Public Housing Agency Plans

SUMMARY: On February 18, 1999, HUD published an interim rule

implementing section 511 of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility

Act of 1998. Section 511 introduces the public housing agency (PHA)

plans--a 5-Year Plan and an Annual Plan. Through these plans a PHA will

advise HUD, its residents and members of the public of the PHA's

mission for serving the needs of low-income and very low-income

families, and the PHA's strategy for addressing those needs. This rule

makes final the policies and procedures described in the February 18,

1999 interim rule, taking into consideration the public comments

received on the interim rule.

DATES: Effective Date: November 22, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Rod

Solomon, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy, Program and

Legislative Initiatives, Office of Public and Indian Housing,

Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW,

Room 4116, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-0713 (this is not

a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may

access that number via TTY by calling the Federal Information Relay

Service at (800) 877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. The February 18, 1999 Interim Rule

On February 18, 1999 (64 FR 8170), HUD published an interim rule to

implement section 511 of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility

Act of 1998 (Public law 105-276, approved October 21, 1998; 112 Stat.

2461) (referred to as the ``Public Housing Reform Act''). Section 511

of the Public Housing Reform Act, which added a new section 5A to the

U.S. Housing Act of 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq; see 1437c-1),

introduces the public housing agency (PHA) plans--a 5-Year Plan and an

Annual Plan. Through these plans a PHA will advise HUD, its residents

and members of the public of the PHA's mission for serving the needs of

low-income and very low-income families, and the PHA's strategy for

addressing those needs.

The 5-Year Plan describes the mission of the PHA and the PHA's long

range goals and objectives for achieving its mission over the

subsequent 5 years. The Annual Plan provides details about the PHA's

immediate operations, program participants, programs and services, and

the PHA's strategy for handling operational concerns, residents'

concerns and needs, programs and services for the upcoming fiscal year.

Both planning mechanisms (the 5-Year Plan and the Annual Plan) require

PHAs to examine their existing operations and needs (particularly the

needs of the families they serve) and to design long-range and short-

range strategies to address those needs.

The February 18, 1999 interim rule established the initial

procedures and requirements for development, submission and

implementation of the PHA plans. The interim rule became effective on

March 22, 1999, and is codified at 24 CFR part 903 (entitled ``Public

Housing Agency Plans''). The preamble to the February 18, 1999 interim

rule described in detail the provisions of 24 CFR part 903. This

preamble to the final rule does not repeat that description.

B. Electronic Template for the PHA Plans

In the preamble to the February 18, 1999 interim rule, HUD

announced that it would develop software and eventually require

electronic submission of the PHA Plan that would provide uniform

formats and layouts. On July 30, 1999, HUD announced the availability

of the PHA Plan Template, including instructions and supplemental

guidance on preparation and submission of PHA Plans. The template is

currently provided as a word processing document that will be

downloaded by PHAs, completed, and submitted to HUD via the Internet.

HUD's goal is to quickly transform the PHA Plans into an on-line

submission system that will further facilitate streamlined PHA

submissions to HUD. By using the electronic template, PHAs will provide

responses to a number of structured questions designed to provide the

most relevant data regarding local operations in a concise manner.

The PHA Plan template also serves as a central reference point for

very detailed information about the PHA's operations and activities.

This is accomplished through the template's listing of required

``supporting documents'' that must be available locally for public

review and serve as a resource library for the community, while

eliminating the need for extensive submissions to HUD. The PHA Plan

template is available at HUD's homepage website at http://www.hud.gov/

pih/pha/plans/phaps-home.html. In keeping with HUD's move to an

electronic government, the PHA Plan website will become the primary

source of information and resources regarding the PHA Plans. In

addition, this PHA Plans website will serve as the location from which

agencies download the electronic PHA Plan template for their use in

developing the Plans. Once completed and ready for submission, PHAs

will transmit the electronic PHA Plans to HUD via the HUD internet

site. After HUD approval, these Plans will be placed on display on this

same webpage.

C. The September 21, 1999 Amendments to the Interim Rule

On September 21, 1999 (64 FR 51045), HUD published a rule making

two amendments to the February 18, 1999 interim rule. First, the

September 21, 1999 rule amended Sec. 903.3 to extend the due date for

initial PHA plan submissions made by PHAs with fiscal years beginning

on January 1, 2000. Specifically, the September 21, 1999 rule provides

that these PHAs must submit their first PHA plans to HUD by December 1,

1999. Second, the September 21, 1999 rule amended Sec. 903.23 to add a

new paragraph (c) which provides that, for purposes of the submission

of the first PHA plans, the date on which the PHA submits its plan will

be considered to be the submission due date. This final rule reflects

the changes made by the September 21, 1999 document.

Section II of this preamble highlights the significant changes made

to the February 18, 1999 interim rule at this final rule stage. Section

III of the preamble discusses the basic objectives of the PHA planning

process. Section IV of the preamble discusses the participation of

PHAs, residents, and other groups in this rulemaking through public

forums held on this rule. Section V of the preamble discusses the

issues raised on the rule by the groups that attended four public

forums and the issues raised by the members of the public that

commented on the rule during the 60-day public comment period.

[[Page 56845]]

II. Significant Changes Between the February 18, 1999 Interim Rule

and This Final Rule

This rule makes final the policies and procedures contained in the

February 18, 1999 interim rule, and takes into consideration the public

comments received on the interim rule. The significant changes made to

the interim rule are described below.

In Sec. 903.1 (What are the Public Housing Agency Plans?)

paragraph (c) is revised in this rule to note that HUD also may

prescribe the format of certain required attachments to be submitted

with the PHA Plan or documents to be made available locally, but not

submitted.

Section 903.3 (When Must a PHA Submit the Plans to HUD?)

reflects the changes that were made by the September 21, 1999 rule,

discussed in Section II.B of this preamble.

In Sec. 903.7 (What Information Must a PHA Provide in the

Annual Plan?), HUD removed the language in the introductory paragraph

that lists the information that need not be included in the first

Annual Plan. This paragraph is revised in this final rule to provide

that HUD will advise PHAs by separate notice of the information that

must be included in the first Annual Plan, as well as any special

instructions or directions that may be applicable to first year filing

of the Annual Plan.

In this introductory paragraph, HUD also has added language to

clarify that the Annual Plan must be consistent with the goals and

objectives of the 5-Year Plan.

In Sec. 903.7(a)(2), HUD added language to require PHAs to make

reasonable efforts to identify the housing needs of each group listed

in paragraph (a)(1) of this section based on information provided by

the applicable Consolidated Plan, information provided by HUD, and

generally available data.

In Sec. 903.7(b) (statement of financial resources), HUD removed

the word ``significant'' to describe resources that PHAs must list, and

revised this language to provide that PHAs must list, by general

categories, their resource commitments, such as PHA operating, capital,

and other proposed resources.

In Sec. 903.7(c) (statement of the PHA's policies that govern

eligibility, selection and admissions), HUD has added language to

paragraph (c)(2)(i) that simplifies and clarifies the provisions

regarding deconcentration of poverty and income-mixing. Most

importantly, HUD has clarified that the initiative applies to all

family (general occupancy) developments; and that with respect to the

identification of families, developments and buildings as higher income

or lower income, PHAs that use a dividing line of the average income in

these developments will be considered to be in compliance with the law.

With respect to the actions then to be taken, PHAs may offer

incentives to eligible families that would help accomplish the

deconcentration and income mixing objectives. Skipping of a family on a

waiting list to reach another family with a lower or higher income is

required, provided that such skipping is uniformly applied. Such

skipping must be adopted by a PHA to the extent necessary to implement

the statute's requirements. Skipping families is consistent with site-

based and community-wide waiting lists. Admissions policies related to

deconcentration do not impose specific quotas.

PHAs may consider a number of approaches as they examine designing

an admissions policy to achieve the goals of deconcentration and income

mixing, such as the use of skipping over certain families on waiting

lists based on incomes; the establishment of certain preferences such

as worker preferences; appropriate affirmative marketing efforts;

additional applicant consultation and information; provision of

additional supportive services and amenities; and rent incentives

authorized by the Act. Of course, PHA policies must be in writing and

followed consistently, and must affirmatively further fair housing.

In Sec. 903.7(c)(1)(A), HUD has revised this paragraph to provide

that the MTCS occupancy data upon which the PHA must assess changes in

racial, ethnic or disability-related tenant composition, has been

confirmed to be complete and accurate by an independent audit or is

otherwise satisfactory to HUD.

In Sec. 903.7(c)(1)(B), HUD revised this paragraph to provide that

at least every three years (as opposed to biannually as required by the

interim rule), PHAs must use independent testers or means satisfactory

to HUD to assure that the site-based waiting list is not being

implemented in a discriminatory manner.

In Sec. 903.7(e) (statement of the PHA's operation and management),

HUD revised paragraph (e)(1) to reflect that PHAs need only list (not

describe) their rules, standards and policies that govern maintenance

and management of their housing.

In Sec. 903.7(g) (statement of the capital improvements needed),

HUD revised the last sentence of this paragraph to state that PHAs

receiving capital funding are required to include 5-year plans covering

large capital items. This will both facilitate basic capital planning

and asset management, and allow more flexible use of capital funds by

increasing the number of items that have been subject to public review.

In Sec. 903.7(h), (i), (j), and (k) which concern, respectively,

statements pertaining to demolition and/or disposition, designated

housing, required or voluntary conversion, and homeownership programs,

HUD added language to each of these paragraphs to clarify that the

application and approval processes discussed in these paragraphs are

separate application and approval processes from the PHA Annual Plan

submission and approval process.

In Sec. 903.7(h), HUD has added a new paragraph concerning

submission of an interim plan for demolition/disposition that was

previously described in the preamble to the February 18, 1999 interim

rule.

In Sec. 903.7(l) (statement of the PHA's community service and

self-sufficiency programs), HUD added language that requires the PHA to

address any cooperation agreements, as described by section 12(d)(7) of

the 1937 Act that the PHA has entered into or plans to enter into. This

statutory section requires the PHA to make best efforts to enter into

cooperation agreements with State, local, and other agencies that

provide assistance to target supportive services to covered families

and provide information to facilitate administration of requirements

for community service and tying rents to welfare compliance.

In Sec. 903.7(m), HUD revised paragraph (1)(iv) of this section to

clarify that if a PHA expects to receive public housing drug

elimination grant funds, the information required to be included by the

Public Housing Drug Elimination Program regulations must be submitted

with the PHA Plan.

In Sec. 903.7(q) (statement of asset management), HUD clarifies

that the PHA need not repeat information concerning asset management

that is covered by other plan components.

In Sec. 903.7(r) (additional information to be provided), HUD

removed the requirement to submit a Table of Contents and Executive

Summary. HUD's template eliminates the necessity of a separate

requirement in the

[[Page 56846]]

regulation for a table of contents or executive summary.

In Sec. 903.7(r), HUD adds language to provide that a PHA must

identify in the Annual Plan the basic criteria that a PHA will use to

determine what constitutes a ``substantial deviation'' from the 5-Year

Plan, and a ``significant amendment or modification'' to either the 5-

Year Plan or Annual Plan for purposes of Sec. 903.21. HUD also added

language to provide that a PHA must include in the PHA plan such other

information as HUD may request. HUD will advise PHAs of any additional

information through advance notice.

In Sec. 903.9 (Must a Troubled PHA Include Additional

Information in its Annual Plan?), HUD has added a reference to the

regulations of the Public Housing Management Assessment Program (PHMAP)

(the predecessor to HUD's new assessment system, the Public Housing

Assessment System (PHAS)) in recognition that some PHAs may have been

designated as troubled under the PHMAP regulations (24 CFR part 901).

In Sec. 903.11 (Are Certain PHAs Eligible to Submit a

Streamlined Annual Plan?), HUD added, in paragraph (b)(2), a cross

reference to section 6(j)(2) of the 1937 Act that addresses PHAs at

risk of being troubled.

In Sec. 903.13 (What Is a Resident Advisory Board and What

Is Its Role in Development of the Annual Plan?), HUD revised paragraph

(a)(1) to more closely track the statutory language. In paragraph

(a)(2), HUD added language concerning the reasonable resources to be

provided to Resident Advisory Boards by PHAs. In HUD's Capital Fund

Formula proposed rule, published on September 14, 1999 (64 FR 49924),

HUD advised in the preamble to this proposed rule that it would clarify

in the PHA Plan final rule that reasonable resources for the Resident

Advisory Boards must provide reasonable means for them to become

informed on programs covered by the PHA Plan, to communicate in writing

and by telephone with assisted families and hold meetings with those

families, and to access information regarding covered programs on the

internet, taking into account the size and resources of the PHA.

In Sec. 903.13(b)(1), HUD provides an exception to the requirement

to appoint a jurisdiction-wide resident council. This language as

revised provides that if a jurisdiction-wide resident council exists

that complies with the tenant participation regulations in 24 CFR part

964, the PHA shall appoint the jurisdiction-wide resident council or

its representatives as the Resident Advisory Board, except that members

shall be added or another Resident Advisory Board formed to provide for

reasonable representation of families receiving tenant-based assistance

where necessary.

In Sec. 903.13(b)(2), HUD clarifies that a tenant-based assistance

program of significant size is one that is 20% or more of the PHA's

assisted households.

In Sec. 903.13(c), HUD clarifies that the PHA must consider the

recommendations of the Resident Advisory Board or Boards in preparing

not only the final Annual Plan but also any significant amendment or

modification to the Annual Plan. Section 511(g)(2) of the Public

Housing Reform Act imposes this requirement.

In Sec. 903.15 (What is the Relationship of the Public

Housing Agency Plans to the Consolidated Plan), HUD has revised this

section to allow PHAs, subject to HUD approval, to change their fiscal

years to encourage coordination with local Consolidated Plans.

For Sec. 903.17, HUD changed the title of this section to

read ``What is the Process for Obtaining Public Comment on the Plans?''

In paragraph (b) of this section, HUD clarifies that not only the

proposed PHA plans, but all attachments and documents related to the

plans must be available for review by the public. HUD also added a new

paragraph (c) to require PHAs to conduct reasonable outreach activities

to encourage broad public participation in the PHA plans.

In Sec. 903.21, HUD added a new paragraph (b) to clarify that any

significant amendment or modification to a PHA Plan is subject to the

requirements of Secs. 903.13, 903.15, and 903.17. As noted earlier,

this requirement is consistent with section 511(g)(2) of the Public

Housing Reform Act.

In Sec. 903.23, HUD added a new paragraph (b)(4) to clarify that a

plan deemed approved as a result of HUD's failure to respond by the

75th day after the PHA's submission does not apply to the plan of a

troubled PHA. This provision is consistent with section 511(i)(4)(A) of

the Public Housing Reform Act. In paragraph (d) of this section, HUD

added language to clarify that not only the approved PHA plan, but all

attachments and documents related to the approved plan must be

available for review by the public.

In addition to these changes, HUD made editorial changes to certain

provisions of the regulation.

III. The Goals of the PHA Plans--Comprehensive Planning; Local

Accountability; Reduction in Submissions; and Increased Flexibility

The PHA plan concept is based on the highly successful consolidated

planning process used for HUD's community planning and development

programs. Like the Consolidated Plan for CPD programs, the PHA plans

provide a planning mechanism by which a PHA can examine its long-range

needs and its short-range needs, specifically the needs of the families

that it serves, and design both long-term strategies and short-term

strategies for addressing those needs. Like the Consolidated Plan, the

PHA plans involve consultation with affected groups in the development

of the plan. Through this planning mechanism, PHAs will make more

efficient use of Federal assistance, more effectively operate their

programs, and better serve their residents.

HUD has strived, in developing its PHA plan regulations, to keep

the plan submission requirements complete but simple. A significant

step in meeting this objective is HUD's issuance of the electronic

template for the PHA Plans (as discussed earlier in this preamble). The

electronic template with its ``question and answer'' format provides a

comprehensive yet easy mechanism for PHAs to record and submit the

information required for the PHA Plans.

To the extent practicable, the PHA Annual Plan will eventually

consolidate all PHA information that is required to be submitted under

existing HUD planning and reporting requirements into one document. The

objective is for the PHA Annual Plan to eventually supersede submission

requirements currently imposed on PHAs under various HUD programs. For

example, see HUD's September 14, 1999 final rule regarding formula

allocation for the Public Housing Drug Elimination Program (64 FR

4990), which provides that PHAs must submit their drug elimination

plans with their PHA Annual Plan. In addition, the process for

distributing capital funds is being combined with the PHA Plan process.

(HUD's proposed rule on the allocation of capital funds was published

on September 14, 1999 at 64 FR 49924.) HUD intends that the new PHA

planning process, to the extent practicable, will allow for a PHA to

plan for all of its program needs based on the PHA's fiscal year. This

will assist PHAs in planning in a comprehensive manner and will

expedite the release of public housing funds.

Further, as part of the HUD 2020 Management Reform effort, HUD is

[[Page 56847]]

moving toward electronic reporting for all required submissions under

its programs. In addition to making submissions easier for its program

participants (paper reduction), electronic data assists HUD and its

program partners to exchange information more easily and to monitor

activity, note trends in programs and the performance of the program

participants (weaknesses and strengths) and better serve the families

and communities that HUD programs are designed to serve. HUD believes

that its electronic template for the PHA Plans is a significant first

step in achieving these objectives.

IV. Public Participation in the Development of this Final Rule

Section 511 of the Public Housing Reform Act requires that before

issuance of a final rule, HUD seek the recommendations on

implementation of the PHA plans from organizations representing (1)

State or local public housing agencies; (2) residents, including

resident management corporations; and (3) other appropriate parties.

Section 511 also requires HUD to convene not less than two public

forums at which the persons or organizations making recommendations may

express their views concerning the proposed disposition of their

recommendations. In addition to the general solicitation of public

comments on the February 18, 1999 interim rule, HUD specifically

invited recommendations on implementation of the PHA plans from the

three groups specified in the statute, and included under the third

category, representatives of affected communities (See preamble

discussion of the February 18, 1999 interim rule at 64 FR 8170).

In order to ensure broad public participation in this rulemaking,

HUD held four public forums to discuss implementation of the PHA plans.

These forums were held in Atlanta, Georgia, on May 4, 1999; Omaha,

Nebraska, on May 19, 1999; Syracuse, New York, on June 28, 1999; and

Washington, DC, on July 28, 1999. The final forum in Washington, DC

allowed persons to participate via telephone from 33 sites around the

country. At each of the forums, helpful recommendations and suggestions

were made by the forum participants, issues were discussed and ideas

exchanged on the PHA planning process, specifically the requirements

established by the February 18, 1999 interim rule. Consistent with the

statutory requirements, HUD advised the forum participants of its

proposed disposition of the participants' recommendations when HUD had

formulated a proposed disposition of a specific view or recommendation

offered. For certain issues, HUD was unable to offer the forum

participants a proposed disposition, because the issues required

further deliberation by HUD, but HUD discussed with the participants

the considerations involved in HUD's decisionmaking process.

Section V of this preamble, which immediately follows, provides a

summary of the comments, issues and recommendations made on the

February 18, 1999 interim rule, those made at the public forums, and

those provided as written comments during the 60-day comment period on

the rule.

V. Discussion of Public Comments Raised on the February 18, 1999

Interim Rule

The public comment period on the February 18, 1999 interim rule

closed on April 19, 1999. Written comments were submitted by PHAs,

organizations representing PHAs, legal services organizations, public

interest/housing policy organizations, and various other organizations

and individuals. In addition to the written comments, HUD also received

comments and suggestions at the four public forums held throughout the

country.

This section of the preamble presents a summary of the significant

issues raised by the public commenters on the February 18, 1999 interim

rule, both through written submission of comments and at the forum. The

heading ``Comment'' states the comment or comments made by the

commenter or commenters, and the heading ``Response'' presents HUD's

response to the issue or issues raised by the commenters.

1. General Comments

Comment. HUD should view the planning process and the Plan itself

as a mechanism for PHAs to express local choices. HUD should not use

the Plan as a tool to impose substantive requirements on PHAs.

Response. HUD's views of the PHA planning process are consistent

with those of the commenters. HUD views the PHA planning process as a

mechanism for PHAs to express local choices consistent, however, with

Federal statutory requirements. The requirements imposed by HUD on PHAs

with respect to the PHA planning process are those required to be

imposed by statute. The substantive requirements imposed on PHAs are

those imposed through the statutes and regulations that govern the

various HUD programs in which PHAs participate. The statutory and

regulatory requirements governing the PHA planning process are directed

to compiling basic information about PHA operations, missions and

goals, and making that information available to HUD and to the public.

Comment. In order to ensure accuracy, HUD needs to work with PHAs

to ensure software compatibility. HUD needs to address the problems

with the MTCS and Community 2020 software packages, which are

burdensome to use. HUD should provide PHAs with software early in the

process. PHAs should be able to request local HUD offices to provide

various MTCS printouts to help with preparation of the Plan.

Response. HUD is cognizant of PHA concerns about problems with the

MTCS software and Community 2020 software. HUD has been working with

PHAs to minimize problems and increase MTCS reporting. Based on data

received through the end of September 1999, MTCS reporting is as

follows: tenant-based section 8 is reported at 95%; public housing at

86%; and overall reporting at 88%. As with all new software products,

problems will be uncovered and have been uncovered with respect to HUD

2020 software and MTCS but HUD is working to eliminate these problems.

With respect to local assistance, HUD's local Public and Indian Housing

offices are available to offer all needed assistance to PHAs.

Comment. It will be difficult to complete the Plan without

additional funding.

Response. The PHA Plans provide for compilation in one location

information that PHAs already have been required to put together under

various other program regulations. By requiring, however, that this

information be put together one time annually in one source, the

administrative burden placed on PHAs will be decreased rather than

increased. While there may be increased burden during the first year of

PHA Plan submissions, once the first Plans are submitted the subsequent

submissions should be prepared and submitted with significantly less

burden. Additionally, HUD believes that the electronic template for the

PHA Plans issued July 30, 1999, helps to reduce administrative burden

in the preparation and submission of the PHA Plans. As requested by

commenters HUD has made (and plans to continue to make) the PHA Plan

software available at no cost.

Comment. HUD's decision to maintain separate submission and

approval processes for activities such as demolition, disposition,

conversion to

[[Page 56848]]

vouchers, designation, and public housing homeownership programs seems

to contradict the Public Housing Reform Act's mandate to deregulate and

consolidate. By creating the PHA Plan process, Congress intended to

dramatically limit HUD's traditional discretionary powers to review and

approve these specific programs. Maintaining submission and approval

processes separate from the PHA Plan thwarts this intent.

Response. The PHA Plan regulations reference separate submission

and approval processes for various activities such as demolition,

disposition, and conversion to vouchers because the Congress did not

provide for a common approval process in its enactment of the PHA Plan,

and in particular provided for different approval standards for these

activities. PHAs are encouraged to coordinate public consultation

processes for these applications and simultaneously submit such Plans,

but the approval processes remain separate.

Comment. The currently available census data is too old. Annual

Plans should not be required until new census data is available in

2002.

Response. HUD has no statutory authority to defer submission of

Annual Plans until the year 2002. HUD recognizes that the census data

is not the optimum planning mechanism as the decade draws to a close;

nevertheless it remains the official census data. To the extent that

PHAs need to refer to census data, which is limited, PHAs can continue

to use this data.

Comment. ``One size fits all'' approach of the PHA Plan does not

work well for PHAs because of differences in size, number, and type of

programs.

Response. HUD believes that the PHA planning mechanism provides

sufficient flexibility for PHAs to make the necessary adjustments given

the PHA's size, number and type of programs. This flexibility is also

reflected in HUD's electronic template for the PHA Plans.

Comment. HUD has added oversight in the rule that is beyond what

the Public Housing Reform Act requires.

Response. HUD's oversight of PHA programs and activities is

consistent with the Public Housing Reform Act and the statutes and

regulations governing the individual HUD programs covered by the PHA

Plan.

Comment. HUD should set parameters for who can sue a PHA over a

Plan.

Response. HUD has no authority to limit legal action in connection

with a PHA Plan.

Comment. Fair housing considerations should be addressed in all

aspects of the Plan. The final rule should specifically direct PHAs to

comply with fair housing laws when making choices related in the Plan.

Response. Fair housing considerations are an important part of the

PHA planning process and are addressed in the regulation. Please see

Sec. 903.7(o) the PHA certification requirement and the PHA's

obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.

Comment. All policies should be in the Plan, not just discretionary

ones. The purpose of the Plan is to provide a framework for local

accountability. The Plan must be complete. All material must be

included, even material already submitted to HUD. All rent policies

should be included. Even with mandatory policies, PHAs have a lot of

discretion.

Response. HUD believes that the rule provides for a PHA Plan that

presents the necessary framework for local accountability. In addition,

the rule provides that PHAs must make HUD-specified documents (which

includes documents covering all critical operations of a PHA) available

locally to the public for inspection. Therefore, the public has a

complete view of the PHA's operations.

Comment. In the preamble to the interim rule, quantifiable goals

are discussed. Where the Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Program is

discussed, the goal should be determined by looking at how many

families have replaced welfare income with earnings.

Response. PHAs are welcome to frame an FSS goal as suggested by the

commenter.

2. Comments Regarding Timing of the Rule

Comment. The time frame for implementation in the interim rule is

too short to do all the work and will create a serious burden for PHAs.

This is particularly so given all the new changes required by the

Public Housing Reform Act. HUD should allow for extensions and delay

publication of the final rule to allow adequate time for enhanced

rulemaking sessions. Additionally, HUD's estimate of time needed to

complete the planning process does not take into account the lack of

guidance and instructions provided by HUD. HUD should issue guidance,

not prescriptive rules, and this help should be given early in the

process, not later.

Response. The Public Housing Reform Act does not permit HUD to

delay issuance of this final rule. HUD recognized, however, that

additional time was needed by PHAs for submission of their first PHA

Plans and HUD has provided the additional time in the rule published on

September 21, 1999, and discussed earlier in this preamble. In addition

to allowing more time to prepare and submit the plans, HUD believes

that the electronic template assists PHA's in significantly reducing

the time for preparation and submission of the plan elements. Issuance

of the electronic template was accompanied by additional HUD guidance

on the PHA Plans. (See Notice PIH 99-33 (HA), issued July 30, 1999.)

3. Comments Regarding Small PHAs

Comment. The rule will create a real hardship for small PHAs, who

have limited staffs, budgets, and relatively few units. It is

unrealistic to expect small PHAs to comply with the timelines

established by the rule and the extra paperwork required by the rule.

The requirement that Plans be submitted 75 days prior to end of FY 2000

is a major burden for small PHAs, who need time to complete an in-depth

analysis. Another commenter stated that the requirement is also a

burden because small PHAs will need extra funds to complete the Plan

and the commenter stated that ``CDBG funds'' will not be available

until after the Plan is due. In addition, coordination with the State's

Consolidated Plan and forming Resident Advisory Boards will take

considerable time for small PHAs. Small PHAs are also already

overburdened with paperwork. The final rule should be delayed until HUD

works with PHAs to further streamline the rule.

Response. As noted in responses to earlier comments, HUD has made

considerable effort to reduce the administrative burden of the PHA

planning process on all PHAs, and especially small PHAs. With respect

to the timing, HUD provided through the September 21, 1999 final rule,

the maximum additional time that it could provide in accordance with

the statutory requirements. The statute itself is cognizant of the

burden that uniform requirements can place on small entities, and

allows HUD to provide streamlined PHA Plans for small PHAs which it has

done. As HUD also has noted earlier, HUD believes that its electronic

template considerably reduces the administrative burden on all PHAs

especially small PHAs.

Comment. Small PHAs should not have to submit homeownership

statements. Most small PHAs will probably never implement a

homeownership program because they do not have the personnel or

resources to undertake such a program.

[[Page 56849]]

Response. Under the streamlined submission for small PHAs, small

PHAs are only required to provide statements for Section 8

Homeownership programs that they plan to operate. Again, HUD believes

that the statements required by the PHA Plan electronic template

significantly reduce the PHA's administrative burden.

Comment. Small PHAs should not be automatically required to address

the crime prevention item because they have not had to address the

security indicator in PHMAP.

Response. Small PHAs are only required to address the crime

prevention items if they receive funding under the Public Housing Drug

Elimination Program (PHDEP).

Comment. Numerous small PHAs have Federal expenditures of less than

$300,000 per year. Since these PHAs are exempt from the Single Audit

Act, they should only be required to submit audit information if HUD

has approved the PHAs request for payment for a financial audit.

Response. The PHA Plan regulations do not require the submission of

any financial information inconsistent with the Single Audit Act (31

U.S.C. 7501-7507) or OMB Circular A-133 (Audits of States, Local

Governments and Non-Profit Organizations), and do not in themselves add

audit requirements.

Comment. Small PHAs have limited resources. One commenter

specifically asked whether CIAP funds can be used to complete the Plan.

Another commenter asked whether operating reserves be used and

reimbursed from capital funds.

Response. Capital and operating funds can be used to complete the

Plan, consistent with the regulatory requirements of these programs.

4. Comments Regarding Section 8-Only PHAs

Comment. Why are high performing and small PHAs exempt from

submitting a grievance procedures section and not Section 8-only PHAs.

This must be unintended.

Response. Section 8-only PHAs are not exempt from the grievance

procedures element of the PHA Plan. The template, however, basically

requires that these PHAs make these procedures available locally.

Comment. Section 8-only PHAs should not have to comply with

anything in this rule. Use of Section 8 is in the hands of residents.

The Consolidated Plan already covers Section 8 issues and public notice

is already required for Section 8 Administrative Plans.

Response. The statute includes PHAs that receive assistance under

section 8(o) of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. HUD has no authority to

exclude these PHAs from the PHA planning process required under section

5A of the 1937 Act.

5. Issues on Which HUD Specifically Sought Comment

In the preamble to the February 18, 1999 interim rule, HUD

specifically sought comment on certain issues (see 64 FR 8179). Those

issues are listed here, as well as the comments received on these

issues, and HUD's responses to the comments.

The Feasibility of Combining the 5-Year Plan and/or Annual Plan With

the Submission of the Consolidated Plan Either in Whole or in Part

Comment. In response to this issue, many commenters would like to

see the Consolidated Plan and the Annual Plan combined so that the

process is not so burdensome and duplication is kept at a minimum. Most

of these commenters, however, requested that this be an option and not

a requirement. The commenters stated that while combining the plans

makes sense for ``joint agencies'' (by this it is understood to mean

agencies administering both Consolidated Plan and PHA Plan programs),

it makes no sense for independent PHAs. At the very least, combining

the two types of plans should not be a requirement for the first few

years of plan submissions.

Response. PHAs have the option of submitting the Annual Plan

simultaneously with the submission of the Consolidated Plan and

coordinating public processes, provided that the statutory and

regulatory requirements of both are met. Although the Congress provided

for the Annual Plan to be consistent with the Consolidated Plan, it did

not provide for the Annual Plan to be part of the Consolidated Plan.

The Congress established separate requirements for development,

submission and approval of the Annual Plan. Therefore the requirements

of both plans must be met.

Comment. For PHAs that want to combine the planning process, HUD

should assist by offering guidance on how to combine the processes and

allowing PHAs to change fiscal years to match localities. The plans

should be due at the same time.

Response. This rule allows PHAs, subject to HUD approval, to change

fiscal years to match localities. HUD's July 30, 1999 Notice includes

guidance that is helpful to PHAs interested in combining the PHA

planning process with the Consolidated Planning process.

Ways to Streamline or Merge Current Information Requirements Already

Reported Electronically by PHAs to HUD With the Additional Requirements

Listed in This Rule

Comment. In order to streamline reporting, HUD should increase the

accuracy of reports on the HUD website and should standardize

budgeting, requisitioning, and reporting requirements for all funding.

Response. HUD believes that the electronic template is a

significant step forward in meeting the commenter's concerns. HUD's

Office of Public and Indian Housing, as well as other HUD offices, are

working on standardization of required reports under HUD programs, and

converting these to a simple electronic format that can be accessed

through the internet.

Comment. PHAs should not have to include components that do not

apply them.

Response. The PHA Plan regulation includes only those components of

the Plan that PHAs are required by statute to submit. PHAs are only

required to make available information that pertains to programs and

activities they actually conduct.

How Should the Term ``Substantial Deviation'' be Defined

Comment. In the February 18, 1999 interim rule, HUD stated that a

PHA would not be required to submit an annual update of the 5-Year

Plan, but the PHA would be required to explain any substantial

deviation from the 5-Year Plan in its Annual Plan. HUD solicited

comment on how substantial deviation should be defined. Comments on how

this term should be defined were as follows. Substantial deviation

should be defined as any changes to a PHA's overall mission, any

changes to the goals or objectives that affect services to residents,

or significant changes to a PHA's financial situation. Substantial

deviation should be defined as a complete revision or abandonment of

one or more of the components in a PHA's 5-Year Plan. A substantial

deviation should not include a delay in the implementation of any

particular component caused by a PHA's business needs. Substantial

deviation should apply only to the mission statement and not to goals

or objectives. Community planning is not a static process, and goals

and objectives must be able to be changed without requiring HUD

approval each time. It should be sufficient that Resident Advisory

Boards

[[Page 56850]]

and PHA Boards review and approve these changes. The definition of

substantial deviation needs to take into account the social, political,

and economic conditions of an area because if any of these factors

changes, adjustments will need to be made in planning documents.

Substantial deviation should mean a change in a PHA's mission statement

or in the PHAs goals or objectives. Substantial deviation should not

deal with meeting objectives, nor should it include deviations based on

emergencies or circumstances out of a PHA's control. HUD should combine

the 5-Year Plan and the Annual Plan. This would simplify the definition

of substantial deviation because the issue would be covered by the term

significant amendments. The definition of substantial deviation should

be determined locally.

Response. HUD appreciates all the suggestions on how this term

should be defined. These comments convince HUD that the definition of

substantial deviation should be defined at the local level, as

suggested by some of the commenters. HUD believes that substantial

deviation should be defined at the local level as part of the public

participation in the PHA planning process. PHAs together with their

residents, local partners and affected and interested members of the

public are in a better position to define these terms. The definition

of this term, as well as others defined locally, must be noted in the

PHA Plan. The definition must be applied to the goals and objectives as

well as the mission statement.

With respect to combining the two plans, HUD notes that to a

certain extent the 5-Year Plan and the Annual Plan are combined because

they must be submitted at the same time, and the Annual Plan reflects

the mission and long range goals of the PHA as provided in the 5-Year

Plan. Additionally, HUD's electronic template for the PHA Plans

provides for the submission to be made as one.

What Constitutes an Acceptable 5-Year Plan?

Comment. An acceptable 5-Year Plan should be one that a PHA

believes in. HUD will not be able to review all 5-Year Plans, so this

requirement only matters to PHAs.

Response. HUD is required to review all PHA Plans, 5-Year Plans and

Annual Plans. A PHA's 5-Year Plan should provide for a mission and

goals and objectives that a PHA believes in. HUD believes that these

goals are likely to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the

HUD programs under which the PHA receives funding.

Comment. The February 18, 1999 preamble statement about what

constitutes an acceptable 5-Year Plan is correct, but meeting any goals

depends on annual appropriations. Any 5-Year Plan should have to

preface any goal with this acknowledgement. HUD cannot expect PHAs to

meet goals if funding is lower than expected. HUD should make specific

allowances in 5-Year Plans for the fact that increasing housing supply

is dependent on HUD and Congress.

Response. PHAs may condition the achievement of goals on at least

level annual appropriations where appropriate. PHAs should establish

goals and objectives that are ambitious given current funding levels.

Comment. The 5-Year Plan should be a strategic plan outlining goals

and objectives, strategies to meet goals and objectives, and barriers

and measurements of achievements.

Response. HUD believes that this is exactly what the 5-Year Plan

is, but to make the goals and objectives ones that can be practically

achieved, they need to be described in terms of quantifiable goals and

objectives.

Comment. HUD should consider a 5-Year Plan that substantially meets

or in good faith attempts to address the 18 components.

Response. The 18 components constitute the substance of the Annual

Plan. However, a 5-Year Plan that establishes quantifiable goals and

objectives that substantially meet or show a reasonable good faith

effort to address the purposes of the 18 components of the Annual Plan

(which components describe the PHA's overall strategy for handling

operations on an annual basis) will be considered acceptable.

The Manner of Submission of the Information Required Under the Annual

Plan.

Comment. The manner of submission should be as flexible as possible

and include fax, email, postal service, and Internet.

Response. With the introduction of the PHA Plan electronic

template, HUD believes that it has provided a highly flexible manner of

submission. Electronic submission provides for ease in preparation,

revisions, and submission. For PHAs that do not have the capability to

make electronic submission via the internet, HUD's local Offices of

Public and Indian Housing will assist PHAs with electronic submission.

Comment. Several commenters expressed concern about electronic

submission of the plan. Their concerns were as follows. HUD should

provide free software for submission of the Plan, but should not

require electronic submission in initial years so PHAs can focus on

formulating Plans and not have to fit parameters of preconceived

format. This is especially important because PHAs do not know how

difficult the software will be to master, what ``bugs'' the software

will have, and whether it will be compatible with other PHA systems.

The Plan should not be submitted electronically because the Plan has to

be available for public view. HUD and the public should review

identical copies of the Plan.

Response. With respect to the Plan software, HUD has adopted an

internet submission system that utilizes commonly-used office software.

The electronic template for the Plan has been available free of charge.

HUD has been testing the submission system before and after

announcement of the template's availability on July 30, 1999. HUD

believes that there should not be any delay in the use of the template

for PHA Plan submissions. The template will significantly reduce the

administrative burden on PHAs. HUD is ready to assist PHAs with its use

and will respond rapidly to correct any ``bugs'' in the system.

With respect to the capability of PHAs to submit information

electronically, in today's environment, HUD believes that all PHAs have

access to computers and therefore this type of electronic capability

but may not have internet capability. HUD's local Offices of Public and

Indian Housing will assist these PHAs with electronic submission of PHA

Plans to HUD Headquarters via the internet.

With respect to public review of the plan, electronic submission

does not preclude a hard copy printout by the PHA of the information

submitted electronically to HUD.

Comment. The Plan software used for submission should allow for

hyperlinked access to public information found in other electronic

submissions or as part of the Consolidated Plan.

Response. The PHA Plan is required to be submitted in electronic

form, and HUD is working on quick and easy electronic access to public

information found in other electronic submissions or as part of the

Consolidated Plan.

Comment. The rule offers a positive feature in providing that PHAs

will not have to resubmit previously submitted items. HUD should,

however, move expeditiously to consolidate all required

[[Page 56851]]

submissions. Do previously submitted items include previously submitted

unfunded CIAP applications? What does HUD mean by the local

availability of previously submitted items? Does this mean a file

cabinet, specific building, city, town, or can a PHA identify the local

HUD office?

Response. With advancements in technology, HUD believes that

eventually it as well as its program partners will be able to

consolidate information (including items previously submitted in non-

electronic forms) into an easily downloadable electronic document.

HUD's Office of Information Technology is working to move HUD closer to

that objective for this program as well as others. With respect to the

location of locally available information, the PHA will identify in the

PHA Plan the location closest to its main offices (if not made

available at its main office) that contains the information that must

be made available locally, including items previously submitted to HUD.

Comment. The final rule should clarify exactly where in HUD the

Plan should be submitted.

Response. The PHA Plans are to be submitted to HUD via the

internet. Through this submission, HUD offices that need to review the

plans or elements of the plans can do so simultaneously.

HUD's addition of items to the Annual Plan submission and whether

commenters recommend any other items for inclusion.

Comment. If HUD wants to add items to the Plan, they must do so by

public notice and comment. HUD should not be allowed to add items not

required by the Public Housing Reform Act.

Response. To the extent that items added by HUD to the Plan are not

reasonably within the Plan's scope and do not constitute clarifications

of information that clearly the statute envisions to be submitted, HUD

will provide the opportunity for notice and comment. HUD also notes

that it may be required to add items to the Plan as a result of new

statutory requirements and subsequently enacted statutes may provide

for immediate implementation of new Plan components and preclude the

opportunity for notice and comment.

Comment. The regulation should require that PHAs state reasons for

decisions made and any policy choices.

Response. The PHA Plan electronic template requires PHAs to

indicate the reasons they selected particular strategies for addressing

housing needs.

Comment. Several commenters offered suggestions on items that

should or should not be part of the streamlined plans. PHAs that have

been high performing for two consecutive years should only have to

submit Plans with admissions, demolition/disposition, and fair housing

certification. High performers and small PHAs should also be required

to submit grievance policies, conversions, and community service

programs because these programs directly affect residents. Streamlined

Plans should include conversion, description of asset management, and

Family Self-Sufficiency information because so many PHAs are either

high performing or small.

Response. HUD appreciates the suggestions made by the commenters.

At this time, HUD is not making changes to the streamlined plans to be

submitted by high performing PHAs or small PHAs that are not troubled.

The PHA Plan electronic template makes the Plan submission

significantly easier. With respect to submissions regarding

conversions, the conversion submission and approval process is a

separate process as HUD has noted earlier in this preamble. Other

documents covered by the PHA Plan but that are not part of the Plan

submission are required to be available locally for review. The

addition of documents to be made available locally but not submitted to

HUD also will facilitate the public review.

Comment. What should high performing PHAs who are also small PHAs

submit (1)?

Response. PHAs that are small PHAs and also designated high

performing PHAs should submit the Plan elements described for high

performing PHAs.

Comment. The final rule should clarify the definition of high

performing PHA by adding the following language ``as of the last annual

or interim assessment of the PHA before the submission of the 5-Year or

Annual Plan''.

Response. HUD agrees with this comment and has added clarification

language to the regulation.

What Should Constitute ``Significant'' Amendments or Modifications to

Either the 5-Year Plan or Annual Plan?

Comment. Comments on what constitutes significant amendments or

modifications were as follows. The final rule must clarify what a

significant amendment is and when HUD needs to approve it. PHAs should

be able to correct errors or omissions without having to restart the

entire process. The final rule should define significant amendments as

anything that substantively alters the policies as originally proposed

or that might result in a different outcome for or treatment of

tenants, participants, or applicants. Any amendment should be subject

to a fair housing analysis. The definition of significant amendments

should exclude any changes that are made as a result of new HUD

regulations not in effect when the Plan was developed.

Response. HUD appreciates these comments and has decided that the

changes that constitute significant amendment or modification should be

defined at the local level. As noted earlier in this preamble (under

the section which highlights changes made at the final rule stage), HUD

has amended Sec. 903.7(r) to provide that a PHA must include in the PHA

Plan a brief statement identifying the basic criteria it will use for

determining what constitutes a significant amendment or modification of

its plan for purposes of Sec. 903.21.

Whether the Final Rule Should Provide That a PHA Must Post Notice in

the Projects Owned, Operated or Administered by the PHA That the Plan

has Been Approved and Provide Information on Where the Plan may be

Inspected, and Also Whether the PHA Should Post Notice in a Newspaper

of General Circulation That the Plan has Been Approved and Information

About its Availability for Review.

Comment. The final rule should adopt a requirement that PHAs should

post a notice in a newspaper of general circulation that the Plan has

been approved and information about its availability for review. The

final rule should require that notices be posted at all developments

and that copies of pending and final plans should be made available at

all developments, not just the principal office of the PHA. In

addition, residents should be able to view these plans in the evening

and not just during normal business hours. The final rule should not

require posting and publication of notice after the Plan is completed

and approved.

Response. HUD appreciates the comments in response to this issue.

HUD has decided not to change the rule at this time. HUD, however

encourages PHAs to adopt these suggestions. Additionally, as part of

the public input on the plans, the PHAs and the public may wish to

adopt such a requirement as part of their local process.

Is the rule organized in a manner that is helpful and should the rule

include a definition section?

Comment. The final rule should not adopt the conversational tone

and question-and-answer format used in the

[[Page 56852]]

interim rule. This format is best reserved for supporting documents

that are designed to provide additional guidance for complying with HUD

regulations. The conversational tone and question-and-answer format

detracts from the ability of governed entities to easily ascertain what

is required of them and to locate provisions that govern specific

questions with optimal speed and efficiency.

Response. The question-and-answer format is strongly encouraged by

the Administration's Plain Language initiative. The concern is that too

many regulations are incomprehensible because they are written using

terms that are too legalistic and too entrenched in the language of

Federal bureaucracy. The majority of HUD's regulations are now being

written in this format, and without complaint from HUD's constituents.

HUD notes that only one commenter made this comment. HUD notes that the

PHA Plan template provides for consolidated, easily referenced

information.

Comment. The final rule should contain a definition section.

Response. Many of the terms that HUD would generally define are

already defined in regulations governing HUD programs in which PHAs are

participants. HUD declines to repeat these definitions in this part.

For other terms, HUD declines to be overly prescriptive and prefers to

give PHAs greater flexibility by allowing them to define terms at the

local level given local considerations.

6. Comments on Specific Provisions of the Interim Rule

Section 903.1 What are the Public Housing Agency Plans?

Comment. As the following comments indicate, several commenters

were concerned about the format of the plans. Comments were as follows.

HUD should not require PHAs to submit Plans when HUD has not specified

the format for the Plan nor given guidance to PHAs on all issues. HUD

should delay publication of the final rule until the rule can be

clarified. HUD needs to define the format, substance, and length of the

Plan. If HUD does not specify a format by July 1, 1999, initial Plans

should be accepted in any format. PHAs should be able to simply

reference other documents in the Plan and insert only brief summaries

of those documents.

Response. As noted earlier in this preamble, HUD has addressed

these concerns through its July 30, 1999 issuance of the PHA Plan

electronic template and accompanying guidance, and HUD's decision to

delay the date for the first submissions to December 1, 1999.

Section 903.3 When Must a PHA Submit the Plans to HUD?

Comment. HUD needs to clarify when the 75-day process starts and

stops. The interim rule is not clear about when PHAs are required to

submit their Plans.

Response. HUD's rule published on September 21, 1999, clarifies

this process, and this language is included in this final rule.

Comment. Large PHAs should be able to submit separate Annual Plans

for different jurisdictions or be allowed to submit Plans in phases.

Response. The statute does not allow for this type of submission.

HUD believes that the framework for the Annual Plan adopted by the

Congress is similar to that of the Consolidated Plan, and the objective

of this framework is to consolidate information and present a single

unifying plan that crosses jurisdictional lines where there are more

than one jurisdiction. The additional objective is to provide for one

annual submission by a PHA, not staggered submissions.

Section 903.5 What Information Must a PHA Provide in the 5-Year Plan?

Comment. Why is HUD requiring a 5-Year Plan when PHAs only get

funding on a yearly basis?

Response. The 5-Year Plan is a statutory requirement. Even if PHAs

only receive funding annually, it is funding that is assured annually

at some level, and therefore the PHA should plan for its uses on a

long-term basis.

Comment. The 5-Year Plan guidance needs further development. The

guidance appears to be a vision statement and not actual work items to

implement long range strategy. The required statements for the 5-Year

Plan should be combined into the Annual Plan (as part of the Executive

Summary) because the Annual Plan has to contain changes in the 5-Year

Plan anyway.

Response. The guidance and PHA Plan template issued on July 30,

1999, provides additional guidance to PHAs on development and

preparation of the 5-Year Plan, and on the format. PHAs are welcome to

develop more detailed plans than that provided by the template.

Comment. The 5-Year Plan should be subject to only cursory HUD

review.

Response. HUD's review must be consistent with the statutory

mandate imposed on HUD.

Section 903.7 What Information Must a PHA Provide in the Annual Plan?

This section of the rule describes the information that the PHA

must provide as part of the Annual Plan. There were a number of

comments praising HUD's approach to not require the submission of

certain items. There was also praise for elements of the Plan that high

performing PHAs and small PHAs were not required to submit. The

following presents the questions and concerns raised about the Plan

elements.

Comment. The final rule needs to contain more detailed descriptions

of what information is required under each section of the Plan so that

PHA submissions are more consistent. For example, under Sec. 903.7(b)

(financial resources) how is funding to be broken down for Section 8;

Sec. 903.7(c) (eligibility, selection, and admissions) should state

exactly what information is required; Sec. 903.7(e) (operation and

management) needs a clear list of what will satisfy a ``description of

the management organization''; Sec. 903.7(l) (community service and

self-sufficiency) is unclear about what information is to be submitted.

Response. These comments were submitted before HUD issued its July

30, 1999 guidance and the PHA Plan electronic template. The PHA Plan

template and guidance address these concerns.

Comment. The PHA Annual Plan should only include the information

necessary to reach the strategies and goals described in the PHA 5-Year

Plan. The final rule should not expand the list of items that are

required, under section 511 of the Public Housing Reform Act, to be

included in the Annual Plan. This will bring certainty to the PHA

planning process and allow PHAs to steadfastly pursue the goals

outlined in the 5-Year Plan.

Response. HUD believes that the PHA Plan regulation closely adheres

to the statutory requirements and does not go beyond these

requirements.

Comment. The February 18, 1999 interim rule provides that, before

submission of the first PHA Annual Plan, PHAs may submit an interim PHA

Annual Plan solely with respect to demolition and disposition. However,

the interim Annual Plan must include a certification of consistency

with the Consolidated Plan, and confirm that a public hearing was held

on the proposed action and that the resident advisory board was

consulted. (See the preamble discussion at 64 FR 8177-8178.) HUD should

extend the interim plan provision to cover: (1) The new voucher payment

standard; (2)

[[Page 56853]]

deconcentration and rent choice policies; and (3) any voluntary changes

in admission preferences prior to the submission of the complete

initial annual plan. This will help to ensure that residents

participate in the development of these important policies, and that

the policies are consistent with the Consolidated Plan.

Response. The interim plans for demolition or disposition addressed

a particular issue in the statute and legislative history, to allow

continued submission of applications for demolition or disposition

prior to submission of the first annual PHA Plans. Interim plans are

unnecessary for the other plan elements raised by the commenter.

Comments Regarding the Statement of Housing Needs

Comment. The provision of this data will be difficult for PHAs that

do not collect the required waiting list information. It would be

easier for the PHAs to provide the required information for families

admitted during the PHA's last fiscal year.

Response. The statutory language is clear that the information that

must be submitted under this Annual Plan element is waiting list

information. The guidance to the template makes clear that PHAs are not

being required to change their procedures regarding data verification

to supply this data.

Comment. It is unclear what information PHAs are being requested to

provide or what constitutes ``housing need.'' The final rule should

clarify terms such as: ``affordable,'' ``supply,'' ``quality,''

``accessibility,'' ``location,'' and ``size of units.'' Further, the

rule is ambiguous as to what income groups should be considered for

purposes of determining housing need. This must also be clarified.

Response. These terms are addressed in the guidance accompanying

the PHA Plan template.

Comment. PHAs should not be required to assess housing needs based

on the race or ethnicity of applicants for assisted housing. The

interim rule is unclear whether a threshold number of applicants

belonging to a certain racial/ethnic group triggers the need

assessment, or whether a single applicant from that group is

sufficient. Further, it is unclear how the information will help the

PHA meet its obligation to serve low, very-low, and extremely low-

income families. The rule is ambiguous regarding the ethnic/racial

groups a PHA must identify. The collection of this data may also

conflict with civil rights and fair housing requirements.

Response. The assessment of housing needs as provided in the

regulation is consistent with HUD's obligation to affirmatively further

fair housing. The guidance accompanying the PHA Plan template also

addresses this issue.

Comment. PHAs should be able to use the ``Housing Needs and Market

Analysis'' section of Consolidated Plan as their plan statement of

housing needs. However, the terms used in the PHA plan interim rule

differ from that used in the Consolidated Plan. HUD should provide

guidance to assist PHAs in using the relevant provisions of the

Consolidated Plan in preparing the annual plan statement of housing

needs. Another commenter expressed the opposite viewpoint. The

Consolidated Plan should not be used to develop the statement of

housing needs. The Consolidated Plan is based on outdated 1990 census

data. Further, the Consolidated Plan is rarely prepared by the PHA. PHA

waiting list data is the most accurate indicator of the potential

resident base. Accordingly, the PHA waiting list should be used to

develop the annual plan statement of housing needs. Another commenter

expressed opposition to use of waiting list data. The commenter stated

that gathering waiting list data will create significant administrative

burden for PHAs.

Response. The Consolidated Plan can serve as the basic source of

the PHA's housing needs statement. The PHA, however, needs to complete

the statement of housing needs as provided in the PHA Plan regulation.

The PHA Plan template significantly simplifies this task. The use of

waiting list data is a statutory requirement and HUD has no authority

to remove this requirement.

Comments Regarding the Statement of Financial Resources

Comment. The interim rule is overly prescriptive when it asks PHAs

to identify the planned uses of the financial resources by major

category (i.e., operations, modernization and or development, etc.).

This is addressed elsewhere in the Annual Plan and, therefore, it is

redundant to require PHAs to address them in this portion of the plan.

Response. The financial information required by the rule is

consistent with statutory intent and is the minimum necessary to allow

public housing residents, local representatives, taxpayers, and other

interested members of the public to sufficiently determine a PHA's

planned uses of its financial resources. The PHA Plan template reduces

the administrative burden of compiling and submitting this information.

Comment. HUD should clarify what financial data is required in the

statement of financial resources. Are PHAs required to provide end data

from the most recent calendar year, or from the most current fiscal

year?

Response. The PHA Plan template clarifies that the financial data

required to be included in the Plan concerns funds anticipated to be

available during the upcoming fiscal year.

Comment. The statement of financial resources should include

detailed PHA budgets with information regarding the operating and

modernization of the public housing, as well as personnel, consultant

and other contractors, equipment, supplies, utilities, and travel. With

fully disclosed information, residents and the public will better be

able to participate and reach the goals of the Public Housing Reform

Act.

Response. Current operating and modernization budgets are required

to be made available locally for review by the public.

Comments Regarding the Statement of Eligibility, Selection, and

Admission Polices

1. Transfers

Comment. The PHA Annual Plan should include specific policies for

the transfer of public housing residents to other public housing units

within the PHA. Transfer policies and practices are of critical concern

to residents and Resident Advisory Boards. Accordingly, all PHAs should

have written policies and procedures governing transfers, which should

be included in the PHA Annual Plan.

Response. Transfer policies are covered by the PHA Plan template.

These policies typically also will be in the PHA's admissions and

continued occupancy policies, which are required to be made available

to the public locally.

2. Deconcentration

Comment. Several commenters raised concern about the

deconcentration policies. Their concerns are as follows.

Deconcentration requirements will lower occupancy rates, make waiting

lists longer, and increase PHA administrative costs. HUD therefore

should not expand on the statutory language and impose a

deconcentration requirement on PHAs. HUD should accept the good faith,

best efforts made by a PHA to achieve deconcentration. HUD should

permit deconcentration to be addressed at a local level, and not

establish prescriptive Federally mandated requirements. There are

differences between rural, urban and

[[Page 56854]]

suburban agencies and individual reason for which families move. Any

Federal requirements should acknowledge variations in local conditions,

and provide PHAs with the flexibility to address those local issues.

HUD should provide additional guidance on what constitutes an

acceptable deconcentration policy. The final rule should provide that

PHA deconcentration policies must affirmatively further fair housing

and not discriminate against a protected class. Further, the final rule

should explicitly prohibit PHAs from establishing or enforcing racial

or financial quotas. The rule should also require that PHAs perform an

Analysis of Impediments as part of their PHA plan process. (The

Consolidated Plan includes a certification that requires the

preparation of an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice).

Response. Section II of this preamble addresses the changes that

HUD has made with respect to deconcentration. HUD believes that these

changes address and balance the concerns of the commenters.

Comment. There is a conflict between the mission of the PHA to

serve low-income families and the deconcentration requirements of the

interim rule. If the PHA is supposed to focus on the needs of low

income families, how can it also be expected to undertake efforts to

attract higher-income families?

Response. HUD understands that these two objectives may appear in

conflict with each other. HUD's focus and the PHA's focus remain on

addressing the needs of low income families, but these needs are often

best served and best addressed by housing that provides for a mix of

family incomes--families that need HUD assistance but are not all in

the same income range.

Comment. The deconcentration requirements should not apply if the

PHA's developments all have similar average incomes. In such a

situation there is no income concentration. Deconcentration should only

be required if the difference hits a specific threshold, e.g. a 25%

disparity.

Response. HUD declines to adopt a threshold disparity as

recommended by the commenter. However, the new provisions added to the

final rule on deconcentration provide a measurement for compliance. The

rule provides that PHAs shall be considered to be in compliance with

the deconcentration requirements if they determine the average

household income in such developments and define higher-income families

as those with incomes over 115% of this average, higher-income

developments as those where the average family income is over 115% of

this average, lower-income families as those with incomes under 115% of

this average and lower-income developments as those where the average

family income is under 115% of this average.

Comment. The deconcentration requirements should only be applicable

to ``traditional'' public housing developments occupied entirely by

households eligible for public housing. Mixed income developments, Jobs

Plus sites, Welfare-to-Work sites, and other housing developments

hosting other demonstration programs should not be subject to the

deconcentration rules. These developments have special work incentives,

different rent structures and other factors that attract or retain

special subpopulations of public housing residents. Accordingly, they

are not suitable for deconcentration efforts.

Response. The statute does not limit applicability of the

deconcentration requirements to traditional public housing

developments. Generally, HUD has no authority to set such limitations.

Comment. In order to realize deconcentration, FMRs must be

increased in cities where the cost of housing is constantly increasing.

This is one of the most critical methods that will allow housing

residents a choice and an opportunity to lease in higher-income

neighborhoods.

Response. HUD believes that its system for setting fair market

rents generally meets this objective, but can be improved. HUD

currently is reviewing this system.

Comment. HUD should not require a PHA to perform an analysis of

household incomes until the MTCS data system can facilitate this type

of analysis.

Response. The analysis is not dependent upon the MTCS data system

but HUD recognizes that this system may facilitate the PHA's analysis.

HUD has worked to correct problems with MTCS, and is working with PHAs

to increase the level of reporting, as noted earlier in this preamble.

HUD believes that PHAs should be able to utilize this system in

performing their analysis.

Comment. The interim rule requires that PHAs use census tracts for

purposes of developing their deconcentration policies. The use of

census tracts for comparison of relative income does not work for many

scattered-site developments as they are in multiple census tracks. The

final rule should accommodate this problem by exempting scattered-site

projects from the deconcentration plan requirements.

Response. The final rule does not require an analysis based on

census tract data.

Comment. PHAs should be able to identify other factors (such as the

size of units) that play a role in relative income in order to

distinguish developments.

Response. The rule provides a safe harbor for defining lower income

and higher income which is simple, then leaves substantial flexibility

for implementation.

3. Targeting

Comment. The final rule should state that admissions policies must

include income targeting policies and must specify that local

preferences are subordinate to Congressional directive of targeting.

HUD needs to publish regulations covering how targeting must work soon.

Response. These policies were first addressed in HUD's proposed

rule on ``Changes to Admission and Occupancy Requirements in Public

Housing and Section 8 Housing Assistance Programs'' published on April

30, 1999 (64 FR 23460). The final rule on this subject is expected to

be published soon.

Comment. HUD should provide clear guidance about the interaction

between targeting, deconcentration, and site-based waiting lists. Which

takes precedence? How will HUD monitor or evaluate PHA success?

Response. Full compliance with both the specific income targeting

minimum percentages of extremely low-income households and with

deconcentration and income mixing provisions is required.

4. Site-Based Waiting Lists

Various proposals were made to modify the February 18, 1999 interim

rule's treatment of site-based waiting lists. As the preamble to the

interim rule discussed, the Senate Committee Report on the Senate

version of the Public Housing Reform Act (Congressional Record of

October 8, 1998, p. S11840) provides the most detailed statement on

site-based waiting lists. That report cites several of the possible

benefits of site-based waiting lists, but also acknowledges that past

HUD limitations were based on concern about racial steering and a

desire to prevent housing discrimination. HUD believes that the

approach proposed in the February 18, 1999 interim rule is

appropriately balanced in view of that legislative history. The

approach generally allows adoption of site-based waiting lists, with

protections to assure that applicants are aware of their choices and

rights, but also calls for careful monitoring of

[[Page 56855]]

implementation. This final rule therefore generally retains these

provisions, except that the requirement that MTCS data be confirmed by

independent audit is supplemented by other means of verification

acceptable to HUD and testing or other HUD-approved means of verifying

appropriate implementation are required at least every three years

rather than two years.

Comment. PHAs should not be required to use testers biannually. The

requirement is excessive if there is no indication of possible civil

rights violations. Testers should only be used to confirm problems

where there is an indication of steering or other illegal activities.

Other requirements such as the review of MTCS, absence of court orders,

PHA certifications, ongoing review of policies and HUD's monitoring

through FHEO are sufficient safeguards. HUD, and not PHAs, should

provide testers.

Response. As noted in Section II of the preamble and in the

introduction to this section of the public comments, HUD has revised

this requirement on the frequency of the use of testers. The final rule

provides that testers are to be used every three years. HUD believes

that the role of testers is not only to confirm problems but to

determine if problems exist that have not yet been raised.

Comment. Language in Sec. 903.7(c)(1)(v)(C) (any steps necessary)

is too broad and will result in a large burden for PHAs. The final rule

should be revised to state, ``any reasonable or business practicable

steps necessary.'' Additionally, site-based waiting lists should be

subject to no more scrutiny than review of the Plan.

Response. HUD believes that the additional language recommended by

the commenter is not necessary. ``Any steps necessary'' would include

business practicable steps. With respect to review of site-based

waiting lists, site-based waiting lists are part of the PHA Plan

approval process; that is the only approval necessary.

Comment. Additional concerns raised about site-based waiting lists

included the following. The final rule should ensure that site-based

waiting lists increase housing choice and options for minorities.

Policies should require that public housing applicants are advised of

all subsidized housing in the area. PHAs should supply applicants with

a list of every assisted housing development in the market area,

including tax credit properties, and HUD should give this list to PHAs.

HUD should design a standardized pre-application so that applicants

could copy the form and submit to various projects. PHAs should be

required to do a preliminary racial impact analysis. Requiring testers

is a good idea. For projects going into initial occupancy, HUD should

require a lottery system.

Response. HUD appreciates these comments, but declines to adopt up-

front the recommendations for additional procedures to be imposed on

PHAs. HUD believes that the rule takes the appropriate approach to

site-based waiting lists, which is to provide the necessary direction

and guidance to PHAs on the establishment of site-based waiting lists

and describe the circumstances in which a PHA may adopt a site-based

waiting list and provide for careful monitoring of implementation.

E. Rent Determination Policies

Comment. Does the statement of rents charged include the exception

procedures for minimum rents?

Response. Yes, this statement includes the exception procedures for

minimum rents.

Comment. Several comments on this rule were directed to the changes

in rent policies made by the Public Housing Reform Act. These comments

raised the following issues and questions. Since PHAs have to give

residents 90 days to prove they have a long term hardship and cannot

evict for nonpayment of rent, what effect will uncollected minimum

rents have on PHMAP indicator? Can PHAs submit a modification request?

Flat rents are based on rental value of units. What if rental value is

more than the actual monthly cost to provide and operate? The final

rule should clarify that PHAs can evict for nonpayment families on

minimum rent who fail to request hardship exemption or on the 91st day

for families who are denied hardship exemptions. PHAs will be at a

disadvantage if residents can set their maximum rent payments. How can

PHAs set a year-long budget when residents can change their rent

payments at will? HUD should limit rent payment changes to once per

year. The final rule should clarify minimum rent is discretionary for

PHAs and can be between $0 and $50.

Response. All these issues will be addressed in HUD's final rule on

Changes to Admission and Occupancy, expected to be published soon.

Comment. All rent policies should be in Plans, including mandatory

policies.

Response. It is an unnecessary administrative burden imposed on

PHAs to have them include in the Plan those PHA policies that only

repeat statutory or regulatory requirements. Additionally, the addition

of these policies would make the PHA Plan unwieldy.

F. Operations and Management

Comment. The Administrative Plan should be incorporated into the

Annual Plan. HUD should provide guidance on what information from the

Administrative Plan must be included in the Annual Plan.

Response. The PHA template provides guidance on information in the

Administrative Plan that must be included in the Annual Plan. The PHA

Plan regulation requires the Administrative Plan to be made available

for review by the public locally.

Comment. The preamble to the interim rule states that this section

is required for public housing and Section 8. The rule text only

mentions public housing. The final rule should clarify the

applicability of this requirement. Limiting the requirement to public

housing is not allowed by the Public Housing Reform Act. Congress did

not limit the statement to public housing. PHAs must be required to

submit Section 8 Administrative Plans.

Response. The regulatory text mentions both public housing and

Section 8 tenant-based assistance. Section 903.7(e) which addresses the

statement of a PHA's operation and management provides in paragraph

(e)(2) that the information pertaining to the PHA's rules, standards

and policies regarding management and maintenance of housing applies

only to public housing. This is the only portion of this subsection

that applies only to public housing. The rest of Sec. 903.7(e) applies

to both public housing and Section 8 tenant-based assistance.

G. Grievance Procedures

No significant issues were raised on this element of the plan.

H. Capital Improvements

Comment. The final rule should be revised to state that

Comprehensive Grant Program (CGP) updates will continue to satisfy this

requirement. HUD must distribute CGP formula amounts in a timely

fashion to ensure inclusion in the Plan. Additionally, Annual Plans are

due before CGP planning process would normally take place. Unless a

separate notice is issued that describes how modernization program

submission will be satisfied by Plans, PHAs should be able to reference

existing submissions.

Response. HUD's Comprehensive Grant Program is being replaced by

the Capital Fund Program. Accordingly, all

[[Page 56856]]

forms are being updated to reflect the new program. Guidance on the PHA

Plan template, issued July 30, 1999, addresses how PHAs may satisfy

Capital Fund planning requirements. As a transitional phase, PHAs will

be permitted to use properly updated CGP forms.

I. Demolition/Disposition

Comment. This section should be incorporated in the Asset

Management section.

Response. The statute provides for separate statements to be

submitted on demolition/disposition and asset management. (See section

511(d)(8) and (d)(17)). However, HUD's PHA Plan template includes an

optional chart by which the PHA can combine these and other plan

sections.

Comment. The final rule should require that the PHA Annual Plans

include: Reasons for demolition; a description of how the planned

demolition meets statutory criteria for demolition or sale;

identification of any studies relied upon that support the demolition

(and the studies should be available to Resident Advisory Boards); a

statement of specific requirements if consolidation of vacancies is

planned; relocation plans; and an evaluation in light of the

Consolidated Plan. The final rule also should require that the

application for demolition and any supporting documents be available at

PHA office.

Response. The PHA Plan regulation requires that demolition and/or

disposition applications must be made available locally for review by

members of the public. Affected or interested parties therefore have

the opportunity to review and comment to the PHA on these applications

if they so choose. As noted earlier in this preamble, demolition and/or

disposition activities are subject, by statute, to a submission and

approval process separate from the PHA Plan submission and approval

process. It would be an unnecessary administrative burden to have a PHA

duplicate in the PHA Annual Plan extensive information on planned

demolition and/or disposition that the PHA must provide under the

separate demolition/disposition approval process.

Comment. The interim demolition/disposition plan is unauthorized by

law and is inconsistent with deregulation and streamlining goals the

Public Housing Reform Act. HUD is prohibited from enacting early any

piece of the Plan.

Response. The Public Housing Reform Act provisions concerning

demolition/disposition were effective upon the statute's enactment. The

interim plan fulfills Congressional intent that demolition/disposition

activities not be interrupted or halted and that HUD continue to

process demolition/disposition applications before, if necessary,

approval of the first PHA plans.

Comment. The rule needs to clarify the contents of the interim

demolition/disposition plan. Is the submission a statement or does the

PHA have to submit all components of the Annual Plan.

Response. As noted earlier in this preamble, HUD has added language

at the final rule stage to address submission of an interim demolition/

disposition plan. Also, HUD's notice to PHAs on demolition/disposition

processing requirements under the Public Housing Reform Act, PIH Notice

99-19, issued April 20, 1999, describes the information to be submitted

in the interim demolition/disposition plan.

J. Designated Housing

Comment. PHAs that submit streamlined Plans should have to submit

this information. The final rule needs to address how currently

approved designated housing plans meet the requirements of the Public

Housing Reform Act.

Response. Designated housing is subject to a separate application

and approval process, and designated housing is subject to separate

regulations. A streamlined plan does not need to repeat information

that is already required to be submitted under a separate approval

process, and the PHA Plan regulation does not need to duplicate

information addressed in other regulations. Designated housing

applications, however, are required to be made available locally for

review by members of the public.

K. Conversion

Comment. The final rule should require an evaluation of conversion

in relation to the Consolidated Plan, include certification from local

officials, describe any demolition/disposition plan for units, set

forth time table, and provide for certification of resident

consultation.

Response. Demolition/disposition and conversion plans are subject

to a submission and approval process separate from the PHA plan

submission and approval process. These applications, however, are

required to be made available locally for review by members of the

public.

L. Homeownership

Comment. PHAs should be allowed to propose creative ways to

increase homeownership opportunities.

Response. The PHA Plan rule reflects the statutory requirement with

respect to the information that must be part of the PHA Plan. The

statute requires a description of any homeownership programs of the

agency under section 8(y) or for which the public housing agency has

applied or will apply for approval under section 32 of the U.S. Housing

Act of 1937. The fact, however, that the statute requires this

information, and the rule reflects the statutory requirement, does not

preclude PHAs from proposing creative ways to increase homeownership

opportunities and these proposals can be part of the PHA's 5-Year Plan

or other information that it may choose to provide in its Annual Plan.

Comment. PHAs should be required to establish measures to increase

accessibility to homeownership programs for persons who have

successfully participated in the Continuum of Care Program.

Response. HUD believes that establishing such a requirement exceeds

HUD's statutory authority with respect to the PHA planning process.

M. Community Service and Self-Sufficiency

Comment. Several commenters addressed concerns not about

information required to be included in the PHA Annual Plan with respect

to community service and self-sufficiency, but implementation of these

requirements. The comments raised the following concerns. Eviction for

noncompliance with this requirement will be difficult to uphold in

courts. PHAs will need additional insurance protection to cover

increased number of volunteers. Residents who volunteer at a church/

temple should be exempt from community service requirements. Does

service on a Resident Advisory Board count towards community service.

PHAs should not have to monitor community service unless they have an

FSS program. Welfare agencies should conduct monitoring. The final rule

should list the exemptions to the community service requirement listed

in section 512(a)(2) of the Public Housing Reform Act. This requirement

will create a huge burden with limited benefit. Residents should be

able to self-certify compliance with this requirement.

Response. These issues will be addressed in HUD's final rule on

``Changes to Admissions and

[[Page 56857]]

Occupancy Requirements in Public Housing and Section 8 Housing

Assistance Programs,'' which expected to be published soon.

Comment. Rulemaking for this requirement is incomplete. Will PHAs

be required to submit an amendment to their Plans when the final rules

are published. The community service requirement should not be

implemented before January 1, 2001.

Response. HUD has completed the rulemaking for this requirement.

HUD's final rule on Changes to Admission and Occupancy Requirements,

which is expected to be published soon, addresses this requirement. HUD

has informed the PHAs with fiscal years commencing January 1, 2000,

that community service need not be a part of their PHA Plans for that

fiscal year.

N. Safety/Crime Prevention

Comment. The requirement to check for lifetime registration for sex

offenders is an unfunded mandate. Such checks undertaken by the Federal

Bureau of Investigation (FBI) cost $27 and take 30-90 days. HUD should

arrange for PHAs to obtain this data at no charge.

Response. This issue is not relevant to this rule, but pertains to

HUD's rule on ``One Strike Screening and Eviction for Drug Abuse and

Other Criminal Activity.'' The proposed rule for this subject was

published on July 23, 1999 (64 FR 40262). HUD is developing the final

rule.

Comment. The submission requirements should be modified to require

submission of Public Housing Drug Elimination Program (PHDEP) grants

only.

Response. For high performing and small PHAs, the final rule limits

the submission to PHDEP grant information only.

Comment. Until HUD issues a separate notice how PHDEP will be

satisfied by Plans, PHAs should be able to reference existing

submissions.

Response. HUD issued its final rule on PHDEP formula allocation on

September 14, 1999 (64 FR 49900).

O. Pets

Note: A number of commenters made substantive suggestions

regarding how pet policies should be structured (as opposed to

comments about the structuring of the PHA Plans). These comments

will be responded to in the final rule concerning pet ownership in

public housing.

Comment. The final rule should clarify when this submission is

required. The February 18, 1999 interim rule states that this

submission is not required until HUD issues its pet regulations, but

there are already pet rules covering elderly and people with

disabilities projects. In addition, the final rule should clarify

whether PHAs must make a submission if they have their own pet policy

in effect.

Response. The regulations governing pets in housing for the elderly

or persons with disabilities are not required to be covered by the PHA

Annual Plan. The Public Housing Reform Act requires a statement

concerning the PHA's policies and requirements pertaining to the

ownership of pets in public housing issued in accordance with section

31 of the 1937 Act. HUD's proposed rule to implement section 31 of the

1937 Act was published on June 23, 1999 (64 FR 33640). Approximately

4,000 timely public comments were received on this rule, and

approximately 3,000 public comments continued to be submitted to HUD

well past the August 23, 1999 comment deadline. HUD is developing the

final rule.

P. Civil Rights

Comment. The deconcentration policies contradict the affirmatively

furthering fair housing policies.

Response. HUD disagrees. Both policies work to improve housing

options for low-income families.

Comment. HUD needs to issue further guidance regarding the

maintenance of records to reflect analysis of programs and impediments.

The guidance needs to address which programs will be analyzed, how the

analysis is to be documented, and how often must the analysis be done?

Response. This final rule provides guidance concerning these

analyses.

Q. Asset Management

Comment. This requirement is confusing and redundant. Much of this

area is covered in other areas of the Plan.

Response. As noted earlier in this preamble, the statute requires a

separate submission on asset management. However, the PHA Plan

regulation (and the PHA Plan template) clarify that information related

to asset management addressed under other Plan elements is not to be

repeated in the asset management section.

Comment. This requirement is unclear, especially with regards to

Section 8. More guidance is needed in the final rule.

Response. The electronic template issued by HUD on July 30, 1999,

provides the additional guidance that is needed to satisfactorily

respond to this element of the PHA Annual Plan.

Section 903.13 What is a Resident Advisory Board and What is its Role

in Development of the Annual Plan?

Comment. When a Resident Advisory Board files a written request

with HUD claiming that a PHA has failed to provide adequate notice and

opportunity for comment, HUD's 75-day review limit should be tolled so

that the PHA may respond to the claim.

Response. Section 903.13(c)(2) of the PHA Plan regulation addresses

the commenter's concern.

Comment. It is very difficult and even impossible in some projects

to obtain resident participation. In those cases where PHAs are

unsuccessful in forming Resident Advisory Boards because of a lack of

resident interest, the Resident Advisory Board requirement should be

considered satisfied if the PHA has made adequate efforts to establish

a Board. PHAs can only make resident participation opportunities

available, they cannot require participation. Additionally,

confidentiality is very important to section 8 participants and results

in less of a desire to participate. If HUD wants to ensure residents

participation, they should make such participation part of the lease

requirement.

Response. HUD believes that the cases in which PHAs were unable to

form Resident Advisory Boards will be few. If, however, PHAs have been

unsuccessful in forming Resident Advisory Boards, they should notify

HUD immediately and advise the efforts undertaken to establish Resident

Advisory Boards. HUD will determine at that time what additional action

may be necessary.

Comment. Resident Advisory Boards should be involved in the

preparation of the 5-Year Plan as well as the Annual Plan.

Response. Section 903.19 of the rule permits the PHA to adopt its

5-Year Plan only after, among other things, the PHA has consulted with

the Resident Advisory Board or other resident organizations about any

changes made to the plan. Additionally, the 5-Year Plan is subject to

public input and through this process, Resident Advisory Boards have

the opportunity to be involved in the preparation of the 5-Year Plan.

Comment. The interim rule is unclear about whether Resident

Advisory Boards can contact HUD directly to protest the 5-Year Plan in

addition to the Annual Plan. The final rule should protect PHAs by

providing only a restricted right of protest.

Response. Any party may complain to HUD concerning a PHA's

[[Page 56858]]

noncompliance with its plan or with the PHA Plan regulations.

Comment. The final rule should identify how Resident Advisory

Boards will be financially supported, what funds are available, and

what funds PHAs will provide. For example, can a PHA give stipends to

residents and exclude them from rent calculations, or can the PHA use

CIAP, CGP, or Capital funds? The final rule should make clear that the

resources for Resident Advisory Boards include technical assistance.

HUD should provide sufficient resources to Resident Advisory Boards to

ensure that residents are effectively represented.

Response. The funds available to Resident Advisory Boards, resident

organizations and for resident activities are generally the funds

appropriated for HUD's public housing funded programs. For example, in

the preamble to HUD's Capital Fund formula proposed rule published on

September 14, 1999 (64 FR 49924), HUD noted that various funds

allocated to Resident Advisory Boards, other resident organizations and

for resident participation are eligible Capital Fund management

expenses if the activities engaged in by these groups are directly

related to Capital Fund activities. Funds are available to Resident

Advisory Boards and other resident organizations from the public

housing Operating Fund, and other HUD funded programs.

Comment. PHAs should be allowed to self-certify to compliance with

Resident Advisory Board requirement.

Response. Section 903.13 only requires that PHAs, in submitting

their final plans to HUD for approval, must include a copy of the

recommendations made by the Resident Advisory Board or Boards and a

description of the manner in which the PHA addressed these

recommendations. If the Resident Advisory Board did not provide

recommendations, the PHA need only note that in its plan submission.

Comment. The final rule should require broader collaboration

between PHAs and Resident Advisory Boards. The final rule should

require PHAs to: produce a Plan development time-line before the Plan

development process begins and share this time-line with Resident

Advisory Boards; give Resident Advisory Boards early notice of when

Plan development process begins and provide copies of drafts to

Resident Advisory Boards; hold joint meetings with Resident Advisory

Boards throughout the Plan development process; and give Resident

Advisory Boards written notice of their right to seek recourse from

HUD, the mechanisms to seek this recourse, and HUD contact information

.

Response. The final rule clarifies that Resident Advisory Boards

are to assist and make recommendations to PHAs regarding the

development of the PHA plan, and any significant amendment or

modification to the PHA plan. HUD declines to impose, by regulation,

requirements beyond those required by statute. HUD, however, encourages

PHAs to involve Resident Advisory Boards as early in the plan

development process as possible. Since PHAs must, by statute, involve

Resident Advisory Boards in the PHA Planning process, PHAs should find

it advantageous to consult with these Boards as early as possible.

Comment. Section 903.13 is confusing. HUD should add some

discussion of the different scenarios a PHA may face forming a Resident

Advisory Board and ensuring adequate Section 8 representation.

Response. A discussion of different scenarios that a PHA may face

in forming a Resident Advisory Board is not appropriate for regulatory

text. HUD will provide guidance on this issue through direct notices to

PHAs and through the Office of Public and Indian Housing website at

HUD's homepage.

Comment. Several comments were directed to the rule's requirement

that where a PHA has a tenant-based assistance program of significant

size, the PHA shall assure that the Resident Advisory Board or Boards

has reasonable representation of families receiving tenant-based

assistance. The comments raised the following issues. The definition of

significant size for a Section 8 program should be 1,250 or more

certificates. The definition of significant size should not be based on

the ratio of public housing to Section 8 units. A Section 8-only PHA

should be required to form an Resident Advisory Board regardless of the

size of the program. The Resident Advisory Board requirement should be

satisfied for Section 8-only PHAs if the PHA has an Family Self-

Sufficiency (FSS) coordinating committee with resident participation.

Response. HUD continues to believe that only PHAs with a tenant-

based assistance program of significant size should be subject to the

Resident Advisory Board requirement. HUD has defined significant size

to mean at least 20 percent of assisted households receive tenant-based

assistance.

Comment. Any waiver of this requirement should be granted only

after notice of waiver is given to all residents.

Response. The waiver of this requirement can only occur, in

accordance with the statute, if the PHA demonstrates to the

satisfaction of HUD that there exist resident councils or other

organizations that adequately represent the interests of the residents

of the public housing agency, and have the ability to perform the

functions of a Resident Advisory Board. Since this requirement can only

be waived if the residents are represented through some other

organization, notification of the waiver of this requirement to all

residents is unnecessary.

Comment. The final rule needs to provide criteria and guidelines

for what constitutes adequate representation and what is an appropriate

size for an Resident Advisory Board. The final rule should require that

Resident Advisory Board composition take into account representation

based on geographic neighborhood location and reflect the racial/ethnic

makeup of resident households. In addition, all Resident Advisory

Boards should be required to meet the requirements concerning the

structure and selection of authority-wide resident councils contained

in 24 CFR part 964.

Response. Resident Advisory Boards should not be viewed as a

totally new concept. Both PHAs and public housing residents have

experience with similar boards through resident councils. One of the

responsibilities of resident councils is to advise PHAs in all aspect

of public housing operations. Given the experience to date between PHAs

and resident councils, HUD declines to provide more specific guidelines

regarding representation. It is important to note, however, that the

final rule provides for appointment of a jurisdiction-wide resident

council that complies with HUD's regulations in 24 CFR part 964, or its

representatives as the Resident Advisory Board. If a jurisdiction-wide

resident council does not exist, local resident councils that are in

compliance with part 964 shall be appointed, provided that the PHA may

require the local council to choose a limited number of

representatives. The PHA may appoint other members only to cover public

housing or section 8 families not represented by a tenant council that

complies with 24 CFR part 964.

Comment. It will take time for PHAs to include Section 8

participants in Resident Advisory Boards. PHAs should be required to

address how they will address Section 8 participation in the Plan, but

actual participation should not be required for the initial submission.

Response. HUD does not believe that the inclusion of Section 8

participants

[[Page 56859]]

in Resident Advisory Boards will take such time that PHAs will be

unable to rely on this type of resident involvement in its first plans,

especially considering that the first plan submission dates have been

delayed by HUD.

Comment. The final rule should not require PHAs that already have

resident councils to form Resident Advisory Boards. The final rule

should specify, however, that any resident councils that are appointed

as Resident Advisory Boards can be expanded and that PHAs can use both

resident councils and Resident Advisory Boards.

Response. The statute provides for formation of Resident Advisory

Boards. HUD's PHA Plan regulation, however, requires PHAs to appoint

existing resident councils as Resident Advisory Boards when these

councils meet the statutory and regulatory requirements.

Comment. There should be no automatic appointments to Resident

Advisory Boards. The interim rule places too great a burden on PHAs to

ensure compliance with 24 CFR part 964 and may lead to perception that

PHAs are intruding into the internal workings of resident councils.

Using resident councils as Resident Advisory Boards is unwieldy--a

resident council could consist of as many as 50 residents. The Public

Housing Reform Act does not require that any particular group have an

absolute right to serve. HUD should leave it up to PHAs to design their

own Resident Advisory Boards.

Response. HUD believes that the rule is clear on the appointment of

Resident Advisory Boards. The rule provides that if a jurisdiction-wide

resident council exists that complies with the tenant participation

regulations in 24 CFR part 964, the PHA shall appoint the jurisdiction-

wide resident council or its representatives as the Resident Advisory

Board, except that members shall be added or another Resident Advisory

Board formed to provide for reasonable representation of families

receiving tenant-based assistance where necessary. If a jurisdiction-

wide resident council does not exist but resident councils exist that

comply with the tenant participation regulations, the PHA shall appoint

such resident councils or their representatives to serve on Resident

Advisory Boards, provided that the PHA may require that the resident

councils choose a limited number of representatives. The PHA would

appoint other representatives of families not represented by qualifying

resident councils. HUD believes that this best supports the purposes

and administration of part 964, which is the only regulation

specifically protected by the Public Housing Reform Act.

Comment. Participation by Section 8 participants is not required by

Public Housing Reform Act. Section 8 participants have little

significant relationship with a PHA after initial lease up, and Section

8 program lacks the communication structure of public housing. Section

8 participants should not be included in Resident Advisory Board

requirement.

Response. Section 8 tenant-based assistance is covered by the PHA

planning process. HUD believes that it is important that Section 8

participants are therefore included in this process as well.

Comment. A PHA's city-wide resident council is an appropriate

entity to discuss the Plan. Why does HUD require the group to change

its name when it is discussing the Plan? It will only serve to confuse.

Response. There is no requirement for a resident council to change

its name. The statute uses the term Resident Advisory Board and

describes specific functions that the Resident Advisory Board must

perform. The city-wide council need not change its name to Resident

Advisory Board, but it should be clear to the residents that the

council has been appointed the Resident Advisory Board as provided by

the statute.

Section 903.15 What is the Relationship of the Public Housing Agency

Plan to the Consolidated Plan?

Comment. Several comments were directed to the requirement that the

PHA plan be consistent with the Consolidated Plan. These comments

raised the following issues. Consistency should be defined as broadly

as possible and should be worked out at the local level. HUD official

who approves Consolidated Plan should be the same official who

determines consistency. HUD should give examples of what it considers

to be consistent Plans. Thirty days should be adequate for local

government review Plan and certify that it is consistent with

Consolidated Plan. HUD should work with States to ensure a workable

process of determining consistency with Consolidated Plan.

Response. HUD appreciates these comments and agrees that

consistency should be worked out at the local level. HUD, therefore,

declines to include a definition in the rule.

Comment. HUD should devise an appeals process or a waiver of

certification process to resolve disputes between Consolidated Plans

and PHA Plans. There are several concerns about the Consolidated Plan

process. For example, what if PHAs are not given adequate notice of the

State process and Consolidated Plan does not adequately cover housing

needs? What if the PHA Plan has to be consistent with various

Consolidated Plans? What if the Consolidated Plans are themselves not

consistent? What if a city's goals are not consistent with a PHA's

goals and the PHA's goal are more consistent with national goals?

Response. HUD will take these comments into consideration but HUD

is not adopting these concerns in this final rule. HUD notes that the

statute requires a PHA Plan to be consistent with the consolidated plan

and does not provide for exceptions. HUD believes that any

inconsistencies between a PHA's plan and the Consolidated Plan would

probably surface during the public hearing process. HUD also notes that

the Consolidated Plan process is subject to HUD's regulations in 24 CFR

part 91, which require public participation and consultation. Before

adopting regulatory measures to address possible inconsistencies, HUD

would like experience with the PHA planning process first to determine

if there are these problems as suggested by the commenters, and these

problems would not be resolved by either of the public participation

and consultation processes that govern the Consolidated Plan and the

PHA Plan.

Comment. The interim rule is not clear about what happens if the

Consolidated Plan has expired. HUD should allow PHAs to certify that

there is no active Consolidated Plan.

Response. Once a Consolidated Plan, once approved, continues in

existence until a new or updated Consolidated Plan is submitted and

approved.

Comment. If a deconcentration plan is inconsistent with

Consolidated Plan's identified needs, PHAs should be required to

explain steps taken to address this impact.

Response. PHAs are required to indicate why they chose the strategy

they did for addressing housing needs.

Section 903.17 Must the PHA Make Public the Contents of the Plans?

Comment. Notices should be given to other organizations and

agencies, such as legal services organizations, welfare agencies, local

governments, and non-profit housing providers. Copies of Plans should

be available at no cost to those who cannot afford to pay.

Response. With respect to notification about the plan to other

organizations and agencies, the final rule requires PHAs to undertake

reasonable outreach to encourage participation. With respect to copies

of the plan, the final rule is

[[Page 56860]]

clear that this information must be available for public review.

Comment. The final rule should specify that notices must be in

compliance with State public meeting laws.

Response. HUD need not adopt this requirement in the rule. PHAs

must operate in accordance with applicable State laws.

Comment. The final rule should provide PHAs with alternate ways to

provide residents with notice.

Response. The rule tracks the statutory requirement, and makes

clear the extent of the public's opportunity for participation in the

PHA Plan process. PHAs are encouraged to contact residents about the

PHA plan and the public hearing process in ways that the PHA believes

will provide for wide dissemination of this information and better

solicit interest.

Comment. The final rule should require that the notice list the

components of the Plan so that the public is clear as to the purpose of

the Plan. The notice should also make clear that this is the public's

only opportunity to comment.

Response. HUD declines to adopt such a requirement in the final

rule. PHAs are welcome to list the Plan's components in the notice and

are also encouraged to emphasize to the public that the hearing is the

opportunity for the public to provide comments and have input before

the plan's adoption.

Comment. The final rule should require a PHA Board to wait 30 days

after the public hearing before it can approve the Plan).

Response. HUD declines to adopt this requirement. The 30-day wait

may be a delay that is unnecessary given local circumstances. The

public housing residents, the public and local officials may be totally

supportive of the plan, and under these circumstances a 30-day delay

for submission of the plan would serve no clear purpose.

Comment. The final rule should provide for public participation

during the development of the Plan, not just when the Plan is ready to

be adopted.

Response. The rule reflects the statutory requirement. HUD declines

to impose a public participation requirement beyond that established by

statute. PHAs, however, are free to involve the public in the

development of the plan beyond the requirements imposed by the statute.

Comment. Some commenters suggested that the 45-day notice

requirement should be reduced to 15 days. One commenter suggested that

the requirement should be increased to 60 days.

Response. The 45-day notice requirement is set by statute. While

HUD could extend the time period, HUD cannot reduce this period. The

final rule reflects HUD's decision to adhere to the minimum statutory

time period.

Comment. Items submitted in advance of the Plan, such as

deconcentration policies and new preferences, should not be accepted

without input from Resident Advisory Boards and public comment.

Response. All items that are part of the PHA Plan, regardless of

whether submitted in advance, are subject to Resident Advisory Board

input and the public hearing process.

Section 903.21 May the PHA Amend or Modify the Plan?

Comment. Several concerns were raised about the PHA's amendment or

modification of the plan. Concerns were as follows. Section 903.21(a)

may strip a PHA's executive director of the authority to reasonably

modify certain policies, rules, or regulations without formal Board

approval. Further, the final rule should clarify that a ``duly called''

meeting is not subject to the 45-day notice requirement. Section

903.21(b) will significantly slow implementation of changes by giving

HUD 75 days to review amendments or modifications to the Plan. The

final rule should delete this provision and, instead, require PHAs to

submit significant changes as part of next Annual Plan. The final rule

should require that only modifications to the mission statement be

provided to HUD for approval. HUD should not be allowed more than 30

days to approve/disapprove amendments. The final rule should provide

that when PHAs amend or modify a Plan, the public should be given 45

days notice of the meeting to discuss the change. The notice should

include a description of any proposed changes.

Response. These requirements and time period with which the

commenters are concerned derive directly from the statute, and track

the statutory language.

Comment. Section 903.21 does not track all the required statutory

language. In particular, Sec. 903.21 does not include the requirements

to meet with Resident Advisory Boards and to conduct a public hearing

process.

Response. Consultation with the Resident Advisory Board is covered

in Sec. 903.13, and the public hearing process is covered in

Sec. 903.17.

Comment. Amendments should not be necessary for any changes made in

response to HUD actions or decisions.

Response. Depending upon HUD's actions or decisions regarding its

review of the PHA Plan, a PHA's failure to amend its Plan in response

to HUD actions or decisions may mean that the PHA does not have an

approved plan. If HUD's action requires no discretionary PHA action, no

amendment would be required. Section 903.23 addresses these issues.

Comment. PHAs should be able to inform HUD of any modifications in

the yearly progress report.

Response. PHAs are free to inform HUD of any modifications in its

yearly progress report, but PHAs must comply with the provisions of the

PHA Plan regulation for significant amendments and modifications.

Comment. The amendment process should not interfere with the day-

to-day operations of a PHA.

Response. None of the PHA planning process should disrupt the day-

to-day operations of a PHA. The PHA plan should contribute to more

effective operations.

Comment. The final rule should require that Resident Advisory

Boards be included in the amendment or modification process.

Response. The statute provides for this and the rule reflects this

requirement.

Section 903.23 What is the Process by Which HUD Reviews, Approves, or

Disapproves an Annual Plan?

Comment. HUD should indicate that any provisions of the Public

Housing Reform Act that are not yet fully implemented by HUD and are

components of the Plan will not be considered in the approval process.

Response. The PHA Plan template addresses what is currently

required to be included in the PHA Plan. As provisions of the Public

Housing Reform Act become implemented and are required by statute to be

included in the PHA Plan, the template will be updated to reflect these

provisions, and PHAs will be notified.

Comment. HUD should use a checklist to conduct reviews of Plans,

and this checklist should be distributed to PHAs.

Response. The PHA Plan template serves as the checklist that will

guide HUD in reviewing PHAs plans.

Comment. Troubled PHAs should not be ``deemed approved'' if HUD

does not respond in 75 days. Section 511 contains exceptions for

troubled PHAs. HUD needs to add language to Sec. 903.23 to address this

issue.

Response. The PHA Plan final rule reflects the exceptions for

troubled PHAs provided in section 511(i)(4)(A).

[[Page 56861]]

Comment. In the initial year, HUD should not penalize PHAs for late

or incomplete Plans. Generally, HUD should not penalize PHAs for late

or incomplete Plans who make a good faith effort to comply.

Response. For the initial PHA plans, HUD has delayed the date of

first submission as provided in the September 21, 1999 rule.

Additionally, the PHA Plan template makes preparation and submission of

the Plan much easier. With the template and additional time to prepare

and submit plans, HUD does not believe that PHAs will be late or plans

will be incomplete.

Comment. The final rule should clarify what the process is when HUD

does not approve a Plan.

Response. HUD's notice to the PHA disapproving the plan will not

only advise the PHA of the reasons for the disapproval but what action

the PHA needs to take to obtain approval.

Comment. Based on experiences with MTCS and the physical inspection

process, HUD has problems improving the accuracy of its information

about PHAs. HUD should provide a mechanism for resolving disputes over

inconsistencies in information contained in HUD databases. HUD should

be required to identify the specific information it says is

inconsistent and give PHAs the opportunity to corroborate or correct

the information.

Response. The relevancy of this comment to the PHA Plan rule is not

totally clear. HUD notes, however, that its physical inspection process

has a mechanism for resolving disagreements over claims that

information in HUD databases is inaccurate. This process is part of the

Public Housing Assessment System. HUD has similar systems for

correcting inaccurate information in other programs.

Comment. The final rule should provide a means for technical

corrections, re-submission, and conditional approval if HUD review

shows a need for minor changes.

Response. For minor changes, HUD believes that a formal process

mandated by regulation is not necessary. HUD and PHAs should be able to

easily address technical corrections and any necessity for minor

changes.

Comment. Complaints about PHA non-compliance with the Plan should

have to pass a materiality test before disrupting the HUD approval

process.

Response. The regulation does not provide that any complaint about

a PHA's non-compliance with the Plan will disrupt the HUD approval

process. Whether a complaint is filed with HUD during the review

process or after HUD approval has been given, HUD will investigate, but

this investigation will not interfere with HUD's responsibilities to

PHAs either as part of the PHA plan review and approval process or in

other areas. When the investigation is complete, and a finding made,

HUD will take appropriate action if action is required.

Comment. The final rule should make clear that a PHA will not need

HUD approval for anything the PHA does not currently need HUD approval

for.

Response. This is a broad statement but HUD believes that with

respect to the PHA plans, the rule is clear on what requires HUD

approval. This rule, however, only addresses the PHA Plan requirements.

Section 903.25 How Does HUD Ensure PHA Compliance With its Plan?

Comment. The final rule needs to contain more detail on how HUD

will measure PHA compliance and what actions will be taken if a PHA is

not in compliance.

Response. For the majority, if not all, of the elements that

constitute the PHA Plan, compliance is measured by a PHA's compliance

with existing program regulations. The PHA Plan brings together in one

source, the PHA's policies, financial information, operating

procedures, grievance procedures, and similar information, but a PHA's

compliance with these policies or procedures is covered by other

program regulations. Therefore, assuming that a PHA has an approved PHA

Plan and follows it, a PHA's compliance will be measured by the PHA's

compliance with existing program regulations.

Comment. HUD should refrain from taking enforcement actions against

PHAs and should use the Plan for monitoring purposes only. The final

rule should provide a process, similar to the one at 24 CFR part 135,

subpart D, for receiving complaints against non-complying PHAs.

Response. HUD believes that its response to the preceding comments

covers these issues as well. HUD's enforcement actions will largely be

based on a PHA's compliance with existing program regulations.

VI. Findings and Certifications

Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements for the interim rule were

approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance

with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.

3501-3520) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2577-0226. Changes

made to the information collection requirements at the final rule stage

are not yet approved. The approval when recieved will be announced by

separate notice. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is

not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the

collection displays a valid control number.

Executive Order 12866

This final rule was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. OMB

determined that this final rule is a ``significant regulatory action,''

as defined in section 3(f) of the Order (although not economically

significant under section (3)(f)(1) of the Order). Any changes made to

the final rule subsequent to its submission to OMB 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 Street SW, Washington DC, 20410.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Secretary, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed and approved this final rule, and in so

doing certifies that this rule does not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule

implements, by statutory directive, a comprehensive planning system for

PHAs (which also provides for a consolidated statement of PHA policies

on various PHA operations) and also provides a consolidated reporting

mechanism. The PHA plans ultimately should minimize administrative

burden on all PHAs, including small PHAs, consistent with reasonable

accountability. HUD is sensitive to the fact, however, that the uniform

application of requirements on entities of differing sizes may place a

disproportionate burden on small entities. In this regard, the final

rule provides for submission of a streamlined plan by small entities.

For all PHAs, HUD's PHA plan electronic template, issued July 30, 1999,

significantly reduces the burden of preparation and submission of the

PHA Plan.

Executive Order 12612, Federalism

The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under section 6(a)

of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that this final

rule will not have substantial direct effects on States or their

political subdivisions, or the relationship between the Federal

[[Page 56862]]

government and the States, or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government. This rule

pertains solely to Federal assistance and no programmatic or policy

changes would result from this final rule that affect the relationship

between the Federal Government and State and local governments.

Environmental Impact

A Finding of No Significant Impact with respect to the environment

was prepared at the interim rule stage, in accordance with HUD

regulations in 24 CFR part 50 that implement section 102(2)(C) of the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4223). That

Finding remains applicable to this final rule, and is available for

public inspection between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays in the

Office of the Rules Docket Clerk, Office of General Counsel, Room

10276, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20410.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-

4; approved March 22, 1995) (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal

agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State,

local, and tribal governments, and on the private sector. This rule

does not impose any Federal mandates on any State, local, or tribal

governments, or on the private sector, within the meaning of the UMRA.

List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 903

Administrative practice and procedure, Public housing, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements

For the reasons stated in the preamble, HUD adopts as final, the

interim rule published on February 18, 1999 (64 FR 8170), by revising

24 CFR part 903 to read as follows:

PART 903--PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY PLANS

903.1 What are the public housing agency plans?

903.3 When must a PHA submit the plans to HUD?

903.5 What information must a PHA provide in the 5-Year Plan?

903.7 What information must a PHA provide in the Annual Plan?

903.9 May HUD request additional information in the Annual Plan of

a troubled PHA?

903.11 Are certain PHAs eligible to submit a streamlined Annual

Plan?

903.13 What is a Resident Advisory Board and what is its role in

development of the Annual Plan.

903.15 What is the relationship of the public housing agency plans

to the Consolidated Plan?

903.17 What is the process for obtaining public comment on the

plans?

903.19 When is the 5-Year Plan or Annual Plan ready for submission

to HUD?

903.21 May the PHA amend or modify a plan?

903.23 What is the process by which HUD reviews, approves, or

disapproves an Annual Plan?

903.25 How does HUD ensure PHA compliance with its plans?

Authority. 42 U.S.C. 1437c; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).

Sec. 903.1 What are the public housing agency plans?

(a) There are two public housing agency plans. They are:

(1) The 5-year plan (the 5-Year Plan) that a public housing agency

(PHA) must submit to HUD once every 5 PHA fiscal years; and

(2) The annual plan (Annual Plan) that the PHA must submit to HUD

for each fiscal year for which the PHA receives:

(i) Section 8 tenant-based assistance (under section 8(o) of the

U.S. Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) (tenant-based

assistance); or

(ii) Amounts from the public housing operating fund or capital fund

(under section 9 of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g)

(public housing)).

(b) The purpose of the plans is to provide a framework for local

accountability and an easily identifiable source by which public

housing residents, participants in the tenant-based assistance program,

and other members of the public may locate basic PHA policies, rules

and requirements concerning its operations, programs and services.

(c) HUD may prescribe the format of submission (including

electronic format submission) of the plans, as well as the format of

attachments to the plans and documents related to the plan that the PHA

does not submit but may be required to make available locally. PHAs

will receive appropriate notice of any prescribed format.

(d) The requirements of this part only apply to a PHA that receives

the type of assistance described in paragraph (a) of this section.

(e) In addition to the waiver authority provided in 24 CFR 5.110,

the Secretary may, subject to statutory limitations, waive any

provision of this title on a program-wide basis, and delegate this

authority in accordance with section 106 of the Department of Housing

and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3535(q)) where the

Secretary determines that such waiver is necessary for the effective

implementation of this part.

(f) References to the ``1937 Act'' in this part refer to the U.S.

Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.)

Sec. 903.3 When must a PHA submit the plans to HUD?

(a) 5-Year Plan. (1) The first PHA fiscal year that is covered by

the requirements of this part is the PHA fiscal year that begins

January 1, 2000. The first 5-Year Plan submitted by a PHA must be

submitted for the 5-year period beginning January 1, 2000. The first 5-

Year Plans for such PHAs are due on December 1, 1999. For PHAs whose

fiscal years begin after January 1, 2000, the 5-Year Plans are due no

later than 75 days before the commencement of their fiscal year. For

all PHAs, after submission of their first 5-Year Plan, all subsequent

5-Year Plans must be submitted once every 5 PHA fiscal years, no later

than 75 days before the commencement of the PHA's fiscal year.

(2) PHAs may choose to update their 5-Year Plans every year as good

management practice. PHAs must explain any substantial deviation from

their 5-Year Plans in their Annual Plans.

(b) The Annual Plan. The first fiscal year that is covered by the

requirements of this part is the PHA fiscal year that begins January 1,

2000. The first Annual Plans for such PHAs are due December 1, 1999.

For PHAs whose fiscal years begin after January 1, 2000, the first

Annual Plans are due 75 days in advance of PHAs fiscal year

commencement dates. For all PHAs, after submission of the first Annual

Plan, all subsequent Annual Plans will be due 75 days in advance of the

commencement of a PHA's fiscal year.

Sec. 903.5 What information must a PHA provide in the 5-Year Plan?

(a) A PHA must include in its 5-Year Plan for the 5 PHA fiscal

years immediately following the date on which the 5-Year Plan is due to

HUD, a statement of:

(1) The PHA's mission for serving the needs of low-income, very

low-income and extremely low-income families in the PHA's jurisdiction;

and

(2) The PHA's goals and objectives that enable the PHA to serve the

needs of the families identified in the PHA's Annual Plan. For HUD, the

PHA and the public to better measure the success of the PHA in meeting

its goals and objectives, PHAs must adopt quantifiable goals and

objectives for serving those needs wherever possible.

(b) After submitting its first 5-Year Plan, a PHA in its succeeding

5-Year

[[Page 56863]]

Plans, in addition to addressing its mission, goals and objectives for

the next 5 years, must address the progress it has made in meeting the

goals and objectives described in its previous 5-Year Plan.

Sec. 903.7 What information must a PHA provide in the Annual Plan?

With the exception of the first Annual Plan submitted by a PHA, the

Annual Plan must include the information provided in this section. HUD

will advise PHAs by separate notice, sufficiently in advance of the

first Annual Plan submission date, of the information, described in

this section that must be included in the first Annual Plan, and any

additional instructions or directions that may be necessary with

respect to preparation and submission of the first Annual Plan. The

information described in this section applies to both public housing

and tenant-based assistance, except where specifically stated

otherwise. Additionally, the information that the PHA must submit for

HUD approval under the Annual Plan are the discretionary policies of

the various plan components or elements (for example, rent policies)

and not the statutory or regulatory requirements that govern these

components. The PHA's Annual Plan also must be consistent with the

goals and objectives of the PHA's 5-Year Plan.

(a) A statement of housing needs. (1) This statement must address

the housing needs of the low-income and very low-income families who

reside in the jurisdiction served by the PHA, and other families who

are on the public housing and Section 8 tenant-based assistance waiting

lists, including:

(i) Families with incomes below 30 percent of area median

(extremely low-income families);

(ii) Elderly families and families with disabilities;

(iii) Households of various races and ethnic groups residing in the

jurisdiction or on the waiting list.

(2) A PHA must make reasonable efforts to identify the housing

needs of each of the groups listed in paragraph (a)(1) on this section

based on information provided by the applicable Consolidated Plan,

information provided by HUD, and other generally available data. The

identification of housing needs should address issues of affordability,

supply, quality, accessibility, size of units and location. The

statement of housing needs also must describe the ways in which the PHA

intends, to the maximum extent practicable, to address those needs, and

the PHA's reasons for choosing its strategy.

(b) A statement of financial resources. This statement must address

the financial resources that are available to the PHA for the support

of Federal public housing and tenant-based assistance programs

administered by the PHA during the plan year. The statement must

include a listing, by general categories, of the PHA's anticipated

resources, such as PHA operating, capital and other anticipated Federal

resources available to the PHA, as well as tenant rents and other

income available to support public housing or tenant-based assistance.

The statement also should include the non-Federal sources of funds

supporting each Federal program, and state the planned uses for the

resources.

(c) A statement of the PHA's policies that govern eligibility,

selection, and admissions. This statement must describe the PHA's

policies governing resident or tenant eligibility, selection and

admission. This statement also must describe any PHA admission

preferences, and any assignment and occupancy policies that pertain to

public housing units and housing units assisted under section 8(o) of

the 1937 Act. The requirement to submit PHA policies governing

assignment only applies to public housing. This statement also must

include the following information:

(1) The PHA's procedures for maintaining waiting lists for

admission to the PHA's public housing projects. The statement must

address any site-based waiting lists, as authorized by section 6(s) of

the 1937 Act. This section permits PHAs to establish a system of site-

based waiting lists that is consistent with all applicable civil rights

and fair housing laws and regulations. Notwithstanding any other

regulations, a PHA may adopt site-based waiting lists where:

(i) The PHA regularly submits required occupancy data to HUD's

Multifamily Tenant Characteristics Systems (MTCS) in an accurate,

complete and timely manner;

(ii) The system of site-based waiting lists provides for full

disclosure to each applicant of any option available to the applicant

in the selection of the development in which to reside, including basic

information about available sites (location, occupancy, number and size

of accessible units, amenities such as day care, security,

transportation and training programs) and an estimate of the period of

time the applicant would likely have to wait to be admitted to units of

different sizes and types (e.g., regular or accessible) at each site;

(iii) Adoption of site-based waiting lists would not violate any

court order or settlement agreement, or be inconsistent with a pending

complaint brought by HUD;

(iv) The PHA includes reasonable measures to assure that such

adoption is consistent with affirmatively furthering fair housing, such

as reasonable marketing activities to attract applicants regardless of

race or ethnicity;

(v) The PHA provides for review of its site-based waiting list

policy to determine if it is consistent with civil rights laws and

certifications through the following steps:

(A) As part of the submission of the Annual Plan, the PHA shall

assess changes in racial, ethnic or disability-related tenant

composition at each PHA site that may have occurred during the

implementation of the site-based waiting list, based upon MTCS

occupancy data that has been confirmed to be complete and accurate by

an independent audit (which may be the annual independent audit) or is

otherwise satisfactory to HUD;

(B) At least every three years the PHA uses independent testers or

other means satisfactory to HUD, to assure that the site-based waiting

list is not being implemented in a discriminatory manner, and that no

patterns or practices of discrimination exist, and providing the

results to HUD; and

(C) Taking any steps necessary to remedy the problems surfaced

during the review and the steps necessary to affirmatively further fair

housing.

(2) The PHA's admissions policy with respect to deconcentration of

very low-income families and income-mixing, as required by section

16(a)(3)(B) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437n). To implement this

requirement, which is only applicable to public housing, PHAs must:

(i) Determine and compare the relative tenant incomes of each

development occupied predominately by families with children. PHAs

shall be considered to be in compliance with these requirements if they

determine the average household income in all such developments

combined and define higher-income families as those with incomes over

this average, higher-income developments and buildings as those where

the average family income is over this average, lower-income families

as those with incomes under this average and lower-income developments

and buildings as those where the average family income is under this

average;

[[Page 56864]]

(ii) Consider what admissions policy measures or incentives, if

any, will be needed to bring higher-income families into lower-income

and buildings developments and lower-income families into higher income

developments and buildings. PHA policies must devote appropriate

attention to both of these goals. PHA policies must affirmatively

further fair housing; and

(iii) Make any appropriate changes in their admissions policies.

(3) The policies governing eligibility, selection and admissions

are applicable to public housing and tenant-based assistance, except

that the information requested on site-based waiting lists and

deconcentration, which information is applicable only to public

housing.

(d) A statement of the PHA's rent determination policies. This

statement must describe the PHA's basic discretionary policies that

pertain to rents charged for public housing units, applicable flat

rents, and the rental contributions of families receiving tenant-based

assistance. For tenant-based assistance, this statement also shall

cover any discretionary minimum tenant rents and payment standard

policies.

(e) A statement of the PHA's operation and management. (1) This

statement must list the PHA's rules, standards, and policies that

govern maintenance and management of housing owned, assisted, or

operated by the PHA. The policies listed in this statement must include

a description of any measures necessary for the prevention or

eradication of pest infestation which includes cockroach infestation.

Additionally, this statement must include a description of PHA

management organization, and a listing of the programs administered by

the PHA.

(2) The information pertaining to PHA's rules, standards and

policies regarding management and maintenance of housing applies only

to public housing. The information pertaining to PHA and program

management and listing of administered programs applies to public

housing and tenant-based assistance.

(f) A statement of the PHA grievance procedures. This statement

describes the grievance and informal hearing and review procedures that

the PHA makes available to its residents and applicants. This includes

public housing grievance procedures and tenant-based assistance

informal review procedures for applicants and hearing procedures for

participants.

(g) A statement of capital improvements needed. With respect to

public housing only, this statement describes the capital improvements

necessary to ensure long-term physical and social viability of the

public housing projects, including the capital improvements to be

undertaken in the year in question and their estimated costs, and any

other information required for participation in the Capital Fund. PHAs

also are required to include 5-Year Plans covering large capital items.

(h) A statement of any demolition and/or disposition. (1) Plan for

Demolition/Disposition. With respect to public housing only, a

description of any public housing project, or portion of a public

housing project, owned by the PHA for which the PHA has applied or will

apply for demolition and/or disposition approval under section 18 of

the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437p), and the timetable for demolition and/or

disposition. The application and approval process for demolition and/or

disposition is a separate process. Approval of the PHA Plan does not

constitute approval of these activities.

(2) Interim Plan for Demolition/Disposition. Before submission of

the first Annual Plan, PHAs may submit an interim PHA Annual Plan

solely with respect to demolition/disposition. The interim plan must

provide the required description of the action to be taken, include a

certification of consistency with the Consolidated Plan, and

description of how the plan is consistent with the Consolidated Plan,

and confirm that a public hearing was held on the proposed action and

that the resident advisory board was consulted. Interim plans for

demolition/disposition are subject to PHA Plan procedural requirements

in this part (see Secs. 903.13, 903.15, 903.17, 903.19, 903.21, 903.23,

903.25) except that if a resident advisory board has not yet been

formed, the PHA may seek a waiver of the requirement to consult with

the resident advisory board on the grounds that organizations that

adequately represent residents for this purpose were consulted. The

actual application for demolition or disposition could be submitted at

the same time or at a later date.

(i) A statement of the public housing projects designated as

housing for elderly families or families with disabilities or elderly

families and families with disabilities. With respect to public housing

only, this statement identifies any public housing projects owned,

assisted, or operated by the PHA, or any portion of these projects,

that the PHA has designated for occupancy only by the elderly families

or only by families with disabilities, or by elderly families and

families with disabilities or will apply for designation for occupancy

by only elderly families or only families with disabilities, or by

elderly families and families with disabilities as provided by section

7 of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437e). The designated housing application

and approval process is a separate process. Approval of the PHA Plan

does not constitute approval of these activities.

(j) A statement of the conversion of public housing to tenant-based

assistance. (1) This statement describes any building or buildings that

the PHA is required to convert to tenant-based assistance under section

33 of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437z-5), or the status of any building

or buildings that the PHA may be required to convert to tenant-based

assistance under section 202 of the Fiscal Year 1996 HUD Appropriations

Act (42 U.S.C. 14371 note), or describes that the PHA plans to

voluntarily convert under section 22 of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437t).

The statement also must include an analysis of the projects or

buildings required to be converted under section 33. For both voluntary

and mandatory conversions, the statement must include the amount of

assistance received commencing in Federal Fiscal Year 1999 to be used

for rental assistance or other housing assistance in connection with

such conversion. The application and approval processes for required or

voluntary conversions are separate approval processes. Approval of the

PHA Plan does not constitute approval of these activities.

(2) The information required under this paragraph (j) of this

section is applicable to public housing and only that tenant-based

assistance which is to be included in the conversion plan.

(k) A statement of homeownership programs administered by the PHA.

This statement describes any homeownership programs administered by the

PHA under section 8(y) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f(y)), or under

an approved section 5(h) homeownership program (42 U.S.C. 1437c(h)), or

an approved HOPE I program (42 U.S.C. 1437aaa) or for any homeownership

programs for which the PHA has applied to administer or will apply to

administer under section 5(h), the HOPE I program, or section 32 of the

1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437z-4). The application and approval process for

homeownership under the programs described in paragraph (k) of this

section, with the exception of the section 8(y) homeownership program,

are separate processes. Approval of the PHA Plan does not constitute

approval of these activities.

(l) A statement of the PHA's community service and self-sufficiency

programs. (1) This statement describes:

[[Page 56865]]

(i) Any PHA programs relating to services and amenities

coordinated, promoted or provided by the PHA for assisted families,

including programs provided or offered as a result of the PHA's

partnership with other entities;

(ii) Any PHA programs coordinated, promoted or provided by the PHA

for the enhancement of the economic and social self-sufficiency of

assisted families, including programs provided or offered as a result

of the PHA's partnerships with other entities, and activities under

section 3 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1968 and

under requirements for the Family Self-Sufficiency Program and others.

The description of programs offered shall include the program's size

(including required and actual size of the Family Self-Sufficiency

program) and means of allocating assistance to households.

(iii) How the PHA will comply with the requirements of section

12(c) and (d) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437j(c) and (d)). These

statutory provisions relate to community service by public housing

residents and treatment of income changes in public housing and tenant-

based assistance recipients resulting from welfare program

requirements. PHAs must address any cooperation agreements, as

described in section 12(d)(7) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437j(d)(7)),

that the PHA has entered into or plans to enter into.

(2) The information required by paragraph (l) of this section is

applicable to both public housing and tenant-based assistance, except

that the information regarding the PHA's compliance with the community

service requirement applies only to public housing.

(m) A statement of the PHA's safety and crime prevention measures.

With respect to public housing only, this statement describes the PHA's

plan for safety and crime prevention to ensure the safety of the public

housing residents that it serves. The plan for safety and crime

prevention must be established in consultation with the police officer

or officers in command of the appropriate precinct or police

departments, and the plan must provide, on a development-by-development

or jurisdiction wide-basis, the measures necessary to ensure the safety

of public housing residents.

(1) The statement regarding the PHA's safety and crime prevention

plan must include the following information:

(i) A description of the need for measures to ensure the safety of

public housing residents;

(ii) A description of any crime prevention activities conducted or

to be conducted by the PHA; and

(iii) A description of the coordination between the PHA and the

appropriate police precincts for carrying out crime prevention measures

and activities.

(2) If the PHA expects to receive drug elimination program grant

funds, the PHA must submit, in addition to the information required by

paragraph (m)(1) of this section, the plan required by HUD's Public

Housing Drug Elimination Program regulations (see 24 CFR part 761).

(3) If HUD determines at any time that the security needs of a

public housing project are not being adequately addressed by the PHA's

plan, or that the local police precinct is not assisting the PHA with

compliance with its crime prevention measures as described in the

Annual Plan, HUD may mediate between the PHA and the local precinct to

resolve any issues of conflict.

(n) A statement of the PHA's policies and rules regarding ownership

of pets in public housing. This statement describes the PHA's policies

and requirements pertaining to the ownership of pets in public housing

issued in accordance with section 31 of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437a-

3).

(o) Civil rights certification. (1) The PHA must certify that it

will carry out its plan in conformity with title VI of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d-2000d-4), the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C.

3601-19), section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C.

794), and title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42

U.S.C. 12101 et seq.), and also certify that it will affirmatively

further fair housing. The certification is applicable to both the 5-

Year Plan and the Annual Plan.

(2) PHAs shall be considered in compliance with the certification

requirement to affirmatively further fair housing if they examine their

programs or proposed programs, identify any impediments to fair housing

choice within those programs, address those impediments in a reasonable

fashion in view of the resources available, work with local

jurisdictions to implement any of the jurisdiction's initiatives to

affirmatively further fair housing that require the PHA's involvement,

and maintain records reflecting these analyses and actions.

(p) Recent results of PHA's fiscal year audit. The PHA's plan must

include the results of the most recent fiscal year audit of the PHA

conducted under section 5(h)(2) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437c(h)).

(q) A statement of asset management. To the extent not covered by

other components of the PHA Annual Plan, this statement describes how

the PHA will carry out its asset management functions with respect to

the PHA's public housing inventory, including how the PHA will plan for

long-term operating, capital investment, rehabilitation, modernization,

disposition, and other needs for such inventory.

(r) Additional information to be provided. (1) For all Annual Plans

following submission of the first Annual Plan, a PHA must include a

brief statement of the PHA's progress in meeting the mission and goals

described in the 5-Year Plan;

(2) A PHA must identify the basic criteria the PHA will use for

determining:

(i) A substantial deviation from its 5-Year Plan; and

(ii) A significant amendment or modification to its 5-Year Plan and

Annual Plan.

(3) A PHA must include such other information as HUD may request of

PHAs, either on an individual or across-the-board basis. HUD will

advise the PHA or PHAs of this additional information through advance

notice.

Sec. 903.9 May HUD request additional information in the Annual Plan

of a troubled PHA?

HUD may request that a PHA that is at risk of being designated as

troubled or is designated as troubled under section 6(j)(2) of the 1937

Act (42 U.S.C. 1437d(j)(2)), under the Public Housing Management

Assessment Program (24 CFR part 901) or under the Public Housing

Assessment System (24 CFR part 902) include its operating budget, and

include or reference any applicable memorandum of agreement with HUD or

other plan to improve performance and such other material as HUD may

prescribe.

Sec. 903.11 Are certain PHAs eligible to submit a streamlined Annual

Plan?

(a) Yes, the following PHAs may submit a streamlined Annual Plan,

as described in paragraph (b) of this section:

(1) PHAs that are determined to be high performing PHAs as of the

last annual or interim assessment of the PHA before the submission of

the 5-Year or Annual Plan;

(2) PHAs with less than 250 public housing units (small PHAs) and

that have not been designated as troubled under section 6(j)(2); and

(3) PHAs that only administer tenant-based assistance and that do

not own or operate public housing.

(b) All streamlined plans must provide information on how the

public

[[Page 56866]]

may reasonably obtain additional information on the PHA policies

contained in the standard Annual Plan, but excluded from their

streamlined submissions. A streamlined plan must include the following

information:

(1) For high performing PHAs, the streamlined Annual Plan must

include the information required by Sec. 903.7(a), (b), (c), (d), (g),

(h), (m), (n), (o), (p) and (r). The information required by

Sec. 903.7(m) must be included only to the extent this information is

required for PHA's participation in the public housing drug elimination

program and the PHA anticipates participating in this program in the

upcoming year.

(2) For small PHAs that are not designated as troubled or that are

not at risk of being designated as troubled under section 6(j)(2) of

the 1937 Act the streamlined Annual Plan must include the information

required by Sec. 903.7(a), (b), (c), (d), (g), (h), (k), (m), (n), (o),

(p) and (r). The information required by Sec. 903.7(k) must be included

only to the extent that the PHA participates in homeownership programs

under section 8(y). The information required by Sec. 903.7(m) must be

included only to the extent this information is required for the PHA's

participation in the public housing drug elimination program and the

PHA anticipates participating in this program in the upcoming year.

(3) For PHA's that administer only tenant-based assistance, the

streamlined Annual Plan must include the information required by

Sec. 903.7(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (k), (l), (o), (p) and (r).

Sec. 903.13 What is a Resident Advisory Board and what is its role in

development of the Annual Plan?.

(a) A Resident Advisory Board is a board or boards, as provided in

paragraph (b) of this section, whose membership consists of individuals

who adequately reflect and represent the residents assisted by the PHA.

(1) The role of the Resident Advisory Board (or Resident Advisory

Boards) is to assist and make recommendations regarding the development

of the PHA plan, and any significant amendment or modification to the

PHA plan.

(2) The PHA shall allocate reasonable resources to assure the

effective functioning of Resident Advisory Boards. Reasonable resources

for the Resident Advisory Boards must provide reasonable means for them

to become informed on programs covered by the PHA Plan, to communicate

in writing and by telephone with assisted families and hold meetings

with those families, and to access information regarding covered

programs on the internet, taking into account the size and resources of

the PHA.

(b) Each PHA must establish one or more Resident Advisory Boards,

as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.

(1) If a jurisdiction-wide resident council exists that complies

with the tenant participation regulations in 24 CFR part 964, the PHA

shall appoint the jurisdiction-wide resident council or its

representatives as the Resident Advisory Board, except that members

shall be added or another Resident Advisory Board formed to provide for

reasonable representation of families receiving tenant-based assistance

where such representation is required under paragraph (b)(2) of

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.