[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 155 (Friday, August 9, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41640-41646]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20361]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 41641]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-4103-N-01]
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing;
Notice of Implementation of the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and
Appropriations Act of 1996
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of Implementation of the Omnibus Consolidated
Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104-134, approved
April 26, 1996) (``OCRA'') relating to the Public and Indian Housing
Program and the Section 8 Certificate, Voucher, and Moderate
Rehabilitation Programs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The OCRA affects the public and Indian housing and Section 8
programs by providing certain funds and by amending the U.S. Housing
Act of 1937 (the ``USHA''). This Notice advises the public of the
Department's intentions regarding funding processes for affected
programs. This Notice also advises the public of various changes to
regulatory requirements and program policies, implementing the
administrative provisions of the OCRA that amend the USHA for Federal
Fiscal Year 1996 (``FY 1996'').
The Department will issue instructions concerning Section 202 of
the OCRA, Conversion of Certain Public Housing to Tenant-based Section
8 Vouchers and Certificates, by separate notice.
This Notice does not modify or negate the policies contained in
Notices PIH 96-6 and 7 (HA) dated February 13, 1996, which were issued
to implement provisions of the January 26, 1996 Continuing Resolution.
Those Notices concerned minimum tenant rents, public and Indian housing
ceiling rents, the definition of ``adjusted income'' for public and
Indian housing residents, suspension of Federal tenant selection
preferences, repeal of provisions regarding income disregards, delay in
reissuance of turnover certificates and vouchers, and FY 1996 Section 8
administrative fees.
This Notice also does not modify or negate the guidance issued in
Notice PIH 96-12 (HA) on March 21, 1996, which concerned management of
the minimum rent requirements.
In addition, this Notice does not modify or negate the guidance
issued in Notice PIH 96-24 (HA) on May 3, 1996, which concerned
Performance Funding System policy revisions to encourage public and
Indian housing authorities to facilitate resident employment and
undertake entrepreneurial initiatives.
Further, this Notice is not intended to supersede the Public/
Private Partnership for Mixed-Finance Public Housing Development rule
in 24 CFR part 941, subpart F (published May 2, 1996, 61 FR 19708).
That rule remains in effect. This Notice is intended to provide
implementation guidance on that subject in those limited areas where
the language in the OCRA differs from that in the rule.
The provisions of this Notice apply both to Public Housing Agencies
(``PHAs'') and to Indian Housing Authorities (``IHAs''), which are
collectively referred to in this Notice as ``HAs'' unless otherwise
noted.
Contents of this Notice
I. Annual Contributions Contracts and Commitment of Funds
II. Extension of Administrative Provisions from the Rescissions Act
III. Streamlining Section 8 Tenant-Based Assistance
IV. Public Housing/Section 8 Moving to Work Demonstration
V. Extension Period for Sharing Utility Cost Savings with HAs
VI. Repeal of Frost-Leland
VII. Minimum Rent Waiver Authority
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rod Solomon, Director, Special
Actions, Public and Indian Housing, Room 4116, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410,
telephone (202) 708-0713.
For IHAs, contact Dom Nessi, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native
American Programs, Room B-133, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC
20410, telephone (202) 755-0032.
For hearing or speech impaired persons, these numbers may be
accessed via TTY by contacting the Federal Information Relay Service at
1-800-877-8339. (Except for the ``800'' number, the telephone numbers
are not toll-free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Annual Contributions Contracts and Commitment of Funds
A. Indian Housing
1. Indian Housing Development Funding
A Notice of Funding Availability (``NOFA'') was published in the
Federal Register on March 29, 1996 (61 FR 14218), which announced
approximately $160 million in FY 1996 funding for the development of
new Indian Housing units and provided the applicable criteria,
processing requirements and action timetable.
2. Indian HOME Funding, Indian Community Development Block Grant
Funding, and Indian Emergency Shelter Grant Funding
A NOFA was published in the Federal Register on March 27, 1996 (61
FR 13574) announcing the availability of up to $14 million in funding
for FY 1996 for the HOME Program for Indian Tribes and providing
selection criteria, information on how to apply, and an explanation of
how selections would be made.
A NOFA was published in the Federal Register on May 9, 1996 (61 FR
21338), which announced the availability of $50,000,000 in funds for
the Community Development Block Grant Program for Indian Tribes and
Alaska Native Villages for Fiscal Year 1996.
A NOFA was published in the Federal Register on March 5, 1996 (61
FR 8824), which announced the availability of approximately $1,150,000
in funds for emergency shelter grants to be allocated to Indian tribes
and Alaskan Native villages by competition for Fiscal Year 1996.
B. Section 8 Certificate, Voucher and Moderate Rehabilitation Funding
In a Federal Register notice published July 19, 1996 (61 FR 37758),
HUD issued instructions concerning Section 8 certificate, voucher, and
moderate rehabilitation funding.
C. Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program (``CIAP'')
A NOFA was published in the Federal Register on April 18, 1996 (61
FR 17218), which announced the availability of up to $257 million for
FY 1996 CIAP funding. The NOFA informed HAs that own or operate fewer
than 250 public and Indian housing units (and, therefore, are eligible
to apply and compete for CIAP funds) of the requirements and
application deadline. The NOFA application deadline was June 17, 1996
and the Department is now processing applications.
D. Public Housing Demolition, Site Revitalization, and Replacement
Housing (HOPE VI) Grants
Title II of the OCRA appropriates $480 million for public housing
demolition, site revitalization, and replacement housing grants
(referred to as the HOPE VI program). A NOFA was published on July 22,
1996 (61 FR 38024), which announced the availability of HOPE VI
funding. The funds will be used for grants to PHAs to enable them to
demolish obsolete projects or portions of them, or
[[Page 41642]]
revitalize, where appropriate, the sites (including remaining public
housing units) on which the projects are located. Also, grants may be
used for replacement housing that will avoid or lessen concentrations
of very low-income families and for tenant-based Section 8 assistance
to provide replacement housing or to assist tenants who will be
displaced by demolition.
E. Public and Indian Housing Drug Elimination Program (``PHDEP'') and
Technical Assistance (``TA'') Program
A NOFA was published in the Federal Register on April 8, 1996 (61
FR 15674) announcing approximately $250 million for PHDEP. A notice was
published in the Federal Register on July 10, 1996 (61 FR 36472), which
makes two amendments to the April 8, 1996 NOFA, and reopens the
application period for a period of 30 days. The application deadline
under the July 10, 1996 NOFA is August 9, 1996.
A NOFA was published in the Federal Register on June 25, 1996 ((61
FR 32902) announcing the availability of $1.5 million under the PHDEP
TA program. OCRA set aside $10 million for ``grants, technical
assistance, contracts and other assistance training, program assessment
and execution for or on behalf of public housing agencies and resident
organizations.'' This NOFA makes $1.5 million out of the $10 million
available under the PHDEP TA program. The NOFA provides that
applications may be submitted anytime up to August 16, 1996.
F. Economic Development and Supportive Services Program
The OCRA provided $53 million for supportive services under
Community Development Block Grants. This funding will be used as
follows:
1. Section 202 Service Coordinators: Five million dollars will be
used to assist elderly residents to obtain the supportive services they
need from community agencies in order to prevent premature or
unnecessary institutionalization. The Office of Housing will award
funds on a first come, first serve, basis pursuant to current
procedures.
2. Tenant-Based Section 8 Family Self-Sufficiency Service
Coordinators (FSS): A NOFA was published on July 26, 1996 (61 FR
39262), announcing $9.2 million for this program. Under the FSS
program, HAs are required to use Section 8 rental assistance together
with public and private resources to provide supportive services to
enable participating families to achieve economic independence and
self-sufficiency. Effective delivery of supportive services is a
critical element in a successful program. Funds are available under
this NOFA to employ or otherwise retain the services of up to one FSS
program coordinator for one year. A part-time FSS program coordinator
may be retained where appropriate. The application deadline is
September 9, 1996.
3. Economic Development and Supportive Services: The Department
will publish a NOFA in the Federal Register announcing a total of up to
$30.8 million in grant funds. This funding will allow HAs to (1)
provide economic development opportunities or supportive services to
assist residents of public and Indian housing to become economically
self-sufficient and (2) provide supportive services to assist elderly
and handicapped persons to live independently.
4. Bridges to Work: The Department has set-aside $8 million for a
Bridges to Work Demonstration to assist central city low-income
individuals and families, including public housing and Section 8
recipients, who are work ready, to become self-sufficient by linking
them with suburban jobs. The linkage is to be achieved by coordinated
programs of job search assistance, work preparation and job retention
counseling, transportation and child care assistance, and other
necessary supportive services. The six sites for the demonstration are:
Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Milwaukee, St. Louis, and Philadelphia.
G. Public and Indian Housing Youth Sports (YSP) Program
There will not be a NOFA this year for the Public and Indian
Housing Youth Sports Program. A notice was published in the Federal
Register on June 12, 1996 (61 FR 29884) that announced that HUD would
not fund the Youth Sports Program for FY 1996.
H. Tenant Opportunities Program (``TOP'') Technical Assistance
A NOFA was published in the Federal Register on July 3, 1996 (61 FR
35022) announcing the availability of $15 million for this program. TOP
provides assistance to Resident Councils, Resident Management
Corporations, Resident Organizations, National Resident Organizations,
Regional Resident Organizations, and Statewide Resident Organizations,
to fund training and other tenant opportunities, such as the formation
of such entities, identification of the relevant social support needs,
and securing of such support for residents of public and Indian
housing.
The application deadline is August 9, 1996.
II. Extension of Administrative Provisions From the Rescissions Act
A. Expansion of Eligible Uses of Modernization and Development
Assistance
1. General Provisions
Section 201(a) of the OCRA gives HAs significant new flexibility in
using public and Indian housing modernization and development funds
provided under authority of the United States Housing Act (the
``USHA''). This provision follows the expansion of the permitted uses
of modernization funds that was made by Section 1001(a) of the 1995
Rescissions Act (Pub.L. 104-19, approved July 27, 1995). The OCRA
amends Section 14(q) of the USHA (as defined above), which was added by
the 1995 Rescissions Act, to further expand the eligible uses of
modernization assistance and also to expand the eligible uses of public
and Indian housing development assistance. These provisions apply to
modernization and development funds appropriated in FY 1996 and in
prior fiscal years.
With certain limitations, HAs may now use modernization assistance
or development assistance for any eligible activity authorized (a) by
the public and Indian housing modernization program (under Section 14
of the USHA, as amended by the OCRA), (b) by the public and Indian
housing development program (under Section 5 of the USHA), or (c) by
applicable appropriations acts for an HA. Eligible activities include
the demolition, rehabilitation, revitalization, and replacement of
existing units and developments. Eligible activities also include those
authorized under the Urban Revitalization Demonstration program (also
known as ``HOPE VI''), as set forth in the 1993 HUD, VA, and
Independent Agencies Appropriations Act (Pub.L. 102-389, approved),
which authorizes both physical revitalization activities and activities
to promote resident self-sufficiency, such as community services,
social services, training and education, and other activities designed
to encourage and support work by public housing residents. Although
IHAs have not been eligible for HOPE VI funding in the past, IHAs may
now use modernization and development funds for eligible activities
authorized under HOPE VI.
2. Assistance Previously Allocated for Priority Replacement Housing
The expansion of the eligible uses of modernization and development
[[Page 41643]]
assistance, as described above, does not apply to public and Indian
housing development assistance that was allocated, as determined by the
Department, for priority replacement housing. Such assistance may only
be used for the specific activities for which it was allocated to the
HA by the Department. In general, development assistance allocated for
priority replacement housing is development assistance that was
committed by the Department to an HA for an approved replacement
housing plan, or development assistance (including assistance under a
Major Reconstruction of Obsolete Projects (``MROP'') grant) which was
not under an Annual Contributions Contract prior to July 27, 1995, and
which HUD did not recapture. (Please note that the MROP program does
not apply to IHAs.)
3. Section 5(j) Limitations on Public Housing Development
While the OCRA authorizes the use of modernization assistance for
the development activities authorized by Section 5 of the USHA, it does
not exempt HAs from compliance with other applicable requirements of
Section 5. In particular, the development of public housing (though not
Indian housing) remains subject to Section 5(j) of the USHA, which
limits the circumstances under which HUD may provide assistance to an
HA for development activity. More specifically, Section 5(j) permits
the use of funds for public housing development only if at least one of
the following five conditions is met:
(1) The Department determines that additional amounts are required
to complete the development of units already under development;
(2) The HA certifies that 85 percent of its units--
(i) Are maintained in substantial compliance with Housing Quality
Standards;
(ii) Will be so maintained upon completion of modernization for
which funding has been awarded; or
(iii) Will be so maintained upon completion of modernization which
is likely to be funded;
(3) The HA certifies that such development--
(i) Is for replacement housing; or
(ii) Is required to comply with court orders or directions of the
Department;
(4) The HA certifies that it has demands for family housing not
satisfied by tenant-based Section 8 assistance for which it plans
developments of not more than 100 units; or
(5) In the case of elderly housing development, the HA certifies
that the use of such assistance will expand housing opportunities for
disabled persons.
4. Other Limitations on Incremental Public Housing Development
Section 201(a)(1) of the OCRA provides that housing units developed
with modernization funds are eligible for operating subsidies unless
the Department determines that such units do not meet other
requirements of the USHA. The USHA contains other limitations on the
use of modernization assistance for public housing development in
addition to those imposed by Section 5(j).
Section 14 of the USHA (which authorizes the public and Indian
housing modernization program), provides that the Department may
disapprove an HA's 5-year comprehensive plan for modernization where
the Department determines that the HA's action plan for performing
modernization work is plainly inappropriate to meeting the needs
identified in the comprehensive plan. HUD considers the use of
modernization funds to be ``plainly inappropriate'' under Section 14
where an HA would use such funds for incremental development (i.e., for
units other than replacement housing) while the HA has substantial
backlog modernization needs, unfunded emergency work, or work required
to comply with Federal laws (e.g., lead-based paint abatement or
Section 504 compliance) or court-ordered settlements at existing
developments. In such situations, an HA may not use modernization funds
for incremental public housing development, although it may use such
funds to meet replacement housing needs or to fulfill obligations under
a court-ordered settlement.
Section 9(a)(2) of the USHA permits the Department to make
operating assistance available only for public housing units that have
been ``developed'' under an ACC authorized by Section 5 of the USHA.
Section 5 authorizes the Department to make grants to HAs for the
development of public housing. Under Section 201(a) of the OCRA, an HA
may now also use Section 14 modernization funds for Section 5
development activities. Thus, under the USHA, the Department's
contribution of operating assistance to an HA is predicated on the
Department's contribution of funds for development, regardless of
whether such funds were allocated to the HA under authority of Section
5 or Section 14.
By the same reasoning, an HA may not use a nominal amount of
Federal capital assistance simply to trigger operating assistance
eligibility for incremental (i.e., other than replacement) units. As
outlined above, only units ``developed'' under Section 5 are eligible
for operating assistance under Section 9. Therefore, it would subvert
the intent of the statute and the structure of the program to commit
public housing operating assistance in a manner that is essentially
independent of public housing capital assistance, or for purposes other
than expansion of low-income housing resources (e.g., to relieve State
or local jurisdictions of responsibility for their low-income housing
programs).
The Department does not intend, at this time, to set firm rules as
to the level or nature of capital investment that an HA must make in
order for housing units to be eligible for public housing operating
assistance. Rather, the critical test for determining operating subsidy
eligibility should be whether such units could have been developed but
for the HA's investment of Federal capital funds. In general, the
Department will consider this test to have been met, without further
scrutiny, if the HA contributes Federal funds amounting to at least 50
percent of the HUD-computed total development cost of the units,
including acquisition and rehabilitation costs. An HA may meet this
test in all other cases (i.e., where it contributes less than 50
percent of the total development cost) only where it demonstrates to
HUD's satisfaction that the HA's investment of Federal capital funds is
necessary to leverage other, non-Federal capital funds essential to
development, and will not be used merely to trigger eligibility for
Federal operating assistance.
The Department is aware that these restrictions preclude an HA from
receiving Federal public housing operating subsidies for incremental
housing units that would be donated to the HA, or for which the HA
would contribute a nominal amount of capital funds. However, HUD
believes that this result is required by existing law and that a
different outcome would require further Congressional action.
Finally, HAs should also be aware that public housing development
activity under Section 5 of the USHA, including that funded with
modernization assistance, is subject to the public housing development
rule at 24 CFR part 941. The Department intends to issue a new,
streamlined development rule in the near future. IHAs are subject to
the development
[[Page 41644]]
regulations found in 24 CFR part 950, subpart C.
The Department is also issuing a separate notice that provides
additional processing guidance, including accounting procedures, on
using modernization funds for development activities and using
development funds for modernization activities.
5. Operating Subsidy Eligibility
Subject to the limitations above, low-income and very low-income
units assisted under Section 14(q)(1) of the USHA are eligible for
operating subsidies, unless (as provided in the OCRA) the Department
determines that such units or developments do not meet other
requirements of the USHA.
6. Use of Modernization and Development Assistance for Operations
An HA may also use up to 10 percent of the modernization and
development assistance it has received in FY 1996, or in any prior
fiscal year, for operating expenses of projects included under Section
9 of the USHA. An HA may implement this provision by requisitioning
funds from its modernization (or development) grant program and
reflecting the funds for operations as a cost in its modernization (or
development) plan. Any such funds may be used by an HA for any eligible
expenditure included in an approved operating budget.
Except for modernization and development assistance used for
operating subsidy purposes, modernization and development assistance
for a fiscal year shall principally be used, states the OCRA, for the
following activities: the physical improvement, replacement of public
housing, other capital purposes, and for associated management
improvements, and such other extraordinary purposes as may be approved
by the Department. In general, the Department considers assistance to
be used ``principally'' for the eligible activities described above in
this paragraph as long as at least 90 percent of the assistance is used
for such activities.
B. Assistance to Mixed-Income Developments
1. Eligible Entities and Forms of Assistance
The OCRA also amends Section 14(q)(2) of the USHA to permit HAs to
provide assistance to developments that include units other than public
housing units (``mixed-income developments''), in the form of a grant,
loan, operating assistance, or other form of investment. An HA may
provide such assistance to entities described in paragraphs (1) or (2),
below.
(1) A partnership, a limited liability company, or other legal
entity in which the HA or its affiliate is a general partner, managing
member, or otherwise participates in the activities of such entity. For
purposes of this paragraph, HUD will find that an HA ``otherwise
participates'' in the activities of an entity if the HA and the entity
have entered into a valid and enforceable regulatory or operating
agreement, which, among other things, (a) states the number and
characteristics of units in the development that will be made available
for occupancy by low-income and very low-income families, as well as
the duration and conditions of such availability, and (b) provides
binding assurances that the operation of such units will be in
accordance with public housing program requirements. The HA must
perform monitoring and oversight duties, including but not limited to,
periodic performance reviews, or provide for delivery of services and
programs to low- and very low-income residents in mixed-income
developments.
(2) Any entity which grants to the HA the option to purchase the
development within 20 years after initial occupancy in accordance with
certain rules under the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, as set
forth in Section 42(i)(7) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended.
2. Units for Low-Income and Very Low-Income Occupancy
Units in any such mixed-income development must be made available
for periods of not less than 20 years, by master contract or by
individual lease, for occupancy by low-income and very low-income
families whom the HA refers (either directly, or through any other
tenant selection and assignment system now permissible under public and
Indian housing program rules) to the development. The period of
availability may be extended by HUD, on a case-by-case basis, if the
level of public benefit is not commensurate with the amount and kind of
assistance provided. Except as otherwise approved by HUD, the number of
units in such a development that must be made available must be in the
same proportion to the total number of units in the development that
the total financial commitment provided by the HA bears to the value of
the total financial commitment in the development, provided that the
number of units for occupancy by low-income and very low-income
families must not be less than the number of units that could have been
developed under the conventional public and Indian housing program with
the assistance involved. In making this determination, the financial
commitment provided by the HA to cover the cost of putting an existing
public housing site in buildable condition, such as relocation,
demolition, and site remediation, should not be included in the
proportionality calculation.
3. Local Real Estate Taxes
A mixed-income development may elect to have all units subject only
to the applicable local real estate taxes, notwithstanding that the
low-income units assisted by public and Indian housing funds would
otherwise be subject to Section 6(d) of the USHA, which relates to
local real estate tax exemptions and payments in lieu of taxes for
public housing units.
4. Deviations from the United States Housing Act
Section 201(a) of the OCRA adds a new Subsection 14(q)(4) to the
USHA, which directs HUD to promulgate regulations providing guidelines
and procedures under which an entity that owns or operates a mixed-
income development may deviate from various requirements. In
particular, the OCRA states that a contract between an HA and such an
entity may provide that, in the event the HA is unable to fulfill its
contractual obligations with respect to the public housing units in the
development (as a result of a reduction in operating subsidy
appropriations, or any other change in applicable law), then that
entity may deviate, under procedures and requirements to be developed
through regulations by HUD, from otherwise applicable restrictions
under the USHA regarding rents, income eligibility, and other areas of
public housing management. Such deviations may be made with respect to
a portion or all of the public housing units in the development, to the
extent necessary to preserve the viability of those units while
maintaining the low-income character of the units, to the maximum
extent practicable. HUD expects to provide regulations in the near
future.
C. Suspension of One-For-One Replacement Housing Requirement
Section 201(b) of the OCRA extends, up to September 30, 1996, the
suspension of the one-for-one replacement housing requirement that was
made in the Fiscal Year 1995 Rescissions Act. Therefore, except as
provided below with respect to priority replacement housing, there is
no
[[Page 41645]]
replacement housing requirement for public housing demolition,
disposition, or homeownership conversion applications that are approved
by the Secretary, or for other consolidation and relocation activities
of HAs undertaken before September 30, 1996. In such cases, HAs are no
longer required to provide replacement housing, and HUD is not
obligated to commit the funds necessary to carry out the replacement
housing plan.
The OCRA also amends Section 18(f) of the USHA, which was added by
the 1995 Rescissions Act, and which describes the circumstances under
which replacement housing units for public housing units demolished may
be built on the original public housing site or in the same
neighborhood. The OCRA amendment provides that ``no one may rely on
[Section 18(f)] as the basis for reconsidering a final order of a court
issued, or a settlement approved, by a court.''
III. Streamlining Section 8 Tenant-Based Assistance
The Department issued Notice PIH 26-23 (HA) on May 1, 1996
providing detailed instructions to HAs on implementing the Section 8
administrative provisions. While the scope of this Notice is described
briefly below, HAs should review the Notice in its entirety.
A. ``Take-One, Take-All'' Suspension
Section 203(a) of the OCRA suspends Section 8(t) of the USHA for FY
1996. Section 8(t) required that an owner who entered into a Section 8
HAP contract on behalf of any tenant in a multifamily housing project
could not refuse to lease certain units in all multifamily projects of
the owner, if the proximate cause of the refusal was that the family
was a certificate or voucher holder.
B. Suspension of Owner Termination Notices to HUD
Section 203(b) of the OCRA amends Section 8(c)(9) of the USHA so
that the owner termination notice provisions do not apply to HAP
contracts under the certificate and voucher program for FY 1996.
C. ``Endless Lease'' Elimination
Section 203(c) of the OCRA amends Sections 8(d)(1)(B)(ii) and (iii)
of the USHA for FY 1996. Section 8(d)(1)(B)(ii) provides that the owner
may not terminate a Section 8 tenancy except for serious or repeated
lease violations, for violation of applicable Federal, State, or local
law, or for other good cause. Section 8(d)(1)(B)(iii) provides that
certain criminal activity is grounds for the tenancy termination. The
OCRA amends the law to confirm that the above cited statutory
requirements for termination of tenancy only apply to a termination
that occurs ``during the term of the lease.''
IV. Public Housing/Section 8 Moving to Work Demonstration
Section 204 of the OCRA creates the Public Housing/Moving to Work
Demonstration (``MTW'') in order to give HAs and HUD the flexibility to
design and test various approaches for providing and administering
housing assistance that: reduce cost and achieve greater cost
effectiveness in Federal expenditures; give incentives to families with
children when the head of household is working, seeking work, or is
preparing for work by participating in job training, educational
programs, or programs that assist people to obtain employment and
become economically self-sufficient; and increase housing choices for
low-income families.
HUD will implement MTW in two phases. The first, entitled Jobs-
Plus, will be a collaborative effort of HUD, the Manpower Demonstration
Research Corporation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. Jobs-Plus will
target six to ten public housing developments for families with a goal
of substantially raising employment levels by providing saturation-
level services to residents. The impact of Jobs-Plus will be closely
monitored in order to develop replicable models for increasing
employment levels among public housing residents. HUD will use the $5
million in technical assistance funds appropriated in the OCRA to
leverage additional funding from private foundations. Requests for
expressions of interest in Jobs-Plus were mailed to certain HAs deemed
to be the most promising for this aspect of the demonstration on June
14, 1996.
The second phase of MTW will be implemented by selecting
approximately 20 to 25 high-performing HAs to design innovative
programs for providing housing assistance and related services to low-
income families. Selected HAs may combine public housing operating and
modernization funds and Section 8 assistance into a single pool of
resources. They may also seek HUD waivers from most provisions of the
United States Housing Act, permitting unprecedented flexibility in
program design and implementation.
The Department will issue an invitation to apply for this phase of
MTW in the near future.
V. Extension Period for Sharing Public Housing Utility Cost Savings
With HAs
Section 218 of the OCRA removes the limitation on the period during
which HUD may share utility cost savings with HAs. The Act amends
Section 9(a)(3)(B)(i) of the USHA by deleting the words ``for a period
not to exceed six years''.
Consequently, HAs that take actions to reduce the rate paid for
utilities (including water, fuel oil, electricity and gas) now will be
able to retain half of the savings for as long as the savings last.
Examples of such actions are the well-head purchase of natural gas,
administrative appeals, or legal action (beyond routine public
participation in general ratemaking proceedings leading to broadly
applicable rate adjustments). Under these circumstances, HAs that have
reached the end of the six year period previously permitted for the
sharing of the resulting rate savings may now continue to share such
savings on a fifty/fifty basis. There is no longer a specified time
limitation on the sharing of rate saving arrangements.
HAs which had reached the six year time limit as of September 30,
1995 may reinstate the fifty/fifty rate savings with HUD for the fiscal
years ending September 30, 1996 and thereafter. Other HAs contemplating
entering into such arrangements may do so with the knowledge that the
sharing of the savings will continue without the specific six year time
limit.
This change is being made not only for public housing but also for
Indian housing.
VI. Repeal of Frost-Leland
Section 220 of the OCRA repeals section 415 of the fiscal year 1988
appropriations act (often referred to as ``Frost-Leland''), which
prohibited the use of any funds appropriated under any act for any
fiscal year for demolishing George Loving Place, Edgar Ward Place or
Elmer Scott Place in Dallas, Texas, or Allen Parkway Village in
Houston, Texas.
VII. Minimum Rent Waiver Authority
Section 230 of the OCRA permits HUD or HAs to waive the minimum
rent requirement to provide a transition period for affected families.
The term of the waiver approved may be retroactive, but may not apply
for more than three months with respect to any family. The Department
issued further guidance on this provision by Notice PIH 96-42 (HA) on
June 20, 1996.
[[Page 41646]]
Dated: August 5, 1996.
Kevin Marchman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.
[FR Doc. 96-20361 Filed 8-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-33-P
