31898 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 25, 2022 / Notices 

the HUD Secretary, for the 2022 

calendar year funding cycle, provide 

renewal funding for each public housing 

agency (PHA) based on validated 

voucher management system (VMS) 

leasing and cost data for the prior 

calendar year and by applying an 

inflation factor as established by the 

Secretary, by notice published in the 

Federal Register. This notice announces 

the FY 2022 inflation factors and 

describes the methodology for 

calculating them. Tables in PDF and 

Microsoft Excel formats showing RFIFs 

by HUD Fair Market Rent Area are 

available electronically from the HUD 

data information page at: https://

www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/rfif/ 

rfif.html. 

II. Methodology 

RFIFs are used to adjust the allocation 

of Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) 

program renewal funds to PHAs for 

local changes in rents, utility costs, and 

tenant incomes. To calculate the RFIFs, 

HUD first forecasts a national inflation 

factor, which is the annual change in 

the national average PUC. HUD then 

calculates individual area inflation 

factors, which are based on the annual 

changes in the two-bedroom Fair Market 

Rent (FMR) for each area. Finally, HUD 

adjusts the individual area inflation 

factors to be consistent with the national 

inflation factor. 

HUD’s forecast of the national average 

PUC is based on forecasts of gross rent 

and tenant income. Each forecast is 

produced using historical and 

forecasted macroeconomic data as 

independent variables, where the 

forecasts are consistent with the 

Economic Assumptions of the 

Administration’s FY 2022 Budget. The 

forecast of gross rent is itself based on 

forecasts of the Consumer Price Index 

(CPI) Rent of Primary Residence Index 

and the CPI Fuels and Utilities Index. 

Forecasted values of these series are 

applied to the FY 2022 national average 

two-bedroom FMR to produce a CY 

2022 value. A ‘‘notional’’ PUC is 

calculated as the difference between 

gross rent value and 30 percent of 

family income (the standard for family 

rent contribution in the voucher 

program). The change between the 

forecasted CY 2022 notional PUC and 

the CY 2021 notional PUC is the 

expected national change in PUC, or 

5.80 percent. HUD uses a notional PUC 

as opposed to the actual PUC to project 

costs that are consistent with PHAs 

leasing the same number and quality of 

units. For more information on HUD’s 

forecast methodology, see 82 FR 26710. 

The inflation factor for an individual 

geographic area is based on the 

annualized change in the area’s FMR 

between FY 2021 and FY 2022. These 

changes in FMRs are then scaled such 

that the voucher-weighted average of all 

individual area inflation factors is equal 

to the national inflation factor, i.e., the 

expected annual change in national PUC 

from CY 2021 to CY 2022, and such that 

no area has a factor less than one. For 

PHAs operating in multiple FMR areas, 

HUD calculates a voucher-weighted 

average inflation factor based on the 

count of vouchers in each FMR area 

administered by the PHA as captured in 

HUD administrative data as of December 

31, 2021. 

III. The Use of Inflation Factors 

HUD subsequently applies the 

calculated individual area inflation 

factors to eligible renewal funding for 

each PHA based on VMS leasing and 

cost data for the prior calendar year. 

IV. Geographic Areas and Area 

Definitions 

As explained above, inflation factors 

based on area FMR changes are 

produced for all FMR areas and applied 

to eligible renewal funding for each 

PHA. The tables showing the RFIFs, 

available electronically from the HUD 

data information page, list the inflation 

factors for each FMR area on a state-bystate basis. The inflation factors use the 

same OMB metropolitan area 

definitions, as revised by HUD, that are 

used in the FY 2022 FMRs. PHAs 

should refer to the Area Definitions 

Table on the following web page to 

make certain that they are referencing 

the correct inflation factors: http://

www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/rfif/ 

FY2022/FY2022_RFIF_FMR_AREA_

REPORT.pdf. The Area Definitions 

Table lists areas in alphabetical order by 

state, and the counties associated with 

each area. In the six New England states, 

the listings are for counties or parts of 

counties as defined by towns or cities. 

HUD is also releasing the data in 

Microsoft Excel format to assist users 

who may wish to use these data in other 

calculations. The Excel file is available 

at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/ 

datasets/rfif/rfif.html. Note that, as 

described earlier, the actual renewal 

funding inflation factor applied to 

agency funding will be the voucherweighted average of the FMR area 

factors when the PHA operates in 

multiple areas. 

V. Environmental Impact 

This notice involves a statutorily 

required establishment of a rate or cost 

determination which does not constitute 

a development decision affecting the 

physical condition of specific project 

areas or building sites. Accordingly, 

under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6), this notice is 

categorically excluded from 

environmental review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321). 

Todd Richardson, 

General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy 

Development and Research. 

[FR Doc. 2022–11238 Filed 5–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R1–NWRS–2022–N004; 

FXRS12610100000–223–FF01R00000] 

Record of Decision for the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Bighorn Sheep Management Plan, 

Hart Mountain National Antelope 

Refuge, Lake County, OR 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; record of 

decision. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of a record of decision 

(ROD) for the final environmental 

impact statement for the Bighorn Sheep 

Management Plan for Hart Mountain 

National Antelope Refuge in Oregon. 

The ROD documents the Service’s 

decision to select a preferred alternative 

comprised of a combination of bighorn 

sheep habitat improvement and 

population management actions. 

ADDRESSES: You may obtain copies of 

the ROD and other documents 

associated with the decision by the 

following methods. 

• Internet: https://www.fws.gov/ 

refuge/hart_mountain/. 

• Upon Request: You may request 

alternative formats of the documents 

directly from the Service (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shannon Ludwig, by telephone at 541– 

947–3315, or by email at shannon_

ludwig@fws.gov. Individuals in the 

United States who are deaf, deafblind, 

hard of hearing, or have a speech 

disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or 

TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 25, 2022 / Notices 31899 

announce the availability of a record of 

decision (ROD) for the final 

environmental impact statement for the 

Bighorn Sheep Management Plan at the 

Hart Mountain National Antelope 

Refuge (Refuge), in Lake County, 

Oregon. The ROD documents the 

Service’s decision to select Alternative 

D, Comprehensive Integrated 

Management (Preferred), which is a 

combination of bighorn sheep habitat 

improvement and population 

management actions. 

The bighorn sheep herd on the Refuge 

has declined from approximately 150 

animals in 2017, to as few as 48 in 2020. 

Consequently, the herd is at risk of 

extirpation (local extinction) in the next 

few years without prompt management 

intervention. In response to the decline, 

the Service developed a bighorn sheep 

management plan and final 

environmental impact statement (EIS) to 

analyze existing data and identify 

alternatives and actions needed to 

restore the herd to a sustainable 

population level. The EIS analyzes four 

alternatives: Continuing current 

management; a habitat management 

focus; a predator control focus; and a 

preferred alternative, which is a 

combination of habitat management and 

predator control. The alternatives reflect 

the urgency to implement short-term 

management actions that are based on 

the best available science, in 

combination with mid-to-long-term 

management and monitoring. 

The ROD documents the Service’s 

decision to select Alternative D, the 

Comprehensive Integrated Management 

approach. Considering complex 

interactions between habitat features 

and demographic factors that ultimately 

determine the sustainability of bighorn 

sheep on the Refuge, we prefer an 

integrated management approach. 

Alternative D includes a long-term focus 

on habitat improvement and a shorterterm focus on bighorn sheep and 

predator population management. 

We are advising the public of the 

availability of the ROD, developed in 

compliance with agency decision 

making requirements of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.). Our draft EIS and final EIS were 

made available to the public via 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Federal Register notices on April 30, 

2021 (86 FR 22963), and December 3, 

2021 (86 FR 68661), respectively. In the 

draft and final EIS documents, we 

described in detail, evaluated, and 

analyzed all alternatives. Because we 

initiated the EIS process prior to the 

September 14, 2020, effective date for 

the Council on Environmental Quality’s 

updated NEPA regulations, the final EIS 

and ROD were completed consistent 

with the previous regulations (40 CFR 

1506.13). 

Authority 

We provide this notice in accordance 

with the requirements of NEPA (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its 

implementing regulations (40 CFR 

1506.6; 43 CFR part 46). 

Hugh Morrison, 

Acting Regional Director. 

[FR Doc. 2022–11225 Filed 5–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R8–ES–2022–0051; 

FXES11140800000–223–FF08EVEN00] 

Receipt of Incidental Take Permit 

Application and Proposed Habitat 

Conservation Plan for California Tiger 

Salamander and California Red-Legged 

Frog; Monterey County, CA; 

Categorical Exclusion 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service), announce receipt of 

an application from Mike Knoop and 

Michelle Wright (applicants) for an 

incidental take permit (ITP) under the 

Endangered Species Act. The applicants 

request the ITP to take the federally 

listed California tiger salamander and 

California red-legged frog, incidental to 

the development of a single-family 

residence in Carmel Valley, California. 

We request public comment on the ITP 

application, which includes the 

applicants’ proposed habitat 

conservation plan (HCP), and on the 

Service’s preliminary determination that 

this HCP qualifies as ‘‘low effect,’’ 

categorically excluded under the 

National Environmental Policy Act. To 

make this determination, we used our 

environmental action statement and 

low-effect screening form, both of which 

are also available for public review. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

received on or before June 24, 2022. 

ADDRESSES:

To obtain documents: You may obtain 

copies of the documents online in 

Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2022–0051 at 

https://www.regulations.gov, or you may 

request copies of the documents by 

email, phone, or U.S. mail (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

To submit comments: If you wish to 

submit comments on any of the 

documents, you may do so in writing by 

any one of the following methods: 

• Online: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2022–0051. 

• U.S. mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS–R8– 

ES–2022–0051; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg 

Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen Sinclair, Biologist, by email at 

karen_sinclair@fws.gov, by phone at 

805–677–3315, or by U.S. mail at the 

Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 

Portola Rd #B, Ventura, CA 93003. 

Individuals in the United States who 

are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or 

have a speech disability may dial 711 

(TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), 

announce the availability of a draft 

habitat conservation plan (HCP) and 

draft screening form for a low-effect 

incidental take permit (ITP) 

determination, and a National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

environmental action statement 

(screening form) for activities described 

in an application for an incidental take 

permit (ITP) under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 

16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The application 

was received from Mike Knoop and 

Michelle Wright (applicants). If granted, 

the permit would authorize take of the 

federally threatened California tiger 

salamander (Ambystoma californiense) 

and California red-legged frog (Rana 

draytonii) incidental to activities 

described in the HCP for the 

construction of a single-family 

residence, within Monterey County 

Parcels 187–021–040 and 187–021–041, 

and driveway improvements within 

adjacent parcels 187–021–028 and 187– 

021–013, in the northern foothills of 

Carmel Valley, California. The 

applicants developed a draft HCP as 

part of their application for an ITP 

under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. 

The Service prepared a draft screening 

form in accordance with NEPA (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to evaluate the 

potential effects to the natural and 

human environment resulting from 

issuing an ITP to the applicants. We 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1