were defined in the CHAS rule. An advocate for low-
income households stated that the rule needs definitions for additional 
terms: assisted family, disabled family, federal preference, and 
overcrowding. These definitions are needed to define ``worst case'' 
housing needs, which another low-income advocacy group wanted included 
in the defined terms. (``Worst case needs'' was a term defined only in 
the CHAS guidelines; it was not a term found in the CHAS rule.)
    The terms mentioned above that are essential to the consolidated 
plan rule are being added in the final rule. Those terms are ``moderate 
income,'' ``elderly person,'' ``person with disability,'' ``large 
family,'' ``cost burden,'' ``severe cost burden,'' and 
``overcrowding.'' The last three terms are derived from the census, and 
the definitions used in the rule are, therefore, those of the census. 
The other definitions being added follow the definitions provided for 
those terms in the CHAS rule.
    One disability group advocate urged HUD to adopt the definition of 
``persons with disabilities'' used in the Americans with Disabilities 
Act. The definition used in the CHAS rule is consistent with the one 
required for use in the assisted housing programs. The Department sees 
no reason to abandon this definition.
    The terms ``assisted family,'' ``federal preference,'' and ``worst 
case'' are not being used in the rule, and therefore no definitions for 
them are needed.
c. Homeless
    Legal service agencies, homeless and low-income advocates, and 
various disability and public interest organizations were concerned 
that the rule's definition of ``homeless'' was not identical to the 
definition of that term in the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance 
Act. The definition requires the individual or family to both lack ``a 
fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and [have] a primary 
nighttime residence that is [a supervised emergency shelter]; * * * an 
institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals 
intended to be institutionalized; or a * * * place not designed for, or 
ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human 
beings.'' The commenters argued that the McKinney Act defines a 
homeless individual as either one who lacks a fixed, regular, and 
adequate nighttime residence or one whose primary nighttime residence 
is one of the three described types. Their point seems to be that 
families that are overcrowded, because more than one original family 
unit resides in a housing unit intended for one, should be considered 
``homeless.''
    The Department agrees that the definition used in this rule should 
be essentially the same as the definition in the McKinney Act. This 
change does not, however, signal that the Department is altering its 
position that the definition must read within the context of the 
findings and purpose section of the McKinney Act. It is clear to the 
Department that the McKinney Act was enacted in 1987 to assist the 
rapidly growing numbers of persons living on the streets and in 
shelters. It was not enacted for the purpose of assisting the 
substantially larger number of persons who unfortunately live in 
substandard housing or with others in so-called doubled-up arrangements 
because of the problem of a lack of affordable housing. The latter 
problems have been the subject of legislation since 1934, and the 
Department administers many programs designed to address these 
problems. Persons living in substandard housing or in doubled-up 
arrangements are not homeless, although they may be at high risk of 
becoming homeless. Although the Department is not changing the core 
definition of homelessness in the McKinney Act, it should be noted that 
the prevention of homelessness is an essential part of a larger 
homeless program and the homeless plan includes actions to help low-
income families avoid becoming homeless. This would include persons who 
are precariously housed.
    The Department does believe that the wording of the definition for 
``homeless family'' in the proposed rule was confusing. Therefore, the 
definition has been renamed ``homeless family with children,'' and the 
language has been clarified.
d. Other Definitions
    A local jurisdiction pointed out that the definition of 
``consolidated plan'' indicates that it is a document submitted 
annually. Only parts of it are submitted annually--the action plan and 
the certifications. The Department agrees that the definition of 
consolidated plan needs to be clarified so that it does not appear that 
every element must be submitted annually. A modification of the 
proposed language [[Page 1882]] that adds references to provisions of 
the rule has been adopted in the final rule.
    Local and State governments suggested that the definitions of 
income categories need to be clarified with respect to whether they 
apply to ``household'' or ``family.'' The terms seem to be used 
interchangeably, although they have distinct demographic meanings 
resulting in different median incomes.
    The final rule defines the income categories in terms of 
``family''. For planning purposes, the definition HUD uses for that 
term in its assisted housing programs is used in this rule (in 
accordance with the definition that is adopted by the Cranston-Gonzalez 
National Affordable Housing Act). The connection between data supplied 
by the Census, which uses a different definition of ``family'', is 
explained in the Guidelines. The individual program definitions govern 
the actual use of the funds and reporting on beneficiaries.
    The District of Columbia points out that the definition of 
``State'' includes the District of Columbia and the definition ``unit 
of general local government'' excludes the District of Columbia; 
however, the District is defined as an entitlement jurisdiction (local 
government) for purposes of the CDBG and ESG programs. These 
definitions should not adversely impact grant allocations or 
application requirements. The final rule removes reference to the 
District of Columbia from the definitions, and adds a new section to 
the rule to specify consolidated plan requirements for the District of 
Columbia.
    A State suggests that the definition of ``jurisdiction'' should be 
clarified to assure that it includes only those jurisdictions receiving 
funds directly from HUD. It states that the rule, as written, appears 
to apply directly to the units of general local government that are 
State recipients of HOME and CDBG funds. The applicability section, 
Sec. 91.2(b), states that ``[a] jurisdiction must have a consolidated 
plan that is approved by HUD as a prerequisite to receiving funds from 
HUD under the following programs. * * *.'' The provision does not state 
that a jurisdiction must have such a plan in order to receive funds 
from a State. However, the section has been revised to clarify its 
applicability rather than to revise the definition of ``jurisdiction.''

Section 91.10  Program Year

    Representatives of county officials and local governments commented 
on the requirement that a jurisdiction must have one program year for 
all four of its CPD formula programs. One city praised this change as 
``a positive step in streamlining the application process.'' It went on 
to say that the flexibility of permitting the jurisdiction to select 
this program year also is beneficial. On the other hand, an 
organization of county officials stated that the change of program year 
will cause additional administrative costs. It proposed that HUD permit 
waiver of the cap on administrative costs in the first year under this 
rule to accommodate the additional cost of changing program years.
    The administrative cap is statutory.

Section 91.15  Submission date

    One concern of States, local governments, disability group 
advocates, and low-income advocates was the timing of the deadline for 
submission of the first consolidated plan. The proposed rule states 
that the consolidated plan must be submitted to HUD ``at least 45 days 
before the start of its program year.'' Since the Department has made 
it known that it plans to implement the rule for Federal Fiscal Year 
1995 funds, many commenters have indicated that there is insufficient 
time before the required submission date to comply with the process 
required under the rule. More specifically, they indicate that the 
stated submission deadlines do not provide for the negotiation of 
exceptions to a jurisdiction's implementation of the consolidated plan 
for FY 1995, as expected.
    Several alternatives were suggested: (1) Delay implementation until 
FY 1996 or make implementation optional in FY 1995; (2) implement the 
new rule by a demonstration, giving incentive grants to several 
jurisdictions to gain experience with the process; (3) start 
implementation with jurisdictions that have a program year beginning 
180 days following the effective date of the rule; or (4) give explicit 
authority in the rule to HUD field offices to provide exceptions to the 
submission deadline where they are warranted. One large city commented 
that it is pleased with the apparent expanded role of local HUD offices 
in granting exceptions and would like the criteria for their action to 
be stated in the final rule.
    The Department has chosen option number 4. The rule has been 
revised to add a provision, Sec. 91.20, that explicitly authorizes HUD 
field offices to grant three types of exceptions: from the requirement 
to submit all or part of the consolidated plan in FY 1995 (and permit 
submission of a CHAS annual update plus the individual program 
submissions), from the deadline for submission, and from the 
guidelines. Exceptions to requirements found in the guidelines require 
that no statutory or regulatory requirements may be overridden and that 
there must be a finding of good cause by the HUD field office, 
documented by sending written memoranda periodically to HUD 
Headquarters stating the authorized exception and the basis for the 
exception.
    Commenters who suggested option number 4 commended HUD for 
empowering its field offices, a change that will allow local HUD staff 
to more effectively coordinate the process to accommodate local needs. 
One commenter recommended that the exception provision state what steps 
must be taken by a jurisdiction in order to request an exception. The 
rule does not deal with the procedure in this level of detail. However, 
any interested jurisdiction should contact its HUD field office for the 
specific information to be contained in a particular request.
    Many States have been in contact with their HUD field offices and 
have worked out agreed upon schedules for complying with the 
requirements of this rule. It is anticipated that most jurisdictions 
will work out arrangements that are mutually agreeable for the 
submission of a consolidated plan that comes close to that envisioned 
in this rule for this fiscal year.
    Another deadline stated in the proposed rule (Sec. 91.15(a)(2)) is 
the date required by the CDBG statute: ``Failure to submit the plan by 
August 16 will automatically result in a loss of the CDBG funds to 
which the jurisdiction would otherwise be entitled.'' State, county and 
local government entities stated that this provision does not appear to 
encompass the flexibility expected from HUD, based on discussions with 
HUD field office staff. They recommend that the rule allow some 
flexibility on HUD's part not to penalize jurisdictions that may have a 
bona fide problem in making the complete submission in any given year.
    The August 16 date for CDBG submissions has been established 
pursuant to section 116(b) of the Housing and Community Development Act 
of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5316) as the final date for submission of final 
statements for each fiscal year.

Section 91.100  Consultation

a. Adjacent Local Governments
    Several local governments criticized the proposed rule's 
requirement to notify adjacent local governments regarding priority 
nonhousing community development needs and [[Page 1883]] suggested that 
it should be deleted. On the other hand, two low-income advocates 
expressed support for the regulatory section providing that the 
jurisdiction should consult with adjacent local governments.
    One local government believed the provision on consultation should 
be deleted because it is burdensome, particularly for large local 
governments which have dozens of adjacent local governments. The needs 
of its own residents are overwhelming and will use all available 
resources. Consultation with adjacent local governments would 
unreasonably raise expectations for services and assistance.
    Another local government wanted clarification regarding whether 
consultation with local governments is required or optional and the 
subject of the consultation. Another local government said the language 
regarding notification and consultation is vague and the purpose to be 
served by ``notifying'' another jurisdiction is unclear.
    The consultation provision with respect to adjacent local 
governments is statutorily required. The CDBG statute (section 
104(m)(2)(A)) of the HCDA (42 U.S.C. 5304(m)) states, that in preparing 
the community development plan (``CD plan'') describing the 
jurisdiction's priority nonhousing community development needs, the 
jurisdiction must, ``to the extent practicable, notify adjacent units 
of general local government and solicit the views of citizens on 
[these] needs.'' The following paragraph of the statute requires 
submission of the CD plan to the State or any other unit of general 
local government within which the jurisdiction is located, as well as 
to HUD.
    From the statutory context, the Department presumes that the views 
of adjacent jurisdictions are to be welcomed on the validity of the 
needs identified by these governments, just as the comments of the 
citizens are to be considered. Consultation with adjacent jurisdictions 
is not to be assumed to entail taking financial responsibility for 
satisfying the needs of the adjacent jurisdictions, but only reflects 
the perspective that adjacent jurisdictions may have occasion to know 
of needs of their neighbors.
    With respect to the burden of notifying a multitude of adjacent 
jurisdictions, the rule does not require personal meetings with each 
one. The burden of mailing a document that has been prepared by the 
jurisdiction to a number of adjacent jurisdictions should be minimal.
    An urban county asked for clarification on how this provision 
applies to an urban county. If there is no adjacent unit of general 
local government, the intergovernmental consultation requirement 
requires only submission of the CD plan to the State. (The language 
concerning submission of the CD plan to the State was not included in 
the proposed rule but has been added to the section in this final 
rule.)
    Two local governments recommended that all jurisdictions in areas 
that receive funding under the HOPWA program should assist the 
jurisdiction responsible for submitting the HOPWA allocation in the 
preparation of its consolidated plan. This is the type of issue that 
was intended to be covered by the rule's provision concerning 
consultation for problems that go beyond a single jurisdiction, found 
in the penultimate sentence of Sec. 91.100(a).
    The Department has determined that the provision concerning 
consultation for problems and solutions that go beyond a single 
jurisdiction should have one more element added: consultation with 
``agencies with metropolitan-wide planning responsibilities where they 
exist.''
b. Public and Private Service Providers
    One county commented that the regulation should recommend, rather 
than require, consultation with public and private agencies because the 
current CDBG citizen participation process is sufficient to ensure an 
open process for citizen participation. On the other side of the issue, 
several nonprofit disability advocates commented that the regulation 
should mandate, rather than encourage, consultation with public and 
private agencies. They suggest that the consultation should be 
undertaken at least 30 days before the jurisdiction develops its 
proposed consolidated plan.
    The CHAS statute (section 105(b)(17), 42 U.S.C. 12705(b)(17)) 
requires a jurisdiction to consult with public and private agencies 
concerning programs and services to be provided in accordance with the 
housing strategy. Consequently, the proposed rule required such 
consultation. Section 91.100(a) provides: ``When preparing the plan, 
the jurisdiction shall consult with other public and private agencies 
that provide assisted housing, health services, and social services 
(including those focusing on services to children, elderly persons, 
persons with disabilities--including HIV/AIDS, homeless persons) during 
preparation of the plan.'' However, the Department does not want to 
prescribe the precise timetable for these consultations. Presumably, 
the consultation will take place well in advance of the jurisdiction's 
submission of its proposed consolidated plan.
    Homeless and low-income advocates recommended that the regulation 
specifically mention consultation with specific entities. Most of the 
suggested groups are already included in the categories stated in the 
proposed rule. In addition, as residents, any persons not contacted as 
part of the consultation process will receive notice of and have the 
opportunity to participate in the development of the consolidated plan 
as part of the citizen participation process, described in Sec. 91.105. 
In fact, residents in public and assisted housing developments are 
specifically mentioned in paragraph (a)(3) of that section. The 
Department believes it is unnecessary to lengthen the list of entities 
consulted.
    A homeless advocate suggested adding a new paragraph to this 
section dealing with consultation on homeless needs. The advocate 
wanted the regulation to require the jurisdiction to convene a local 
board whose members are appointed by the jurisdiction and a majority of 
whom are currently or formerly homeless or nonprofit providers serving 
the homeless. The local board would be responsible for completing the 
homeless portions of the consolidated plan, which would be submitted to 
the jurisdiction for inclusion in the overall plan. The board would be 
responsible for considering comments on the homeless portion of the 
plan. This proposal may be authorized by legislative change; however, 
there is no statutory basis for it now. Elsewhere, the Department is 
encouraging communities to establish coordinating boards to carry out a 
homeless plan, but it is inappropriate to require it now in this rule.
c. Public Housing Agency
    Paragraph (c) of this section of the proposed rule requires the 
jurisdiction ``to consult with the local public housing agency 
participating in an approved Comprehensive Grant program concerning 
consideration of public housing needs and planned Comprehensive Grant 
program activities.'' One large housing authority commented that there 
should be a mutual exchange of information between the jurisdiction and 
the housing authority needed for the housing authority's Comprehensive 
Grant Program plan and for the jurisdiction's consolidated plan.
    One local government interest group commented that HUD should be 
[[Page 1884]] sensitive to the difficulties involved in the requirement 
of consultation and interagency coordination, particularly with public 
housing authorities over which the jurisdiction has no control. They 
recommended that HUD pursue public housing regulation which require 
public housing agencies (PHAs) to work with the department of the 
jurisdiction that has responsibility for the consolidated plan. One 
city commented that the Comprehensive Grant program regulations already 
provide for local government cooperation in providing resident program 
and services to low-income public housing residents. The proposed rule 
contained a change in that regulation (Sec. 968.320) designed to have 
exactly the effect suggested by the first commenter.
d. Lead-Based Paint Consultation
    The consultation requirement for the portion of the consolidated 
plan concerning lead-based paint hazards is to consult with State or 
local health or child welfare agencies and ``examine health department 
data on the addresses of housing units in which children have been 
identified as lead poisoned.'' One city stated that the information it 
receives from its health department is related to areas or blocks in 
which lead-poisoning cases have been identified, not specific 
``addresses,'' due to Privacy Act concerns about making information 
available to the public.
    The CHAS statute (section 105(e)(2), 42 U.S.C. 12705(e)(2)) is 
stated in terms of requiring the jurisdiction to consult with the 
agencies and to ``examine existing data related to lead-based paint 
hazards and poisonings, including health department data on the 
addresses of housing units in which children have been identified as 
lead poisoned.'' The statute does not pre-empt the Privacy Act, and the 
approach taken in this particular jurisdiction is reasonable. In 
addition, neither the statute nor the regulation requires the 
jurisdiction to provide data regarding the addresses to the public. The 
consolidated plan section for lead-based paint hazards under the 
housing needs assessment requires the plan to estimate the number of 
housing units that are occupied by low- and moderate-income families 
and that contain lead-based paint hazards.
    Several low-income advocates point out that the regulation fails to 
restate the statutory language concerning consultation for lead-based 
paint hazards to examine ``existing data related to lead-based paint 
hazards and poisonings,'' although the regulation does include the 
statutory language to examine data on the addresses of housing units in 
which children have been identified as lead poisoned. The rule has been 
revised to include the missing statutory language.
e. Description of the Consultation Process
    Disability community and low-income community advocates recommend 
that the consolidated plan require a description of the consultation 
process and an identification of those who participated in the process. 
Such a description is required under the CHAS regulations (Sec. 91.15, 
as published on September 1, 1992). The rule has been revised to 
include such a provision.

Section 91.105  Citizen Participation (``CP'') Plan

a. General
    An urban county recommends that a section be added for urban county 
programs, enabling urban counties to complete a consortium-wide citizen 
participation plan, instead of a separate plan for each municipality. 
No change is needed. An urban county is the jurisdiction, and the 
regulation requires only one citizen participation plan for the 
jurisdiction.
    One State commented that the regulation is not clear regarding what 
is applicable or required for State governments. The regulation seems 
to impose additional requirements for the planning process over and 
above CDBG requirements. The State believes that in the CDBG program, 
the State passes citizen participation requirements to local 
governments, which actually propose and carry out activities. It 
comments that the requirements imposed by the proposed rule are 
excessive and impractical at the State level.
    Two States and two State interest groups commented that the 
guidelines indicate that States do not have to provide a detailed 
citizen participation plan for citizens, but must have such a plan for 
units of general local government. The regulations detail a laundry 
list of requirements and do not mention the fact that States are exempt 
from this requirement. Clarification is needed.
    One State agency commented that it would be difficult to implement 
the regulatory provision that encourages the participation of all 
citizens, including minorities, non-English speaking persons, and 
persons with disabilities. The State action plan does not require the 
State to identify the geographic areas within the state that will 
receive funds or the specific activities to be funded. Therefore, such 
participation would be required by every potentially involved 
geographic area of the state and every potentially affected population. 
The agency suggested that the rule permit States to develop citizen 
participation plans that include participation of citizens and groups 
representative of potentially affected geographic areas (i.e., rural, 
urban and/or suburban) or potentially affected populations.
    Two State agencies commented on the provision requiring the 
jurisdiction to provide information to the public housing agency about 
housing and community development plan activities related to its 
development and surrounding communities, so the housing agency can make 
this information available at the public hearing required under the 
Comprehensive Grant program. One State said that the provision does not 
make sense for States and should not apply to States. Another State 
explained that it does not currently have ties with every public 
housing authority throughout the State, although it is developing these 
relationships.
    A citizen participation process is statutorily required for the 
CDBG program and the CHAS. Under the CDBG program, citizen 
participation requirements are imposed by the statute for both the 
State and the local governments. The rule has been revised to have a 
separate section on the citizen participation plan for States, which 
takes into account the unique situation of States, eliminating the 
requirement that information be furnished to the public housing agency 
for its use in developing its Comprehensive Grant program.
    One local government thought that this section was extremely 
confusing; it is not clear whether hearings and comments pertain to the 
citizen participation plan, the consolidated plan, or both. The 
Department agrees that the language needs to be more precise. This 
section has been reorganized and clarified.
    Low-income advocates commented that HUD should give clear and 
precise minimum standards to jurisdictions in terms of time periods for 
each step in the process and the type of notice, in order to avoid 
confusion as to whether or not the jurisdiction is complying with HUD's 
purpose and to ensure meaningful citizen participation. Expressing a 
different point of view, one local government commented that the 
requirement for more citizen and agency participation may complicate an 
already lengthy consultative process. This local government already has 
a nine month process to include citizens and agencies in determining 
the elements of the CDBG application; adding components 
[[Page 1885]] could significantly slow down an already unwieldy 
process. On balance, the Department has decided not to prescribe 
additional detailed minimums for all elements, since that would reduce 
the flexibility of the jurisdictions. It is up to the jurisdictions to 
adopt a detailed citizen participation plan (with citizen input) that 
fits local conditions.
    The Department notes that the statutes require more extensive 
citizen participation for the proposed CHAS/final statement/
consolidated plan than for amendments and reports, which only require 
notice and an opportunity to comment. The final rule has been revised 
to distinguish the citizen participation required for the consolidated 
plan from the citizen participation required for reports and 
amendments.
    One local government requested that the rule address the citizen 
participation process in a jurisdiction where separate agencies 
administer homeless services and housing services. The city would like 
to be able to continue to use two separate citizen participation 
processes and to incorporate the homeless plan into the consolidated 
plan. The Department believes that two separate processes would hinder 
a key premise of the consolidated plan, i.e., to require the 
jurisdiction to comprehensively consider and address the housing and 
community development needs of all persons within the jurisdiction.
b. Applicability
    This section of the regulation requires the jurisdiction to adopt a 
citizen participation plan for the consolidated plan process before a 
jurisdiction's start of the next program year. The rule also provides 
that any amendment of a jurisdiction's current citizen participation 
plan for the CDBG program to satisfy these requirements must be 
completed before the beginning of the program year, if it starts on or 
after 180 days after the effectiveness of the final rule.
    Several low-income and disability community advocates recommended 
that the regulation must clearly provide that the citizen participation 
plan must be adopted by the jurisdiction before the development of the 
proposed consolidated plan, and the plan must describe the 
jurisdiction's specific efforts to ensure participation of housing 
consumers, including people with mental retardation and other 
disabilities and their advocates. One individual commenter stated that 
the new citizen participation plan must be adopted as soon as possible, 
not after the initial consolidated submission is submitted.
    Since the Department is eager to implement the consolidated plan 
expeditiously, the rule does not require that the citizen participation 
plan be developed, approved, and used, before any consolidated planning 
process begins. It merely requires that the citizen participation plan 
be completed, in accordance with this rule, before the first program 
year under the consolidated plan begins. In the first year, the 
jurisdiction must follow the substance of the citizen participation 
plan requirements, but it does not have to have a written citizen 
participation plan that follows the specific provisions of Sec. 91.105 
if its program year starts within 180 days of the effective date of the 
rule. In the following years, the new written citizen participation 
plan will be used in developing the consolidated plan.
    Several disability and low-income community advocates suggested 
that the regulation set forth the process for developing and adopting 
the citizen participation plan, e.g., publish the citizen participation 
plan for comment, require one or more public hearings on the plan, 
require a 30 day comment period, and publish the final plan. The 
proposed rule's provision requires only a ``reasonable opportunity'' to 
comment, not a hearing process. The Department has concluded, after 
listening to the suggestions of jurisdictions, that it should not 
impose greater procedural requirements on the development of the 
citizen participation plan, although we have made a few modifications 
to the citizen participation requirements to reflect improved notice to 
citizens.
    Two local governments commented that it is unclear whether the 
citizen participation plan is a specific, written document that must be 
submitted for approval, or whether the jurisdiction may merely report 
on its activities to meet the requirements of the citizen participation 
plan. The regulation suggests a separate document is required, but the 
guidelines are unclear. A separate document is required; however, the 
citizen plan is not required to be submitted to HUD. The requirement 
for a citizen participation plan came from the CDBG statute.
c. Affected Citizens
    Several disability and low-income community advocates requested 
that the regulation state that the plan must ``provide for'', not just 
``encourage'', participation by residents of low and moderate income 
neighborhoods. They also wanted the word ``although'' stricken from the 
beginning of paragraph (a)(2) because it diminishes the importance of 
the first part of the sentence. These changes have been made.
    Several low-income community advocates supported the regulatory 
language encouraging the participation by minorities, non-English 
speakers, persons with mobility, visual, or hearing impairments, and 
public housing residents. One disability community advocate wanted the 
language broadened to include ``persons with disabilities,'' not just 
those with physical impairments. Although it may be more difficult for 
a jurisdiction to determine how to provide for participation of persons 
with disabilities other than the physical ones specified, the 
Department agrees that the obligation should relate to the whole 
category of persons with disabilities. The rule has been revised 
accordingly.
    Several low-income community advocates said that the regulation 
does not sufficiently address the statutory requirement that ``affected 
citizens'' must be given a reasonable opportunity to examine the 
contents of the proposed consolidated plan and to submit comments. They 
want the regulation to state that ``extremely low and very low-income'' 
people are among those most ``affected.'' They want the regulation to 
require the jurisdictions to take additional actions to publicize/give 
notice to these affected citizens, e.g., notice should be in the non-
legal section of major daily newspapers, in major non-English 
newspapers, and in public service announcements on TV and radio.
    The rule is written in terms of all citizens, rather than just 
``affected'' citizens. One could certainly argue that all citizens in 
the jurisdiction are affected. This comment is just another way of 
saying that the citizen participation requirements should be stated in 
greater detail. That level of detail will be provided not in this 
section of the HUD rule but in the citizen participation plan prepared 
by the jurisdiction.
d. Information To Be Provided
    This section of the rule requires that, before it adopts a 
consolidated plan, a jurisdiction must make available to the public 
``information that includes the amount of assistance the jurisdiction 
expects to receive and the range of activities that may be undertaken, 
including the amount that will benefit persons of low- and moderate-
income and the plans to minimize displacement of persons and to assist 
any persons displaced.'' [[Page 1886]] 
    Fearing that jurisdictions will make this information available the 
day before a consolidated plan is adopted, low-income advocates urged 
that the regulation specify a time period for the jurisdiction to make 
information available to the public. The commenters suggested various 
periods of 10 to 30 days before the consolidated plan is prepared, and 
at least 30 days or 60 days before the consolidated plan is adopted.
    This requirement is derived from both the CDBG statute and the CHAS 
statute. Since the Department is not aware of any controversy 
concerning the implementation of the CDBG requirement to furnish 
information, it declines to impose a time limit in this rule, whose 
purpose is to consolidate requirements--not to impose more strict 
timeframes on jurisdictions. Again, the jurisdiction's citizen 
participation plan is the appropriate place for these timeframes.
    Local governments and local government interest groups supported 
the regulation for permitting publication of a summary of the proposed 
consolidated plan, rather than the entire plan. Low-income and 
disability community advocates indicated disapproval of this proposal. 
One local government requested that the regulation should list precise 
content requirements for the plan summary to avoid lengthy disputes 
about what content is acceptable. The Department continues to believe 
that publication of a summary of the consolidated plan is more 
meaningful to stimulate general interest in the process than 
publication of the lengthy and complicated document. However, the rule 
is not being revised to specify its precise contents.
    Low-income and disability community advocates indicated that the 
entire draft consolidated plan, plan amendments, and the performance 
reports, must be made available to citizens within a period such as two 
working days free of charge. The Department agrees that the documents 
needed for public comment must be made available without charge in a 
timely fashion. This requirement is being added to the rule.
    Low-income advocates want the consolidated plan computer software 
to be made available to community-based organizations. They suggested 
that one local grassroots organization could be chosen to act as a lead 
and to share the software with other such organizations. The software 
should also be made available at no or reduced cost to local libraries. 
Among the options that HUD is considering at this point are 
participating in a number of demonstrations with city-wide low income 
coalitions where HUD would provide the software and providing reduced 
cost copies of the software to various groups.
    One local government asked when the period begins for access to 
records and information relating to the jurisdiction's use of program 
assistance during the preceding five years. The commenter also said 
that the CDBG program only requires records to be maintained for three 
years and suggests the regulation be amended to give access to records 
for the preceding three years. The current CDBG program regulation 
requires records to be maintained for three years after the date of 
submission of the performance report in which the specific activity is 
reported on for the final time. The CHAS statute requires access to 
records regarding assistance received during the preceding five year 
period. Blending these provisions to cover all the programs requires 
use of the five-year period.
    Accordingly, the program regulations are being amended in this rule 
to require records to be retained for a longer period than is currently 
required. Since performance reports are submitted after the program 
year, retention of records for four years after the activity is last 
included in a performance report yields a five-year retention period. 
For the CDBG program, the retention period has been changed to four 
years after the CDBG activity is last included in the performance 
report. Since program closeout would occur no earlier than the end of 
the program year in which the activity is initiated, retention of 
records for four years after closeout yields a five-year retention 
period. For programs other than the CDBG program, the retention period 
has been changed to four years after closeout.
e. Notice
    Some low-income advocates support the requirements in the proposed 
regulation for the kind of citizen participation required, but 
virtually all of the advocates believe that the regulation fails to 
provide sufficient specificity regarding ``publish'' and ``notice'' and 
reasonable opportunity to comment.
    Suggestions for specific elements to be included in the rule were 
the following: how notice is given; what groups and populations must 
receive notice; time period for advance notice before issuance of the 
draft plan (45 days); and responses provided in draft plan to all oral 
and written comments received at or before the first public hearing. 
The notice should be in the non-legal section of major daily 
newspapers, in major non-English newspapers, and in public service 
announcements on TV and radio. The jurisdiction should maintain a 
mailing list of interested individuals, nonprofit organizations, low-
income neighborhood organizations, and other interested parties and be 
required to send written notice of the opportunity to comment on the 
proposed consolidated plan, as well as a copy of the final plan. Copies 
also should be available at public and private agencies that provide 
assisted housing, health services, and social services. In addition, a 
reasonable number of copies are to be provided without charge to 
citizens and groups that request a copy.
    The Department declines to add all of these elements to the rule. 
However, recognizing that citizen notice of hearings is critical to 
success of citizen participation, the Department has added language to 
indicate that publishing small print notices in the newspaper a few 
days before the hearing does not constitute adequate notice. Also, the 
examples provided by commenters are excellent examples of how to 
provide notice, and they will be included in the Guidelines issued to 
assist jurisdictions in implementing the rule.
    The proposed rule contained three provisions related to 
accessibility of the process to persons with disabilities: the 
statement about encouraging the participation in the citizen 
participation process in paragraph (a)(2), discussed above, the 
statement that accommodations for persons with disabilities must be 
made at public hearings in paragraph (b)(5), and the statement about 
accessibility of the citizen participation plan in paragraph (c).
    Several disability community advocates commented that section 504 
of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 794) requires each jurisdiction to 
make the content of the proposed plan available to persons with 
disabilities in a form that is accessible to them. Further, they stated 
that it is essential that announcements, materials, training sessions, 
and hearings related to the plan are accessible to persons with 
disabilities.
    Several cities asked whether the format accessible to persons with 
disabilities had to be available regardless of demand for the format. 
Two cities suggested that the regulatory provision for the citizen 
participation plan to be made available in a format accessible to 
persons with disabilities should be based upon a specific request. One 
city based this suggestion on the fact that taped or Braille version of 
information had not been requested in [[Page 1887]] the past 20 years. 
The rule has been revised to require provision of the materials in 
accessible form, upon request.
f. Comment Period
    Comments were received about the appropriateness of the 30-day 
comment period on the consolidated plan, as well as on the 30-day 
comment period for plan amendments and for performance reports. Several 
local governments believe that the 30-day comment period for the 
consolidated plan is reasonable. Several low-income advocates want the 
minimum period for the jurisdiction to receive comment from citizens on 
the consolidated plan to be increased from 30 days to 60 days to give 
residents more adequate opportunity to research, discuss, and comment 
on the proposed consolidated plan.
    The opportunity to comment on the consolidated plan derives from 
the CHAS statute, section 107(a), which requires that a jurisdiction 
provide a reasonable opportunity to examine the content of the proposed 
housing strategy and to submit comments on the proposed housing 
strategy and from the CDBG statute, section 104(a)(2)(B), which 
requires CDBG grantees to provide a reasonable opportunity to examine 
the content of the proposed statement of CDBG activities and to submit 
comments on the proposed statement. The Department believes the 30-day 
period specified in the rule for this process is appropriate, 
especially given the comments from both sides of the issue.
    Thirty days was stated to be too long and burdensome a comment 
period for amendments by several local governments. The commenters 
suggested a 15-day comment period for amendments to the plan or suggest 
that the regulation not prescribe the period and instead required a 
``reasonable period.''
    One local government stated the 30 day period for receiving 
comments on reports is a new requirement and is infeasible because the 
report is due 90 days after the end of the program year and the report 
will require information on all the formula programs. Two other local 
governments agreed that the requirement for notification and a 30 day 
comment period for performance reports is time consuming, redundant, 
and should be eliminated. Others suggested a 15-day period for the 
performance report or a ``reasonable period.''
    A public comment period is required for substantial amendments and 
performance reports in accordance with the CHAS statute, section 
107(b). Section 91.62 of the current CHAS rule contains this same 
requirement. The requirement, therefore, is not totally new, although 
jurisdictions may not have been required to submit performance reports 
concerning formula grant programs for public comment before submitting 
them to HUD.
    We note that not all changes in activities constitute a 
``substantial amendment'' that will trigger this public comment 
process. See the provision that permits the jurisdiction's citizen 
participation plan to determine what type of change requires a 
substantial amendment.
    The final rule has been revised to provide that the comment period 
for performance reports is 15 days, instead of 30 days, and the 
deadline for submission of the reports is preserved at 90 days after 
the end of the program year.
    Several low-income community advocates also suggested that the 
regulation specify a period between the end of the comment period and 
the submission of the plan so that the jurisdiction will be able to 
make changes in plan based on citizen comments. Different timeframes 
were suggested: at least 10 working days, 30 days. The final rule has 
been reorganized so that the provision requiring a minimum 30 day 
public comment period also requires that the jurisdiction must consider 
the comments. The jurisdictions need to give themselves adequate time 
to consider the comments, but the regulation does not prescribe this 
time period.
g. Technical Assistance
    Paragraph (b)(4) of the proposed rule requires that the citizen 
participation plan ``must provide for technical assistance to groups 
representative of persons of low- and moderate-income that request such 
assistance in developing proposals for funding assistance under any of 
the programs covered by the consolidated plan, with the level and type 
of assistance determined by the jurisdiction.''
    One State and one State interest group asked for clarification of 
how this provision would apply to States. They indicated that since 
some States do not develop proposals for CDBG and HOME programs, but 
instead receive requests from local governments for funds for what they 
determine to be their local needs, the States would not be in a 
position to provide this type of technical assistance. A local 
government wanted clarification regarding whether this requirement is 
statutory, and suggested eliminating it if it is not statutorily 
required.
    This provision comes from the CDBG statute and has applied to the 
CDBG State and Entitlement programs since 1988, so it cannot be 
eliminated. However, the CDBG rule has applied the requirement to 
States via the local governments' citizen participation plans (see 
Sec. 570.486(a)(4)). The final rule has been revised to treat it the 
same way in the separate States provision on citizen participation.
    Two states commented that the regulation is unclear on the extent 
of the technical assistance that is to be provided. Government interest 
groups and a local government expressed support for the regulation 
language, which requires the jurisdiction to determine the level and 
type of technical assistance. There is no change to the final rule on 
this issue, although more guidance is provided on it in the Guidelines.
    Two agencies from one State wanted to know the source of funds to 
provide the technical assistance and requested that the regulation 
specifically permit federal administrative funds to cover the costs of 
providing technical assistance. One low-income advocate also asked 
whether funds will be available to jurisdictions to provide this 
technical assistance to them. Another State also wanted to know the 
extent of any tracking of such assistance that might be required. 
Technical assistance is an eligible administrative expense under the 
CDBG and HOME programs.
    One low-income advocate suggested that technical assistance 
available to groups representative of very low and low-income people 
should be advertised via mailings to all such groups in the 
jurisdiction. Available technical assistance should include written 
guidance, telephone contact and one-on-one meetings. Low-income and 
disability community advocates want HUD to provide funding to their 
organizations to develop materials and training for citizen groups to 
allow for meaningful participation. The rule does not prescribe the 
forms of technical assistance, but the implementing guidelines will 
include suggestions.
h. Public Hearings
    Local government interest groups stated that they believe that 
public hearings are not the most effective way to obtain citizen views. 
One city and low-income advocate recommended neighborhood meetings as 
useful in the process. The rule follows the statute in requiring public 
hearings, but is open to other forms of involving the public. 
[[Page 1888]] 
    One local government suggested that HUD interpret ``public 
hearing'' to mean traditional public hearings, as well as, public 
meetings. This would give jurisdictions flexibility to use public 
meetings and other public forums to gather citizen comments. Formal 
public hearings in local government require city council members to be 
present and for comments to be tape recorded. The requirement for 
public hearing has been in the CDBG statute for many years, and HUD has 
not found it necessary to define what this means. Public hearings are 
governed by state and local law.
    The question of how many hearings are required and at what point 
was raised by a number of commenters. Several local government 
representatives read the regulation to require two public hearings 
during the plan development process and believe only one should be 
required. The low-income advocates commented that the regulation should 
require three hearings, instead of two, each program year, indicating 
that they believe the CDBG statute requires three hearings. Various 
timeframes for these hearings were also suggested.
    The proposed rule was based on the requirements of the CDBG 
statute, which requires (at 42 U.S.C. 5304(a)(3)((D)) that a 
jurisdiction have a citizen participation plan that

    Provides for public hearings to obtain citizen views and respond 
to proposals and questions at all stages of the community 
development program, including at least the development of needs, 
the review of proposed activities, and review of program performance 
* * *

    One local government requested that the regulation clearly say how 
many hearings are required and what topics are required to be covered. 
In an attempt to give jurisdictions as much flexibility as possible, 
the regulation requires a minimum of two public hearings, since the 
statutory language uses the plural ``hearings,'' to be conducted at two 
different stages of the process. Under this wording, the jurisdiction 
may combine the hearing on needs for the coming year's planning with 
the hearing on the previous year's performance, for example. However, a 
jurisdiction may choose to hold one public hearing on needs, a second 
on the draft consolidated plan, and a third on the draft performance 
report.
    One advocate wanted the regulation to require the hearing on needs 
to be expanded to permit citizens the opportunity to respond to 
proposals and questions. The rule has been revised to reflect the CDBG 
statutory language requiring response to proposals and questions.
    The low-income and disability community advocates stated that the 
development of needs in the consolidated plan must be based on 
determination of housing needs made after public hearings. Several 
disability community advocates commented that the timeframes for 
citizen participation through the public hearing process do not require 
citizen participation in the earliest stages of the consolidated 
planning process, when ``worst case'' housing needs can be identified. 
They argued that timeframes permitted by the regulation significantly 
reduce the likelihood that meaningful housing needs information or 
housing strategies will be sought from persons with disabilities, 
advocates, or service providers as the consolidated plan is developed. 
The rule does require that the hearing on needs be conducted before the 
proposed consolidated plan is published.
    One nonprofit and several low-income advocates stated that HUD must 
assure that meeting places and times are convenient to the persons most 
affected by these programs, by providing guidance in the rule. The rule 
requires the citizen participation plan to provide that hearings be 
held at times and locations convenient to potential and actual 
beneficiaries.
    A local government interest group commended HUD for not prescribing 
how the needs of non-English speaking residents will be met. The rule 
does require that the citizen participation plan specify how the 
jurisdiction will meet these needs.
    Clarification was requested by jurisdictions on whether flexibility 
is also permitted to meet the needs of disabled persons. Disability 
advocates stated that the physical accessibility of meeting or hearing 
sites should be ensured. Since accommodation for persons with 
disabilities is required by the CDBG statute (42 U.S.C. 5304(a)(3)(D)), 
by section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) and by 
the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12101-12213) and 
implementing regulations, it does not seem necessary for the rule to 
spell out exactly what is required for accommodation in this rule.
i. Comments and Complaints
    Local governments and local government interest groups believe that 
the requirement to attach a summary of public comments or views and set 
forth the reasons for not accepting comments should be eliminated 
because it is not statutory, is too burdensome, and creates additional 
paperwork. One low income advocate wanted the regulation to require 
detailed summaries of comments indicating the number of comments for 
each constituency type and responding appropriately to each comment 
that was not incorporated into the final version of the consolidated 
plan.
    Section 107(c) of the CHAS statute, 42 U.S.C. 12707(c), requires 
the jurisdiction to consider comments and views and to attach a 
summary. Although the statute does not require a discussion of the 
consideration of the views/comments, the Department believes that such 
a provision strengthens the citizen participation process.
    Low-income advocates suggested that the regulation include a time 
period from close of the comment period to submission of the 
consolidated plan to ensure that the jurisdiction has adequate time to 
consider the comments. The Department is reluctant to specify 
additional time periods that must be honored, but citizens can 
certainly seek addition of this element to a local government's citizen 
participation plan.
    One large city and one local government interest group commented 
that the regulation should not require ``substantive responses'' to 
every citizen complaint within 15 days because it is not practicable in 
its city to respond to every comment individually within 15 days. HUD 
should delete the reference to 15 days in the rule and allow local 
control over public response time. The CDBG statute and the 
consolidated plan regulation specify the 15 day period, ``where 
practicable.''
    Several low-income advocates stated that the regulatory requirement 
for a timely substantive written response to written complaints is not 
sufficient to provide resolution of the complaints. Advocates also 
wanted the regulation to set forth an appeals process to HUD on 
complaints and on comments on the consolidated plan.
    The CDBG statute (section 104)(a)(3)(E)) requires a ``written 
answer,'' while the CHAS statute (section 107(d)) requires a 
jurisdiction to follow HUD-established ``procedures appropriate and 
practicable for providing a fair hearing and timely resolution of 
citizen complaints.'' The rule requires each jurisdiction to specify in 
its citizen participation plan the procedures it has determined are 
``appropriate and practicable'' to resolve complaints. A system 
involving an appeal to HUD would not be possible, given the limited 
staff available.
    One state agency commented that it is unclear whether each 
commenter on the consolidated plan is required to be sent an individual 
response, separately from [[Page 1889]] the responses that must be 
prepared as a part of the consolidated plan document. If so, this would 
be burdensome. The provision on responses to complaints was not 
intended to cover comments on the consolidated plan. The rule has been 
revised to have a separate paragraph for comments and a separate 
paragraph for complaints.
j. Criteria for Amendments
    One state interest group commented on behalf of a state that the 
citizen participation plan is very idealistic and will restrict states' 
flexibility to amend individual programs. The regulation requires the 
citizen participation plan to specify the criteria that the 
jurisdiction will use to determine what constitutes a ``substantial 
change'' which necessitates citizen participation to amend the 
consolidated plan.
k. Adoption of Citizen Participation Plan
    One state commenter believes that HUD presents no rationale for the 
provision requiring citizen input on the citizen participation plan and 
it exceeds the statute. The state is also concerned that the need to 
allow for input on the citizen participation plan will require a much 
earlier initiation of actions than may have been contemplated by many 
states.
    The Department believes that input by citizens and their advocates 
is necessary for a meaningful citizen participation plan that will meet 
the needs of citizens in the jurisdiction, particularly those who are 
the intended beneficiaries of programs covered by the consolidated 
plan. The regulation does not require adoption of a new citizen 
participation plan each year.
l. Pending CDBG Rule on Citizen Participation
    The citizen participation requirements in the consolidated plan 
regulation incorporate the citizen participation requirements of the 
CDBG program and supersede the pending rulemaking on citizen 
participation for the CDBG Entitlement program. In that rulemaking, a 
proposed rule was published on March 28, 1990 (55 FR 11556). 
Publication of a final CDBG regulation on citizen participation was 
delayed primarily by a moratorium on rulemaking.
    HUD received comments on citizen participation requirements in the 
proposed CDBG program from eight commenters. Some of the comments on 
public hearings duplicated comments made on the proposed consolidated 
plan regulation and are addressed above. Comments that apply equally to 
citizen participation under the consolidated plan have been considered 
by HUD in the development of the final consolidated plan regulation as 
follows.
    Two commenters expressed concern about the proposed requirements 
that grantees must provide citizens an opportunity to comment on the 
original citizen participation plan and any amendments to the plan, and 
must make the plan public. The comments expressed the view that these 
requirements were duplicative and would only serve to increase costs of 
compliance with little benefit to the objective of public 
participation.
    The Department disagrees. Because the plan sets forth the detailed 
mechanisms for involving citizens in the development and review of the 
grantee's CDBG program and consolidated plan, it must certainly be made 
public. But it is also important that the citizens, who will be so much 
affected by the approaches selected by the grantee for involving them, 
be given the opportunity to comment on the development and amendment of 
that plan. Although this will be more costly than simply making the 
plan public, it is largely a one-time added expense and is fully 
justified in light of the importance placed on meaningful involvement 
of citizens in the development and review of local CDBG programs and 
the consolidated plan.
    One of the commenting citizen organizations recommended that the 
rule require that hearings be held each time a final statement is 
proposed to be amended and that language be added to encourage the use 
of hearings for the purpose of enabling citizens to participate in 
project design and implementation. Neither of the suggestions was 
adopted. The Department believes that to require hearings to discuss 
amendments would be very costly, since a grantee could be expected to 
have several amendments during a program year. It is also highly 
questionable that holding a hearing to discuss an amendment would be 
more effective in getting citizen views than the current requirement of 
providing citizens the opportunity to comment in writing. It is 
reasonable to assume that many citizens would be willing to submit 
comments in writing about a proposal but would not be willing or able 
to attend a hearing to register those comments.
    In a related matter, another commenter recommended the removal of 
the requirement that the hearings be held at different times during the 
year. This requirement is statutory.
    A commenter recommended that the requirement that the grantee 
provide ``reasonable'' notice of public hearings be replaced with the 
need for providing ``adequate'' notice, noting that the statute had 
used the word ``adequate'' for this purpose. The Department believes 
that there is little difference between the meaning of the two words in 
this application. Accordingly, the final rule uses the word contained 
in the statute. The commenter also recommended that the rule set a 
standard for ``adequate notice,'' suggesting as a model what the 
Department of Treasury has established for small-issue private purpose 
industrial revenue bonds. The final rule does not contain such a model, 
since HUD believes that each grantee should be given the flexibility to 
meet the notice requirement in its own way, describing in its plan how 
it will provide adequate notice.
    One commenter questioned the inclusion of the requirement that 
grantees provide ``timely notice of local meetings'' (other than for 
public hearings) in addition to the requirement that they provide 
``reasonable and timely access to local meetings, information, and 
records * * *''. The commenter noted that the requirement to provide 
timely notice went beyond the provision in the statute, and appeared to 
require formal legal notices in daily newspapers. Believing this to be 
unnecessary and costly, the commenter suggested that the regulation 
simply retain the statutory language. This suggestion is adopted in the 
final rule.
    A large city expressed concern about the need for targeting citizen 
participation to low- and moderate-income persons residing in certain 
areas. This requirement is statutory and cannot be removed from the 
rule. This commenter also objected to the requirement that the citizen 
participation plan contain information on the types and levels of 
assistance to be provided to persons who may be displaced by CDBG-
assisted activities. It was noted that this information is already 
required to be made public and the need to duplicate it in another 
document would be costly. The regulations do not duplicate requirements 
concerning plans for displacement. Instead, the citizen participation 
requirements in the proposed CDBG regulation and in the consolidated 
plan regulation combine all citizen participation requirements, 
including the requirement the plan for displacement, into a single 
citizen participation plan.
    One of the citizen organizations suggested that grantees be 
required to [[Page 1890]] maintain all of the key CDBG materials 
together in several locations throughout the community to make it 
easier for citizens to involve themselves in the program. HUD is 
unwilling to require this of all grantees, but notes that local citizen 
groups having particular problems in this regard may want to press 
their grantee to do this on a voluntary basis.
    One commenter recommended that grantees be required to identify the 
amount of ``unexpended'' funds allocated in previous years at the time 
it provides information to citizens about the amount of CDBG funds 
available in the coming year. The expressed objectives of this 
suggestion were that it would help citizens identify problem areas 
(presumably with performance) and would highlight that certain needs 
will not have to be addressed in the coming year's program because of 
earlier allocation decisions.
    The Department does not believe that such a change would be 
appropriate, since the rule already requires sufficient disclosure of 
performance. (The rule requires that performance be covered at a public 
hearing and that the grantee's performance report be subjected to 
public review and comment.)

Section 91.205  Housing and homeless needs assessment

a. Categories of Persons Affected
    Numerous low-income and disability community advocates commented 
that the proposed rule does not require the level of detail on 
subpopulations that was required in the CHAS Table 1C. They argue that 
this information is essential to illustrate the needs of special 
populations. A disability group advocate indicates that the rule fails 
to create a comprehensive, inclusive and detailed needs analysis for 
programs that address the needs of persons living with HIV/AIDS. The 
commenter states that all jurisdictions are likely to be affected by 
the HIV epidemic and should have a needs assessment for residents in 
their areas who are living with HIV/AIDS, even if they are not seeking 
funds under the HOPWA program.
    The low-income advocates also note that the proposed rule does not 
require that the needs of single, non-elderly or households of 
nonrelated individuals be identified. Also missing is the requirement 
to identify needs of nonhomeless people with disabilities, especially 
those with AIDS.
    The Department has revised the rule to specify that the needs must 
be estimated for the number and type of families by income groups and 
tenure. The requirement now includes specific reference to single 
persons. Nonelderly persons presumably fall into the general categories 
of persons whose needs are identified. Households of nonrelated 
individuals are covered by the HUD definitions.
    Nonhomeless people with special needs are now the subject of a 
separate paragraph (d) in Sec. 91.205. This category covers elderly, 
frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical 
developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addiction, persons 
with HIV/AIDS and their families, and any other categories the 
jurisdiction may specify.
    We note that with regard to identification of special needs 
populations, the use of HOME tenant-based rental assistance to be used 
exclusively for assistance to one subpopulation of the disabled will 
only be permitted if the grantee can demonstrate that (1) the need has 
been documented in its consolidated plan, and (2) the reason for their 
preferential treatment is to narrow the gap in available benefits and 
services to the group. Therefore, this element is essential to the 
consolidated plan.
    The Department declines to require all the information contained in 
CHAS Table 1C, because that would be contrary to our efforts to avoid 
unnecessary requirements and detailed tables. However, we have 
attempted to assure that the categories of special need to be served by 
the Department's programs are adequately addressed in the assessment of 
need.
    Low-income advocates also stated that an indicator of need which 
should be included is analysis of the public housing and Section 8 
waiting lists. We are including this suggestion in the implementing 
Guidelines.
    Several public interest groups and local government commenters 
questioned the requirement to collect data on ``extremely low-income'' 
families, indicating that this information was not statutorily 
required, not required by the four grant programs included in the 
proposed rule for targeting program assistance, and not required in the 
past. As described above in the discussion of definitions, the term 
``extremely low-income'' has been preserved in the final rule.
b. Disproportionate Need
    Two local governments disagreed with the methodology on 
disproportionate need, indicating that it should be weighted for 
population size. Several low-income advocacy commenters thought the 
approach was excellent. The Department is preserving the language on 
calculation of disproportionate need from the proposed rule.
c. Lead-Based Paint Hazards
    Several local government commenters requested that they not be 
required to provide data on lead-based paint hazards, since it was not 
easily available. One local government commenter suggested a rough 
analysis between Census data on pre-1970 housing and low-income 
occupancy data as a way to yield a pool of units likely to have some of 
lead-based paint.
    The requirement to provide this information is statutory. The 
commenter's suggestion for a method to estimate the scope of hazard is 
not unreasonable. However, the consultation section (Sec. 91.100) does 
require consultation with local health and child welfare agencies and 
examination of health department data on this subject in the 
preparation of the consolidated plan.
d. Homeless
    Several low-income advocates and disability community advocates 
complained about the deletion of the CHAS rule's more detailed homeless 
needs assessment. Commenters indicated that the rule should spell out 
in detail the data required to be submitted. The proposed rule requires 
that a homeless needs table be included in the plan that is prescribed 
by HUD. This follows the statutory language. The final rule preserves 
this provision intact.
e. Racial Impact
    A number of low-income advocates stated that racial impact should 
be addressed in the needs assessment. In fact, several groups advocated 
that if this rule were implemented without the anticipated Fair Housing 
Plan rule it should contain consideration of racial impact in every 
element of the consolidated plan.
    The Department has decided to deal with the more comprehensive 
issue of a Fair Housing Plan in a separate proposed rule, which is 
expected to be published shortly. To assure that some minimal 
requirements for compliance with the statutorily required certification 
that a jurisdiction is affirmatively furthering fair housing, this rule 
includes, in the certification section, the requirement that an 
analysis of impediments be done and that the steps to address the 
impediments be described, mirroring the language added to the CDBG 
regulations on the same subject. In addition, the performance report 
now includes for all programs the element of data on race and ethnicity 
of beneficiaries. [[Page 1891]] 

Section 91.210  Housing Market Analysis

a. General Characteristics
    A few low-income advocates suggested that a description of housing 
stock be related to income, race and neighborhoods and ranked as 
housing needs are. The language of the rule does require the 
description to relate to income, race, and neighborhoods. Since this 
section does not deal with needs, but with the available stock, ranking 
would be inappropriate.
    There were several comments on redundancy between what must be 
reported in the market analysis section and what must be reported in 
the strategy, especially on coordination, institutional structure and 
barriers to affordable housing. The final rule has been revised by 
consolidating the provisions on coordination and institutional 
structure with the provisions on the same subject in the strategy 
section. However, the provision on barriers to affordable housing is 
seen as necessary to an analysis of the housing market and have been 
retained in this section.
    Two commenters suggested that a description of the housing market 
should include information on vacancy rates and the availability of 
credit. Such language is not being added to the rule, but it will be 
included in the implementing Guidelines.
    Local definitions of areas of low-income and minority 
concentrations may be inconsistent with the fair housing rule once it 
is published, local government commenters suggested. They requested the 
ability to choose either local or HUD's definitions. This rule will 
permit local definitions. However, when the Fair Housing Plan rule is 
published as a final rule, it will prescribe use of its definitions for 
this purpose.
    One low-income advocacy commenter suggested that a city should be 
required to assess whether it has sufficient sites to meet the low-
income housing needs in its community. The consolidated plan rule is 
not being expanded to require this assessment in this section. However, 
the Department does plan to address the question of site selection in a 
later proposed rule.
b. Public and Assisted Housing
    Eight disability community advocates indicated that jurisdictions 
must assess the loss of public housing units which will occur because 
of the implementation of Title VI of Housing and Community Development 
Act of 1992. They recommended that an analysis of these issues be 
required by reviewing the PHA's allocation plan and identifying the 
number of units lost to persons with disabilities. The provision to 
which the commenters refer is the provision that permits public housing 
and Section 8 housing projects to be designated for only elderly 
families, only disabled families, or for either. The Department is 
considering how to encourage balancing the resources available for 
these different groups. If special funding is announced to further this 
end, applicants will need to supply such information.
c. Barriers to Affordable Housing
    Several local government and government interest group commenters 
objected to the provision requiring cities to identify public policies 
that affect the cost or incentive to develop affordable housing. They 
should not be required to do a self-analysis but only relate criticisms 
they have received. Cities suggested that they be required to list 
Federal policies that create barriers.
    This element is statutorily required, so it has not been 
eliminated. The Department believes that listing of Federal policies in 
this part of the local plan is not appropriate. However, HUD will work 
with localities to assess the impact of HUD policies separately.

Section 91.215  Strategies, Priority Needs, and Objectives

a. General
    The majority of low-income and disability community advocates 
recommended inclusion of the link between needs and priorities, with 
the worst case needs being given the highest priority. Several 
commenters wanted to restore the comparative analysis required by the 
CHAS at 91.19(b)(1), matching housing inventory with severity of needs 
and types of housing problems of each priority category. Some 
recommended that the rule require that a jurisdiction commit to 
providing a ``fair share'' of its resources to meet the ``worst case'' 
needs.
    The Department agrees with the low-income and disability community 
advocates that the strategy must explain how the priorities have been 
established and how the strategic plan addresses the needs identified 
in the needs assessment. The rule has been strengthened to require a 
comparative analysis of the severity of housing problems and needs of 
extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income renters and 
owners. The rationale for establishing the priorities and determining 
the relative priorities should flow logically from this analysis. The 
title of the section has been revised to ``Strategic Plan'' to 
emphasize the cohesive nature of this section of the document.
    The Department declines, however, the suggestion to adopt a ``fair 
share'' approach. The Department's goal for this rule is to provide the 
framework for communities to have meaningful plans, serving low-income 
families. The Department does not want to substitute its judgment for 
locally developed plans and priorities framed through a strong citizen 
participation process.
    However, by establishing a stronger rationale for relating 
priorities to needs, the Department hopes to discourage such situations 
as the following: A major city identified a large need for housing by 
low-income groups and homeless persons and proposed actions to address 
these needs. Then the city council overturned these proposals and built 
a high profile ``trophy'' project which completely ignored those needs.
    Several commenters were critical about the level of detail which 
seems to be required about specific objectives at 91.215(a)(2). This 
section seems to require localities to quantify and geographically 
locate Federal grant budget resources for a 3 to 5 year period in the 
consolidated plan. They claimed this level of specificity is only 
practical for an annual plan. There was a fear that a listing of 
projects would preclude the funding of other worthwhile projects not on 
the list.
    The burden of the analysis has been decreased by focusing the 
discussion of the basis for assigning the relative priority given to 
priority needs by category of priority needs instead of by each 
priority need. In addition, the information is to be provided for a 
specific period of time, which is determined by the jurisdiction.
    Some low-income and disability advocacy groups have argued that 
priority needs of non-homeless persons with disabilities should be 
added. The Department agrees. A separate section on this group has been 
added.
b. Affordable Housing
    Several low-income advocacy commenters wanted the Department to 
require jurisdictions to address the proposed availability of 
affordable housing for each income group, especially extremely low-
income, very low-income and low-income (as these terms were used in the 
proposed rule), and to define affordable housing as housing for which a 
low-income family pays less than 30 percent of income. The Department 
agrees, and the rule has been revised accordingly to more closely 
approximate what was in the CHAS. It requires specific housing 
[[Page 1892]] objectives that identify the number of extremely low-, 
low-, and moderate-income families (using the revised terminology) to 
whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing.
c. Community Development
    Several low-income advocates recommended that needs of extremely 
low-, very low- and low-income people be expressly addressed in the CD 
plan. One commenter suggested that this discussion of needs belongs in 
Sec. 91.205 with the discussion of housing and homeless needs. Since 
there is a statutory requirement for a discussion of priority 
nonhousing community development needs, the Department is keeping the 
CD plan as a part of the strategy, and not part of the housing and 
homeless needs description. The Department agrees that the needs of 
these income groups need to be discussed in this plan, and language 
referring to the statutory goal of serving these income groups has been 
added to the paragraph on the CD plan.
    In addition, language has been added indicating that jurisdictions 
may elect to develop a neighborhood revitalization strategy that 
includes the economic empowerment of area residents. HUD is willing to 
provide greater flexibility in program rules governing the use of CDBG 
funds for jurisdictions that develop such a strategy, in accordance 
with rule changes being made in another pending rulemaking. Approval of 
the consolidated plan does not imply approval of a neighborhood 
revitalization strategy proposal. A jurisdiction's neighborhood 
revitalization strategy must provide that the area selected is 
primarily residential and contains a percentage of low-income and 
moderate-income residents that is no less than 51 percent. In addition, 
the jurisdiction should consider the following:
    (1) Developing the strategy in consultation with the area's 
stakeholders, including residents, owners/operators of businesses and 
financial institutions, non-profit organizations, and community groups 
that are in or serve the area(s);
    (2) Including an assessment of the economic situation in the area 
and examination of economic development improvement opportunities and 
problems;
    (3) Developing a realistic development strategy and implementation 
plan to promote the area's economic progress;
    (4) Focusing on activities to create meaningful jobs for the 
unemployed and low-income people in the area as well as activities to 
promote the substantial revitalization of the area(s); and
    (5) Identifying the results expected to be achieved, expressing 
them in terms that are readily measurable.
    With respect to the proposed rule, local governments commented that 
the information required in the table prescribed by HUD to describe the 
jurisdiction's priority nonhousing community development needs eligible 
for assistance in dollar amounts is not very useful, only raises 
expectations concerning infrastructure needs that cannot be met, and is 
very difficult to cost out. Low-income advocates commented that there 
is too little information in this section compared to the housing 
section.
    It is clear that Congress wanted data that could be aggregated 
nationally. The key to the table is ``priority needs'' and those 
covered in the table are to be those activities that are eligible for 
CDBG assistance. All needs do not have to be covered. Further, it is 
not difficult to estimate the dollar amounts when linear or square feet 
for facilities are known and the average cost per that unit of measure 
is known. The guidelines will be clarified on this point.
d. Barriers to Affordable Housing
    One commenter requested that the rule state that the plan cannot be 
rejected for the content of its regulatory barrier assessment. One 
commenter admonished HUD to put stronger teeth in the plan to make 
cities remove barriers. The CHAS statute does not permit HUD to reject 
a consolidated plan on the basis of the jurisdiction's inaction to 
remove identified barriers. The Department will comply with that 
requirement but sees no need to add a provision to the rule on the 
subject.
    Another public interest group wanted jurisdictions to explain the 
purpose of the policy perceived as a barrier and offer alternative 
options. The Department declines to make this a more burdensome 
requirement.
e. Anti-Poverty Strategy
    Several public interest group and city commenters were critical of 
this paragraph, indicating that it was difficult to measure how HUD 
programs directly reduced the number of families with incomes below the 
poverty line. Of primary concern was describing their actions in terms 
of ``factors over which the jurisdiction has control,'' language from 
the statute. They recommended that the requirement be restated for 
programs discussed in the housing component of the consolidated plan 
that the city directed to poverty families. The rule has been revised 
accordingly.

Section 91.220  Action Plan

a. Linkage
    The low-income and disability community advocates were critical of 
what they viewed as inadequate linkage in the action plan between the 
needs of the extremely low-income families and those in the worst 
housing conditions and the proposed activities to be undertaken by the 
jurisdiction under the draft language of this section.
    In response to these concerns, the rule has been revised to require 
a clearer statement of priority needs and local objectives covered in 
the strategic plan, including the number and type of families to be 
benefitted from the activities proposed for the year, with a required a 
target date for completion of each activity. We also have required 
information on location of projects, to allow citizens to determine the 
degree to which they are affected.
b. Resources
    With regard to describing resources, several commenters insisted 
that only those resources under the control of the jurisdiction should 
be listed. There was resistance to including private and nonfederal 
resources. The CHAS statute requires private and nonfederal resources 
that are reasonably expected to be available to be identified. The CHAS 
statute also requires the extent of leverage of Federal resources to be 
discussed. However, all discussion of resources has been moved from the 
strategic plan section of the rule to the action plan section, in 
response to commenters suggestions.
c. CDBG Float-Funded Activities
    The CDBG ``miscellaneous amendments'' rule included provisions 
governing float-funded activities that are perceived as providing some 
risk to the CDBG program. A ``float-funded activity'' is an activity 
that uses undisbursed funds in the line of credit or program account 
that have been previously budgeted in an action plan (formerly, the 
CDBG final statement) for one or more activities that do not need the 
funds immediately.
    Ten comments were received with respect to these requirements. 
Responses to these comments and the specific requirements for treatment 
of CDBG float-funded activities will be published in the final 
miscellaneous amendments rule. However, for purposes of this rule, the 
Department notes that there are two primary risks to the CDBG program 
inherent in the float funding process. First, the float-funded activity 
will not generate sufficient program income in a manner to allow 
[[Page 1893]] for timely undertaking of previously budgeted activities. 
Second, in undertaking a float-funded activity that exceeds a certain 
size or duration, grantees are apparently relying on additional CDBG 
funds being received in future years to enable them to continue funding 
previously budgeted activities until the float-funded activity 
generates program income.
    The paragraph of the action plan dealing with CDBG program-specific 
requirements now deals with float-funded activities, requiring a 
jurisdiction to show the stream of income from repayment of float-
funded activities. This provision is designed to address: (1) the 
problems identified by the Department's Inspector General in managing 
such activities and (2) the need for citizens to have sufficient 
information for them to know the extent to which they are likely to be 
affected by these activities, particularly the consequences of their 
default, so that they may have an opportunity to object to such a use 
of the funds.
    The action plan section also requires that jurisdictions receiving 
CDBG entitlement funds may generally budget no more than 10 percent of 
the total available CDBG funds described for the contingency of cost 
overruns. The Department has had a longstanding requirement that the 
amount so budgeted must be reasonable in relation to the grant. This is 
based largely on the statutory requirement under section 104(a) of the 
HCD Act that, as a prerequisite to receive its annual grant, a 
community must submit a statement describing how it intends to use the 
funds. When the grantee's statement contains a set-aside of funds for 
contingencies in an amount that goes beyond the amount that reasonably 
may be expected to be needed for cost overruns of activities 
specifically identified in the statement, the net effect is that the 
grantee is simply deferring making a decision as to the use of the 
funds. The Department believes that this is not allowable under the 
statute. The Department provided guidance in the form of a notice 
(dated September 18, 1992) that it would not question the 
``reasonableness'' of a set-aside of up to 10 percent of the amount of 
CDBG funds described in the final statement (now part of the action 
plan) for cost overruns. The regulatory language contained in this rule 
now reflects this threshold. This would not, however, prohibit a 
jurisdiction from setting an amount higher than 10 percent if the 
jurisdiction has data available, drawing on its prior experience, to 
show that actual cost overruns are likely to require a higher 
contingency amount.
d. Public Housing
    A provision has been added to the housing market analysis section, 
to the institutional structure paragraph of the strategic plan section, 
and, most importantly, to the ``other actions'' paragraph of the action 
plan section, to require a jurisdiction to state any actions it is 
taking to assist a public housing agency that has been designated as 
``troubled'' by HUD to overcome its problems.

Section 91.225  Certifications

    One commenter pointed out that the paragraph on consultation ``by 
States'' is inapplicable to local governments, who are covered by this 
provision. Another commenter recommended that the certification 
currently found in the CDBG program that a jurisdiction's notification, 
inspection, testing and abatement procedures concerning lead-based 
paint will comply with the provisions of Sec. 570.608 should be 
included here. We agree with both of these comments, and the rule has 
been revised accordingly.
    One low-income advocate suggested that jurisdictions should be 
required to certify, in connection with the CDBG program, that they 
have satisfied their obligations under the regulation interpreting 
section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 
U.S.C. 5309), which is found at 24 CFR 570.602. It requires a 
jurisdiction that has discriminated in the administration of the CDBG 
program or activity, or where there is sufficient evidence to conclude 
that there was discrimination, on the basis of race, color, national 
origin, or sex, to take remedial affirmative action to overcome the 
effects of the discrimination.
    There are two provisions of the certifications section that have a 
bearing on anti-discrimination laws. The first mirrors the current 
requirements for the CDBG program to require specific certification of 
compliance with two civil rights laws: Title VI of the 1964 Act and the 
Fair Housing Act. Although the Department agrees that section 109 is 
applicable to the CDBG program, it is encompassed within the second 
certification, which requires certification that the jurisdiction/State 
will comply with all applicable laws. We note that the underlying CDBG 
regulation requiring compliance with section 109 remains in effect.

Section 91.235  Abbreviated Plan

    One State pointed out that paragraph (a) appears to make use of the 
abbreviated plan permissive, but paragraph (b)(1) appears to make it 
required--if a jurisdiction is permitted to use it. The commenter also 
complained about the lack of any requirement for the jurisdiction to 
consult with the State.
    The Department agrees that the provision needs clarification, so it 
is now clear that a jurisdiction eligible to submit an abbreviated plan 
instead of a full consolidated plan may do so, but is not required to 
do so. Consultation with the State has been added.

Section 91.305  Housing and Homeless Needs Analysis

    Two States complained that the requirement for a State seeking 
HOPWA funding to collect data about the size and characteristics of the 
population with HIV/AIDS and their families was too burdensome and 
costly for States. The language for this provision and its local 
government counterpart have been revised to require estimation, ``to 
the extent practicable,'' of the number of persons in various 
categories of special need, including persons with HIV/AIDS and their 
families.

Section 91.310  Housing Market Analysis

    A few low-income advocates recommended requiring States to describe 
substate markets, including those that have higher poverty areas. The 
rule requires analysis of the State's ``housing markets.'' This implies 
that there is more than one housing market within the State.
    One State commented that paragraphs (b) (Low income tax credit 
use), (e) (Institutional structure), and (f) (Governmental 
coordination) relate not to market analysis but to strategy. It 
recommended moving them to Sec. 91.315. The Department agrees and has 
revised the rule accordingly.
    Several low-income advocates recommended that the paragraph on 
barriers to affordable housing should require that all jurisdictions do 
their ``fair share'' to provide housing opportunities to low-income 
persons. They also stated that States should look at cross-
jurisdictional barriers. The Department is constrained by the statutory 
limit that prevents disapproval of a plan that does not provide for 
removal of barriers to affordable housing. Therefore, it cannot require 
such a ``fair share'' proposal. Analysis of cross-jurisdictional 
barriers would be beneficial, but the Department does not want to add 
to the burden of requirements imposed by this rule. [[Page 1894]] 

Section 91.315  Strategy, Priority Needs, and Objectives

    Two States stated that the requirement for a statement of the 
reasons for the State's choice of priority needs is too detailed a 
requirement for States, since they respond to priorities established by 
localities and to their requests for funding. Low-income advocates, on 
the other hand, argued that States should be required to describe the 
basis for assigning the relative priority to a category of needs since 
the CHAS statute requires it. The language of this provision has been 
revised to refer to each category of priority needs since that is the 
most flexibility the Department can give to States under the statute.
    The priority needs table that the rule requires States to complete 
was criticized as being too detailed. The table is less detailed than 
the table that was required for the State CHAS. However, HUD recognizes 
that the States have less control over fulfillment of this section than 
do local jurisdictions.
    Several States objected to the requirement that the States include 
a target date for completion of specific objectives. The final rule 
indicates that the State must identify the proposed accomplishments 
that the State hopes to achieve in quantitative terms, or in other 
measurable terms as identified and defined by the State.
    A number of States objected to the requirement that the State 
furnish a projection of its resource allocation geographically within 
the State, since often the funds are awarded on the basis of 
competitive selection rather than on some geographic distribution plan. 
The rule has been revised to reflect that a State must describe how the 
State's method of distribution contributes to its general priorities 
for allocating investment geographically within the State.
    Three commenters recommended that the only non-Federal funds that 
be included in the resource description be those that are ``available 
for use in conjunction with Federal funds to address needs 
identified.'' We decline to make this change, since the CHAS statute 
does not so limit the language.

Section 91.325  Certifications

    One commenter pointed out that the certification concerning 
excessive force was not applicable to States. That provision has been 
modified to clarify that the States must require the localities to make 
this certification.

Sections 91.400-91.435  Consortia

    Several local governments complained that the proposed rule was 
confusing about which units of general local government are directed to 
participate in the development of a consolidated plan of the consortium 
as well as submit their own consolidated plan to cover all programs 
other than HOME. They suggested that Sec. 91.400 should be revised to 
clarify that units of local government that participate in a consortium 
must participate in submission of a consolidated plan for the 
consortium, prepared in accordance with subpart E, as well as 
submitting for their own jurisdiction the following components of 
subpart C: Sec. 91.215(e) (CD plan), Sec. 91.220 (Action Plan) and 
Sec. 91.225 (Certifications). The preparation and submission of a 
separate housing and homeless needs assessment (Sec. 91.205), housing 
market analysis (Sec. 91.210) and strategies, priority needs and 
objectives (Sec. 91.215) for the entitlement jurisdictions should be 
optional not a requirement. We agree, and the rule has been modified 
accordingly.
    The majority of the commenters on this issue raised the problems 
presented by the same program year for all consortium members; 
suggesting this will cause consortia to break up. One suggested 
solution was to eliminate the requirement. Instead the consortium would 
develop its housing and homeless needs, housing market analysis and 
strategy on a planning year that coincides with the program year of the 
earliest entitlement jurisdiction in the consortium. Individual action 
plans would be submitted on individual entitlement members' program 
year cycle. Individual CD plans would be submitted at the same time as 
the strategic plan or with the individual entitlement submissions. The 
lead agency's action plan and program year would control the timing of 
the HOME program year. The rule has not been changed; however, we will 
develop waiver policies to handle this issue with consortia.
    Local governments urged that Secs. 91.105 and 91.430 be clarified 
to explain what citizen participation requirements apply to entitlement 
jurisdictions that are part of a consortium. Such clarification is now 
provided in Sec. 91.401.

Section 91.500  HUD Approval Action

    Low-income advocacy groups argued that the standards for review of 
the consolidated plan do not provide adequate guidance to participating 
jurisdictions, citizens, and HUD field offices about what would 
constitute an acceptable plan. They suggest that a consolidated plan 
should be approved by HUD only if it ``demonstrates integrity when read 
as a whole.'' They suggest that the needs assessment, priority 
assignments, and action plan must be sound and consistent with each 
other and with the purposes of the statute. For example, they state 
that a housing strategy that failed to seriously address ``worst case'' 
needs would lack the logical link between needs and action required by 
section 105(b)(8) of the CHAS statute.
    We agree that the current regulations provide few guidelines on the 
standards for approval. We have modified the proposed regulations to 
make them more similar to the existing CHAS rule. While we agree with 
the desirability of internal consistency and require a certification 
that housing activities undertaken under CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA 
funds are consistent with the strategic plan, we feel that the 
provision recommended by the advocacy groups is needlessly directive.

Section 91.505  Amendments to Consolidated Plan

    Several government interest groups, citing HUD's proposed CDBG rule 
published on August 10, 1994, suggest that jurisdiction be allowed to 
notify HUD after adoption of amendments to the consolidated plan. The 
majority of the commenters were concerned that the specificity of the 
action plan will trigger a number of amendments that will need to 
undergo citizen participation and submission to the Department. The 
preference was to list major activities under which projects could fall 
without creating the need for amendments. One community suggested if 
the jurisdiction deemed a change consistent with its need section it 
could be done without citizen participation or HUD review. An alternate 
suggestion was to consider an increase or decrease in the original 
allocation mix over 35 percent as a substantial change.
    Jurisdictions are free to determine and describe in the citizen 
participation plan what constitutes a ``substantial amendment,'' upon 
which public comment is required. The suggestions offered by these 
commenters may be good options for defining when a change requires a 
``substantial amendment.''

Section 91.510  Consistency Determinations

    One commenter suggested that HUD clarify the meaning of this 
section by stating that it only applies to sources of funds that are 
not applied for through [[Page 1895]] the consolidated plan; for 
example, the HOPE Program and Section 811. This section has been 
revised to cover competitive programs only. In addition, because the 
CHAS statute requires this statement of consistency for the formula 
grant programs as well, the certifications have been changed to require 
consistency with the strategic plan.

Section 91.520  Performance Reports

    One commenter objected to reporting on the results of on-site 
inspections of affordable rental housing assisted with HOME funds, 
citing it as a new requirement. This is a statutory requirement at 
section 226(b) of the NAHA (42 U.S.C. 12756) and is contained at 
Sec. 92.504(e)(1) of the HOME regulation. That rule requires annual on-
site inspections of projects of 25 units or more, requiring every other 
year inspections of projects of fewer than 25 units.
    Two commenters stated that the 90-day period provided after the 
program year for submission of the performance report is inadequate 
time, especially for large cities, given the lack of information about 
the format of the report and the computer software that HUD says it 
will make available for this purpose. The 30-day comment period on the 
performance report increases the difficulty of making the 90-day 
deadline.
    As discussed above in the citizen participation section, the 
comment period on reports has been shortened to 15 days. Therefore, the 
final rule retains the 90 day deadline for performance reports. HUD 
will facilitate the provision of information needed by the 
jurisdictions to submit the reports.
    Several local governments complained about the requirement to 
report on the degree to which the CDBG program was used to benefit 
extremely low-income persons. The reasons stated for eliminating the 
requirement are that it is not required by statute, the program is not 
targeted to that specific group, and it is burdensome. A low-income 
community advocate found the language of the provision inadequate in 
that it was not strong enough in emphasizing the requirement of the 
CDBG statute that the program benefit low-income and moderate-income 
persons.
    In fact, both the CDBG and HOME programs have specific requirements 
with regard to income targeting. Previous reporting instructions (if 
not regulations) have required information about benefits to extremely 
low-income persons for activities where income information and family 
data are required to justify the activity. In these cases, the 
information is readily available, and therefore this reporting is not 
considered to be a burdensome requirement.

Sections 570.487, 570.601 and 570.904  Fair Housing Certifications

    One commenter stated that there was no justification for imposing 
new CDBG fair housing requirements. The commenter argued that the 
changes to these sections provide minimal requirements for compliance 
with the certification that a jurisdiction will affirmatively further 
fair housing. The rule now states requirements rather than performance 
standards for affirmatively furthering fair housing. The requirements 
include conducting an analysis of impediments, taking actions to 
address the impediments, and maintaining records reflecting both. A 
jurisdiction need not do an analysis of impediments every year, but is 
expected to have conducted its first analysis of impediments no later 
than 12 months following February 6, 1995.

Subpart G  Insular Areas

    In the proposed rule, there was a heading reserved for a separate 
subpart to specify the consolidated plan requirements for insular 
areas. There were no public comments received on this topic. The 
Department has decided to handle the few jurisdictions that are insular 
areas individually, through administrative guidance. Therefore, this 
rule contains no subpart G.

Findings and Certifications

Regulatory Review

    This rule was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under 
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. Any changes made 
to the rule as a result of that review are clearly identified in the 
docket file, which is available for public inspection in the office of 
the Department's Rules Docket Clerk, room 10276, 451 Seventh St., SW., 
Washington, DC.

Impact on the Environment

    A Finding of No Significant Impact with respect to the environment 
has been made in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 50 that 
implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332. The Finding of No Significant Impact is available 
for public inspection and copying during regular business hours (7:30 
a.m. to 5:30 p.m.) in the Office of the Rules Docket Clerk, room 10276, 
451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410-0500.

Federalism Impact

    The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under section 6(a) 
of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that the policies 
contained in this rule do not have significant impact on States or 
their political subdivisions since the requirements of the rule are 
limited to requirements imposed by the statutes being implemented. The 
final rule reflects revisions to decrease the impact on States, in 
particular. Duplication of effort by State and local governments is 
being avoided by focusing the efforts of the States on the CDBG 
nonentitlement areas within their borders.

Impact on the Family

    The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under Executive 
Order 12606, The Family, has determined that this rule does not have 
potential for significant impact on family formation, maintenance, and 
general well-being, and, thus is not subject to review under the Order. 
The rule merely carries out the mandate of federal statutes with 
respect to planning documents for housing and community development 
programs.

Impact on Small Entities

    The Secretary, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 
U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this rule before publication and by 
approving it certifies that this rule will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, because it does not 
place major burdens on jurisdictions.

Regulatory Agenda

    This rule was listed as sequence number 1723 under the Office of 
the Secretary in the Department's Semiannual Regulatory Agenda 
published on November 14, 1994 (59 FR 57632, 57641), under Executive 
Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Catalog

    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers for the programs 
affected by this rule are 14.218, 14.231. 14.239, and 14.241.

List of Subjects

24 CFR Part 91

    Grant programs--Indians, Homeownership, Low and moderate income 
housing, Public housing.

24 CFR Part 92

    Grant programs--housing and community development, Manufactured 
homes, Rent subsidies, Reporting and record keeping requirements. 
[[Page 1896]] 

24 CFR Part 570

    Administrative practice and procedure, Grant programs--housing and 
community development, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, 
Pacific Islands Trust Territory, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands.

24 CFR Part 574

    Community facilities, Disabled, Emergency shelter, Grant programs--
health programs, Grant programs--housing and community development, 
Grant programs--social programs, HIV/AIDS, Homeless, Housing, Low and 
moderate income housing, Nonprofit organizations, Rent subsidies, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Technical assistance.

24 CFR Part 576

    Community facilities, Emergency shelter grants, Grant programs--
housing and community development, Grant programs--social programs, 
Homeless, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

24 CFR Part 968

    Grant programs--housing and community development, Loan programs--
housing and community development, Public housing, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, parts 91, 92, 570, 574, 576, and 968 of title 24 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows:
    1. Part 91 is revised to read as follows:

PART 91--CONSOLIDATED SUBMISSIONS FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

Subpart A--General

Sec.

91.1  Purpose.
91.2  Applicability.
91.5  Definitions.
91.10  Consolidated program year.
91.15  Submission date.
91.20  Exceptions.

Subpart B--Citizen Participation and Consultation

91.100  Consultation; local governments.
91.105  Citizen participation plan; local governments.
91.110  Consultation; States.
91.115  Citizen participation plan; States.

Subpart C--Local Governments; Contents of Consolidated Plan

91.200  General.
91.205  Housing and homeless needs assessment.
91.210  Housing market analysis.
91.215  Strategic plan.
91.220  Action plan.
91.225  Certifications.
91.230  Monitoring.
91.235  Special case; abbreviated consolidated plan.
91.236  Special case; District of Columbia.

Subpart D--State Governments; Contents of Consolidated Plan

91.300  General.
91.305  Housing and homeless needs assessment.
91.310  Housing market analysis.
91.315  Strategic plan.
91.320  Action plan.
91.325  Certifications.
91.330  Monitoring.

Subpart E--Consortia; Contents of Consolidated Plan

91.400  Applicability.
91.401  Citizen participation plan.
91.402  Consolidated program year.
91.405  Housing and homeless needs assessment.
91.410  Housing market analysis.
91.415  Strategic plan.
91.420  Action plan.
91.425  Certifications.
91.430  Monitoring.

Subpart F--Other General Requirements

91.500  HUD approval action.
91.505  Amendments to the consolidated plan.
91.510  Consistency determinations.
91.515  Funding determinations by HUD.
91.520  Performance reports.
91.525  Performance review by HUD.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 3601-3619, 5301-5315, 11331-11388, 
12701-12711, 12741-12756, and 12901-12912.

Subpart A--General


Sec. 91.1  Purpose.

    (a) Overall goals. (1) The overall goal of the community planning 
and development programs covered by this part is to develop viable 
urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living 
environment and expanding economic opportunities principally for low- 
and moderate-income persons. The primary means towards this end is to 
extend and strengthen partnerships among all levels of government and 
the private sector, including for-profit and non-profit organizations, 
in the production and operation of affordable housing.
    (i) Decent housing includes assisting homeless persons to obtain 
appropriate housing and assisting persons at risk of becoming homeless; 
retention of the affordable housing stock; and increasing the 
availability of permanent housing in standard condition and affordable 
cost to low-income and moderate-income families, particularly to 
members of disadvantaged minorities, without discrimination on the 
basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, 
or disability. Decent housing also includes increasing the supply of 
supportive housing, which combines structural features and services 
needed to enable persons with special needs, including persons with 
HIV/AIDS and their families, to live with dignity and independence; and 
providing housing affordable to low-income persons accessible to job 
opportunities.
    (ii) A suitable living environment includes improving the safety 
and livability of neighborhoods; increasing access to quality public 
and private facilities and services; reducing the isolation of income 
groups within a community or geographical area through the spatial 
deconcentration of housing opportunities for persons of lower income 
and the revitalization of deteriorating or deteriorated neighborhoods; 
restoring and preserving properties of special historic, architectural, 
or aesthetic value; and conservation of energy resources.
    (iii) Expanded economic opportunities includes job creation and 
retention; establishment, stabilization and expansion of small 
businesses (including microbusinesses); the provision of public 
services concerned with employment; the provision of jobs involved in 
carrying out activities under programs covered by this plan to low-
income persons living in areas affected by those programs and 
activities; availability of mortgage financing for low-income persons 
at reasonable rates using nondiscriminatory lending practices; access 
to capital and credit for development activities that promote the long-
term economic and social viability of the community; and empowerment 
and self-sufficiency opportunities for low-income persons to reduce 
generational poverty in federally assisted and public housing.
    (2) The consolidated submission described in this part 91 requires 
the jurisdiction to state in one document its plan to pursue these 
goals for all the community planning and development programs, as well 
as for housing programs. It is these goals against which the plan and 
the jurisdiction's performance under the plan will be evaluated by HUD.
    (b) Functions of plan. The consolidated plan serves the following 
functions:
    (1) A planning document for the jurisdiction, which builds on a 
participatory process at the lowest levels;
    (2) An application for federal funds under HUD's formula grant 
programs;
    (3) A strategy to be followed in carrying out HUD programs; and
    (4) An action plan that provides a basis for assessing performance. 
[[Page 1897]] 


Sec. 91.2  Applicability.

    (a) The following formula grant programs are covered by the 
consolidated plan:
    (1) The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs (see 24 
CFR part 570, subparts D and I);
    (2) The Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG) program (see 24 CFR part 
576);
    (3) The HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) program (see 24 CFR 
part 92); and
    (4) The Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) program 
(see 24 CFR part 574).
    (b) The following programs require either that the jurisdiction 
receiving funds directly from HUD have a consolidated plan that is 
approved by HUD or that the application for HUD funds contain a 
certification that the application is consistent with a HUD-approved 
consolidated plan:
    (1) The HOPE I Public Housing Homeownership (HOPE I) program (see 
24 CFR Subtitle A, Appendix A);
    (2) The HOPE II Homeownership of Multifamily Units (HOPE II) 
program (see 24 CFR Subtitle A, Appendix B);
    (3) The HOPE III Homeownership of Single Family Homes (HOPE III) 
program (see 24 CFR part 572);
    (4) The Low-Income Housing Preservation (prepayment avoidance 
incentives) program, when administered by a State agency (see 24 CFR 
248.177);
    (5) The Supportive Housing for the Elderly (Section 202) program 
(see 24 CFR part 889);
    (6) The Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program 
(see 24 CFR part 890);
    (7) The Supportive Housing program (see 24 CFR part 583);
    (8) The Single Room Occupancy Housing (SRO) program (see 24 CFR 
part 882, subpart H);
    (9) The Shelter Plus Care program (see 24 CFR part 582);
    (10) The Community Development Block Grant program--Small Cities 
(see 24 CFR part 570, subpart E);
    (11) HOME program reallocations;
    (12) Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing (section 
24 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.));
    (13) Hope for Youth: Youthbuild (see 24 CFR part 585);
    (14) The John Heinz Neighborhood Development program (see 24 CFR 
part 594);
    (15) The Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction program (see 24 CFR part 
35);
    (16) Grants for Regulatory Barrier Removal Strategies and 
Implementation (section 1204, Housing and Community Development Act of 
1992 (42 U.S.C. 12705c)); and
    (17) Competitive grants under the Housing Opportunities for Persons 
With AIDS (HOPWA) program (see 24 CFR part 574).
    (c) Other programs do not require consistency with an approved 
consolidated plan. However, HUD funding allocations for the Section 8 
Certificate and Voucher Programs are to be made in a way that enables 
participating jurisdictions to carry out their consolidated plans.


Sec. 91.5  Definitions.

    Certification. A written assertion, based on supporting evidence, 
that must be kept available for inspection by HUD, by the Inspector 
General of HUD, and by the public. The assertion shall be deemed to be 
accurate unless HUD determines otherwise, after inspecting the evidence 
and providing due notice and opportunity for comment.
    Consolidated plan (or ``the plan''). The document that is submitted 
to HUD that serves as the planning document (comprehensive housing 
affordability strategy and community development plan) of the 
jurisdiction and an application for funding under any of the Community 
Planning and Development formula grant programs (CDBG, ESG, HOME, or 
HOPWA), which is prepared in accordance with the process prescribed in 
this part.
    Consortium. An organization of geographically contiguous units of 
general local government that are acting as a single unit of general 
local government for purposes of the HOME program (see 24 CFR part 92).
    Cost burden. The extent to which gross housing costs, including 
utility costs, exceed 30 percent of gross income, based on data 
available from the U.S. Census Bureau.
    Elderly person. A person who is at least 62 years of age.
    Emergency shelter. Any facility with overnight sleeping 
accommodations, the primary purpose of which is to provide temporary 
shelter for the homeless in general or for specific populations of the 
homeless.
    Extremely low-income family. Family whose income is between 0 and 
30 percent of the median income for the area, as determined by HUD with 
adjustments for smaller and larger families, except that HUD may 
establish income ceilings higher or lower than 30 percent of the median 
for the area on the basis of HUD's findings that such variations are 
necessary because of prevailing levels of construction costs or fair 
market rents, or unusually high or low family incomes.
    Homeless family with children. A family composed of the following 
types of homeless persons: at least one parent or guardian and one 
child under the age of 18; a pregnant woman; or a person in the process 
of securing legal custody of a person under the age of 18.
    Homeless person. A youth (17 years or younger) not accompanied by 
an adult (18 years or older) or an adult without children, who is 
homeless (not imprisoned or otherwise detained pursuant to an Act of 
Congress or a State law), including the following:
    (1) An individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate 
nighttime residence; and
    (2) An individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is:
    (i) A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to 
provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, 
congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill);
    (ii) An institution that provides a temporary residence for 
individuals intended to be institutionalized; or
    (iii) A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily 
used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.
    Homeless subpopulations. Include but are not limited to the 
following categories of homeless persons: severely mentally ill only, 
alcohol/drug addicted only, severely mentally ill and alcohol/drug 
addicted, fleeing domestic violence, youth, and persons with HIV/AIDS.
    HUD. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
    Jurisdiction. A State or unit of general local government.
    Large family. Family of five or more persons.
    Lead-based paint hazards. Any condition that causes exposure to 
lead from lead-contaminated dust, lead-contaminated soil, lead-
contaminated paint that is deteriorated or present in accessible 
surfaces, friction surfaces, or impact surfaces that would result in 
adverse human health effects as established by the appropriate Federal 
agency.
    Low-income families. Low-income families whose incomes do not 
exceed 50 percent of the median family income for the area, as 
determined by HUD with adjustments for smaller and larger families, 
except that HUD may establish income ceilings higher or lower than 50 
percent of the median for the area on the basis of HUD's findings that 
such variations are necessary because of prevailing levels of 
construction costs or fair market rents, or unusually high or low 
family incomes.
    Middle-income family. Family whose income is between 80 percent and 
95 [[Page 1898]] percent of the median income for the area, as 
determined by HUD, with adjustments for smaller and larger families, 
except that HUD may establish income ceilings higher or lower than 95 
percent of the median for the area on the basis of HUD's findings that 
such variations are necessary because of prevailing levels of 
construction costs or fair market rents, or unusually high or low 
family incomes. (This corresponds to the term ``moderate income 
family'' under the CHAS statute, 42 U.S.C. 12705.)
    Moderate-income family. Family whose income does not exceed 80 
percent of the median income for the area, as determined by HUD with 
adjustments for smaller and larger families, except that HUD may 
establish income ceilings higher or lower than 80 percent of the median 
for the area on the basis of HUD's findings that such variations are 
necessary because of prevailing levels of construction costs or fair 
market rents, or unusually high or low family incomes.
    Overcrowding. A housing unit containing more than one person per 
room.
    Person with a disability. A person who is determined to:
    (1) Have a physical, mental or emotional impairment that:
    (i) Is expected to be of long-continued and indefinite duration;
    (ii) Substantially impedes his or her ability to live 
independently; and
    (iii) Is of such a nature that the ability could be improved by 
more suitable housing conditions; or
    (2) Have a developmental disability, as defined in section 102(7) 
of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (42 
U.S.C. 6001-6007); or
    (3) be the surviving member or members of any family that had been 
living in an assisted unit with the deceased member of the family who 
had a disability at the time of his or her death.
    Poverty level family. Family with an income below the poverty line, 
as defined by the Office of Management and Budget and revised annually.
    Severe cost burden. The extent to which gross housing costs, 
including utility costs, exceed 50 percent of gross income, based on 
data available from the U.S. Census Bureau.
    State. Any State of the United States and the Commonwealth of 
Puerto Rico.
    Transitional housing. A project that is designed to provide housing 
and appropriate supportive services to homeless persons to facilitate 
movement to independent living within 24 months, or a longer period 
approved by HUD. For purposes of the HOME program, there is no HUD-
approved time period for moving to independent living.
    Unit of general local government. A city, town, township, county, 
parish, village, or other general purpose political subdivision of a 
State; an urban county; and a consortium of such political subdivisions 
recognized by HUD in accordance with the HOME program (24 CFR part 92) 
or the CDBG program (24 CFR part 570).
    Urban county. See definition in 24 CFR 570.3.


Sec. 91.10  Consolidated program year.

    (a) Each of the following programs shall be administered by a 
jurisdiction on a single consolidated program year, established by the 
jurisdiction: CDBG, ESG, HOME, and HOPWA. Except as provided in 
paragraph (b) of this section, the program year shall run for a twelve 
month period and begin on the first calendar day of a month.
    (b) Once a program year is established, the jurisdiction may either 
shorten or lengthen its program year to change the beginning date of 
the following program year, provided that it notifies HUD in writing at 
least two months before the date the program year would have ended if 
it had not been lengthened or at least two months before the end of a 
proposed shortened program year.
    (c) See subpart E of this part for requirements concerning program 
year for units of general local government that are part of a 
consortium.


Sec. 91.15  Submission date.

    (a) General. (1) In order to facilitate continuity in its program 
and to provide accountability to citizens, each jurisdiction should 
submit its consolidated plan to HUD at least 45 days before the start 
of its program year. (But see Sec. 92.52(b) of this subtitle with 
respect to newly eligible jurisdictions under the HOME program.) With 
the exception of the August 16 date noted in paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section, HUD may grant a jurisdiction an extension of the submission 
deadline for good cause.
    (2) In no event will HUD accept a submission earlier than November 
15 or later than August 16 of the Federal fiscal year for which the 
grant funds are appropriated. (Failure to submit the plan by August 16 
will automatically result in a loss of the CDBG funds to which the 
jurisdiction would otherwise be entitled.)
    (3) A jurisdiction may have a program year that coincides with the 
Federal fiscal year (e.g., October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1996 
for Federal fiscal year 1996 funds. However, the consolidated plan may 
not be submitted earlier than November 15 of the Federal fiscal year 
and HUD has the period specified in Sec. 91.500 to review the 
consolidated plan.
    (4) See Sec. 91.20 for HUD field office authorization to grant 
exceptions to these provisions.
    (b) Frequency of submission. (1) The action plan and the 
certifications must be submitted on an annual basis.
    (2) The complete submission must be submitted less frequently, in 
accordance with a period to be specified by the jurisdiction; however, 
in no event shall the complete submission be submitted less frequently 
that every five years.


Sec. 91.20  Exceptions.

    The HUD field office may grant a jurisdiction an exception from 
submitting all or part of the consolidated plan in FY 1995, from the 
submission deadline, or from a requirement in the implementation 
guidelines for good cause, as determined by the field office, and 
reported in writing to HUD Headquarters--to the extent the requirement 
is not required by statute or regulation.

Subpart B--Citizen Participation and Consultation


Sec. 91.100  Consultation; local governments.

    (a) General. (1) When preparing the consolidated plan, the 
jurisdiction shall consult with other public and private agencies that 
provide assisted housing, health services, and social services 
(including those focusing on services to children, elderly persons, 
persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, 
homeless persons) during preparation of the consolidated plan.
    (2) When preparing the portion of its consolidated plan concerning 
lead-based paint hazards, the jurisdiction shall consult with State or 
local health and child welfare agencies and examine existing data 
related to lead-based paint hazards and poisonings, including health 
department data on the addresses of housing units in which children 
have been identified as lead poisoned.
    (3) When preparing the description of priority nonhousing community 
development needs, a unit of general local government must notify 
adjacent units of general local government, to the extent practicable. 
The nonhousing community development plan must be submitted to the 
state, and, if the jurisdiction is a CDBG entitlement grantee other 
than an urban county, to the county.
    (4) The jurisdiction also should consult with adjacent units of 
general [[Page 1899]] local government, including local government 
agencies with metropolitan-wide planning responsibilities where they 
exist, particularly for problems and solutions that go beyond a single 
jurisdiction.
    (b) HOPWA. The largest city in each eligible metropolitan 
statistical area (EMSA) that is eligible to receive a HOPWA formula 
allocation must consult broadly to develop a metropolitan-wide strategy 
for addressing the needs of persons with HIV/AIDS and their families 
living throughout the EMSA. All jurisdictions within the EMSA must 
assist the jurisdiction that is applying for a HOPWA allocation in the 
preparation of the HOPWA submission.
    (c) Public housing. The jurisdiction shall consult with the local 
public housing agency participating in an approved Comprehensive Grant 
program concerning consideration of public housing needs and planned 
Comprehensive Grant program activities. This consultation will help 
provide a better basis for the certification by the local Chief 
Executive Officer that the Comprehensive Grant Plan/annual statement is 
consistent with the local government's assessment of low-income housing 
needs (as evidenced in the consolidated plan) and that the local 
government will cooperate in providing resident programs and services 
(as required by Sec. 968.320(d) of this title for the Comprehensive 
Grant program). It will also help ensure that activities with regard to 
local drug elimination, neighborhood improvement programs, and resident 
programs and services, funded under the public housing program and 
those funded under a program covered by the consolidated plan are fully 
coordinated to achieve comprehensive community development goals.


Sec. 91.105  Citizen participation plan; local governments.

    (a) Applicability and adoption of the citizen participation plan. 
(1) The jurisdiction is required to adopt a citizen participation plan 
that sets forth the jurisdiction's policies and procedures for citizen 
participation. (Where a jurisdiction, before March 6, 1995, adopted a 
citizen participation plan that complies with section 104(a)(3) of the 
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5304(A)(3)) 
but will need to amend the citizen participation plan to comply with 
provisions of this section, the citizen participation plan shall be 
amended by the first day of the jurisdiction's program year that begins 
on or after 180 days following March 6, 1995.)
    (2) Encouragement of citizen participation. (i) The citizen 
participation plan must provide for and encourage citizens to 
participate in the development of the consolidated plan, any 
substantial amendments to the consolidated plan, and the performance 
report.
    (ii) These requirements are designed especially to encourage 
participation by low- and moderate-income persons, particularly those 
living in slum and blighted areas and in areas where CDBG funds are 
proposed to be used, and by residents of predominantly low- and 
moderate-income neighborhoods, as defined by the jurisdiction. A 
jurisdiction also is expected to take whatever actions are appropriate 
to encourage the participation of all its citizens, including 
minorities and non-English speaking persons, as well as persons with 
disabilities.
    (iii) The jurisdiction shall encourage, in conjunction with 
consultation with public housing authorities, the participation of 
residents of public and assisted housing developments, in the process 
of developing and implementing the consolidated plan, along with other 
low-income residents of targeted revitalization areas in which the 
developments are located. The jurisdiction shall make an effort to 
provide information to the housing agency about consolidated plan 
activities related to its developments and surrounding communities so 
that the housing agency can make this information available at the 
annual public hearing required under the Comprehensive Grant program.
    (3) Citizen comment on the citizen participation plan and 
amendments. The jurisdiction must provide citizens with a reasonable 
opportunity to comment on the original citizen participation plan and 
on substantial amendments to the citizen participation plan, and must 
make the citizen participation plan public. The citizen participation 
plan must be in a format accessible to persons with disabilities, upon 
request.
    (b) Development of the consolidated plan. The citizen participation 
plan must include the following minimum requirements for the 
development of the consolidated plan.
    (1) The citizen participation plan must require that, before the 
jurisdiction adopts a consolidated plan, the jurisdiction will make 
available to citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties 
information that includes the amount of assistance the jurisdiction 
expects to receive (including grant funds and program income) and the 
range of activities that may be undertaken, including the estimated 
amount that will benefit persons of low- and moderate-income. The 
citizen participation plan also must set forth the jurisdiction's plans 
to minimize displacement of persons and to assist any persons 
displaced, specifying the types and levels of assistance the 
jurisdiction will make available (or require others to make available) 
to persons displaced, even if the jurisdiction expects no displacement 
to occur. The citizen participation plan must state when and how the 
jurisdiction will make this information available.
    (2) The citizen participation plan must require the jurisdiction to 
publish the proposed consolidated plan in a manner that affords 
citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties a reasonable 
opportunity to examine its contents and to submit comments. The citizen 
participation plan must set forth how the jurisdiction will publish the 
proposed consolidated plan and give reasonable opportunity to examine 
the contents of the proposed consolidated plan. The requirement for 
publishing may be met by publishing a summary of the proposed 
consolidated plan in one or more newspapers of general circulation, and 
by making copies of the proposed consolidated plan available at 
libraries, government offices, and public places. The summary must 
describe the contents and purpose of the consolidated plan, and must 
include a list of the locations where copies of the entire proposed 
consolidated plan may be examined. In addition, the jurisdiction must 
provide a reasonable number of free copies of the plan to citizens and 
groups that request it.
    (3) The citizen participation plan must provide for at least one 
public hearing during the development of the consolidated plan. See 
paragraph (e) of this section for public hearing requirements, 
generally.
    (4) The citizen participation plan must provide a period, not less 
than 30 days, to receive comments from citizens on the consolidated 
plan.
    (5) The citizen participation plan shall require the jurisdiction 
to consider any comments or views of citizens received in writing, or 
orally at the public hearings, in preparing the final consolidated 
plan. A summary of these comments or views, and a summary of any 
comments or views not accepted and the reasons therefor, shall be 
attached to the final consolidated plan.
    (c) Amendments. (1) Criteria for amendment to consolidated plan. 
The citizen participation plan must specify [[Page 1900]] the criteria 
the jurisdiction will use for determining what changes in the 
jurisdiction's planned or actual activities constitute a substantial 
amendment to the consolidated plan. (See Sec. 91.505.) It must include 
among the criteria for a substantial amendment changes in the use of 
CDBG funds from one eligible activity to another.
    (2) The citizen participation plan must provide citizens with 
reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment on substantial 
amendments. The citizen participation plan must state how reasonable 
notice and an opportunity to comment will be given. The citizen 
participation plan must provide a period, not less than 30 days, to 
receive comments on the substantial amendment before the amendment is 
implemented.
    (3) The citizen participation plan shall require the jurisdiction 
to consider any comments or views of citizens received in writing, or 
orally at public hearings, if any, in preparing the substantial 
amendment of the consolidated plan. A summary of these comments or 
views, and a summary of any comments or views not accepted and the 
reasons therefor, shall be attached to the substantial amendment of the 
consolidated plan.
    (d) Performance reports. (1) The citizen participation plan must 
provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment 
on performance reports. The citizen participation plan must state how 
reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment will be given. The 
citizen participation plan must provide a period, not less than 15 
days, to receive comments on the performance report that is to be 
submitted to HUD before its submission.
    (2) The citizen participation plan shall require the jurisdiction 
to consider any comments or views of citizens received in writing, or 
orally at public hearings in preparing the performance report. A 
summary of these comments or views shall be attached to the performance 
report.
    (e) Public hearings. (1) The citizen participation plan must 
provide for at least two public hearings per year to obtain citizens' 
views and to respond to proposals and questions, to be conducted at a 
minimum of two different stages of the program year. Together, the 
hearings must address housing and community development needs, 
development of proposed activities, and review of program performance. 
To obtain the views of citizens on housing and community development 
needs, including priority nonhousing community development needs, the 
citizen participation plan must provide that at least one of these 
hearings is held before the proposed consolidated plan is published for 
comment.
    (2) The citizen participation plan must state how and when adequate 
advance notice will be given to citizens of each hearing, with 
sufficient information published about the subject of the hearing to 
permit informed comment. (Publishing small print notices in the 
newspaper a few days before the hearing does not constitute adequate 
notice. Although HUD is not specifying the length of notice required, 
it would consider two weeks adequate.)
    (3) The citizen participation plan must provide that hearings be 
held at times and locations convenient to potential and actual 
beneficiaries, and with accommodation for persons with disabilities. 
The citizen participation plan must specify how it will meet these 
requirements.
    (4) The citizen participation plan must identify how the needs of 
non-English speaking residents will be met in the case of public 
hearings where a significant number of non-English speaking residents 
can be reasonably expected to participate.
    (f) Meetings. The citizen participation plan must provide citizens 
with reasonable and timely access to local meetings.
    (g) Availability to the public. The citizen participation plan must 
provide that the consolidated plan as adopted, substantial amendments, 
and the performance report will be available to the public, including 
the availability of materials in a form accessible to persons with 
disabilities, upon request. The citizen participation plan must state 
how these documents will be available to the public.
    (h) Access to records. The citizen participation plan must require 
the jurisdiction to provide citizens, public agencies, and other 
interested parties with reasonable and timely access to information and 
records relating to the jurisdiction's consolidated plan and the 
jurisdiction's use of assistance under the programs covered by this 
part during the preceding five years.
    (i) Technical assistance. The citizen participation plan must 
provide for technical assistance to groups representative of persons of 
low- and moderate-income that request such assistance in developing 
proposals for funding assistance under any of the programs covered by 
the consolidated plan, with the level and type of assistance determined 
by the jurisdiction. The assistance need not include the provision of 
funds to the groups.
    (j) Complaints. The citizen participation plan shall describe the 
jurisdiction's appropriate and practicable procedures to handle 
complaints from citizens related to the consolidated plan, amendments, 
and performance report. At a minimum, the citizen participation plan 
shall require that the jurisdiction must provide a timely, substantive 
written response to every written citizen complaint, within an 
established period of time (within 15 working days, where practicable, 
if the jurisdiction is a CDBG grant recipient).
    (k) Use of citizen participation plan. The jurisdiction must follow 
its citizen participation plan.
    (l) Jurisdiction responsibility. The requirements for citizen 
participation do not restrict the responsibility or authority of the 
jurisdiction for the development and execution of its consolidated 
plan.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.110  Consultation; States.

    When preparing the consolidated plan, the State shall consult with 
other public and private agencies that provide assisted housing 
(including any State housing agency administering public housing), 
health services, and social services (including those focusing on 
services to children, elderly persons, persons with disabilities, 
persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, homeless persons) during 
preparation of the consolidated plan. When preparing the portion of its 
consolidated plan concerning lead-based paint hazards, the State shall 
consult with State or local health and child welfare agencies and 
examine existing data related to lead-based paint hazards and 
poisonings, including health department data on the addresses of 
housing units in which children have been identified as lead poisoned. 
When preparing its method of distribution of assistance under the CDBG 
program, a State must consult with local governments in nonentitlement 
areas of the State.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.115  Citizen participation plan; States.

    (a) Applicability and adoption of the citizen participation plan. 
(1) The State is required to adopt a citizen participation plan that 
sets forth the State's policies and procedures for citizen 
participation. (Where a State, before March 6, 1995, adopted a citizen 
participation plan that complies with section 104(a)(3) of the Housing 
and [[Page 1901]] Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
5304(A)(3)) but will need to amend the citizen participation plan to 
comply with provisions of this section, the citizen participation plan 
shall be amended by the first day of the State's program year that 
begins on or after 180 days following March 6, 1995.
    (2) Encouragement of citizen participation. The citizen 
participation plan must provide for and encourage citizens to 
participate in the development of the consolidated plan, any 
substantial amendments to the consolidated plan, and the performance 
report. These requirements are designed especially to encourage 
participation by low- and moderate-income persons, particularly those 
living in slum and blighted areas and in areas where CDBG funds are 
proposed to be used and by residents of predominantly low- and 
moderate-income neighborhoods, as defined by the State. A State also is 
expected to take whatever actions are appropriate to encourage the 
participation of all its citizens, including minorities and non-English 
speaking persons, as well as persons with disabilities.
    (3) Citizen and local government comment on the citizen 
participation plan and amendments. The State must provide citizens and 
units of general local government a reasonable opportunity to comment 
on the original citizen participation plan and on substantial 
amendments to the citizen participation plan, and must make the citizen 
participation plan public. The citizen participation plan must be in a 
format accessible to persons with disabilities, upon request.
    (b) Development of the consolidated plan. The citizen participation 
plan must include the following minimum requirements for the 
development of the consolidated plan.
    (1) The citizen participation plan must require that, before the 
State adopts a consolidated plan, the State will make available to 
citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties information 
that includes the amount of assistance the State expects to receive and 
the range of activities that may be undertaken, including the estimated 
amount that will benefit persons of low- and moderate-income and the 
plans to minimize displacement of persons and to assist any persons 
displaced. The citizen participation plan must state when and how the 
State will make this information available.
    (2) The citizen participation plan must require the State to 
publish the proposed consolidated plan in a manner that affords 
citizens, units of general local governments, public agencies, and 
other interested parties a reasonable opportunity to examine its 
contents and to submit comments. The citizen participation plan must 
set forth how the State will publish the proposed consolidated plan and 
give reasonable opportunity to examine the contents of the proposed 
consolidated plan. The requirement for publishing may be met by 
publishing a summary of the proposed consolidated plan in one or more 
newspapers of general circulation, and by making copies of the proposed 
consolidated plan available at libraries, government offices, and 
public places. The summary must describe the contents and purpose of 
the consolidated plan, and must include a list of the locations where 
copies of the entire proposed consolidated plan may be examined. In 
addition, the State must provide a reasonable number of free copies of 
the plan to citizens and groups that request it.
    (3) The citizen participation plan must provide for at least one 
public hearing on housing and community development needs before the 
proposed consolidated plan is published for comment.
    (i) The citizen participation plan must state how and when adequate 
advance notice will be given to citizens of the hearing, with 
sufficient information published about the subject of the hearing to 
permit informed comment. (Publishing small print notices in the 
newspaper a few days before the hearing does not constitute adequate 
notice. Although HUD is not specifying the length of notice required, 
it would consider two weeks adequate.)
    (ii) The citizen participation plan must provide that the hearing 
be held at a time and location convenient to potential and actual 
beneficiaries, and with accommodation for persons with disabilities. 
The citizen participation plan must specify how it will meet these 
requirements.
    (iii) The citizen participation plan must identify how the needs of 
non-English speaking residents will be met in the case of a public 
hearing where a significant number of non-English speaking residents 
can be reasonably expected to participate.
    (4) The citizen participation plan must provide a period, not less 
than 30 days, to receive comments from citizens and units of general 
local government on the consolidated plan.
    (5) The citizen participation plan shall require the State to 
consider any comments or views of citizens and units of general 
received in writing, or orally at the public hearings, in preparing the 
final consolidated plan. A summary of these comments or views, and a 
summary of any comments or views not accepted and the reasons 
therefore, shall be attached to the final consolidated plan.
    (c) Amendments. (1) Criteria for amendment to consolidated plan. 
The citizen participation plan must specify the criteria the State will 
use for determining what changes in the State's planned or actual 
activities constitute a substantial amendment to the consolidated plan. 
(See Sec. 91.505.) It must include among the criteria for a substantial 
amendment changes in the method of distribution of such funds.
    (2) The citizen participation plan must provide citizens and units 
of general local government with reasonable notice and an opportunity 
to comment on substantial amendments. The citizen participation plan 
must state how reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment will be 
given. The citizen participation plan must provide a period, not less 
than 30 days, to receive comments on the substantial amendment before 
the amendment is implemented.
    (3) The citizen participation plan shall require the State to 
consider any comments or views of citizens and units of general local 
government received in writing, or orally at public hearings, if any, 
in preparing the substantial amendment of the consolidated plan. A 
summary of these comments or views, and a summary of any comments or 
views not accepted and the reasons therefore, shall be attached to the 
substantial amendment of the consolidated plan.
    (d) Performance Reports. (1) The citizen participation plan must 
provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment 
on performance reports. The citizen participation plan must state how 
reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment will be given. The 
citizen participation plan must provide a period, not less than 15 
days, to receive comments on the performance report that is to be 
submitted to HUD before its submission.
    (2) The citizen participation plan shall require the state to 
consider any comments or views of citizens received in writing, or 
orally at public hearings in preparing the performance report. A 
summary of these comments or views shall be attached to the performance 
report.
    (e) Citizen participation requirements for local governments. The 
citizen participation plan must describe the citizen participation 
requirements for units of general local government receiving CDBG funds 
from the State in 24 CFR 570.486. The citizen 
[[Page 1902]] participation plan must explain how the requirements will 
be met.
    (f) Availability to the public. The citizen participation plan must 
provide that the consolidated plan as adopted, substantial amendments, 
and the performance report will be available to the public, including 
the availability of materials in a form accessible to persons with 
disabilities, upon request. The citizen participation plan must state 
how these documents will be available to the public.
    (g) Access to records. The citizen participation plan must require 
the state to provide citizens, public agencies, and other interested 
parties with reasonable and timely access to information and records 
relating to the state's consolidated plan and the state's use of 
assistance under the programs covered by this part during the preceding 
five years.
    (h) Complaints. The citizen participation plan shall describe the 
State's appropriate and practicable procedures to handle complaints 
from citizens related to the consolidated plan, amendments, and 
performance report. At a minimum, the citizen participation plan shall 
require that the State must provide a timely, substantive written 
response to every written citizen complaint, within an established 
period of time (within 15 working days, where practicable, if the State 
is a CDBG grant recipient).
    (i) Use of citizen participation plan. The State must follow its 
citizen participation plan.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).

Subpart C--Local Governments; Contents of Consolidated Plan


Sec. 91.200  General.

    (a) A complete consolidated plan consists of the information 
required in Secs. 91.205 through 91.230, submitted in accordance with 
instructions prescribed by HUD (including tables and narratives), or in 
such other format as jointly agreed upon by HUD and the jurisdiction.
    (b) The jurisdiction shall describe the lead agency or entity 
responsible for overseeing the development of the plan and the 
significant aspects of the process by which the consolidated plan was 
developed, the identity of the agencies, groups, organizations, and 
others who participated in the process, and a description of the 
jurisdiction's consultations with social service agencies and other 
entities. It also shall include a summary of the citizen participation 
process, public comments, and efforts made to broaden public 
participation in the development of the consolidated plan.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.205  Housing and homeless needs assessment.

    (a) General. The consolidated plan must describe the jurisdiction's 
estimated housing needs projected for the ensuing five-year period. 
Housing data included in this portion of the plan shall be based on 
U.S. Census data, as provided by HUD, as updated by any properly 
conducted local study, or any other reliable source that the 
jurisdiction clearly identifies and should reflect the consultation 
with social service agencies and other entities conducted in accordance 
with Sec. 91.100 and the citizen participation process conducted in 
accordance with Sec. 91.105. For a jurisdiction seeking funding on 
behalf of an eligible metropolitan statistical area under the HOPWA 
program, the needs described for housing and supportive services must 
address the needs of persons with HIV/AIDS and their families 
throughout the eligible metropolitan statistical area.
    (b) Categories of persons affected. (1) The plan shall estimate the 
number and type of families in need of housing assistance for extremely 
low-income, low-income, moderate-income, and middle-income families, 
for renters and owners, for elderly persons, for single persons, for 
large families, for persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, and for 
persons with disabilities. The description of housing needs shall 
include a discussion of the cost burden and severe cost burden, 
overcrowding (especially for large families), and substandard housing 
conditions being experienced by extremely low-income, low-income, 
moderate-income, and middle-income renters and owners compared to the 
jurisdiction as a whole.
    (2) For any of the income categories enumerated in paragraph (b)(1) 
of this section, to the extent that any racial or ethnic group has 
disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that 
category as a whole, assessment of that specific need shall be 
included. For this purpose, disproportionately greater need exists when 
the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a 
particular racial or ethnic group is at least 10 percentage points 
higher than the percentage of persons in the category as a whole.
    (c) Homeless needs. The plan must describe the nature and extent of 
homelessness (including rural homelessness), addressing separately the 
need for facilities and services for homeless individuals and homeless 
families with children, both sheltered and unsheltered, and homeless 
subpopulations, in accordance with a table prescribed by HUD. This 
description must include the characteristics and needs of low-income 
individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-
income) who are currently housed but threatened with homelessness. The 
plan also must contain a narrative description of the nature and extent 
of homelessness by racial and ethnic group, to the extent information 
is available.
    (d) Other special needs. (1) The jurisdiction shall estimate, to 
the extent practicable, the number of persons who are not homeless but 
require supportive housing, including the elderly, frail elderly, 
persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons 
with alcohol or other drug addiction, persons with HIV/AIDS and their 
families, public housing residents, and any other categories the 
jurisdiction may specify, and describe their supportive housing needs.
    (2) With respect to a jurisdiction seeking funding on behalf of an 
eligible metropolitan statistical area under the HOPWA program, the 
plan must identify the size and characteristics of the population with 
HIV/AIDS and their families within the eligible metropolitan 
statistical area it will serve.
    (e) Lead-based paint hazards. The plan must estimate the number of 
housing units within the jurisdiction that are occupied by low-income 
families or moderate-income families that contain lead-based paint 
hazards, as defined in this part.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.210  Housing market analysis.

    (a) General characteristics. Based on information available to the 
jurisdiction, the plan must describe the significant characteristics of 
the jurisdiction's housing market, including the supply, demand, and 
condition and cost of housing and the housing stock available to serve 
persons with disabilities and to serve persons with HIV/AIDS and their 
families. The jurisdiction must identify and describe any areas within 
the jurisdiction with concentrations of racial/ethnic minorities and/or 
low-income families, stating how it defines the terms ``area of low-
income concentration'' and ``area of minority concentration'' for this 
purpose. The locations and degree of these concentrations must be 
identified, either in a narrative or on one or more maps.
    (b) Public and assisted housing. (1) The plan must describe the 
number of public housing units in the jurisdiction, [[Page 1903]] the 
physical condition of such units, the restoration and revitalization 
needs, results from the Section 504 needs assessment (i.e., assessment 
of needs of tenants and applicants on waiting list for accessible 
units, as required by 24 CFR 8.25), and the public housing agency's 
strategy for improving the management and operation of such public 
housing and for improving the living environment of low- and moderate-
income families residing in public housing. The consolidated plan must 
identify the public housing developments in the jurisdictions that are 
participating in an approved HUD Comprehensive Grant program. 
Activities covered by the consolidated plan that are being coordinated 
or jointly funded with the public housing Comprehensive Grant program 
must be identified by project and referenced to the approved 
Comprehensive Grant program. Examples of supportive activities for 
Comprehensive Grant program activities are efforts to revitalize 
neighborhoods surrounding public housing projects (either current or 
proposed); cooperation in provision of resident programs and services; 
coordination of local drug elimination or anti-crime strategies; 
upgrading of police, fire, schools, and other services; and economic 
development projects in or near public housing projects to tie in with 
self-sufficiency efforts for residents.
    (2) The jurisdiction shall include a description of the number and 
targeting (income level and type of family served) of units currently 
assisted by local, state, or federally funded programs, and an 
assessment of whether any such units are expected to be lost from the 
assisted housing inventory for any reason.
    (c) Homeless facilities. The plan must include a brief inventory of 
facilities and services that meet the emergency shelter, transitional 
housing, permanent supportive housing, and permanent housing needs of 
homeless persons within the jurisdiction.
    (d) Special need facilities and services. The plan must describe, 
to the extent information is available, the facilities and services 
that assist persons who are not homeless but who require supportive 
housing, and programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental 
and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive 
housing.
    (e) Barriers to affordable housing. The plan must explain whether 
the cost of housing or the incentives to develop, maintain, or improve 
affordable housing in the jurisdiction are affected by public policies, 
particularly by policies of the jurisdiction, including tax policies 
affecting land and other property, land use controls, zoning 
ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limits, and 
policies that affect the return on residential investment.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.215  Strategic plan.

    (a) General. For the categories described in paragraphs (b), (c), 
(d), and (e) of this section, the consolidated plan must do the 
following:
    (1) Indicate the general priorities for allocating investment 
geographically within the jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for the 
HOPWA program) and among priority needs, as identified in the priority 
needs table prescribed by HUD;
    (2) Describe the basis for assigning the priority (including the 
relative priority, where required) given to each category of priority 
needs;
    (3) Identify any obstacles to meeting underserved needs;
    (4) Summarize the priorities and specific objectives, describing 
how funds that are reasonably expected to be made available will be 
used to address identified needs; and
    (5) For each specific objective, identify proposed accomplishments 
the jurisdictions hopes to achieve in quantitative terms over a 
specified time period (i.e., one, two, three or more years), or in 
other measurable terms as identified and defined by the jurisdiction.
    (b) Affordable housing. With respect to affordable housing, the 
consolidated plan must include the priority housing needs table 
prescribed by HUD and must do the following:
    (1) The description of the basis for assigning relative priority to 
each category of priority need shall state how the analysis of the 
housing market and the severity of housing problems and needs of 
extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income renters and 
owners identified in accordance with Sec. 91.205 provided the basis for 
assigning the relative priority given to each priority need category in 
the priority housing needs table prescribed by HUD. Family and income 
types may be grouped together for discussion where the analysis would 
apply to more than one of them;
    (2) The statement of specific objectives must indicate how the 
characteristics of the housing market will influence the use of funds 
made available for rental assistance, production of new units, 
rehabilitation of old units, or acquisition of existing units; and
    (3) The description of proposed accomplishments shall specify the 
number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income 
families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as 
defined in 24 CFR 92.252 for rental housing and 24 CFR 92.254 for 
homeownership over a specific time period.
    (c) Homelessness. With respect to homelessness, the consolidated 
plan must include the priority homeless needs table prescribed by HUD 
and must describe the jurisdiction's strategy for the following:
    (1) Helping low-income families avoid becoming homeless;
    (2) Reaching out to homeless persons and assessing their individual 
needs;
    (3) Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs 
of homeless persons; and
    (4) Helping homeless persons make the transition to permanent 
housing and independent living.
    (d) Other special needs. With respect to supportive needs of the 
non-homeless, the consolidated plan must describe the priority housing 
and supportive service needs of persons who are not homeless but 
require supportive housing (i.e., elderly, frail elderly, persons with 
disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or 
other drug addiction, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, and 
public housing residents).
    (e) Nonhousing community development plan. (1) If the jurisdiction 
seeks assistance under the Community Development Block Grant program, 
the consolidated plan must describe the jurisdiction's priority non-
housing community development needs eligible for assistance under HUD's 
community development programs by CDBG eligibility category, reflecting 
the needs of families for each type of activity, as appropriate, in 
terms of dollar amounts estimated to meet the priority need for the 
type of activity, in accordance with a table prescribed by HUD. This 
community development component of the plan must state the 
jurisdiction's specific long-term and short-term community development 
objectives (including economic development activities that create 
jobs), which must be developed in accordance with the statutory goals 
described in Sec. 91.1 and the primary objective of the CDBG program to 
develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a 
suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, 
principally for low-income and moderate-income persons.
    (2) A jurisdiction that elects to carry out a neighborhood 
revitalization [[Page 1904]] strategy that includes the economic 
empowerment of low-income residents with respect to one or more of 
their areas may submit this strategy as part of its community 
development plan. If HUD approves such a strategy, the jurisdiction can 
obtain greater flexibility in the use of the CDBG funds in the 
revitalization area(s). The additional flexibility that the 
jurisdiction would be entitled to for this purpose will be described in 
24 CFR part 570, subpart C, at a future date. The criteria for approval 
of the strategy will not be established by regulation, but 
jurisdictions will be notified of these criteria.
    (f) Barriers to affordable housing. The consolidated plan must 
describe the jurisdiction's strategy to remove or ameliorate negative 
effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable 
housing, as identified in accordance with Sec. 91.210(d), except that, 
if a State requires a unit of general local government to submit a 
regulatory barrier assessment that is substantially equivalent to the 
information required under this paragraph (f), as determined by HUD, 
the unit of general local government may submit its assessment 
submitted to the State to HUD and shall be considered to have complied 
with this requirement.
    (g) Lead-based paint hazards. The consolidated plan must outline 
the actions proposed or being taken to evaluate and reduce lead-based 
paint hazards, and describe how the lead-based paint hazard reduction 
will be integrated into housing policies and programs.
    (h) Anti-poverty strategy. The consolidated plan must describe the 
jurisdiction's goals, programs, and policies for reducing the number of 
poverty level families and how the jurisdiction's goals, programs, and 
policies for producing and preserving affordable housing, set forth in 
the housing component of the consolidated plan, will be coordinated 
with other programs and services for which the jurisdiction is 
responsible and the extent to which they will reduce (or assist in 
reducing) the number of poverty level families, taking into 
consideration factors over which the jurisdiction has control.
    (i) Institutional structure. (1) The consolidated plan must explain 
the institutional structure, including private industry, nonprofit 
organizations, and public institutions, through which the jurisdiction 
will carry out its housing and community development plan, assessing 
the strengths and gaps in that delivery system.
    (2) The jurisdiction shall describe the organizational relationship 
between the jurisdiction and the public housing agency, including the 
appointing authority for the commissioners or board of the housing 
agency; relationships regarding hiring, contracting and procurement; 
provision of services funded by the jurisdiction; and review by the 
jurisdiction of proposed development sites, of the comprehensive plan 
of the public housing agency, and of any proposed demolition or 
disposition of public housing developments.
    (3) The plan must describe what the jurisdiction will do to 
overcome gaps in the institutional structure for carrying out its 
strategy for addressing its priority needs. If the public housing 
agency is designated as ``troubled'' by HUD, or otherwise is performing 
poorly, the jurisdiction shall describe any actions it is taking to 
assist the public housing agency in addressing these problems.
    (j) Coordination. The consolidated plan must describe the 
jurisdiction's activities to enhance coordination between public and 
assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental 
health, and service agencies. With respect to the public entities 
involved, the plan must describe the means of cooperation and 
coordination among the State and any units of general local government 
in the metropolitan area in the implementation of its consolidated 
plan.
    (k) Public housing resident initiatives. The consolidated plan must 
describe the jurisdiction's activities to encourage public housing 
residents to become more involved in management and participate in 
homeownership.


Sec. 91.220  Action plan.

    The action plan must include the following:
    (a) Form application. Standard Form 424;
    (b) Resources. (1) Federal resources. The consolidated plan must 
describe the Federal resources expected to be available to address the 
priority needs and specific objectives identified in the strategic 
plan, in accordance with Sec. 91.215. These resources include grant 
funds and program income.
    (2) Other resources. The consolidated plan must indicate resources 
from private and non-Federal public sources that are reasonably 
expected to be made available to address the needs identified in the 
plan. The plan must explain how Federal funds will leverage those 
additional resources, including a description of how matching 
requirements of the HUD programs will be satisfied. Where the 
jurisdiction deems it appropriate, it may indicate publicly owned land 
or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to carry 
out the purposes stated in Sec. 91.1;
    (c) Activities to be undertaken. A description of the activities 
the jurisdiction will undertake during the next year to address 
priority needs in terms of local objectives that were identified in 
Sec. 91.215. This description of activities shall estimate the number 
and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities, 
the specific local objectives and priority needs (identified in 
accordance with Sec. 91.215) that will be addressed by the activities 
using formula grant funds and program income the jurisdiction expects 
to receive during the program year, proposed accomplishments, and a 
target date for completion of the activity. This information is to be 
presented in the form of a table prescribed by HUD;
    (d) Geographic distribution. A description of the geographic areas 
of the jurisdiction (including areas of minority concentration) in 
which it will direct assistance during the ensuing program year, giving 
the rationale for the priorities for allocating investment 
geographically;
    (e) Homeless and other special needs activities. Activities it 
plans to undertake during the next year to address emergency shelter 
and transitional housing needs of homeless individuals and families 
(including subpopulations), to prevent low-income individuals and 
families with children (especially those with incomes below 30 percent 
of median) from becoming homeless, to help homeless persons make the 
transition to permanent housing and independent living, and to address 
the special needs of persons who are not homeless identified in 
accordance with Sec. 91.215(d);
    (f) Other actions. (1) General. Actions it plans to take during the 
next year to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs, foster and 
maintain affordable housing, remove barriers to affordable housing, 
evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards, reduce the number of 
poverty level families, develop institutional structure, and enhance 
coordination between public and private housing and social service 
agencies and foster public housing improvements and resident 
initiatives (see Sec. 91.215 (a), (b), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), and 
(k)).
    (2) Public housing. Appropriate reference to the annual revisions 
of the action plan prepared for the Comprehensive Grant program. If the 
public housing agency is designated as ``troubled'' by HUD, or 
otherwise is performing poorly, the jurisdiction's plan, if any, to 
assist the public housing [[Page 1905]] agency in addressing these 
problems; and
    (g) Program-specific requirements.--(1) CDBG. (i) A jurisdiction 
must describe activities planned with respect to all CDBG funds 
expected to be available during the program year (including program 
income that will have been received before the start of the next 
program year), except that an amount generally not to exceed ten 
percent of such total available CDBG funds may be excluded from the 
funds for which eligible activities are described if it has been 
identified for the contingency of cost overruns.
    (ii) CDBG funds expected to be available during the program year 
includes the following:
    (A) Any program income that will have been received before the 
start of the next program year and that has not yet been programmed;
    (B) Surplus from urban renewal settlements;
    (C) Grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the 
planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan; and
    (D) Income from float-funded activities. The full amount of income 
expected to be generated by a float-funded activity must be shown, 
whether or not some or all of the income is expected to be received in 
a future program year. To assure that citizens understand the risks 
inherent in undertaking float-funded activities, the recipient must 
specify the total amount of program income expected to be received and 
the month(s) and year(s) that it expects the float-funded activity to 
generate such program income.
    (iii) An ``urgent needs'' activity (one that is expected to qualify 
under Sec. 570.208(c) of this title) may be included only if the 
jurisdiction identifies the activity in the action plan and certifies 
that the activity is designed to meet other community development needs 
having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious 
and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community and 
other financial resources are not available.
    (iv) This information about activities shall be in sufficient 
detail, including location, to allow citizens to determine the degree 
to which they are affected.
    (2) HOME. (i) For HOME funds, a participating jurisdiction shall 
describe other forms of investment that are not described in 
Sec. 92.205(b) of this title.
    (ii) If the participating jurisdiction intends to use HOME funds 
for homebuyers, it must state the guidelines for resale or recapture, 
as required in Sec. 92.254 of this subtitle.


Sec. 91.225  Certifications.

    (a) General. The following certifications, satisfactory to HUD, 
must be included in the annual submission to HUD. (See definition of 
``certification'' in Sec. 91.5.)
    (1) Affirmatively furthering fair housing. Each jurisdiction is 
required to submit a certification that it will affirmatively further 
fair housing, which means that it will conduct an analysis to identify 
impediments to fair housing choice within the jurisdiction, take 
appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments 
identified through that analysis, and maintain records reflecting the 
analysis and actions in this regard.
    (2) Anti-displacement and relocation plan. Each jurisdiction is 
required to submit a certification that it has in effect and is 
following a residential antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan 
in connection with any activity assisted with funding under the CDBG or 
HOME programs.
    (3) Drug-free workplace. The jurisdiction must submit a 
certification with regard to drug-free workplace required by 24 CFR 
part 24, subpart F.
    (4) Anti-lobbying. The jurisdiction must submit a certification 
with regard to compliance with restrictions on lobbying required by 24 
CFR part 87, together with disclosure forms, if required by that part.
    (5) Authority of jurisdiction. The jurisdiction must submit a 
certification that the consolidated plan is authorized under State and 
local law (as applicable) and that the jurisdiction possesses the legal 
authority to carry out the programs for which it is seeking funding, in 
accordance with applicable HUD regulations.
    (6) Consistency with plan. The jurisdiction must submit a 
certification that the housing activities to be undertaken with CDBG, 
HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds are consistent with the strategic plan. 
Where the HOPWA funds are to be received by a city that is the most 
populous unit of general local government in an EMSA, it must obtain 
and keep on file certifications of consistency from the authorized 
public officials for each other locality in the EMSA in which housing 
assistance is provided.
    (7) Acquisition and relocation. The jurisdiction must submit a 
certification that it will comply with the acquisition and relocation 
requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property 
Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4601), and 
implementing regulations at 49 CFR part 24.
    (8) Section 3. The jurisdiction must submit a certification that it 
will comply with section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 
1968 (12 U.S.C. 1701u), and implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 
135.
    (b) Community Development Block Grant program. For jurisdictions 
that seek funding under CDBG, the following certifications are 
required:
    (1) Citizen participation. Each jurisdiction must certify that it 
is in full compliance and following a detailed citizen participation 
plan that satisfies the requirements of Sec. 91.105.
    (2) Community development plan. A certification that this 
consolidated housing and community development plan identifies 
community development and housing needs and specifies both short-term 
and long-term community development objectives that have been developed 
in accordance with the primary objective of the statute authorizing the 
CDBG program, as described in 24 CFR 570.2, and requirements of this 
part and 24 CFR part 570.
    (3) Following a plan. A certification that the jurisdiction is 
following a current consolidated plan (or Comprehensive Housing 
Affordability Strategy) that has been approved by HUD.
    (4) Use of funds. A certification that the jurisdiction has 
complied with the following criteria:
    (i) With respect to activities expected to be assisted with CDBG 
funds, the Action Plan has been developed so as to give the maximum 
feasible priority to activities that will benefit low- and moderate-
income families or aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or 
blight. The plan may also include CDBG-assisted activities that are 
certified to be designed to meet other community development needs 
having particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious 
and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community where 
other financial resources are not available to meet such needs;
    (ii) The aggregate use of CDBG funds, including section 108 
guaranteed loans, during a period specified by the jurisdiction, 
consisting of one, two, or three specific consecutive program years, 
shall principally benefit low- and moderate-income families in a manner 
that ensures that at least 70 percent of the amount is expended for 
activities that benefit such persons during the designated period (see 
24 CFR 570.3 for definition of ``CDBG funds''); and
    (iii) The jurisdiction will not attempt to recover any capital 
costs of public improvements assisted with CDBG [[Page 1906]] funds, 
including Section 108 loan guaranteed funds, by assessing any amount 
against properties owned and occupied by persons of low- and moderate-
income, including any fee charged or assessment made as a condition of 
obtaining access to such public improvements. However, if CDBG funds 
are used to pay the proportion of a fee or assessment attributable to 
the capital costs of public improvements (assisted in part with CDBG 
funds) financed from other revenue sources, an assessment or charge may 
be made against the property with respect to the public improvements 
financed by a source other than CDBG funds. In addition, with respect 
to properties owned and occupied by moderate-income (but not low-
income) families, an assessment or charge may be made against the 
property with respect to the public improvements financed by a source 
other than CDBG funds if the jurisdiction certifies that it lacks CDBG 
funds to cover the assessment.
    (5) Excessive force. A certification that the jurisdiction has 
adopted and is enforcing:
    (i) A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law 
enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals 
engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and
    (ii) A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against 
physically barring entrance to or exit from, a facility or location 
that is the subject of such non-violent civil rights demonstrations 
within its jurisdiction.
    (6) Compliance with anti-discrimination laws. The jurisdiction must 
submit a certification that the grant will be conducted and 
administered in conformity with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 
1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d), the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601-3619), and 
implementing regulations.
    (7) Compliance with lead-based paint procedures. The jurisdiction 
must submit a certification that its notification, inspection, testing, 
and abatement procedures concerning lead-based paint will comply with 
the requirements of 24 CFR 570.608.
    (8) Compliance with laws. A certification that the jurisdiction 
will comply with applicable laws.
    (c) Emergency Shelter Grant program. For jurisdictions that seek 
funding under the Emergency Shelter Grant program, the following 
certifications are required:
    (1) In the case of assistance involving major rehabilitation or 
conversion, the applicant will maintain any building for which 
assistance is used under the ESG program as a shelter for homeless 
individuals and families for not less than a 10-year period;
    (2) In the case of assistance involving rehabilitation less than 
that covered under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, the applicant will 
maintain any building for which assistance is used under the ESG 
program as a shelter for homeless individuals and families for not less 
than a three-year period;
    (3) In the case of assistance involving essential services 
(including but not limited to employment, health, drug abuse, or 
education) or maintenance, operation, insurance, utilities and 
furnishings, the applicant will provide services or shelter to homeless 
individuals and families for the period during which the ESG assistance 
is provided, without regard to a particular site or structure as long 
as the same general population is served;
    (4) Any renovation carried out with ESG assistance shall be 
sufficient to ensure that the building involved is safe and sanitary;
    (5) It will assist homeless individuals in obtaining appropriate 
supportive services, including permanent housing, medical and mental 
health treatment, counseling, supervision, and other services essential 
for achieving independent living, and other Federal, State, local, and 
private assistance available for such individuals;
    (6) It will obtain matching amounts required under Sec. 576.71 of 
this title;
    (7) It will develop and implement procedures to ensure the 
confidentiality of records pertaining to any individual provided family 
violence prevention or treatment services under any project assisted 
under the ESG program, including protection against the release of the 
address or location of any family violence shelter project except with 
the written authorization of the person responsible for the operation 
of that shelter;
    (8) To the maximum extent practicable, it will involve, through 
employment, volunteer services, or otherwise, homeless individuals and 
families in constructing, renovating, maintaining, and operating 
facilities assisted under this program, in providing services assisted 
under the program, and in providing services for occupants of 
facilities assisted under the program; and
    (9) It is following a current HUD-approved consolidated plan (or 
CHAS).
    (d) HOME program. Each participating jurisdiction must provide the 
following certifications:
    (1) If it plans to use HOME funds for tenant-based rental 
assistance, a certification that rental-based assistance is an 
essential element of its consolidated plan;
    (2) A certification that it is using and will use HOME funds for 
eligible activities and costs, as described in Secs. 92.205 through 
92.209 of this subtitle and that it is not using and will not use HOME 
funds for prohibited activities, as described in Sec. 92.214 of this 
subtitle; and
    (3) A certification that before committing funds to a project, the 
participating jurisdiction will evaluate the project in accordance with 
guidelines that it adopts for this purpose and will not invest any more 
HOME funds in combination with other federal assistance than is 
necessary to provide affordable housing.
    (e) Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS. For jurisdictions 
that seek funding under the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS 
program, a certification is required by the jurisdiction that:
    (1) Activities funded under the program will meet urgent needs that 
are not being met by available public and private sources; and
    (2) Any building or structure assisted under that program shall be 
operated for the purpose specified in the plan:
    (i) For a period of not less than 10 years in the case of 
assistance involving new construction, substantial rehabilitation, or 
acquisition of a facility; or
    (ii) For a period of not less than three years in the case of 
assistance involving non-substantial rehabilitation or repair of a 
building or structure.


Sec. 91.230  Monitoring.

    The plan must describe the standards and procedures that the 
jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance 
of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with 
requirements of the programs involved, including minority business 
outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements.


Sec. 91.235  Special case; abbreviated consolidated plan.

    (a) Who may submit an abbreviated plan? A jurisdiction that is not 
a CDBG entitlement community under 24 CFR part 570, subpart D, and is 
not expected to be a participating jurisdiction in the HOME program 
under 24 CFR part 92, may submit an abbreviated consolidated plan that 
is appropriate to the types and amounts of assistance sought from HUD 
instead of a full consolidated plan.
    (b) When is an abbreviated plan necessary? (1) Jurisdiction. When a 
jurisdiction that is permitted to use an abbreviated plan applies to 
HUD for [[Page 1907]] funds under a program that requires an approved 
consolidated plan (see Sec. 91.2(b)), it must obtain approval of an 
abbreviated plan (or full consolidated plan) and submit a certification 
that the housing activities are consistent with the plan.
    (2) Other applicants. When an eligible applicant other than a 
jurisdiction (e.g., a public housing agency or nonprofit organization) 
seeks to apply for funding under a program requiring certification of 
consistency with an approved consolidated plan, the jurisdiction--if it 
is permitted to use an abbreviated plan--may prepare an abbreviated 
plan appropriate to the project. See Sec. 91.510.
    (3) Limitation. For the HOME program, an abbreviated consolidated 
plan is only permitted with respect to reallocations to other than 
participating jurisdictions (see 24 CFR part 92, subpart J). For the 
CDBG program, an abbreviated plan may be submitted for the HUD-
administered Small Cities program, except an abbreviated plan may not 
be submitted for the HUD-administered Small Cities program in the State 
of Hawaii.
    (c) What is an abbreviated plan? (1) Assessment of needs, 
resources, planned activities. An abbreviated plan must contain 
sufficient information about needs, resources, and planned activities 
to address the needs to cover the type and amount of assistance 
anticipated to be funded by HUD.
    (2) Nonhousing community development plan. If the jurisdiction 
seeks assistance under the Community Development Block Grant program, 
it must describe the jurisdiction's priority non-housing community 
development needs eligible for assistance under HUD's community 
development programs by CDBG eligibility category, reflecting the needs 
of families for each type of activity, as appropriate, in terms of 
dollar amounts estimated to meet the priority need for the type of 
activity, in accordance with a table prescribed by HUD. This community 
development component of the plan must state the jurisdiction's 
specific long-term and short-term community development objectives 
(including economic development activities that create jobs), which 
must be developed in accordance with the statutory goals described in 
Sec. 91.1 and the primary objective of the Housing and Community 
Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. 5301(c), of the development of 
viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable 
living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally 
for low-income and moderate-income persons.
    (3) Separate application for funding. In addition to submission of 
the abbreviated consolidated plan, an application must be submitted for 
funding is sought under a competitive program. The applicable program 
requirements are found in the regulations for the program and in the 
Notice of Funding Availability published for the applicable fiscal 
year. For the CDBG Small Cities program, the applicable regulations are 
found at 24 CFR part 570, subpart F.
    (d) What consultation is applicable? The jurisdiction must make 
reasonable efforts to consult with appropriate public and private 
social service agencies regarding the needs to be served with the 
funding sought from HUD. The jurisdiction must attempt some 
consultation with the State. (Section 91.100 does not apply.)
    (e) What citizen participation process is applicable? If the 
jurisdiction is seeking CDBG funds under the CDBG Small Cities program, 
before submitting the abbreviated consolidated plan and application to 
HUD for funding, the jurisdiction must comply with the citizen 
participation requirements of 24 CFR 570.431. If it is not seeking such 
funding, the jurisdiction must conduct a citizen participation process 
as provided in section 107 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12707). (Section 91.105 does not apply.)
Sec. 91.236  Special case; District of Columbia.

    For consolidated planning purposes, the District of Columbia must 
follow the requirements applicable to local jurisdictions 
(Secs. 91.100, 91.105, and 91.200 through 91.230). In addition, it must 
submit the component of the State requirements dealing with the use of 
Low Income Housing Tax Credits (Sec. 91.315(j)).

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).
Subpart D--State Governments; Contents of Consolidated Plan
Sec. 91.300  General.

    (a) A complete consolidated plan consists of the information 
required in Secs. 91.305 through 91.330, submitted in accordance with 
instructions prescribed by HUD (including tables and narratives), or in 
such other format as jointly agreed upon by HUD and the State.
    (b) The State shall describe the lead agency or entity responsible 
for overseeing the development of the plan and the significant aspects 
of the process by which the consolidated plan was developed, the 
identity of the agencies, groups, organizations, and others who 
participated in the process, and a description of the State's 
consultations with social service agencies and other entities. It also 
shall include a summary of the citizen participation process, public 
comments, and efforts made to broaden public participation in the 
development of the consolidated plan.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.305  Housing and homeless needs assessment.

    (a) General. The consolidated plan must describe the State's 
estimated housing needs projected for the ensuing five-year period. 
Housing data included in this portion of the plan shall be based on 
U.S. Census data, as provided by HUD, as updated by any properly 
conducted local study, or any other reliable source that the State 
clearly identifies and should reflect the consultation with social 
service agencies and other entities conducted in accordance with 
Sec. 91.110 and the citizen participation process conducted in 
accordance with Sec. 91.115. For a State seeking funding under the 
HOPWA program, the needs described for housing and supportive services 
must address the needs of persons with HIV/AIDS and their families in 
areas outside of eligible metropolitan statistical areas.
    (b) Categories of persons affected. (1) The consolidated plan shall 
estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance 
for extremely low-income, low-income, moderate-income, and middle-
income families, for renters and owners, for elderly persons, for 
single persons, for large families, for persons with HIV/AIDS and their 
families, and for persons with disabilities. The description of housing 
needs shall include a discussion of the cost burden and severe cost 
burden, overcrowding (especially for large families), and substandard 
housing conditions being experienced by extremely low-income, low-
income, moderate-income, and middle-income renters and owners compared 
to the State as a whole.
    (2) For any of the income categories enumerated in paragraph (b)(1) 
of this section, to the extent that any racial or ethnic group has 
disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that 
category as a whole, assessment of that specific need shall be 
included. For this purpose, disproportionately greater need exists when 
the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a 
particular racial or ethnic group is at least 10 percentage points 
[[Page 1908]] higher than the percentage of persons in the category as 
a whole.
    (c) Homeless needs. The plan must describe the nature and extent of 
homelessness (including rural homelessness) within the State, 
addressing separately the need for facilities and services for homeless 
individuals and homeless families with children, both sheltered and 
unsheltered, and homeless subpopulations, in accordance with a table 
prescribed by HUD. This description must include the characteristics 
and needs of low-income individuals and families with children 
(especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but 
threatened with homelessness. The plan also must contain a narrative 
description of the nature and extent of homelessness by racial and 
ethnic group, to the extent information is available.
    (d) Other special needs. (1) The State shall estimate, to the 
extent practicable, the number of persons who are not homeless but 
require supportive housing, including the elderly, frail elderly, 
persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons 
with alcohol or other drug addiction, persons with HIV/AIDS and their 
families, and any other categories the State may specify, and describe 
their supportive housing needs.
    (2) With respect to a State seeking assistance under the HOPWA 
program, the plan must identify the size and characteristics of the 
population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the area it will 
serve.
    (e) Lead-based paint hazards. The plan must estimate the number of 
housing units within the State that are occupied by low-income families 
or moderate-income families that contain lead-based paint hazards, as 
defined in this part.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.310  Housing market analysis.

    (a) General characteristics. Based on data available to the State, 
the plan must describe the significant characteristics of the State's 
housing markets (including such aspects as the supply, demand, and 
condition and cost of housing).
    (b) Homeless facilities. The plan must include a brief inventory of 
facilities and services that meet the needs for emergency shelter and 
transitional housing needs of homeless persons within the State.
    (c) Special need facilities and services. The plan must describe, 
to the extent information is available, the facilities and services 
that assist persons who are not homeless but who require supportive 
housing, and programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental 
and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive 
housing.
    (d) Barriers to affordable housing. The plan must explain whether 
the cost of housing or the incentives to develop, maintain, or improve 
affordable housing in the State are affected by its policies, including 
tax policies affecting land and other property, land use controls, 
zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limits, and 
policies that affect the return on residential investment.


Sec. 91.315  Strategic plan.

    (a) General. For the categories described in paragraphs (b), (c), 
(d), and (e) of this section, the consolidated plan must do the 
following:
    (1) Indicate the general priorities for allocating investment 
geographically within the State and among priority needs;
    (2) Describe the basis for assigning the priority (including the 
relative priority, where required) given to each category of priority 
needs;
    (3) Identify any obstacles to meeting underserved needs;
    (4) Summarize the priorities and specific objectives, describing 
how the proposed distribution of funds will address identified needs;
    (5) For each specific objective, identify the proposed 
accomplishments the State hopes to achieve in quantitative terms over a 
specific time period (i.e., one, two, three or more years), or in other 
measurable terms as identified and defined by the State.
    (b) Affordable housing. With respect to affordable housing, the 
consolidated plan must do the following:
    (1) The description of the basis for assigning relative priority to 
each category of priority need shall state how the analysis of the 
housing market and the severity of housing problems and needs of 
extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income renters and 
owners identified in accordance with Sec. 91.305 provided the basis for 
assigning the relative priority given to each priority need category in 
the priority housing needs table prescribed by HUD. Family and income 
types may be grouped together for discussion where the analysis would 
apply to more than one of them;
    (2) The statement of specific objectives must indicate how the 
characteristics of the housing market will influence the use of funds 
made available for rental assistance, production of new units, 
rehabilitation of old units, or acquisition of existing units; and
    (3) The description of proposed accomplishments shall specify the 
number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income 
families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as 
defined in Sec. 92.252 of this subtitle for rental housing and 
Sec. 92.254 of this subtitle for homeownership over a specific time 
period.
    (c) Homelessness. With respect to homelessness, the consolidated 
plan must include the priority homeless needs table prescribed by HUD 
and must describe the State's strategy for the following:
    (1) Helping low-income families avoid becoming homeless;
    (2) Reaching out to homeless persons and assessing their individual 
needs;
    (3) Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs 
of homeless persons; and
    (4) Helping homeless persons make the transition to permanent 
housing and independent living.
    (d) Other special needs. With respect to supportive needs of the 
non-homeless, the consolidated plan must describe the priority housing 
and supportive service needs of persons who are not homeless but 
require supportive housing (i.e., elderly, frail elderly, persons with 
disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or 
other drug addiction, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, and 
public housing residents).
    (e) Nonhousing community development plan. If the State seeks 
assistance under the Community Development Block Grant program, the 
consolidated plan must describe the State's priority nonhousing 
community development needs that affect more than one unit of general 
local government and involve activities typically funded by the State 
under the CDBG program. These priority needs must be described by CDBG 
eligibility category, reflecting the needs of persons or families for 
each type of activity. This community development component of the plan 
must state the State's specific long-term and short-term community 
development objectives (including economic development activities that 
create jobs), which must be developed in accordance with the statutory 
goals described in Sec. 91.1 and the primary objective of the CDBG 
program to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing 
and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, 
principally for low-income and moderate-income persons. [[Page 1909]] 
    (f) Barriers to affordable housing. The consolidated plan must 
describe the State's strategy to remove or ameliorate negative effects 
of its policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing, as 
identified in accordance with Sec. 91.310.
    (g) Lead-based paint hazards. The consolidated plan must outline 
the actions proposed or being taken to evaluate and reduce lead-based 
paint hazards, and describe how the lead-based paint hazard reduction 
will be integrated into housing policies and programs.
    (h) Anti-poverty strategy. The consolidated plan must describe the 
State's goals, programs, and policies for reducing the number of 
poverty level families and how the State's goals, programs, and 
policies for producing and preserving affordable housing, set forth in 
the housing component of the consolidated plan, will be coordinated 
with other programs and services for which the State is responsible and 
the extent to which they will reduce (or assist in reducing) the number 
of poverty level families, taking into consideration factors over which 
the State has control.
    (i) Institutional structure. The consolidated plan must explain the 
institutional structure, including private industry, nonprofit 
organizations, and public institutions, through which the State will 
carry out its housing and community development plan, assessing the 
strengths and gaps in that delivery system. The plan must describe what 
the State will do to overcome gaps in the institutional structure for 
carrying out its strategy for addressing its priority needs.
    (j) Coordination. The consolidated plan must describe the State's 
activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing 
providers and private and governmental health, mental health, and 
service agencies. With respect to the public entities involved, the 
plan must describe the means of cooperation and coordination among the 
State and any units of general local government in the implementation 
of its consolidated plan.
    (k) Low-income housing tax credit use. The consolidated plan must 
describe the strategy to coordinate the Low-income Housing Tax Credit 
with the development of housing that is affordable to low-income and 
moderate-income families.
    (l) Public housing resident initiatives. For a State that has a 
State housing agency administering public housing funds, the 
consolidated plan must describe the State's activities to encourage 
public housing residents to become more involved in management and 
participate in homeownership.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.320  Action plan.

    The action plan must include the following:
    (a) Form application. Standard Form 424;
    (b) Resources. (1) Federal resources. The consolidated plan must 
describe the Federal resources expected to be available to address the 
priority needs and specific objectives identified in the strategic 
plan, in accordance with Sec. 91.315. These resources include grant 
funds and program income.
    (2) Other resources. The consolidated plan must indicate resources 
from private and non-Federal public sources that are reasonably 
expected to be made available to address the needs identified in the 
plan. The plan must explain how Federal funds will leverage those 
additional resources, including a description of how matching 
requirements of the HUD programs will be satisfied. Where the State 
deems it appropriate, it may indicate publicly owned land or property 
located within the State that may be used to carry out the purposes 
stated in Sec. 91.1;
    (c) Activities. A description of the State's method for 
distributing funds to local governments and nonprofit organizations to 
carry out activities, or the activities to be undertaken by the State, 
using funds that are expected to be received under formula allocations 
(and related program income) and other HUD assistance during the 
program year and how the proposed distribution of funds will address 
the priority needs and specific objectives described in the 
consolidated plan;
    (d) Geographic distribution. A description of the geographic areas 
of the State (including areas of minority concentration) in which it 
will direct assistance during the ensuing program year, giving the 
rationale for the priorities for allocating investment geographically;
    (e) Homeless and other special needs activities. Activities it 
plans to undertake during the next year to address emergency shelter 
and transitional housing needs of homeless individuals and families 
(including subpopulations), to prevent low-income individuals and 
families with children (especially those with incomes below 30 percent 
of median) from becoming homeless, to help homeless persons make the 
transition to permanent housing and independent living, and to address 
the special needs of persons who are not homeless identified in 
accordance with Sec. 91.315(d);
    (f) Other actions. Actions it plans to take during the next year to 
address obstacles to meeting underserved needs, foster and maintain 
affordable housing (including the coordination of Low-Income Housing 
Tax Credits with the development of affordable housing), remove 
barriers to affordable housing, evaluate and reduce lead-based paint 
hazards, reduce the number of poverty level families, develop 
institutional structure, and enhance coordination between public and 
private housing and social service agencies and foster public housing 
resident initiatives. (See Sec. 91.315 (a), (b), (f), (g), (h), (i), 
(j), (k), and (l).)
    (g) Program-specific requirements. In addition, the plan must 
include the following specific information:
    (1) CDBG. (i) An ``urgent needs'' activity (one that is expected to 
qualify under Sec. 570.208(c) of this title) may be included only if 
the State identifies the activity in the action plan and certifies that 
the activity is designed to meet other community development needs 
having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious 
and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community and 
other financial resources are not available.
    (ii) The method of distribution shall contain a description of all 
criteria used to select applications from local governments for 
funding, including the relative importance of the criteria--if the 
relative importance has been developed. The action plan must include a 
description of how all CDBG resources will be allocated among all 
funding categories and the threshold factors and grant size limits that 
are to be applied. If the State intends to aid nonentitlement units of 
general local government in applying for guaranteed loan funds under 24 
CFR part 570, subpart M, it must describe available guarantee amounts 
and how applications will be selected for assistance. (The statement of 
the method of distribution must provide sufficient information so that 
units of general local government will be able to understand and 
comment on it and be able to prepare responsive applications.)
    (2) HOME. (i) The State shall describe other forms of investment 
that are not described in Sec. 92.205(b) of this subtitle.
    (ii) If the State intends to use HOME funds for homebuyers, it must 
state the guidelines for resale or recapture, as required in 
Sec. 92.254 of this subtitle.
    (3) ESG. The State shall state the process for awarding grants to 
State recipients and a description of how the State intends to make its 
allocation [[Page 1910]] available to units of local government and 
nonprofit organizations.
    (4) HOPWA. The State shall state the method of selecting project 
sponsors.


Sec. 91.325  Certifications.

    (a) General--(1) Affirmatively furthering fair housing. Each State 
is required to submit a certification that it will affirmatively 
further fair housing, which means that it will conduct an analysis to 
identify impediments to fair housing choice within the State, take 
appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments 
identified through that analysis, and maintain records reflecting the 
analysis and actions in this regard. (See Sec. 570.487(b)(2)(ii) of 
this title.)
    (2) Anti-displacement and relocation plan. The State is required to 
submit a certification that it has in effect and is following a 
residential antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan in 
connection with any activity assisted with funding under the CDBG or 
HOME programs.
    (3) Drug-free workplace. The State must submit a certification with 
regard to drug-free workplace required by 24 CFR part 24, subpart F.
    (4) Anti-lobbying. The State must submit a certification with 
regard to compliance with restrictions on lobbying required by 24 CFR 
part 87, together with disclosure forms, if required by that part.
    (5) Authority of State. The State must submit a certification that 
the consolidated plan is authorized under State law and that the State 
possesses the legal authority to carry out the programs for which it is 
seeking funding, in accordance with applicable HUD regulations.
    (6) Consistency with plan. The State must submit a certification 
that the housing activities to be undertaken with CDBG, HOME, ESG, and 
HOPWA funds are consistent with the strategic plan.
    (7) Acquisition and relocation. The State must submit a 
certification that it will comply with the acquisition and relocation 
requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property 
Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, and implementing 
regulations at 49 CFR part 24.
    (8) Section 3. The State must submit a certification that it will 
comply with section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 
(12 U.S.C. 1701u), and implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 135.
    (b) Community Development Block Grant program. For States that seek 
funding under CDBG, the following certifications are required:
    (1) Citizen participation. A certification that the State is 
following a detailed citizen participation plan that satisfies the 
requirements of Sec. 91.115, and that each unit of general local 
government that is receiving assistance from the State is following a 
detailed citizen participation plan that satisfies the requirements of 
Sec. 570.486 of this title.
    (2) Consultation with local governments. A certification that:
    (i) It has consulted with affected units of local government in the 
nonentitlement area of the State in determining the method of 
distribution of funding;
    (ii) It engages or will engage in planning for community 
development activities;
    (iii) It provides or will provide technical assistance to units of 
general local government in connection with community development 
programs;
    (iv) It will not refuse to distribute funds to any unit of general 
local government on the basis of the particular eligible activity 
selected by the unit of general local government to meet its community 
development needs, except that a State is not prevented from 
establishing priorities in distributing funding on the basis of the 
activities selected; and
    (v) Each unit of general local government to be distributed funds 
will be required to identify its community development and housing 
needs, including the needs of the low-income and moderate-income 
families, and the activities to be undertaken to meet these needs.
    (3) Community development plan. A certification that this 
consolidated plan identifies community development and housing needs 
and specifies both short-term and long-term community development 
objectives that have been developed in accordance with the primary 
objective of the statute authorizing the CDBG program, as described in 
24 CFR 570.2, and requirements of this part and 24 CFR part 570.
    (4) Use of funds. A certification that the State has complied with 
the following criteria:
    (i) With respect to activities expected to be assisted with CDBG 
funds, the action plan has been developed so as to give the maximum 
feasible priority to activities that will benefit low- and moderate-
income families or aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or 
blight. The plan may also include CDBG-assisted activities that are 
certified to be designed to meet other community development needs 
having particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious 
and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community where 
other financial resources are not available to meet such needs;
    (ii) The aggregate use of CDBG funds, including section 108 
guaranteed loans, during a period specified by the State, consisting of 
one, two, or three specific consecutive program years, shall 
principally benefit low- and moderate-income families in a manner that 
ensures that at least 70 percent of the amount is expended for 
activities that benefit such persons during the designated period (see 
24 CFR 570.481 for definition of ``CDBG funds''); and
    (iii) The State will not attempt to recover any capital costs of 
public improvements assisted with CDBG funds, including Section 108 
loan guaranteed funds, by assessing any amount against properties owned 
and occupied by persons of low- and moderate-income, including any fee 
charged or assessment made as a condition of obtaining access to such 
public improvements. However, if CDBG funds are used to pay the 
proportion of a fee or assessment attributable to the capital costs of 
public improvements (assisted in part with CDBG funds) financed from 
other revenue sources, an assessment or charge may be made against the 
property with respect to the public improvements financed by a source 
other than with CDBG funds. In addition, with respect to properties 
owned and occupied by moderate-income (but not low-income) families, an 
assessment or charge may be made against the property with respect to 
the public improvements financed by a source other than CDBG funds if 
the State certifies that it lacks CDBG funds to cover the assessment.
    (5) Compliance with anti-discrimination laws. A certification that 
the grant will be conducted and administered in conformity with title 
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d) and the Fair 
Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601-3619) and implementing regulations.
    (6) Excessive force. A certification that the State will require 
units of general local government that receive CDBG funds to certify 
that they have adopted and are enforcing:
    (i) A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law 
enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals 
engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and
    (ii) A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against 
physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location that 
is the subject of such [[Page 1911]] non-violent civil rights 
demonstrations within its jurisdiction.
    (7) Compliance with laws. A certification that the State will 
comply with applicable laws.
    (c) Emergency Shelter Grant program. For States that seek funding 
under the Emergency Shelter Grant program, a certification is required 
by the State that it will ensure that its State recipients comply with 
the following criteria:
    (1) In the case of assistance involving major rehabilitation or 
conversion, it will maintain any building for which assistance is used 
under the ESG program as a shelter for homeless individuals and 
families for not less than a 10-year period;
    (2) In the case of assistance involving rehabilitation less than 
that covered under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, it will maintain 
any building for which assistance is used under the ESG program as a 
shelter for homeless individuals and families for not less than a 
three-year period;
    (3) In the case of assistance involving essential services 
(including but not limited to employment, health, drug abuse, or 
education) or maintenance, operation, insurance, utilities and 
furnishings, it will provide services or shelter to homeless 
individuals and families for the period during which the ESG assistance 
is provided, without regard to a particular site or structure as long 
as the same general population is served;
    (4) Any renovation carried out with ESG assistance shall be 
sufficient to ensure that the building involved is safe and sanitary;
    (5) It will assist homeless individuals in obtaining appropriate 
supportive services, including permanent housing, medical and mental 
health treatment, counseling, supervision, and other services essential 
for achieving independent living, and other Federal, State, local, and 
private assistance available for such individuals;
    (6) It will obtain matching amounts required under Sec. 576.71 of 
this title;
    (7) It will develop and implement procedures to ensure the 
confidentiality of records pertaining to any individual provided family 
violence prevention or treatment services under any project assisted 
under the ESG program, including protection against the release of the 
address or location of any family violence shelter project except with 
the written authorization of the person responsible for the operation 
of that shelter;
    (8) To the maximum extent practicable, it will involve, through 
employment, volunteer services, or otherwise, homeless individuals and 
families in constructing, renovating, maintaining, and operating 
facilities assisted under this program, in providing services assisted 
under the program, and in providing services for occupants of 
facilities assisted under the program; and
    (9) It is following a current HUD-approved consolidated plan.
    (d) HOME program. Each State must provide the following 
certifications:
    (1) If it plans to use program funds for tenant-based rental 
assistance, a certification that rental-based assistance is an 
essential element of its consolidated plan;
    (2) A certification that it is using and will use HOME funds for 
eligible activities and costs, as described in Secs. 92.205 through 
92.209 of this subtitle and that it is not using and will not use HOME 
funds for prohibited activities, as described in Sec. 92.214 of this 
subtitle; and
    (3) A certification that before committing funds to a project, the 
State or its recipients will evaluate the project in accordance with 
guidelines that it adopts for this purpose and will not invest any more 
HOME funds in combination with other federal assistance than is 
necessary to provide affordable housing.
    (e) Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS. For States that 
seek funding under the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS 
program, a certification is required by the State that:
    (1) Activities funded under the program will meet urgent needs that 
are not being met by available public and private sources; and
    (2) Any building or structure purchased, leased, rehabilitated, 
renovated, or converted with assistance under that program shall be 
operated for not less than 10 years specified in the plan, or for a 
period of not less than three years in cases involving non-substantial 
rehabilitation or repair of a building or structure.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.330  Monitoring.

    The consolidated plan must describe the standards and procedures 
that the State will use to monitor activities carried out in 
furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance 
with requirements of the programs involved, including the comprehensive 
planning requirements.

Subpart E--Consortia; Contents of Consolidated Plan


Sec. 91.400  Applicability.

    This subpart applies to HOME program consortia, as defined in 
Sec. 91.5 (see 24 CFR part 92). Units of local government that 
participate in a consortium must participate in submission of a 
consolidated plan for the consortium, prepared in accordance with this 
subpart. CDBG entitlement communities that are members of a consortium 
must provide additional information for the consolidated plan, as 
described in this subpart.


Sec. 91.401  Citizen participation plan.

    The consortium must have a citizen participation plan that complies 
with the requirements of Sec. 91.105. If the consortium contains one or 
more CDBG entitlement communities, the consortium's citizen 
participation plan must provide for citizen participation within each 
CDBG entitlement community, either by the consortium or by the CDBG 
entitlement community, in a manner sufficient for the CDBG entitlement 
community to certify that it is following a citizen participation plan.


Sec. 91.402  Consolidated program year.

    (a) Same program year for consortia members. All units of general 
local government that are members of a consortium must be on the same 
program year for CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA. The program year shall run 
for a twelve month period and begin on the first calendar day of a 
month.
    (b) Transition period. (1) A consortium in existence on March 6, 
1995, with all members having aligned program years must comply with 
paragraph (a) of this section. A consortium in existence on March 6, 
1995, in which all members do not have aligned program years will be 
allowed a transition period during the balance of its current 
consortium agreement to bring the program year for all members into 
alignment.
    (2) During any such transition period, the lead agency (if it is a 
CDBG entitlement community) must submit, as its consolidated plan, a 
plan that complies with this subpart for the consortium, plus its 
nonhousing Community Development Plan (in accordance with Sec. 91.215). 
All other CDBG entitlement communities in the consortium may submit 
their respective nonhousing Community Development Plans 
(Sec. 91.215(e)), an Action Plan (Sec. 91.220) and the certifications 
(Sec. 91.425(a) and (b)) in accordance with their individual program 
years.

[[Page 1912]]  (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget 
under control number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.405  Housing and homeless needs assessment.

    Housing and homeless needs must be described in the consolidated 
plan in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 91.205 for the entire 
consortium. In addition to describing these needs for the entire 
consortium, the consolidated plan may also describe these needs for 
individual communities that are members of the consortium.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.410  Housing market analysis.

    Housing market analysis must be described in the consolidated plan 
in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 91.210 for the entire 
consortium. In addition to describing market conditions for the entire 
consortium, the consolidated plan may also describe these conditions 
for individual communities that are members of the consortium.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.415  Strategic plan.

    Strategies and priority needs must be described in the consolidated 
plan in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 91.215 for the entire 
consortium. The consortium is not required to submit a nonhousing 
Community Development Plan; however, if the consortium includes CDBG 
entitlement communities, the consolidated plan must include the 
nonhousing Community Development Plans of the CDBG entitlement 
community members of the consortium. The consortium must set forth its 
priorities for allocating housing (including CDBG and ESG, where 
applicable) resources geographically within the consortium, describing 
how the consolidated plan will address the needs identified (in 
accordance with Sec. 91.405), describing the reasons for the 
consortium's allocation priorities, and identifying any obstacles there 
are to addressing underserved needs.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.420  Action plan.

    (a) Form application. The action plan for the consortium must 
include a Standard Form 424 for the consortium for the HOME program. 
Each entitlement jurisdiction also must submit a Standard Form 424 for 
its funding under the CDBG program and, if applicable, the ESG and 
HOPWA programs.
    (b) Description of resources and activities. The action plan must 
describe the resources to be used and activities to be undertaken to 
pursue its strategic plan. The consolidated plan must provide this 
description for all resources and activities within the entire 
consortium as a whole, as well as a description for each individual 
community that is a member of the consortium.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.425  Certifications.

    (a) Consortium certifications--(1) General--(i) Affirmatively 
furthering fair housing. Each consortium must certify that it will 
affirmatively further fair housing, which means that it will conduct an 
analysis to identify impediments to fair housing choice within the 
area, take appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any 
impediments identified through that analysis, and maintain records 
reflecting the analysis and actions in this regard.
    (ii) Anti-displacement and relocation plan. Each consortium must 
certify that it has in effect and is following a residential 
antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan in connection with any 
activity assisted with funding under the HOME or CDBG program.
    (iii) Drug-free workplace. The consortium must submit a 
certification with regard to drug-free workplace required by 24 CFR 
part 24, subpart F.
    (iv) Anti-lobbying. The consortium must submit a certification with 
regard to compliance with restrictions on lobbying required by 24 CFR 
part 87, together with disclosure forms, if required by that part.
    (v) Authority of consortium. The consortium must submit a 
certification that the consolidated plan is authorized under State and 
local law (as applicable) and that the consortium possesses the legal 
authority to carry out the programs for which it is seeking funding, in 
accordance with applicable HUD regulations.
    (vi) Consistency with plan. The consortium must certify that the 
housing activities to be undertaken with CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA 
funds are consistent with the strategic plan.
    (vii) Acquisition and relocation. The consortium must certify that 
it will comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the 
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies 
Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4601), and implementing regulations 
at 49 CFR part 24.
    (viii) Section 3. The consortium must certify that it will comply 
with section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 (12 
U.S.C. 1701u), and implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 135.
    (2) HOME program. The consortium must provide the following 
certifications:
    (i) If it plans to use HOME funds for tenant-based rental 
assistance, a certification that rental-based assistance is an 
essential element of its consolidated plan;
    (ii) That it is using and will use HOME funds for eligible 
activities and costs, as described in Secs. 92.205 through 92.209 of 
this subtitle and that it is not using and will not use HOME funds for 
prohibited activities, as described in Sec. 92.214 of this subtitle; 
and
    (iii) That before committing funds to a project, the consortium 
will evaluate the project in accordance with guidelines that it adopts 
for this purpose and will not invest any more HOME funds in combination 
with other federal assistance than is necessary to provide affordable 
housing.
    (b) CDBG entitlement community certifications. A CDBG entitlement 
community that is a member of a consortium must submit the 
certifications required by Sec. 91.225 (a) and (b), and, if applicable, 
of Sec. 91.225 (c) and (d).

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.430  Monitoring.

    The consolidated plan must describe the standards and procedures 
that the consortium will use to monitor activities carried out in 
furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance 
with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business 
outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements.

Subpart F--Other General Requirements


Sec. 91.500  HUD approval action.

    (a) General. HUD will review the plan upon receipt. The plan will 
be deemed approved 45 days after HUD receives the plan, unless before 
that date HUD has notified the jurisdiction that the plan is 
disapproved.
    (b) Standard of review. HUD may disapprove a plan or a portion of a 
plan if it is inconsistent with the purposes of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12703), or it is 
substantially incomplete. The following are examples of consolidated 
plans that are substantially incomplete: [[Page 1913]] 
    (1) A plan that was developed without the required citizen 
participation or the required consultation;
    (2) A plan that fails to satisfy all the required elements in this 
part; and
    (3) A plan for which a certification is rejected by HUD as 
inaccurate, after HUD has inspected the evidence and provided due 
notice and opportunity to the jurisdiction for comment.
    (c) Written notice of disapproval. Within 15 days after HUD 
notifies a jurisdiction that it is disapproving its plan, it must 
inform the jurisdiction in writing of the reasons for disapproval and 
actions that the jurisdiction could take to meet the criteria for 
approval. Disapproval of a plan with respect to one program does not 
affect assistance distributed on the basis of a formula under other 
programs.
    (d) Revisions and resubmission. The jurisdiction may revise or 
resubmit a plan within 45 days after the first notification of 
disapproval. HUD must respond to approve or disapprove the plan within 
30 days of receiving the revisions or resubmission.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.505  Amendments to the consolidated plan.

    (a) Amendments to the plan. The jurisdiction shall amend its 
approved plan whenever it makes one of the following decisions:
    (1) To make a change in its allocation priorities or a change in 
the method of distribution of funds;
    (2) To carry out an activity, using funds from any program covered 
by the consolidated plan (including program income), not previously 
described in the action plan; or
    (3) To change the purpose, scope, location, or beneficiaries of an 
activity.
    (b) Criteria for substantial amendment. The jurisdiction shall 
identify in its citizen participation plan the criteria it will use for 
determining what constitutes a substantial amendment. It is these 
substantial amendments that are subject to a citizen participation 
process, in accordance with the jurisdiction's citizen participation 
plan. (See Secs. 91.105 and 91.115.)
    (c) Submission to HUD. (1) Upon completion, the jurisdiction must 
make the amendment public and must notify HUD that an amendment has 
been made. The jurisdiction may submit a copy of each amendment to HUD 
as it occurs, or at the end of the program year. Letters transmitting 
copies of amendments must be signed by the official representative of 
the jurisdiction authorized to take such action.
    (2) See subpart B of this part for the public notice procedures 
applicable to substantial amendments. For any amendment affecting the 
HOPWA program that would involve acquisition, rehabilitation, 
conversion, lease, repair or construction of properties to provide 
housing, an environmental review of the revised proposed use of funds 
must be completed by HUD in accordance with 24 CFR 574.510.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.510  Consistency determinations.

    (a) Applicability. For competitive programs, a certification of 
consistency of the application with the approved consolidated plan for 
the jurisdiction may be required, whether the applicant is the 
jurisdiction or another applicant.
    (b) Certifying authority. (1) The certification must be obtained 
from the unit of general local government if the project will be 
located in a unit of general local government that: is required to have 
a consolidated plan, is authorized to use an abbreviated consolidated 
plan but elects to prepare and has submitted a full consolidated plan, 
or is authorized to use an abbreviated consolidated plan and is 
applying for the same program as the applicant pursuant to the same 
Notice of Funding Availability (and therefore has or will have an 
abbreviated consolidated plan for the fiscal year for that program).
    (2) If the project will not be located in a unit of general local 
government, the certification may be obtained from the State or, if the 
project will be located in a unit of general local government 
authorized to use an abbreviated consolidated plan, from the unit of 
general local government if it is willing to prepare such a plan.
    (3) Where the recipient of a HOPWA grant is a city that is the most 
populous unit of general local government in an EMSA, it also must 
obtain and keep on file certifications of consistency from such public 
officials for each other locality in the EMSA in which housing 
assistance is provided.
    (c) Meaning. A jurisdiction's certification that an application is 
consistent with its consolidated plan means the jurisdiction's plan 
shows need, the proposed activities are consistent with the 
jurisdiction's strategic plan, and the location of the proposed 
activities is consistent with the geographic areas specified in the 
plan. The jurisdiction shall provide the reasons for the denial when it 
fails to provide a certification of consistency.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.515  Funding determinations by HUD.

    (a) Formula funding. The action plan submitted by the jurisdiction 
will be considered as the application for the CDBG, HOME, ESG, and 
HOPWA formula grant programs. The Department will make its funding 
award determination after reviewing the plan submission in accordance 
with Sec. 91.500.
    (b) Other funding. For other funding, the jurisdiction must still 
respond to Notices of Funding Availability for the individual programs 
in order to receive funding.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.520  Performance reports.

    (a) General. Each jurisdiction that has an approved consolidated 
plan shall annually review and report, in a form prescribed by HUD, on 
the progress it has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its 
action plan. The performance report must include a description of the 
resources made available, the investment of available resources, the 
geographic distribution and location of investments, the families and 
persons assisted (including the racial and ethnic status of persons 
assisted), actions taken to affirmatively further fair housing, and 
other actions indicated in the strategic plan and the action plan. This 
performance report shall be submitted to HUD within 90 days after the 
close of the jurisdiction's program year.
    (b) Affordable housing. The report shall include an evaluation of 
the jurisdiction's progress in meeting its specific objective of 
providing affordable housing, including the number and types of 
families served. This element of the report must include the number of 
extremely low-income, low-income, moderate-income, and middle-income 
persons served.
    (c) CDBG. For CDBG recipients, the report shall include a 
description of the use of CDBG funds during the program year and an 
assessment by the jurisdiction of the relationship of that use to the 
priorities and specific objectives identified in the plan, giving 
special attention to the highest priority activities that were 
identified. This element of the report must specify the nature of and 
reasons for any changes in its program objectives and indications of 
how the jurisdiction would change its programs as a result of its 
experiences. This element of the report also must include the number of 
extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income persons served by 
each activity where information on income by family size is required to 
determine the eligibility of the activity. [[Page 1914]] 
    (d) HOME. For HOME participating jurisdictions, the report shall 
include the results of on-site inspections of affordable rental housing 
assisted under the program to determine compliance with housing codes 
and other applicable regulations, an assessment of the jurisdiction's 
affirmative marketing actions and outreach to minority-owned and women-
owned businesses, and data on the amount and use of program income for 
projects, including the number of projects and owner and tenant 
characteristics.
    (e) HOPWA. For jurisdictions receiving funding under the Housing 
Opportunities for Persons With AIDS program, the report must include 
the number of individuals assisted and the types of assistance 
provided.
    (f) Evaluation by HUD. HUD shall review the performance report and 
determine whether it is satisfactory. If a satisfactory report is not 
submitted in a timely manner, HUD may suspend funding until a 
satisfactory report is submitted, or may withdraw and reallocate 
funding if HUD determines, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, 
that the jurisdiction will not submit a satisfactory report.

 (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 91.525  Performance review by HUD.

    (a) General. HUD shall review the performance of each jurisdiction 
covered by this part at least annually, including site visits by 
employees--insofar as practicable, assessing the following:
    (1) Management of funds made available under programs administered 
by HUD;
    (2) Compliance with the consolidated plan;
    (3) Accuracy of performance reports;
    (4) Extent to which the jurisdiction made progress towards the 
statutory goals identified in Sec. 91.1; and
    (5) Efforts to ensure that housing assisted under programs 
administered by HUD is in compliance with contractual agreements and 
the requirements of law.
    (b) Report by HUD. HUD shall report on the performance review in 
writing, stating the length of time the jurisdiction has to review and 
comment on the report, which will be at least 30 days. HUD may revise 
the report after considering the jurisdiction's views, and shall make 
the report, the jurisdiction's comments, and any revisions available to 
the public within 30 days after receipt of the jurisdiction's comments.

PART 92--HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

    2. The authority citation for part 92 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 12701-12839.

    3. In Sec. 92.2, the definition of ``housing strategy'' is removed 
and a definition of ``consolidated plan'' is added in alphabetical 
order, to read as follows:


Sec. 92.2   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Consolidated plan. The plan prepared in accordance with part 91 of 
this subtitle, which describes needs, resources, priorities and 
proposed activities to be undertaken with respect to HUD programs, 
including the HOME program. An approved consolidated plan means a 
consolidated plan that has been approved by HUD in accordance with part 
91 of this subtitle.
* * * * *
    4. Section 92.52 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 92.52   Formula allocations.

    Not later than 20 days after funds become available to HUD, HUD 
will allocate HOME funds and then will promptly notify all 
jurisdictions receiving a formula allocation the amount of each 
jurisdiction's formula allocation.
    5. In Sec. 92.103, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 92.103   Notification of intent to participate.

    (a) A jurisdiction must notify HUD in writing, not later than 30 
days after receiving notice of its formula allocation amount under 
Sec. 92.52, of its intention to become a participating jurisdiction.
* * * * *
    6. Section 92.104 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 92.104   Submission of consolidated plan.

    A jurisdiction that has not submitted a consolidated plan to HUD or 
has submitted an abbreviated consolidated plan (as provided for in 
Sec. 91.235 of this subtitle) must submit to HUD, not later than 90 
days after providing notification under Sec. 92.103, a consolidated 
plan in accordance with part 91 of this subtitle.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
numbers 2501-0013).


    7. Section 92.105 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 92.105   Designation as a participating jurisdiction.

    When a jurisdiction has complied with the requirements of 
Secs. 92.102 through 92.104 and HUD has approved the jurisdiction's 
consolidated plan in accordance with part 91 of this subtitle, HUD will 
designate the jurisdiction as a participating jurisdiction.


(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
numbers 2501-0013 and 2506-0117).


    8. Section 92.150 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 92.150   Submission requirements.

    In order to receive its HOME allocation, a participating 
jurisdiction must submit a consolidated plan in accordance with 24 CFR 
part 91. That part includes requirements for the content of the 
consolidated plan, for the process of developing the consolidated plan, 
including citizen participation provisions, for the submission date, 
for HUD approval, and for the amendment process.


(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 92.151  [Removed]

    9. Section 92.151 is removed.


Sec. 92.152  [Removed]

    10. Section 92.152 is removed.


Sec. 92.200  [Amended]

    11. In Sec. 92.200, the term ``housing strategy'' is removed from 
each place where it appears, and the term ``consolidated plan'' is 
added in each place.


Sec. 92.201  [Amended]

    12. In Sec. 92.201, the term ``housing strategy'' is removed from 
paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) from each place where it appears, and the 
term ``consolidated plan'' is added in each place.


Sec. 92.204  [Amended]

    13. Section 92.204 is amended by removing from paragraph (c) the 
phrase, ``subpart D (Program Description),''.


Sec. 92.207  [Amended]

    14. Section 92.207 is amended by removing from paragraph (f) the 
term ``housing strategy'' in each place where it occurs and adding in 
its place the term ``consolidated plan''.
    15. In Sec. 92.211, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 92.211   Tenant-based rental assistance.

    (a) * * *
    (1) The participating jurisdiction makes the certification about 
inclusion of this type of assistance in its consolidated plan in 
accordance with Secs. 91.225(d)(1), 91.325(d)(1), or 91.425(b)(1)) of 
this subtitle; and
* * * * * [[Page 1915]] 


Sec. 92.220  [Amended]

    16. Section 92.220 is amended by removing the last sentence from 
paragraph (a)(6)(ii).


Sec. 92.222  [Amended]

    17. Section 92.222 is amended by removing from paragraphs (a)(3) 
and (a)(4) the word ``published'' in each place where it appears, and 
adding in its place the word ``made''.


Sec. 92.300  [Amended]

    18. Section 92.300 is amended by removing from paragraph (b) the 
term ``housing strategy'' where it occurs and adding it its place the 
term ``consolidated plan''.


Sec. 92.302  [Amended]

    19. Section 92.302 is amended by removing from paragraph (b)(2) the 
term ``housing strategy'' where it occurs and adding it its place the 
term ``consolidated plan''.


Sec. 92.350  [Amended]

    20. Section 92.350 is amended by removing from paragraph (b) the 
term ``housing strategy'' where it occurs and adding it its place the 
term ``consolidated plan''.


Sec. 92.450  [Amended]

    21. Section 92.450 is amended by removing from paragraph (b) the 
term ``housing strategy'' where it occurs and adding it its place the 
term ``consolidated plan''.


Sec. 92.451  [Amended]

    22. Section 92.451 is amended by removing from paragraph 
(a)(1)(iii), the phrase ``housing strategy in accordance with 
Sec. 92.104'' and by adding in its place, the phrase ``consolidated 
plan, in accordance with part 91 of this subtitle''; and by removing 
from paragraph (a)(2) the phrase ``Sec. 91.70 of this title'' and by 
adding in its place, the phrase ``part 91 of this subtitle''.


Sec. 92.453  [Amended]

    23. Section 92.453 is amended by removing from paragraph (b)(2)(ii) 
the phrase ``housing strategy'' each place where it occurs, and by 
adding the phrase ``consolidated plan''.


Sec. 92.508  [Amended]

    24. Section 92.508 is amended by removing from paragraph (c)(1) the 
word ``three'' and adding in its place the word ``four''.
    25. In Sec. 92.509, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 92.509  Performance reports.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Annual performance report. For annual performance report 
requirements, see part 91 of this subtitle.
* * * * *

PART 570--COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS

    26. The authority citation for part 570 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 5300-5320.

    27. In Sec. 570.3, the definition of ``Comprehensive Housing 
Affordability Strategy (CHAS or housing strategy)'' is removed, and the 
definition of ``consolidated plan'' is added in alphabetical order, to 
read as follows:


Sec. 570.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Consolidated plan. The plan prepared in accordance with 24 CFR part 
91, which describes needs, resources, priorities and proposed 
activities to be undertaken with respect to HUD programs, including the 
CDBG program. An approved consolidated plan means a consolidated plan 
that has been approved by HUD in accordance with 24 CFR part 91.
* * * * *


Sec. 570.205  [Amended]

    28. In Sec. 570.205, paragraph (a)(3)(i) is amended by removing the 
term ``Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy'', and adding in 
its place the term ``consolidated plan''.


Sec. 570.301  [Removed]

    29. Section 570.301 is removed.
    30. Section 570.302 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 570.302  Submission requirements.

    In order to receive its annual CDBG entitlement grant, a grantee 
must submit a consolidated plan in accordance with 24 CFR part 91. That 
part includes requirements for the content of the consolidated plan, 
for the process of developing the consolidated plan, including citizen 
participation provisions, for the submission date, for HUD approval, 
and for the amendment process.


(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


    31. Section 570.303 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 570.303  Certifications.

    The jurisdiction must make the certifications that are set forth in 
24 CFR part 91 as part of the consolidated plan.


(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


    32. In Sec. 570.304, paragraphs (a) and (c)(1) are revised to read 
as follows:


Sec. 570.304  Making of grants.

    (a) Approval of grant. HUD will approve a grant if the 
jurisdiction's submissions have been made and approved in accordance 
with 24 CFR part 91.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) The consolidated plan is not received by the first working day 
in September or is not approved under 24 CFR part 91, subpart F, in 
which case the grantee will forfeit the entire entitlement amount; or
* * * * *


Sec. 570.305  [Removed]

    33. Section 570.305 is removed.


Sec. 570.306  [Removed]

    34. Section 570.306 is removed.


Sec. 570.308  [Amended]

    35. In Sec. 570.308, paragraph (d) is amended by removing the 
phrase, ``this subpart'', and adding in its place the phrase, ``24 CFR 
part 91''.


Sec. 570.420  [Amended]

    36. In Sec. 570.420, paragraph (d) is amended by removing the word 
``CHAS'' and adding in its place the phrase ``consolidated plan''; and 
by removing the phrase ``Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy'' 
and adding in its place the phrase ``consolidated plan''.
    37. In Sec. 570.423, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)(1) are revised to 
read as follows:


Sec. 570.423  Application for the HUD-administered New York Small 
Cities Grants.

    (a) Proposed application. The applicant shall prepare and publish a 
proposed application and comply with citizen participation requirements 
as described in Sec. 570.431, and in 24 CFR part 91--if the application 
contains housing activities and the applicant is required to prepare 
and submit an abbreviated consolidated plan.
    (b) Final application. The applicant shall submit to HUD a final 
application containing its community development objectives and 
activities. This final application shall be submitted, in a form 
prescribed by HUD, to the appropriate HUD office. The application also 
must contain a priority nonhousing community development plan, in 
accordance with 24 CFR 91.235.
    (c) Certifications. (1) Certifications shall be submitted in a form 
prescribed by HUD. If the application contains any housing activities, 
the applicant shall certify that the proposed housing activities are 
consistent with its abbreviated consolidated plan, as described at 24 
CFR part 91.
* * * * * [[Page 1916]] 
    38. Section 570.429 is amended as follows:
    a. By removing from paragraph (b) the word ``through'' and by 
adding, in its place, the word ``and''; and
    b. By revising paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as follows:


Sec. 570.429  Hawaii general and grant requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) Required submissions. In order to receive its formula grant 
under this subpart, the applicant must submit a consolidated plan in 
accordance with 24 CFR part 91. That part includes requirements for the 
content of the consolidated plan, for the process of developing the 
plan, including citizen participation provisions, for the submission 
date, for HUD approval, and for the amendment process.
    (g) Application approval. HUD will follow the requirements of 24 
CFR 91.500.
* * * * *


Sec. 570.430  [Amended]

    39. Section 570.430 is amended by removing paragraph (f).


Sec. 570.431  [Amended]

    40. Section 570.431 is amended by removing paragraph (f).
    41. In Sec. 570.485, paragraphs (b), (c), and (e) are removed; 
paragraph (d) is redesignated as paragraph (b); and paragraph (a) is 
revised to read as follows:


Sec. 570.485  State submissions and state citizen participation 
requirements.

    (a) Required submissions. In order to receive its annual CDBG grant 
under this subpart, a State must submit a consolidated plan in 
accordance with 24 CFR part 91. That part includes requirements for the 
content of the consolidated plan, for the process of developing the 
plan, including citizen participation provisions, for the submission 
date, for HUD approval, and for the amendment process.
* * * * *
    42. Section 570.487 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 570.487  Other applicable laws and related program requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) Affirmatively furthering fair housing. The Act requires the 
state to certify to the satisfaction of HUD that it will affirmatively 
further fair housing. The act also requires each unit of general local 
government to certify that it will affirmatively further fair housing. 
The certification that the State will affirmatively further fair 
housing shall specifically require the State to assume the 
responsibility of fair housing planning by:
    (1) Conducting an analysis to identify impediments to fair housing 
choice within the State;
    (2) Taking appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any 
impediments identified through that analysis;
    (3) Maintaining records reflecting the analysis and actions in this 
regard; and
    (4) Assuring that units of local government funded by the State 
comply with their certifications to affirmatively further fair housing.
* * * * *
    43. Section 570.491 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 570.491  Performance and evaluation report.

    The annual performance and evaluation report shall be submitted in 
accordance with 24 CFR part 91.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).

    44. In Sec. 570.502, paragraph (a)(16) is revised to read as 
follows:


Sec. 570.502  Applicability of uniform administrative requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (16) Section 85.42, ``Retention and access requirements for 
records,'' except that the period shall be four years;
* * * * *
    45. In Sec. 570.506, paragraphs (e) and (g)(1) are revised to read 
as follows:


Sec. 570.506  Records to be maintained.

* * * * *
    (e) Records that demonstrate compliance with the citizen 
participation requirements prescribed in 24 CFR part 91, subpart B, for 
entitlement recipients, or in 24 CFR part 91, subpart C, for HUD-
administered small cities recipients.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) Documentation of the analysis of impediments and the actions 
the recipient has carried out with its housing and community 
development and other resources to remedy or ameliorate any impediments 
to fair housing choice in the recipient's community.
* * * * *
    46. In Sec. 570.507, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 570.507  Reports.

    (a) Performance and evaluation report--(1) Entitlement grant 
recipients and HUD-administered small cities recipients in Hawaii. The 
annual performance and evaluation report shall be submitted in 
accordance with 24 CFR part 91.
    (2) HUD-administered small cities recipients in New York. (i) 
Content. Each performance and evaluation report must contain completed 
copies of all forms and narratives prescribed by HUD, including a 
summary of the citizen comments received on the report.
    (ii) Timing. The performance and evaluation report on each grant 
shall be submitted:
    (A) No later than October 31 for all grants executed before April 1 
of the same calendar year. The first report should cover the period 
from the execution of the grant until September 30. Reports on grants 
made after March 31 of a calendar year will be due October 31 of the 
following calendar year, and the reports will cover the period of time 
from the execution of the grant until September 30 of the calendar year 
following grant execution. After the initial submission, the 
performance and evaluation report will be submitted annually on October 
31 until completion of the activities funded under the grant;
    (B) Hawaii grantees will submit their small cities performance and 
evaluation report for each pre-FY 1995 grant no later than 90 days 
after the completion of their most recent program year. After the 
initial submission, the performance and evaluation report will be 
submitted annually until completion of the activities funded under the 
grant; and
    (C) No later than 90 days after the criteria for grant closeout, as 
described in Sec. 570.509(a), have been met.
    (iii) Citizen comments on the report. Each recipient shall make 
copies of the performance and evaluation report available to its 
citizens in sufficient time to permit the citizens to comment on the 
report before its submission to HUD. Each recipient may determine the 
specific manner and times the report will be made available to citizens 
consistent with the preceding sentence.
* * * * *


Sec. 570.509  [Amended]

    47. Section 570.509 is amended by removing from paragraph (b)(1) 
the word, ``Sec. 570.507'' and adding in its place the words, ``24 CFR 
part 91''; and by removing from paragraph (d) the phrases, 
``comprehensive housing affordability strategy'', ``Comprehensive 
Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)'', and ``fiscal year'', and 
adding, in their place, the phrases, ``consolidated plan'', 
``Consolidated Plan'', and ``program year'', respectively. 
[[Page 1917]] 


Sec. 570.601  [Amended]

    48. In Sec. 570.601, paragraph (b) is amended by adding the 
following sentence to the end of the paragraph, to read as follows:


Sec. 570.601  Public Law 88-352 and Public Law 90-284; affirmatively 
furthering fair housing; Executive Order 11063.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * For each community receiving a grant under subpart D of 
this part, the certification that the grantee will affirmatively 
further fair housing shall specifically require the grantee to assume 
the responsibility of fair housing planning by conducting an analysis 
to identify impediments to fair housing choice within its jurisdiction, 
taking appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments 
identified through that analysis, and maintaining records reflecting 
the analysis and actions in this regard.
* * * * *


Sec. 570.605  [Amended]

    49. Section 570.605 is amended by removing the phrase, ``final 
statement pursuant to Sec. 570.302'', and by adding, in its place, the 
phrase, ``consolidated plan, in accordance with 24 CFR part 91''.


Sec. 570.606  [Amended]

    50. In Sec. 570.606, paragraph (c)(3)(iv) is amended by removing 
the term ``Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy'', and adding 
in its place the term ``consolidated plan''.


Sec. 570.704  [Amended]

    51. Section 570.704 is amended as follows:
    a. In paragraph (a)(1)(v), the phrase, ``statements of community 
development objectives and projected use of funds prepared for its 
annual grant pursuant to Sec. 570.301'' is removed, and the phrase, 
``consolidated plan'' is added in its place; and the phrase, ``include 
in these statements'', is removed and the phrase, ``include in the 
consolidated plan'', is added in its place.
    b. In paragraph (b) introductory text, the phrase ``final 
statement'' is removed and the phrase ``consolidated plan'' is added in 
its place.
    c. In paragraph (a)(2), the third and fourth sentences are revised 
to read as follows:


Sec. 570.704  Application requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Citizen participation plan. * * * The plan may be the citizen 
plan required for the consolidated plan, modified to include guaranteed 
loan funds. The public entity is not required to hold a separate public 
hearing for its consolidated plan and for the guaranteed loan funds to 
obtain citizens' views on community development and housing needs. * * 
*
* * * * *


Sec. 570.901  [Amended]

    52. Section 570.901 is amended by removing from paragraph (d) the 
phrase, ``presubmission requirements at Sec. 570.301, the amendment 
requirements at Sec. 570.305'', and adding in its place the phrase, 
``submission requirements of 24 CFR part 91''.
    53. In Sec. 570.904, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 570.904  Equal Opportunity and Fair Housing Review Criteria.

* * * * *
    (c) Fair housing review criteria. Section 570.601(b) sets forth the 
general requirements for the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601-3620) and 
the grantee's certification that it will affirmatively further fair 
housing.
* * * * *


Sec. 570.910  [Amended]

    54. Section 570.910 is amended by removing from paragraph 
(b)(2)(iii) the phrase, ``subpart D'', and adding in its place the 
phrase, ``24 CFR part 91''.

PART 574--HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS

    55. The authority citation for part 574 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 12901-12912.

    56. Section 574.2 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 574.2  Overview.

    (a) Available funds. The Department awards funds appropriated for 
any fiscal year for the program through a formula allocation and a 
competitive grant process. Ninety percent of funds appropriated for 
this program are distributed by formula entitlement. The remaining ten 
percent is awarded through the competitive process.
    (b) Formula entitlements. The formula grants are awarded upon 
submission and approval of a consolidated plan, pursuant to 24 CFR part 
91, that covers the assistance to be provided under this part. Certain 
States and cities that are the most populous unit of general local 
government in eligible metropolitan statistical areas will receive 
formula allocations based on their State or metropolitan population and 
proportionate number of cases of persons with AIDS. They will receive 
funds under this part (providing they comply with 24 CFR part 91) for 
eligible activities that address the housing needs of persons with AIDS 
or related diseases and their families (see Sec. 574.130(b)).
    (c) Competitive grants. The competitive grants are awarded based on 
applications, as described in subpart C of this part, submitted in 
response to a Notice of Funds Availability published in the Federal 
Register. All States and units of general local government and 
nonprofit organizations are eligible to apply for competitive grants to 
fund projects of national significance. Only those States and units of 
general local government that do not qualify for formula allocations 
are eligible to apply for competitive grants to fund other projects.
    57. In Sec. 574.3, the definitions for ``Eligible State'' and 
``Qualifying city'' are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 574.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Eligible State means a State that has:
    (1) More than 1,500 cumulative cases of AIDS in those areas of the 
State outside of eligible metropolitan statistical areas that are 
eligible to be funded through a qualifying city; and
    (2) A consolidated plan prepared, submitted, and approved in 
accordance with 24 CFR part 91 that covers the assistance to be 
provided under this part. (A State may carry out activities anywhere in 
the State, including within an EMSA.)
* * * * *
    Qualifying city means a city that is the most populous unit of 
general local government in an eligible metropolitan statistical area 
(EMSA) and that has a consolidated plan prepared, submitted, and 
approved in accordance with 24 CFR part 91 that covers the assistance 
to be provided under this part.
* * * * *
    58. In Sec. 574.100, the existing text is designated as paragraph 
(a), and a new paragraph (b) is added, to read as follows:


Sec. 574.100  Eligible applicants.

* * * * *
    (b) HUD will notify eligible States and qualifying cities of their 
formula eligibility and allocation amounts and EMSA service areas 
annually.
    59. Section 574.120 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 574.120  Responsibility of applicant to serve EMSA.

    The EMSA's applicant shall serve eligible persons who live anywhere 
within the EMSA, except that housing assistance shall be provided only 
in localities within the EMSA that have a [[Page 1918]] consolidated 
plan prepared, submitted, and approved in accordance with 24 CFR part 
91 that covers the assistance to be provided under this part. In 
allocating grant amounts among eligible activities, the EMSA's 
applicant shall address needs of eligible persons who reside within the 
metropolitan statistical area, including those not within the 
jurisdiction of the applicant.


Sec. 574.160  [Removed]

    60. Section 574.160 is removed.


Sec. 574.170  [Removed]

    61. Section 574.170 is removed.


Sec. 574.180  [Removed]

    62. Section 574.180 is removed.
    63. In Sec. 574.190, the first sentence is revised to read as 
follows:


Sec. 574.190  Reallocation of grant amounts.

    If an eligible State or qualifying city does not submit a 
consolidated plan in a timely fashion, in accordance with 24 CFR part 
91, that provides for use of its allocation of funding under this part, 
the funds allocated to that jurisdiction will be added to the funds 
available for formula allocations to other jurisdictions in the current 
fiscal year. * * *


Sec. 574.240  [Amended]

    64. In Sec. 574.240, paragraph (c)(11) is amended by removing the 
phrase, ``CHAS approved by HUD (see Sec. 574.160(a))'' and by adding in 
its place the phrase, ``consolidated plan approved by HUD in accordance 
with 24 CFR part 91''.
    65. Section 574.520 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 574.520  Performance reports.

    (a) Formula grants. For a formula grant recipient, the performance 
reporting requirements are specified in 24 CFR part 91.
    (b) Competitive grants. A grantee shall submit to HUD annually a 
report describing the use of the amounts received, including the number 
of individuals assisted, the types of assistance provided, and any 
other information that HUD may require. Annual reports are required 
until all grant funds are expended.


Sec. 574.530  [Amended]

    66. In Sec. 574.530, the word ``three-year'' is removed and the 
word ``four-year'' is added in its place.

PART 576--EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANTS PROGRAM: STEWART B. McKINNEY 
HOMELESS ASSISTANCE ACT

    67. The authority citation for part 576 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 11376.

    68. In Sec. 576.3, the definition of ``Comprehensive Housing 
Affordability Strategy'' is removed and a definition of ``Consolidated 
plan'' is added in alphabetical order, to read as follows:


Sec. 576.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Consolidated plan. The plan prepared in accordance with part 91 of 
this title, which describes needs, resources, priorities and proposed 
activities to be undertaken with respect to HUD programs, including the 
HOME program. An approved consolidated plan means a consolidated plan 
that has been approved by HUD in accordance with part 91 of this title.
* * * * *

Subpart C--[Removed and Reserved]

    69. Subpart C is removed and reserved.
    70. Section 576.51 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 576.51  Application requirements.

    In order to receive a grant under this part, a State or formula 
city or county must submit and obtain HUD approval of a consolidated 
plan in accordance with 24 CFR part 91 that includes activities to be 
funded under this part. 24 CFR part 91 includes requirements for the 
content of the plan, for the process of developing the plan, including 
citizen participation provisions, for the submission date, for HUD 
approval, and for the amendment process. This plan serves as the 
jurisdiction's application for funding under this program.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 2506-0117).


Sec. 576.53  [Amended]

    71. In Sec. 576.53, paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) are removed; and 
paragraphs (c) and (d) are redesignated as paragraphs (a) and (b), 
respectively.
    72. In Sec. 576.61, the section heading and paragraph (a) are 
revised to read as follows:


Sec. 576.61  Reallocation of grant amounts; formula cities and 
counties.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies where a formula city or 
county fails to submit or obtain HUD approval of its consolidated plan 
within 90 days of the date upon which amounts under this part first 
become available for allocation in any fiscal year.
* * * * *
    73. In Sec. 576.63, the section heading, paragraph (a), paragraph 
(d) introductory text, and paragraph (d)(1) are revised, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 576.63  Reallocation of grant amounts; States and Territories.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies where a State or Territory 
fails to submit or obtain HUD approval of its consolidated plan by the 
deadline specified in Sec. 576.61(a), or grant amounts cannot be 
reallocated to a State under Sec. 576.61.
* * * * *
    (d) Eligibility for reallocation amounts. In order to receive 
reallocation amounts under this section, the formula city or county, or 
State or Territory, must:
    (1) Submit an amendment, in accordance with 24 CFR part 91, to its 
consolidated plan for that program year to cover activities for the 
reallocation amount it wishes to receive; and
* * * * *
    74. In Sec. 576.67, paragraphs (c)(5) and (f)(1) are revised to 
read as follows:


Sec. 576.67  Reallocation of grant amounts; returned or unused amounts.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) The responsible HUD field office will announce the availability 
of returned grant amounts. The announcement will establish deadlines 
for submitting applications, and will set out other terms and 
conditions relating to grant awards, consistent with this part. The 
announcement will specify the application documents to be submitted.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) For purposes of this section, emergency shelter grant amounts 
are considered ``returned'' when they become available for reallocation 
because a jurisdiction does not execute a grant agreement with HUD for 
them.
* * * * *


Sec. 576.85  [Removed]

    75. Section 576.85 is removed.


Sec. 576.87  [Amended]

    76. In Sec. 576.87, the word ``three-year'' is removed and the word 
``four-year'' is added in its place.

PART 968--PUBLIC HOUSING MODERNIZATION

    77. The authority citation for part 968 continues to read as 
follows:

    [[Page 1919]] Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1437d, 1437l, 3535(d).

    78. Section 968.320 is amended by:
    a. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (c) introductory text;
    b. Redesignating paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) as paragraphs (e), 
(f), and (g), respectively;
    c. Adding a new paragraph (d);
    d. Amending the newly redesignated paragraph (e) by adding two new 
sentences preceding the last sentence of the introductory text;
    e. Revising the last sentence of paragraph (e)(4)(i); and
    f. Removing from paragraph (e)(6)(ii) the phrase ``Comprehensive 
Housing Affordability Strategy'' and adding in its place the phrase 
``consolidated plan''; to read as follows:


Sec. 968.320  Comprehensive Plan (including Five-Year Action Plan).

* * * * *
    (c) Local government participation. A PHA shall consult with and 
provide information to appropriate local government officials with 
respect to the development of a comprehensive plan to ensure that there 
is coordination between the actions taken under the consolidated plan 
(see 24 CFR part 91) for project and neighborhood improvements where 
public housing units are located or proposed for construction and/or 
modernization and improvement and to coordinate meeting public and 
human service needs of the public and assisted housing projects and 
their residents. * * *
* * * * *
    (d) Participation in coordinating entities. To the extent that 
coordinating entities are set up to plan and implement the consolidated 
plans (under 24 CFR part 91), the PHA shall participate in these 
entities to ensure coordination with broader community development 
strategies.
    (e) * * * Where long-term physical and social viability of the 
development is dependent upon revitalization of the surrounding 
neighborhood in the provision of or coordination of public services, or 
the consolidation or coordination of drug prevention and other human 
service initiatives, the PHA shall identify these needs and strategies. 
In addition, the PHA shall identify the funds or other resources in the 
consolidated plan that are to be used to help address these needs and 
strategies and the activities in the comprehensive plan that strengthen 
the consolidated plan. * * *
* * * * *
    (4) * * * (i) * * * Where necessary, HUD will review the PHA's 
documentation in support of its cost reasonableness and taking into 
account broader efforts to revitalize the neighborhoods in which the 
development are located;
* * * * *
    Dated: December 22, 1994.
Henry G. Cisneros,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-32150 Filed 12-29-94; 3:48 pm]
BILLING CODE 4210-32-P