[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14538-14545]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6562]




[[Page 14537]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Department of Housing and Urban Development





_______________________________________________________________________



Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing for Public and Indian 
Housing



_______________________________________________________________________



Funding Availability for Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program; 
Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / 
Notices 
[[Page 14538]] 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing
[Docket No. N-95-3867; FR-3774-N-02]


Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Comprehensive 
Improvement Assistance Program (CIAP)

agency: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian 
Housing, HUD.

action: Notice of Funding Availability for Fiscal Year (FY) 1995.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice informs HAs that own or operate fewer than 250 
units and, therefore, are eligible to apply and compete for CIAP funds, 
of the availability of FY 1995 CIAP funding. HAs with 250 or more units 
are entitled to receive a formula grant under the Comprehensive Grant 
Program (CGP) and are not eligible to apply for CIAP funds.

DATES: Application is due on or before 3:00 p.m. local time on May 16, 
1995, at the HUD Field Office with jurisdiction over the Public Housing 
Agency or Indian Housing Authority (herein referred to as HA), 
Attention: Director, Office of Public Housing, or Administrator, Office 
of Native American Programs.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William J. Flood, Director, Modernization Division, Office of 
Distressed and Troubled Housing Recovery, Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 4134, Washington, DC 
20410. Telephone (202) 708-1640. (This is not a toll-free number).
    IHAs may contact Dominic A. Nessi, Director, Office of Native 
American Programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 
Seventh Street, SW., B-133, Washington, DC 20410. Telephone (202) 755-
0032. (This is not a toll-free number).
    Hearing or speech impaired individuals may call HUD's TDD number 
(202) 708-4595. (This is not a toll-free number.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On January 20, 1995, at 60 FR 4352, the Department published an 
Advance Notice of FY 1995 CIAP, setting forth all application 
requirements, except the allocation amounts and the application 
deadline date. Since the requirements set forth in the Advance Notice 
pertain to this NOFA, the entire Advance Notice is being republished as 
an attachment to this NOFA.

II. Allocation Amounts

    (a) Total Available. The FY 1995 HUD Appropriations Act P.L. 103-
327, enacted September 28, 1994, made available $3,700,000,000 of 
budget authority for the Modernization Program in the Annual 
Contributions Account. Funding may change if the carry-overs, 
recaptures and transfers estimated to occur in FY 1995 are not 
realized. The following chart shows the total amount of funds available 
in FY 1995, which is the appropriation, plus the carry-over from FY 
1994, less the reduction and set-asides, as of the date of this NOFA:

                                                                        
FY 1995 Appropriation.................................   $3,700,000,000 
Plus Carry-over from FY 1994..........................      194,092,503 
Less Annual Contributions Account Reduction...........      (79,049,983)
                                                       -----------------
FY 1995 Adjusted Appropriation........................    3,815,042,520 
Less FY 1995 Set-Asides:                                                
  Choice in Management (Being reevaluated)*...........      100,000,000 
  Emergency and Natural Disaster Reserve..............       75,000,000 
  Section 6J Activities*..............................       40,042,520 
  Tenant Opportunity Program*.........................       25,000,000 
  Inspection and Technical Assistance*................       15,270,323 
  CGP Allocation from CGP Carry-Over..................       10,882,865 
  LBP Risk Assessment*................................        8,052,534 
  LBP Indemnification.................................          971,983 
                                                       -----------------
    Total Set-Asides..................................      275,220,225 
FY 1995 Adjusted Appropriation Less Set-Asides........    3,539,822,295 
                                                                        
*Set-asides to be implemented through separate NOFAs or Requests for    
  Proposals.                                                            

    (b) Explanation of Carry-Overs. The $194,092,503 in carry-overs 
from FY 1994 are:
    (1) $100,000,000 from the set-aside for Choice-in-Management;
    (2) $40,042,520 from the set-aside for implementing Section 6J 
activities;
    (3) $32,259,237 from the national reserve for emergencies and 
natural and other disasters;
    (4) $10,882,865 from the CGP allocation, including $1,438,509 from 
three HAs which did not apply for their FY 1994 grant, $99,963 unused 
due to the statutorily authorized conversion of a public housing 
project to a Section 8 project, and $9,344,393 from reduced formula 
funding of Mod Troubled PHAs;
    (5) $8,052,534 of unused funds from the Lead-Based Paint (LBP) Risk 
Assessment set-aside, established in FY 1992;
    (6) $1,612,976 from the set-aside for the Vacancy Reduction 
Program;
    (7) $971,983 from the set-aside for the indemnification of three 
PHAs (Albany, New York; Cambridge, Massachusetts; and Omaha, Nebraska) 
that are participating in the LBP Abatement Demonstration. The FY 1991 
Appropriations Act extended the availability of these funds 
appropriated in FY 1990 from October 1, 1991 to October 1, 1998;
    (8) $270,323 from the set-aside for inspection of modernization 
work and technical assistance for HAs; and
    (9) $65 from unassigned CIAP funds.
    (c) Allocation between CGP and CIAP. The allocation between CGP and 
CIAP is explained below:

FY 1995 Adjusted Appropriation, Less Set-Asides........   $3,539,822,295
Less CGP Credits Withheld for Mod Troubled Agencies....       16,862,619
                                                        ----------------
Amount Available for CGP and CIAP......................    3,522,959,676
CGP Allocation.........................................    3,153,244,533
CIAP Allocation........................................      369,715,143
                                                                        
*Does not include $10,882,865 in CGP funds carried over from FY 1994    
  which will be added to the CGP allocation.                            

    (1) The $3,522,959,676 balance is allocated between CIAP and CGP 
agencies based on the relative shares of backlog needs (weighted at 
50%) and accrual needs (weighted at 50%), as determined by the field 
inspections conducted for the HUD-funded ABT study of modernization 
needs. This allocation results in CIAP agencies receiving 10.49% or 
$369, 715, 143 and CGP agencies receiving 89.51% or $3,153,244,533 
(plus the $10,822,865 carryover for a total of $3,164,067,398) of the 
funds available.
    (i) Backlog needs are needed repairs and replacements of existing 
physical systems, items that must be added to meet the HUD 
modernization and energy conservation standards and State or local/
tribal codes, and items that are necessary for the long-term vaibility 
of a specific housing development.
    (ii) Accrual needs are needs that arise over time and include 
needed repairs and replacements of existing physical systems and items 
that must be added to meet the HUD modernization and energy 
conservation standards and State or local/tribal codes.
    (2) The $369,715,143 available to CIAP agencies is allocated 
between Public Housing at 91.8505% or $339,585,355, and Indian Housing 
at 8.1495% or $30,129,788. This allocation also is based on the 
relative shares of backlog needs (weighted at 50%) and accrual needs 
(weighted at 50%). [[Page 14539]] 
    (d) Subassignment of Funds to Field Offices of Public Housing 
(OPH). Headquarters has determined the distribution of Public Housing 
CIAP funds for each Field OPH, based on the relative shares of backlog 
and accrual needs for CIAP PHAs, adjusted as necessary.
    (1) The Field OPH Director shall have authority to make Joint 
Review selections and CIAP funding decisions.
    (2) If additional funds for Public Housing CIAP become available, 
Headquarters will allocate the funds to one or more Field OPHs based on 
their relative shares of modernization need, approvable applications, 
and PHA capability to carry out the modernization.
    (3) If a Field OPH does not receive sufficient fundable 
applications to use its allocation, Headquarters will reallocate the 
remaining funds to one or more Field OPHs based on approvable 
applications and PHA capability to carry out the modernization.
    Of the $339,585,355 available for Public Housing, 1% or $3,395,854 
has been set aside to carry out goals related to pending civil rights 
litigation (e.g., Young v. Cisneros), which is subject to judicial 
oversight. The following table shows the distribution to CIAP funds for 
PHAs, excluding IHAs, assigned by Headquarters to each Field OPH as 
percentages of the $336,189,501 balance available for Public Housing:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent 
                                                               of Public
                Office of Public Housing (OPH)                  Housing 
                                                                 Funds  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New England Region:                                                     
  Massachusetts State Office.................................     2.6187
  Connecticut State Office...................................      .9266
  New Hampshire State Office.................................     1.5066
  Rhode Island State Office..................................      .7365
New York/New Jersey Region:                                             
  Buffalo Area Office........................................     2.1551
  New Jersey State Office....................................     2.7271
  New York State Office......................................     1.1576
Midatlantic Region:                                                     
  Maryland State Office......................................      .4142
  West Virginia State Office.................................     1.4359
  Pennsylvania State Office..................................     1.1444
  Pittsburgh Area Office.....................................     1.2048
  Virginia State Office......................................      .5756
  District of Columbia Office................................      .1686
Southeast Region:                                                       
  Georgia State Office.......................................     5.3561
  Alabama State Office.......................................     4.7698
  South Carolina State Office................................      .9216
  North Carolina State Office................................     3.0244
  Mississippi State Office...................................     1.7112
  Jacksonville Area Office...................................     2.9639
  Knoxville Area Office......................................      .9171
  Kentucky State Office......................................     4.7691
  Tennessee State Office.....................................     1.8640
Midwest Region:                                                         
  Illinois State Office......................................     3.5943
  Cincinnati Area Office.....................................      .4374
  Cleveland Area Office......................................      .5098
  Ohio State Office..........................................     1.1247
  Michigan State Office......................................     2.0393
  Grand Rapids Area Office...................................     3.0354
  Indiana State Office.......................................     1.2262
  Wisconsin State Office.....................................     2.8249
  Minnesota State Office.....................................     2.9713
Southwest Region:                                                       
  New Mexico State Office....................................     1.3454
  Texas State Office.........................................     5.4523
  Houston Area Office........................................     1.1773
  Arkansas State Office......................................     3.0053
  Louisiana State Office.....................................     3.9795
  Oklahoma State Office......................................     1.9327
  San Antonio Area Office....................................     2.6835
Great Plains Region:                                                    
  Iowa State Office..........................................     1.4211
  Kansas/Missouri State Office...............................     3.8535
  Nebraska State Office......................................     1.2155
  St. Louis Area Office......................................     2.2640
Rocky Mountain Region:                                                  
  Colorado State Office......................................     3.5448
Pacific/Hawaii Region:                                                  
  Los Angeles Area Office....................................     1.2057
  Arizona State Office.......................................     1.2634
  Sacramento Area Office.....................................      .2747
  California State Office....................................     1.5927
Northwest/Alaska Region:                                                
  Oregon State Office........................................     1.2688
  Washington State Office....................................     1.6876
    Total....................................................   100.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) Subassignment of Funds to Offices of Native American Programs 
(ONAPs). Headquarters has determined the distribution of Indian Housing 
CIAP funds for each ONAP, based on the relative shares of backlog and 
accrual needs for CIAP IHAs, adjusted as necessary. The fund assignment 
will cover Indian Housing and any Public Housing owned and operated by 
IHAs.
    (1) The ONAP Administrator shall have authority to make Joint 
Review selections and CIAP funding decisions.
    (2) If additional funds for Indian Housing CIAP become available, 
Headquarters will allocate the funds to one or more ONAPs based on 
their relative shares of modernization need, approvable applications, 
and IHA capability to carry out the modernization.
    (3) If an ONAP does not receive sufficient fundable applications to 
use its allocation, Headquarters will reallocate the remaining funds to 
one or more ONAPs based on approvable applications and IHA capability 
to carry out the modernization.
    The following table shows the distribution of CIAP funds for IHAs, 
assigned by Headquarters to each ONAPs as percentages of the total 
$30,129,788 available for Indian Housing:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent 
                                                               of Indian
          Office of Native American Programs (ONAP)             Housing 
                                                                 Funds  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern/Woodlands............................................    14.8444
Southern Plains..............................................    12.3324
Northern Plains..............................................    13.3174
Southwest....................................................    29.9263
Northwest....................................................    24.4868
Alaska.......................................................     5.0927
                                                              ----------
  Total......................................................   100.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Application Deadline Date

    The CIAP Application must be physically received by the local HUD 
Field Office by 3 p.m. local time on May 16, 1995. Faxed copies will 
not be considered official applications. The application deadline for 
this NOFA is firm as to date and hour. In the interest of fairness to 
all competing applicants, the Department will not consider any 
application that is received after the application deadline. All 
applicants should take this into account and submit application 
materials as early as possible to avoid any risk brought about by 
unanticipated delays or delivery-related problems. This application 
deadline does not apply to applications for emergency funding, which 
may be submitted at any time when funds are available.

IV. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program

    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program number is 
14.852.

    Dated: March 9, 1995.
Joseph Shuldiner,
Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.

Attachment

    Note: This is a republication of the advance notice published on 
January 20, 1995 at 60 FR 4352.

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing

[Docket No. N-95-3867; FR 3774-N-01]

Advance Notice of Fiscal Year (FY) 1995 Funding for Comprehensive 
Improvement Assistance Program (CIAP)

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian 
Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Advance Notice of FY 1995 Funding for CIAP.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice provides advance information to Public Housing 
Agencies and Indian Housing Authorities (herein referred to as HAs) 
that own or operate fewer than 250 public housing units and, 
therefore, are eligible to apply and compete for CIAP funds, of the 
requirements for applying for FY 1995 [[Page 14540]] CIAP funding. 
Therefore, the CIAP eligible HA may start now to plan and develop 
its FY 1995 CIAP application. HAs with 250 or more public housing 
units are entitled to receive a formula grant under the 
Comprehensive Grant Program (CGP) and are not eligible to apply for 
CIAP funds.

DATES: This Advance Notice does not establish an application 
deadline date. A Notice of Fund Availability (NOFA) will be 
published at a later date and will establish an application deadline 
date, as well as set forth the amount of funds available for the 
CIAP.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William J. Flood, Director, 
Modernization Division, Office of Distressed and Troubled Housing 
Recovery, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh 
Street, SW., Room 4134, Washington, DC 20410. Telephone (202) 708-
1640. (This is not a toll free number).
    IHAs may contact Dominic A. Nessi, Director, Office of Native 
American Programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 
Seventh Street, SW., B-133, Washington, DC 20410. Telephone (202) 
755-0032. (This is not a toll free number).
    Hearing or speech impaired individuals may call HUD's TDD number 
(202) 708-4595. (This is not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Purpose and Substantive Description

    (a) Authority. Sec. 14, United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
U.S.C. 14371); Sec. 7(d) Department of Housing and Urban Development 
Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)). An interim rule revising the CIAP 
regulation, 24 CFR Part 968, Subparts A and B, for PHAs and 24 CFR 
Part 905, Subpart I, for IHAs, and streamlining the program was 
published on March 15, 1993. A final rule will be published shortly.
    (b) Program Highlights.
    (1) Departmental Priority. Improving Public and Indian Housing 
is one of the Department's major priorities. Accordingly, a review 
has been made of the entire Public and Indian Housing Program. 
Specifically, the Department is very concerned about several aspects 
of the Modernization Program, as follows:
    (i) Design. When identifying physical improvement needs to meet 
the modernization standards, HAs are encouraged to consider design 
which supports the integration of public housing into the broader 
community. Although high priority needs, such as those related to 
health and safety, vacant/substandard units, structural or system 
integrity, and compliance with statutory, regulatory or court-
ordered deadlines, will receive funding priority, HAs should plan 
their modernization in a way which promotes good design, but 
maintains the modest nature of public housing. The HA should pay 
particular attention to design, which is sensitive to traditional 
cultural values, and be receptive to creative, but cost-effective 
approaches suggested by architects, residents, HA staff, and other 
local entities. Such approaches may complement the planning for 
basic rehabilitation needs. It should be noted that there will be no 
increase in operating subsidy due to improved design promoting the 
blend of public housing into the surrounding neighborhood or to 
additional amenities improving the quality of life.
    (ii) Expediting the Program. HAs are reminded that they are 
expected to obligate all funds within two years and to expend all 
funds within three years of program approval (Annual Contributions 
Contract (ACC) Amendment execution) unless a longer project 
implementation schedule is approved by the Field Office. If the HA 
does not obligate approved funds in a timely manner, the Department 
will recapture the funds unless there are clear, valid reasons for 
not meeting the obligation deadline; i.e., delays which are outside 
of the HA's control.
    (iii) Resident Involvement and Economic Uplift. HAs are required 
to explore and implement through all feasible means the involvement 
of residents, including duly-elected resident councils, in every 
aspect of the CIAP, from planning through implementation. HAs shall 
use the provisions of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development 
Act of 1968, as amended (Section 3) to the maximum feasible extent. 
HAs are encouraged to seek ways to employ Section 3 residents in all 
aspects of the CIAP's operation and to develop means to promote 
contracting opportunities for businesses in Section 3 areas. Refer 
to 24 CFR 85.36(e) regarding the provision of such opportunities.
    (iv) Elimination of Vacant Units. Although the Department has a 
vacancy reduction effort specifically aimed at reducing vacancies, 
HAs are encouraged to apply for CIAP funds to address vacant units 
where the work does not involve routine maintenance, but will result 
in reoccupancy.
    (2) Relationship to Technical Review Factors. The Departmental 
goal of improving Public and Indian Housing is reflected in the 
technical review factors, set forth in section IV(c)(5) of this 
Notice, on which the Field Office scores each HA's CIAP Application. 
Based on the HA's total score, the Field Office then ranks each HA 
to determine selection for Joint Review. The technical review 
factors include the following Departmental initiatives to improve 
Public and Indian Housing:
    (i) Restoration of vacant units to occupancy;
    (ii) Resident capacity-building, including opportunities for 
resident management;
    (iii) Economic development, through job training and employment 
opportunities for residents and contracting opportunities for 
Section 3 businesses;
    (iv) Drug elimination initiatives; and
    (v) Partnership with local government.

II. Allocation Amounts

    The Department will publish separately a NOFA in the Federal 
Register, explaining the FY 1995 appropriation, minus any FY 1995 
set-asides and reductions, plus any carry-over from FY 1994. The 
NOFA also will explain the allocation between the CGP and the CIAP, 
and within the CIAP, the allocation between Public Housing and 
Indian Housing and the allocation to each Field Office/Office of 
Native Americans Program (ONAP). The Field Office Public Housing 
Director or the ONAP Administrator shall have authority to make 
Joint Review selections and CIAP funding decisions.

III. Application Preparation and Submission by HA

    (a) Planning. In preparing its CIAP Application, the HA is 
encouraged to assess all its physical and management improvement 
needs. Physical improvement needs should be reviewed against the 
modernization standards, as set forth in HUD Handbook 7485.2, as 
revised, and any cost-effective energy conservation measures, 
identified in updated energy audits. The modernization standards 
include development specific work to ensure the long-term viability 
of the developments, such as amenities and design changes to promote 
the integration of low-income housing into the broader community. 
(See section I(b)(1)(i) of this Notice). In addition, the HA is 
strongly encouraged to contact the Field Office to discuss its 
modernization needs and obtain information. The term ``Field 
Office'' includes the ONAP.
    (b) Resident Involvement/Local Official Consultation 
Requirements.
    (1) Residents/Homebuyers. The CIAP regulations at Secs. 968.220 
or 905.624 require the HA to establish a Partnership Process for 
rental developments which ensures full resident participation in the 
planning, implementation and monitoring of the modernization 
program, as follows:
    (i) Before submission of the CIAP Application, consultation with 
residents, resident organization, and resident management 
corporation (herein referred to as residents) of the development(s) 
being proposed for modernization and request for resident 
recommendations;
    (ii) Reasonable opportunity for residents, including duly-
elected resident councils, to present their views on the proposed 
modernization and alternatives to it, and full and serious 
consideration of resident recommendations;
    (iii) Written response to residents, including duly-elected 
resident councils, indicating acceptance or rejection of resident 
recommendations, consistent with HUD requirements and the HA's own 
determination of efficiency, economy and need, with a copy to the 
Field Office at Joint Review;
    (iv) After HUD funding decisions, notification to residents of 
the approval or disapproval and, where requested, provision to 
residents of a copy of the HUD-approved CIAP budget; and
    (v) During implementation, periodic notification to residents of 
work status and progress and maximum feasible employment of 
residents in the modernization effort.
    (2) Local Officials. Before submission of the CIAP Application, 
consultation with appropriate local officials regarding how the 
proposed modernization may be coordinated with any local plans for 
neighborhood revitalization, economic development, drug elimination 
and expenditure of local funds, such as Community Development Block 
Grant funds.
    (c) Contents of CIAP Application. Within the established time 
frame, the HA shall [[Page 14541]] submit the CIAP Application to 
the Field Office, with a copy to appropriate local/tribal officials. 
The HA may obtain the necessary forms from the Field Office. The 
CIAP Application is comprised of the following documents:
    (1) Form HUD-52822, CIAP Application, in an original and two 
copies, which includes:
    (i) A general description of HA development(s), in priority 
order, (including the current physical condition, for each 
development for which the HA is requesting funds, or for all 
developments in the HA's inventory) and physical and management 
improvement needs to meet the Secretary's standards in Sec. 968.115 
or Sec. 905.603; description of work items required to correct 
identified deficiencies; and the estimated cost. For example:
    Development 1-1: 50 units of low-rent; 25 years old; physical 
needs are: new roofs; LBP testing; storm windows and doors; and 
electrical upgrading at estimated cost of $150,000.
    Development 1-2: 40 units of low-rent; 20 years old; physical 
needs are: physical accessibility of 2 units; kitchen floors; 
shower/bathtub surrounds; fencing; and exterior lighting at 
estimated cost of $90,000.
    Development 1-3: 35 units of Turnkey III: 15 years old; physical 
needs are: physical accessibility of 3 units; and roof insulation at 
estimated cost of $50,000.
    Development 1-4: 20 units of low-rent; 5 years old; no physical 
needs; no funding requested.
    Note: Refer to Section IV(d)(3) of this Notice regarding the 
consequences of not including all developments in the CIAP 
Application; even where there are no known current needs.
    (ii) Where funding is being requested for management 
improvements, an identification of the deficiency, a description of 
the work required for correction, and estimated cost. Examples of 
management improvements include, but are not limited to the 
following areas:
    (A) the management, financial, and accounting control systems of 
the HA;
    (B) the adequacy and qualifications of personnel employed by the 
HA in the management and operation of its developments by category 
of employment; and
    (C) the adequacy and efficacy of resident programs and services, 
resident and development security, resident selection and eviction, 
occupancy and vacant unit turnaround, rent collection, routine and 
preventive maintenance, equal opportunity, and other HA policies and 
procedures.
    (iii) a certification that the HA has met the requirements for 
consultation with local officials and residents/homebuyers and that 
all developments included in the application have long-term physical 
and social viability, including prospects for full occupancy. If the 
HA cannot make this certification with respect to long-term 
viability, the HA shall attach a narrative, explaining its viability 
concerns.
    (2) A narrative statement, in an original and two copies, 
addressing each of the technical review factors in section IV(c)(5) 
and, where applicable, the bonus points in section IV(c)(6).
    (3) Form HUD-50071, Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans 
and Cooperative Agreements, in an original only, required of HAs 
established under State law, applying for grants exceeding $100,000.
    (4) SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, in an original 
only, required of HAs established under State law, only where any 
funds, other than federally appropriated funds, will be or have been 
used to influence Federal workers, Members of Congress and their 
staff regarding specific grants or contracts.
    (5) Form HUD-2880, Applicant/Recipient Update/Disclosure Report, 
in an original only, required of HAs established under State law.
    (6) At the option of the HA, photographs or video cassettes 
showing the physical condition of the developments.

IV. Application Processing by Field Office.

    (a) Completeness Review (Corrections to Deficient Applications). 
To be eligible for processing, the CIAP Application must be 
physically received by the Field Office within the time period 
specified in the NOFA to be published at a future date, and must be 
complete, including the signed certification. Immediately after the 
application deadline, the Field Office shall perform a completeness 
review to determine whether an application is complete, responsive 
to the NOFA and acceptable for technical processing.
    (1) If either Form HUD-52822, CIAP Application, or the narrative 
statement on the technical review factors is missing, the HA's 
application will be considered substantially incomplete and, 
therefore, ineligible for further processing. The Field Office shall 
immediately notify the HA in writing.
    (2) If Form HUD-50071, Certification for Contracts, Grants, 
Loans, and Cooperative Agreements, or SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying 
Activities, are required, but missing, or Form HUD-2880, Applicant/
Recipient Update/Disclosure Form, is missing, or there is a 
technical mistake, such as no signature on a submitted form or the 
HA failed to address all of the technical review factors, the Field 
Office shall immediately notify the HA in writing that the HA has 14 
calendar days from the date of HUD's notification to submit or 
correct the deficiency. This is not additional time to substantially 
revise the application. Deficiencies which may be corrected at this 
time are inadvertently omitted documents or clarifications of 
previously submitted material and other changes which are not of 
such a nature as to improve the competitive position of the 
application.
    (3) If the HA fails to submit or correct the items within the 
required time period, the HA's application will be ineligible for 
further processing. The Field Office shall notify the HA in writing 
immediately after this occurs.
    (b) Eligibility Review. After the HA's CIAP Application is 
determined to be complete and accepted for review, the Field Office 
eligibility review shall determine if the application is eligible 
for processing or processing on a reduced scope.
    (1) Eligibility for Processing. To be eligible for processing:
    (i) HA Eligibility. HA has fewer than 250 Public and Indian 
housing units.
    (ii) Development Eligibility. The development is either a public 
housing development, including a conveyed Lanham Act or Public Works 
Administration development, or a Section 23 Leased Housing Bond-
Financed project (BFP).
    (iii) Date of Full Availability (DOFA)/Major Reconstruction of 
Obsolete Projects (MROP) Funding. Each eligible development for 
which work is proposed has reached DOFA at the time of CIAP 
Application submission. In addition, where funded under MROP after 
FY 1988, the development/building has reached DOFA or where funded 
during FYs 1986-1988, all MROP funds for the development/building 
have been expended.
    (2) Eligibility for Processing on Reduced Scope. Where the 
following conditions exist, the HA will be reviewed on a reduced 
scope:
    (i) Section 504 Compliance. Where the Section 504 needs 
assessment identified a need for accessible units, the HA was 
required to make structural changes to meet that need by July 11, 
1992. (``Section 504'' refers to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation 
Act of 1973.) Where the HA has not completed all required structural 
changes or obtained a time extension from HUD to July 11, 1995, the 
HA is eligible for processing only for Emergency Modernization or 
physical work needed to meet Section 504 requirements. Refer to PIH 
Notice 94-56 (HA), dated August 15, 1994.
    (ii) Lead-Based Paint (LBP) Testing Compliance. Where the HA has 
not complied with the statutory requirement to complete LBP testing 
on all pre-1978 family units, the HA is eligible for processing only 
for Emergency Modernization or work needed to complete LBP testing.
    (iii) FHEO Compliance. Where the HA has not complied with Fair 
Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) requirements as evidenced by an 
action, finding or determination as described below, unless the HA 
is implementing a voluntary compliance agreement or settlement 
agreement designed to correct the area(s) of noncompliance, the HA 
is eligible for processing only for Emergency Modernization or 
physical work needed to remedy civil rights deficiencies.
    (A) A pending proceeding against the HA based upon a Charge of 
Discrimination issued under the Fair Housing Act. A Charge of 
Discrimination is a charge under Section 810(g)(2) of the Fair 
Housing Act, issued by the Department's General Counsel or legally 
authorized designee;
    (B) A pending civil rights suit against the HA, referred by the 
Department's General Counsel and instituted by the Department of 
Justice;
    (C) Outstanding HUD findings of HA noncompliance with civil 
rights statutes and executive orders under Sec. 968.110(a) or 
Sec. 905.115, or implementing regulations, as a result of formal 
administrative proceedings, unless the HA is implementing a HUD-
approved resident selection and assignment plan or compliance 
agreement designed to correct the area(s) of noncompliance;
    (D) A deferral of the processing of applications from the HA 
imposed by HUD under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the 
Attorney General's Guidelines (28 CFR 50.3) and the HUD Title VI 
regulations (24 [[Page 14542]] CFR 1.8) and procedures (HUD Handbook 
8040.1), or under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and 
HUD implementing regulations (24 CFR 8.57); or
    (E) An adjudication of a violation under any of the authorities 
under Sec. 968.110(a) or Sec. 905.115 in a civil action filed 
against the HA by a private individual, unless the HA is 
implementing a HUD-approved resident selection and assignment plan 
or compliance agreement designed to correct the area(s) of 
noncompliance.
    (c) Selection Criteria and Ranking Factors. After all CIAP 
Applications are reviewed for eligibility, the Field Office shall 
categorize the eligible HAs and their developments into two 
processing groups, as defined in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph: 
Group 1 for Emergency Modernization; and Group 2 for Other 
Modernization. HA developments may be included in both groups and 
the same development may be in each group. However, the HA is only 
required to submit one CIAP Application.
    (1) Grouping Modernization Types.
    (i) Group 1, Emergency Modernization. Developments having 
physical conditions of an emergency nature, posing an immediate 
threat to the health or safety of residents or related to fire 
safety, and which must be corrected within one year of CIAP funding 
approval. Funding is limited to physical work items and may not be 
used for management improvements. Emergency Modernization includes 
all LBP testing and abatement of units housing children under six 
years old with elevated blood lead levels (EBLs) and all LBP testing 
and abatement of HA-owned day care facilities used by children under 
six years old with EBLs. Group 1 developments are not subject to the 
technical review rating and ranking in subparagraphs (5), (6) and 
(7) of this paragraph or the long-term viability and reasonable cost 
determination in section V(e).
    (ii) Group 2, Other Modernization. Developments not having 
physical conditions of an emergency nature and located in HAs which 
have demonstrated a capability of carrying out the proposed 
modernization activities. Other Modernization includes: one or more 
physical work items, where the Field Office determines that the 
physical improvements are necessary and sufficient to extend the 
useful life of the development; and/or one or more development 
specific or HA-wide management work items (including planning 
costs); and/or LBP testing, professional risk assessment, interim 
containment, and abatement. Therefore, eligibility of work under 
Other Modernization ranges from a single work item to the complete 
rehabilitation of a development. Refer to section I(b)(1)(i) of this 
Notice regarding modest amenities and improved design. Group 2 
developments are subject to the technical review rating and ranking 
in subparagraphs (5), (6) and (7) of this paragraph and the long-
term viability and reasonable cost determination in section V(e).
    (2) Assessment of HA's Management Capability. As part of its 
technical review of the CIAP Application, the Field Office shall 
evaluate the HA's management capability. Particular attention shall 
be given to the adequacy of the HA's maintenance in determining the 
HA's management capability. This assessment shall be based on the 
compliance aspects of on-site monitoring, such as audits, reviews or 
surveys which are currently available within the Field Office, and 
on the performance review under the Public Housing Management 
Assessment Program (PHMAP) for PHAs or the Administrative Capability 
Assessment for IHAs, and other information sources, as follows:
    (i) Public Housing. A PHA has management capability if it is (A) 
not designated as Troubled under 24 CFR Part 901, PHMAP, or (B) 
designated as Troubled, but has a reasonable prospect of acquiring 
management capability which may include through CIAP-funded 
management improvements. A Troubled PHA is eligible for Emergency 
Modernization only, unless it is making reasonable progress toward 
meeting the performance targets established in its memorandum of 
agreement or equivalent under Sec. 901.140 or has obtained 
alternative oversight of its management functions.
    (ii) Indian Housing. An IHA has management capability if it is 
(A) not designated as High Risk under Sec. 905.135 or (B) designated 
as High Risk, but has a reasonable prospect of acquiring management 
capability which may include through CIAP-funded management 
improvements. A High Risk IHA is eligible for Emergency 
Modernization only, unless it is making reasonable progress toward 
meeting the goals established in its management improvement plan 
under Sec. 905.135.
    (3) Assessment of HA's Modernization Capability. As part of its 
technical review of the CIAP Application, the Field Office shall 
evaluate the HA's modernization capability, including the progress 
of previously approved modernization and the status of any 
outstanding findings from CIAP monitoring visits, as follows:
    (i) Public Housing. A PHA has modernization capability if it is 
(A) not designated as Modernization Troubled under 24 CFR Part 901, 
PHMAP, or (B) designated as Modernization Troubled, but has a 
reasonable prospect of acquiring modernization capability which may 
include through CIAP-funded management improvements and 
administrative support, such as hiring staff or contracting for 
assistance. A Modernization Troubled PHA is eligible for Emergency 
Modernization only, unless it is making reasonable progress toward 
meeting the performance targets established in its memorandum of 
agreement or equivalent under Sec. 901.140 or has obtained 
alternative oversight of its modernization functions. Where a PHA 
does not have a funded modernization program in progress, the Field 
Office shall determine whether the PHA has a reasonable prospect of 
acquiring modernization capability through hiring staff or 
contracting for assistance.
    (ii) Indian Housing. An IHA has modernization capability if it 
is capable of effectively carrying out the proposed modernization 
improvements. Where an IHA does not have a funded modernization 
program in progress, the ONAP shall determine whether the IHA has a 
reasonable prospect of acquiring modernization capability through 
hiring staff or contracting for assistance.
    (4) Technical Processing. After the Field Office has categorized 
the eligible HAs and their developments into Group 1 and Group 2, 
the Field Office shall rate each Group 2 HA on each of the technical 
review factors in subparagraph (5) of this paragraph. With the 
exception of the technical review factor of ``extent and urgency of 
need'', a Group 2 HA is rated on its overall HA application and not 
on each development. For the technical review factor of ``extent and 
urgency of need,'' each development for which funding is requested 
in the CIAP Application by a Group 2 HA is scored; the development 
with the highest priority needs is scored the highest number of 
points, which is then used for the overall HA score on that factor. 
High priority needs are non-emergency needs, but related to: health 
or safety; vacant, substandard units; structural or system 
integrity; or compliance with statutory, regulatory or court-ordered 
deadlines.
    (5) Technical Review Factors. The technical review factors for 
assistance are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Maximum 
                   Technical review factors                      points 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extent and urgency of need, including need to comply with               
 statutory, regulatory or court-ordered deadlines............         40
HA's modernization capability................................         15
HA's management capability...................................         15
Extent of vacancies, where the vacancies are not due to                 
 insufficient demand.........................................         10
Degree of resident involvement in HA operations..............          5
Degree of HA activity in resident initiatives, including                
 tenant opportunity, economic development, and drug                     
 elimination efforts.........................................          5
Degree of resident employment through direct hiring or                  
 contracting or job training initiatives.....................          5
Local government support for proposed modernization..........          5
                                                              ----------
    Total Maximum Score......................................        100
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (6) Bonus points.
    (i) For Public Housing only, the Field Office shall provide up 
to 5 bonus points for any PHA that can demonstrate that it has 
obtained funds from a non-HUD source to improve or support the 
modernization activities or the general operation of the PHA. Non-
HUD sources of funding may include: local government, over and above 
what is required under the Cooperation Agreement for municipal 
services such as police and fire protection and refuse collection; 
private non-profit organizations; or other public and private 
entities. To qualify for the bonus points, the PHA shall identify 
the entity, the amount of funds being obtained, and the purpose of 
the funding.
    (ii) For Public Housing only, the Field Office shall provide up 
to 2 bonus points for any PHA that can demonstrate that it has 
awarded contracts, including subcontracts, to minority business 
enterprises (MBEs) or [[Page 14543]] women's business enterprises 
(WBEs) within the last three years. Such affirmative action is 
required by Executive Orders 11625 and 12432 for MBEs and by 
Executive Order 12138 for WBEs. To qualify for the bonus points, the 
PHA shall identify the contractor or the subcontractor, the dollar 
value of the contract or subcontract, and the date of award.
    (7) Rating and Ranking. After rating all Group 2 HAs on each of 
the technical review factors and providing any bonus points as set 
forth in subparagraph (6) of this paragraph, the Field Office shall 
rank each Group 2 HA based on its total score, list Group 2 HAs in 
descending order and identify other Group 2 HAs with lower ranking 
applications, but with high priority needs. The Field Office shall 
consult with Headquarters regarding any identified FHEO 
noncompliance.
    (d) Joint Review. The purpose of the Joint Review is for the 
Field Office to discuss with the HA the proposed modernization 
program, as set forth in the CIAP Application, and determine the 
size of the grant, if any, to be awarded.
    (1) The Field Office shall select HAs, including all Group 1 
HAs, for Joint Review so that the total dollar value of all proposed 
modernization recommended for funding exceeds the assignment amount 
by at least 15%. This will preserve the Field Office's ability to 
adjust cost estimates and work items as a result of Joint Review.
    (2) The Field Office shall notify in writing each HA whose 
application has been selected for further processing as to whether 
the Joint Review will be conducted on-site or off-site (e.g., by 
telephone or in-office meeting). An HA will not be selected for 
Joint Review if there is a duplication of funding (refer to section 
V(g)). The Field Office shall notify in writing each HA not selected 
for Joint Review and the reasons for non-selection.
    (3) Where the HA has not included some of its developments in 
the CIAP Application, the Field Office may not, as a result of Joint 
Review, consider funding any non-emergency work at excluded 
developments or subsequently approve use of leftover funds at 
excluded developments. Therefore, to provide maximum flexibility, 
the HA may wish to include all of its developments in the CIAP 
Application, even though there are no known current needs.
    (4) The HA shall prepare for the Joint Review by preparing a 
draft CIAP budget, and reviewing the other items to be covered 
during the Joint Review, such as the need for professional services, 
method of accomplishment of physical work (contract or force account 
labor), HA compliance with various Federal statutes and regulations, 
etc. If conducted on-site, the Joint Review may include an 
inspection of the proposed physical work.
    (e) HUD Awards. After all Joint Reviews are completed, the Field 
Office shall adjust the HAs, developments, and work items to be 
funded and the amounts to be awarded, on the basis of information 
obtained from Joint Reviews, FHEO review, and environmental reviews 
(refer to paragraph (h)). Such adjustments are necessary where Joint 
Review determines that actual Group 1 emergencies and Group 2 high 
priority needs, HA priorities, or cost estimates vary from the HA's 
application. Such adjustments may preclude the Field Office from 
funding all of the higher ranked HA applications in order to 
accommodate the funding of high priority needs. However, where the 
information obtained from Joint Reviews, FHEO review, and 
environmental reviews does not substantially alter the information 
used to establish the rankings before Joint Review, the Field Office 
shall make funding decisions in accordance with its rankings. After 
Congressional notifications, the Field Office shall announce the HAs 
selected for CIAP grants, subject to their submission of an 
approvable CIAP budget and other required documents.
    (f) HA Submission of Additional Documents. After field Office 
funding decisions, the Field Office shall provide written 
notification to the HA of funding approval, subject to HA submission 
of the following documents within the time frame prescribed by the 
Field Office:
    (1) Form HUD-52825, CIAP Budget/Progress Report, which includes 
the implementation schedule(s), in an original and two copies.
    (2) Form HUD-50070, Certification for a Drug-Free Workplace, in 
an original only.
    (3) Form HUD-52820, HA Board Resolution Approving CIAP Budget, 
in an original only.
    (g) ACC Amendment. After HUD approval of the CIAP budget, HUD 
and HA shall enter into an ACC amendment in order for the HA to 
obtain modernization funds. The ACC amendment shall require low-
income use of the housing for not less than 20 years from the date 
of the ACC amendment (subject to sale of homeownership units in 
accordance with the terms of the ACC). HUD has the authority to 
condition an ACC amendment (e.g., to require an HA to hire a 
modernization coordinator or contract administrator to administer 
its modernization program).
    (h) Environmental review. The Field Office shall review the 
environmental impact of all modernization activities under Part 50, 
in accordance with the provisions of Parts 905 and 968. The Field 
Office may obtain the information required to conduct the 
environmental review during Joint Review. The HA shall provide any 
documentation to the Field Office that it needs to carry out its 
review under NEPA. After all Joint Reviews are conducted, the Field 
Office shall complete the environmental reviews before funding 
decisions are made and announced and before HAs are invited to 
submit CIAP budgets. Therefore, in requesting CIAP budgets, the 
Field Office shall specify any HA modification or elimination of 
activities or expenditures that the Field Office has determined, 
after review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or 
related laws, to have an unacceptable environmental impact. Upon 
approval of the CIAP budget, the Field Office shall send an approval 
letter to the HA which includes notification that HUD has complied 
with its responsibilities under 24 CFR 905.120(a) or 24 CFR 
968.110(c) and (d) before entering into an ACC amendment with the 
HA.
    (i) Declaration of Trust. Where the Field Office determines that 
a Declaration of Trust is not in place or is not current, the HA 
shall execute and file for record a Declaration of Trust as provided 
under the ACC to protect the rights and interests of HUD throughout 
the 20-year period during which the HA is obliged to operate its 
developments in accordance with the ACC, the Act, and HUD 
regulations and requirements. HUD has determined that its interest 
in Mutual Help units is sufficiently protected without the further 
requirement of a Declaration of Trust; therefore, a Declaration of 
Trust is not required for Mutual Help Units.
    (j) ``Fast Tracking'' Applications. Emergency applications do 
not have to be processed within the normal processing time allowed 
for other applications. Where an immediate hazard must be addressed, 
HA applications may be submitted and processed at any time during 
the year when funds are available. The Field Office shall ``fast 
track'' the processing of these emergency applications so that fund 
reservation may occur as soon as possible.

V. Other Program Items

    (a) Turnkey III Developments.
    (1) General. Eligible physical improvement costs for existing 
Turnkey III developments are limited to work items under Emergency 
Modernization or Other Modernization which are not the 
responsibility of the homebuyer families and which are related to 
health and safety, correction of development deficiencies, physical 
accessibility, energy audits and cost-effective energy conservation 
measures, or LBP testing, interim containment, professional risk 
assessment and abatement. In addition, eligible costs include 
management improvements under the modernization type of Other 
Modernization. Turnkey III units which have been paid off, but not 
conveyed, are eligible for funding, but if funded, the modernization 
work must be completed before conveyance. The cost of the physical 
and management improvements shall not increase the purchase price 
and amortization period for the homebuyer families.
    (2) Ineligible Costs. Nonroutine maintenance or replacements, 
dwelling additions, and items that are the responsibility of the 
homebuyer families are ineligible costs.
    (3) Exception of vacant or non-homebuyer-occupied Turnkey III 
units.
    (i) Notwithstanding the requirements of subparagraph (1) of this 
paragraph, an HA may carry out Other Modernization in a Turnkey III 
development, whenever a Turnkey III unit becomes vacant or is 
occupied by a non-homebuyer family. An HA that intends to use funds 
under this paragraph must identify in its CIAP Application, the 
estimated number of units proposed for Other Modernization and 
subsequent sale. In addition, an HA must certify that: the proposed 
modernization under this paragraph would result in bringing the 
identified units into full compliance with the homeownership 
objectives under the Turnkey III Program; and the HA has homebuyers 
who both are eligible for homeownership, in accordance with the 
regulatory requirements, and have demonstrated their intent to be 
placed into [[Page 14544]] each of the Turnkey III units proposed 
for Other Modernization.
    (ii) Before an HA may be approved for Other Modernization of a 
unit under this paragraph, it must first deplete any Earned Home 
Payments Account (EHPA) or Non-Routine Maintenance Reserve (NRMR) 
pertaining to the unit, and request the maximum operating subsidy. 
Any increase in the value of a unit caused by its Other 
Modernization under this paragraph shall be reflected solely by its 
subsequent appraised value, and not by an automatic increase in its 
purchase price.
    (b) Mutual Help Developments. Mutual Help developments are 
eligible for the same physical and management improvement costs as 
are rental developments. Mutual Help units which have been paid off, 
but not conveyed, are eligible for funding, but if funded, the 
modernization work must be completed before conveyance.
    (c) Professional Risk Assessment for LBP. A set-aside may be 
made available for LBP professional risk assessments under a 
separate NOFA and Processing Notice. HAs with pre-1980 family 
developments are strongly encouraged to apply for these funds to 
conduct LBP professional risk assessments.
    (d) In-Place Management (Interim Containment of LBP). Where the 
results of the LBP professional risk assessment recommend that the 
HA undertake in-place management measures, the HA is strongly 
encouraged to apply for CIAP funds to carry out such measures. 
However, if the HA is not successful in obtaining CIAP funds for in-
place management measures, the HA may request a budget revision of 
previously approved, but unobligated CIAP funds to accomplish such 
measures. Where the HA had a CIAP budget revision approved for this 
purpose in FY 1994, the HA may request FY 1995 CIAP funds to 
complete the items which were eliminated as a result of the budget 
revision.
    (e) Long-Term Viability and Reasonable Cost.
    (1) Long-Term Viability. On Form HUD-52822, CIAP Application, 
the HA certifies whether the developments proposed for modernization 
have long-term viability, including prospects for full occupancy. 
If, during Joint Review, the HA or Field Office believes that a 
particular development may not have long-term viability, the Field 
Office shall make a final viability determination. If the Field 
Office determines that a development does not have long-term 
viability, the Field Office shall only approve Emergency 
Modernization or nonemergency funding necessary to maintain 
habitability until the demolition or disposition application is 
approved and residents can be relocated. In making the final 
viability determination, the Field Office shall consider whether:
    (i) Any special or unusual conditions have been adequately 
explained, all work has been justified as necessary to meet the 
modernization and energy conservation standards, including 
development specific work necessary to blend the development in with 
the design and architecture of the neighborhood; and
    (ii) Reasonable cost estimates have been provided, and every 
effort has been made to reduce costs; and
    (iii) Rehabilitation of the existing development is more cost-
effective in the long-term than construction or acquisition of 
replacement housing; or
    (iv) There are no practical alternatives for replacement 
housing.
    (2) Reasonable Cost. During the Joint Review, the Field Office 
shall determine reasonable cost for the proposed work, using one of 
the following methods: (i) unfunded hard cost of 90 percent or less 
of computed Total Development Cost (TDC), which is easier to apply 
when comprehensive-type modernization is proposed; or (ii) the 
reasonableness of the estimated cost of individual work items, using 
national indices, such as R.S. Means Index, the Dodge Report or 
Marshall and Swift, adjusted to reflect local conditions and actual 
experience, which is easier to apply when piecemeal-type 
modernization is proposed. No computation of the TDC is required 
where the estimated per unit unfunded hard cost is equal to or less 
than the per unit TDC for the smallest bedroom size at the 
development.
    (f) Use of Dwelling Units for Economic Self-Sufficiency Services 
and/or Drug Elimination Activities. On August 24, 1990, the 
Department issued HUD Notice PIH 90-39 (PHA), concerning the 
eligibility for funding under the Performance Funding System of 
dwelling units used to promote economic self-sufficiency services 
for residents and anti-drug programs. CIAP funds may be used to 
convert units for these purposes. Also refer to the Family Self-
Sufficiency Program Guidelines (56 FR 49592, September 30, 1991).
    (g) Duplication of Funding. The HA shall not receive duplicate 
funding for the same work item or activity under any circumstance 
and shall establish controls to assure that an activity, program, or 
project that is funded under any other HUD program, shall not be 
funded by CIAP.

VI. Application Deadline Date and Summary of FY 1995 CIAP 
Processing Steps

    The deadline date for submission of the FY 1995 CIAP Application 
will be established in the NOFA to be published at a future date. 
Dates for other processing steps will be established by each Field 
Office to reflect local workload issues.

Summary of Processing Steps

    1. HA submits CIAP Application.
    2. Field Office conducts completeness review and requests 
corrections to deficient applications.
    3. HA submits corrections to deficient applications within 14 
calendar days of notification from Field Office.
    4. Field Office conducts eligibility review and technical review 
(rating and ranking) and makes Joint Review selections.
    5. Field Office completes Joint Reviews, environmental reviews 
and FHEO review.
    6. Field Office makes funding decisions and forwards 
Congressional notifications to Headquarters.
    7. Congressional notification is completed and Field Office 
notifies HA of funding decisions.
    8. HA submits additional documents as required in section IV(f).
    9. Field Office completes fund reservations and forwards ACC 
amendment to HA for signature and return.
    10. Field Office executes ACC amendment and HA begins 
implementation.

VII. Other Matters

    (a) Environmental Impact. A Finding of No Significant Impact 
with respect to the environment will be made in accordance with HUD 
regulations at 24 CFR Part 50 implementing section 102(2)(C) of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332) in 
connection with issuance of the FY 1995 NOFA for this program. The 
Finding of No Significant Impact will be available for public 
inspection and copying between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays at 
the Office of the Rules Docket Clerk, 451 Seventh Street, S.W., Room 
10276, Washington, DC 20410.
    (b) Federalism Impact. The General Counsel, as the designated 
Official under section 6(a) of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, 
has determined that the policies and procedures contained in this 
Notice will not have substantial direct effects on States or their 
political subdivisions, or the relationship between the federal 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. As a 
result, the Notice is not subject to review under the Order.
    (c) Impact on the Family. The General Counsel, as the Designated 
Official for Executive Order 12606, The Family, has determined that 
this Notice will likely have a beneficial impact on family 
formation, maintenance and general well-being. Accordingly, since 
the impact on the family is beneficial, no further review is 
considered necessary.
    (d) Accountability in the Provision of HUD Assistance. The 
Department has promulgated a final rule to implement section 102 of 
the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 
(HUD Reform Act). The final rule is codified at 24 CFR Part 12. 
Section 102 contains a number of provisions that are designed to 
ensure greater accountability and integrity in the provision of 
certain types of assistance administered by the Department. On 
January 16, 1992, the Department published at 57 FR 1942, additional 
information that gave the public (including applicants for, and 
recipients of, HUD assistance) further information on the 
implementation, public access, and disclosure requirements of 
section 102. The documentation, public access, and disclosure 
requirements of section 102 are applicable to assistance awarded 
under the NOFA to be published as follows:
    (1) Documentation and Public Access. The Department will ensure 
that documentation and other information regarding each application 
submitted pursuant to the NOFA to be published are sufficient to 
indicate the basis upon which assistance was provided or denied. 
This material, including any letters of support, will be made 
available for public inspection for a five-year period beginning not 
less than 30 days after the award of the [[Page 14545]] assistance. 
Material will be made available in accordance with the Freedom of 
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and HUD's implementing regulations at 
24 CFR Part 15. In addition, HUD will include the recipients of 
assistance pursuant to the NOFA in its quarterly Federal Register 
notice of all recipients of HUD assistance awarded on a competitive 
basis. (See 24 CFR 12.14(a) and 12.16(b), and the notice published 
in the Federal Register on January 16, 1992 (57 FR 1942), for 
further information on these requirements.)
    (2) HUD Responsibilities--Disclosures. The Department will make 
available to the public for five years all applicant disclosure 
reports (Form HUD-2880) submitted in connection with the NOFA to be 
published. Update reports (also Form HUD-2880) will be made 
available along with the applicant disclosure reports, but in no 
case for a period less than three years. All reports, both applicant 
disclosures and updates, will be made available in accordance with 
the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and HUD's implementing 
regulations at 24 CFR Part 15. (See 24 CFR Part 12, Subpart C, and 
the notice published in the Federal Register on January 16, 1992 (57 
FR 1942), for further information on these disclosure requirements.)
    (e) Prohibition Against Advance Information on Funding 
Decisions.
    HUD's regulation implementing section 103 of the HUD Reform Act, 
codified as 24 CFR Part 4, will apply to the funding competition to 
be announced under the separately published NOFA. The requirements 
of the rule continue to apply until the announcement of the 
selection of successful applicants. Also refer to a final rule 
amending Part 4 published in the Federal Register on November 19, 
1993 (58 FR 61016), regarding the regulation of certain conduct by 
HUD employees and by applicants for HUD assistance during the 
selection process for the award of financial assistance by HUD.
    HUD employees involved in the review of applications and in the 
making of funding decisions are limited by Part 4 from providing 
advance information to any person (other than an authorized employee 
of HUD) concerning funding decisions, or from otherwise giving any 
applicant an unfair competitive advantage. Persons who apply for 
assistance in this competition should confine their inquiries to the 
subject areas permitted under 24 CFR Part 4.
    Applicants who have questions should contact the HUD Office of 
Ethics at (202) 708-3815 (voice), (202) 708-1112 (TDD). These are 
not toll-free numbers. The Office of Ethics can provide information 
of a general nature to HUD employees, as well. However, a HUD 
employee who has specific program questions, such as whether 
particular subject matter can be discussed with persons outside the 
Department, should contact his or her Field Office Counsel or 
Headquarters Counsel for the program to which the question pertains.
    (f) Prohibition Against Lobbying of HUD Personnel.
    Section 112 of the HUD Reform Act added a new Section 13 of the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3531 et 
seq.). Section 13 contains two provisions dealing with efforts to 
influence HUD's decisions with respect to financial assistance. The 
first imposes disclosure requirements on those who are typically 
involved in these efforts--those who pay others to influence the 
award of assistance or the taking of a management action by the 
Department and those who are paid to provide the influence. The 
second restricts the payment of fees to those who are paid to 
influence the award of HUD assistance, if the fees are tied to the 
number of housing units received or are based on the amount of 
assistance received, or if they are contingent upon the receipt of 
assistance.
    HUD regulations implementing Section 13 are at 24 CFR Part 86. 
If readers are involved in any efforts to influence the Department 
in these ways, they are urged to read the regulation, particularly 
the examples contained in Appendix A of the rule.
    A final rule published in the Federal Register on September 7, 
1993, amended the definition of ``person'' to exclude from coverage 
a State or local government, or the officer or employee of a State 
or local government or housing finance agency thereof who is engaged 
in the official business of the State or local government.
    Any questions regarding the rule should be directed to the 
Office of Ethics, Room 2158, Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, 451, Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20410-3000. 
Telephone: (202) 708-3815 (voice); (202) 708-1112 (TDD). These are 
not toll-free numbers. Forms necessary for compliance with the rule 
may be obtained from the local HUD Office.
    (g) Prohibition Against Lobbying Activities.
    The use of funds awarded under the NOFA to be published is 
subject to the disclosure requirements and prohibitions of Section 
319 of the Department of Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1990 (31 U.S.C. 1352) and the HUD 
implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 87. These authorities 
prohibit recipients of federal contracts, grants or loans from using 
appropriated funds for lobbying the Executive or Legislative 
Branches of the Federal Government in connection with a specific 
contract, grant or loan. The prohibition also covers the awarding of 
contracts, grants, cooperative agreements or loans unless the 
recipient has made an acceptable certification regarding lobbying. 
Under 24 CFR Part 87, applicants, recipients and subrecipients of 
assistance exceeding $100,000 must certify that no federal funds 
have been or will be spent on lobbying activities in connection with 
the assistance.
    IHAs established by an Indian tribe as a result of the exercise 
of the tribe's sovereign power are excluded from coverage of the 
Byrd Amendment, but IHAs established under State law are not 
excluded from the statute's coverage.
    If the amount applied for is greater than $100,000, the 
certification is required at the time application for funds is made 
that federally appropriated funds are not being or have not been 
used in violation of the Byrd Amendment. If the amount applied for 
is greater than $100,000 and the HA has made or has agreed to make 
any payment using nonappropriated funds for lobbying activity, as 
described in 24 CFR Part 87 (Byrd Amendment), the submission also 
must include the SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. The HA 
determines if the submission of the SF-LLL is applicable.
    (h) Paperwork Reduction Act Statement. The information 
collection requirements contained in this NOFA have been approved by 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under section 3504(h) of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1989 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and have 
been assigned OMB control number 2577-0044.

VIII. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program

    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program number is 
14.852.

    Dated: January 9, 1995.
Joseph Shuldiner,
Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.
[FR Doc. 95-6562 Filed 3-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-33-P