83 FR 12806 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Pre-Purchase Homeownership Counseling Demonstration and Impact Evaluation
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 57 (March 23, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 57 (March 23, 2018)
| Page Range | 12806-12808 | |
| FR Document | 2018-05946 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 12806-12808] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-05946] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-7007-N-03] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Pre-Purchase Homeownership Counseling Demonstration and Impact Evaluation AGENCY: Office of Policy Development and Research, HUD. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment. DATES: Comments Due Date: May 22, 2018. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street [[Page 12807]] SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone (202) 402-5534 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410-5000; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone (202) 402-5535 (this is not a toll- free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the proposed collection of information described in Section A. A. Overview of Information Collection Title of Information Collection: Impact Evaluation of the Pre- Purchase Housing Counseling Demonstration. OMB Approval Number: 2528-0293. Type of Request: Revision. Form Number: None. Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is conducting a national study on the effectiveness of pre-purchase homeownership counseling services. This request covers four data collection activities: (1) Administering a final follow-up survey to study participants; (2) extending OMB approval #2528-0293 so that the study can continue to collect updated tracking information from study participants; and (3) extending OMB approval #2528-0293 so that the study can continue to collect consent from the co-borrowers of study participants; and (4) extending OMB approval #2528-0293 so that the study can continue to collect loan origination and servicing data from lenders. The final follow-up survey will be administered to study participants approximately 48 months after they completed the baseline survey. The final survey will provide a comparison of study participants' characteristics from the baseline survey and allow the study to better understand, document, and explain the impacts of first- time homebuyer education and counseling. As part of OMB approval #2528- 0293, the study collects updated study participant contact information to locate study participants for the final follow-up survey. Maintaining contact with study participants over time is critical to minimizing attrition and ensuring high response rates to the follow-up surveys. Additionally, the collection of consent from study participants' co-borrowers is necessary to allow the study to collect data related to the characteristics and performance of study participants' mortgage loans. Lastly, as part of OMB approval #2528- 0293, the study collects study participants' loan origination and service tracking data from the study's three participating lenders. Respondents (i.e. affected public): Up to 5,854 study participants; approximately 1,000 co-borrowers; and, staff at 3 lenders. The average time per study participant (up to 5,854 study participants) to complete the final follow-up survey is 30 minutes. The study mails study participant tracking letters twice per year. The average time for study participants' review of the letters and return of the tracking form is 5 minutes. The collection of co-borrower consent involves including the co-borrower consent form in the study's regular tracking letters, along with a request for the co-borrower to review, sign, and return the written consent form. For co-borrowers who do not return the written form, the study will collect consent verbally at the time of the interim survey. The study estimates that approximately 1,000 study participants will have co-borrowers. The co- borrowers' review of the co-borrower consent information and completion of the consent process is estimated to require approximately 5 minutes per co-borrower. The average time for lenders to prepare study participants' loan origination and performance data for the study team is 60 minutes. The study team will ask for this data semi-annually from each lender during the next 3 years from each lender. The total burden for the study is 3,992 hours: 3,903 hours for study participants, 83 hours for co-borrowers, and 6 hours for lenders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Burden Number of Frequency Responses hours per Annual Hourly Information collection respondents of response per annum response burden cost per Annual cost (mins) hours response -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Final Follow-up Survey....................................... 5,854 1 5,854 30 2,927 * $27.70 $81,078 Tracking Letter.............................................. 5,854 2 11,708 5 976 * 27.70 27,045 Co-borrower Consent Form..................................... 1,000 1 1,000 5 83 * 27.70 2,310 Loan origination and performance data: Lenders............... 3 2 6 60 6 * 35 210 Total.................................................... 12,711 ........... ........... ........... 3,992 ........... 110,643 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * The average income that our study participants received in the last 12 months is $57,811. This estimate of average income is based on responses to the Short-Term Follow-Up Survey and was weighted to represent the full study sample using sample weights that adjust for follow-up survey nonresponse. Thus, the hourly rate for our study participants is estimated at $27.70 (using the U.S. Office of Personnel's national standard of 2,087 hours per year for a full-time employee). B. Solicitation of Public Comment This notice solicits comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions. Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35. [[Page 12808]] Dated: March 12, 2018. Todd M. Richardson, Acting General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research. [FR Doc. 2018-05946 Filed 3-22-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
![12806 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
name, character, or use test in making a subassemblies, two of which involved HOLDING:
substantial transformation determination. See processing in Japan. All the engineering, Based on the facts provided, the imported
Ran-Paige Co., Inc. v. United States, 35 Fed. development, design, and artwork were fully assembled printer subassemblies from
Cl. 117, 121 (1996); Belcrest Linens, 741 F.2d developed in Japan. The multifunctional Japan and Vietnam will not be substantially
at 1371; Uniroyal, 3 C.I.T. at 226, 542 F. printer control unit was described as the transformed into finished monochrome laser
Supp. at 1031. The court has sometimes brain of the model. While some of the printers by the processes that take place in
compared the degree of operations in pre components were installed on the control the United States. However, the finished
versus post-importation processing to printer board in China, the flash read-only monochrome laser printers will be
evaluate whether a substantial transformation memory which included firmware developed considered a product of Japan for purposes
occurred. For example, in Nat’l Hand Tool, in Japan, was manufactured in Japan. The of U.S. Government procurement. With
the court contrasted the pre-importation other unit that involved production in Japan
respect to the Brother replacement toner
processing of cold forming and hot-forging was the process unit, that housed a drum
cartridges, the country of origin will be
and noted that it required more complicated produced in Japan. The process unit was
Japan.
functions than post-importation processing, assembled in China. The other subassemblies
Notice of this final determination will be
which included heat treatment and were assembled in China but certain key
given in the Federal Register, as required by
electroplating. 16 C.I.T. at 311; see also components of the subassemblies originated
19 C.F.R. § 177.29. Any party-at-interest other
Uniroyal, 3 C.I.T. at 224-227, 542 F.Supp. at in Japan. The final assembly was performed
than the party which requested this final
1029-31 (comparing a post-importation in Japan. Based on the totality of the
determination may request, pursuant to 19
‘‘minor manufacturing or combining process’’ circumstances discussed in this ruling, CBP
C.F.R. § 177.31, that CBP reexamine the
in which imported shoe uppers were agreed that the Jupiter II J-models were
matter anew and issue a new final
attached to outsoles with ‘‘complex considered a product of Japan).
determination. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R.
manufacturing processes’’ that occurred pre- Similar to HQ H018467, HQ W563491, and
§ 177.30, any party-at-interest may, within 30
importation when the imported uppers were HQ H020516, in this case, the main PCB
days of publication of the Federal Register
produced). In such cases, CBP has focused on assembly is the motherboard of the printers,
Notice referenced above, seek judicial review
the importance of other components to make which communicates with the PC, houses the
of this final determination before the Court
an origin determination. memory in the printer, and forms the image
of International Trade.
For example, in HQ H018467, dated printed on the page. It also includes key
January 4, 2008, CBP was asked to consider functional circuits, including mechanical Sincerely,
two manufacturing scenarios for multi- control and printing data processing. Monika R. Brenner
function printers. In one scenario, Additionally, the overall structure and each for
manufacturing took place in two countries; in functional circuit of the ASIC, the main Alice A. Kipel, Executive Director
the other, it took place in three countries. In component of PCB, will be designed in Japan Regulations and Rulings
the two-country scenario, 18 units were and manufactured by third-party suppliers in Office of Trade
manufactured in the Philippines from Japan. The firmware itself provides the [FR Doc. 2018–05964 Filed 3–22–18; 8:45 am]
components produced in various countries. control program for the printers and enables
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
The units were sent to Japan where the the main PCB assembly to function as the
system control board, engine control board, electronic ‘‘brains’’ of the printers by
OPC drum unit, and the toner reservoir were controlling all printer functions. The main
manufactured and incorporated into the PCB assembly (consisting of approximately DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
units. The control boards were programmed 1,028 components) and the firmware, URBAN DEVELOPMENT
in Japan with Japanese firmware that produced in Japan, a TAA-designated
controlled the user interface, imaging, country, account for a significant percentage [Docket No. FR–7007–N–03]
memories, and the mechanics of the of the total subassembly cost. Together, the
machines. The machines were then inspected firmware and the main PCB, which serve 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information
and adjusted as necessary. CBP found that major functions and are high in value, Collection: Pre-Purchase
the manufacturing operations in Japan constitute the essential character of the Homeownership Counseling
substantially transformed the Philippine printers. We note that in the three rulings Demonstration and Impact Evaluation
units such that Japan was the country of referenced above, the key components and
origin of the multifunctional machines. In the firmware were manufactured and AGENCY: Office of Policy Development
making the determination (and in addition to developed in the same country in which the and Research, HUD.
the finding that operations performed in final assembly took place. This is not the case ACTION: Notice.
Japan were meaningful and complex and here. However, considering that the
resulted in an article of commerce with a production of the printer occurs in three SUMMARY: The Department of Housing
new name, character and use), CBP took into countries, we find the last substantial and Urban Development (HUD) is
consideration the fact that the system control transformation to occur in Japan, given that seeking approval from the Office of
board, the engine control board, and the the essential character of the printer is made Management and Budget (OMB) for the
firmware, which were very important to the in Japan. Accordingly, we find that Japan is
functionality of the machines, were information collection described below.
the country of origin of the monochrome
manufactured in Japan. laser printers. In accordance with the Paperwork
Similarly, in HQ W563491, dated February Reduction Act, HUD is requesting
8, 2007, CBP was asked to consider a two- Replacement toner cartridges: comment from all interested parties on
country scenario where all of the Finally, counsel argues that Japan is the the proposed collection of information.
subassemblies of the multifunction machine country of origin for the Brother replacement The purpose of this notice is to allow for
were made in China, with the exception of toner cartridges. Several CBP rulings are 60 days of public comment.
the controller unit subassembly, application cited in counsel’s submission. HQ H251592,
DATES: Comments Due Date: May 22,
specific integrated circuits and firmware, dated June 24, 2014, describes an AIO
which were made in Japan. In that case, the cartridge with three main components: 1) 2018.
final assembly, testing, and the final toner powder; 2) developer unit; and, 3) ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
inspection were done in Japan. Although cleaning unit. In HQ H251592, CBP
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
invited to submit comments regarding
CBP stated that the product assembly in determined that the processing in Japan
this proposal. Comments should refer to
Japan was also complex and meaningful, CBP substantially transformed the non-Japanese
focused on the origin of key components in components. We find that a similar rationale the proposal by name and/or OMB
finding that the country of origin was Japan. can be applied to Brother’s replacement Control Number and should be sent to:
See also HQ H020516, dated November 7, cartridges. Therefore, it is the opinion of this Anna P. Guido, Reports Management
2008 (CBP considered Sharp Andromeda II J office that the country of origin of the Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing
models composed of eight main replacement toner cartridges will be Japan. and Urban Development, 451 7th Street
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:54 Mar 22, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_12863/page/1.svg)
![12808 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2018 / Notices
Dated: March 12, 2018. requirements and minimize the public’s from AWEA on that presumption but
Todd M. Richardson, reporting burden. It also helps the received no response.
Acting General Deputy Assistant Secretary public understand our information We are again soliciting comments on
for Policy Development and Research. collection requirements and provide the the proposed ICR that is described
[FR Doc. 2018–05946 Filed 3–22–18; 8:45 am] requested data in the desired format. below. We are especially interested in
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P A Federal Register notice with a 60- public comment addressing the
day public comment period soliciting following issues: (1) Is the collection
comments on this collection of necessary to the proper functions of the
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR information was published on October Service; (2) will this information be
10, 2017 (82 FR 47021). The following processed and used in a timely manner;
Fish and Wildlife Service comment was received: (3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
Comment #1: Received from Michael (4) how might the Service enhance the
[FWS–HQ–ES–2018–N019; quality, utility, and clarity of the
FXHC11220900000–167–FF09E33000; OMB Speerschneider, Senior Director,
Permitting Policy and Environmental information to be collected; and (5) how
Control Number 1018–0148]
Affairs, and Gene Grace, Senior might the Service minimize the burden
Agency Information Collection Counsel, American Wind Energy of this collection on the respondents,
Activities; Submission to the Office of Association, on December 11, 2017, via including through the use of
Management and Budget for Review email. information technology.
Comments that you submit in
and Approval; Land-Based Wind The American Wind Energy
response to this notice are a matter of
Energy Guidelines Association (AWEA) comments were
public record. Before including your
limited to the accuracy of the estimate
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, address, phone number, email address,
of the burden for the collection of
Interior. or other personal identifying
information detailed therein. They
ACTION: Notice of information collection; information in your comment, you
provided the Service with an estimate of
request for comment. should be aware that your entire
the paperwork and respondent burden
comment—including your personal
SUMMARY: In accordance with the required for the wind industry to collect identifying information—may be made
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the data associated with the voluntary publicly available at any time. While
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, are Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines you can ask us in your comment to
proposing to revise an existing (‘‘Guidelines’’) on a per project basis. withhold your personal identifying
information collection. Based on a survey of their member information from public review, we
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
companies involved in the development cannot guarantee that we will be able to
submit comments on or before April 23, of wind energy facilities, they believe do so.
2018. the updated estimates are a more Abstract: As wind energy production
accurate reflection of the work increased, both developers and wildlife
ADDRESSES: Send written comments on
necessary to adhere to the Guidelines, agencies recognized the need for a
this information collection request (ICR) and respectfully requested that the
to the Office of Management and system to evaluate and address the
Service utilize this estimate, combined potential negative impacts of wind
Budget’s Desk Officer for the with other assumed costs (e.g.,
Department of the Interior by email at energy projects on species of concern.
government agency costs) in this and As a result, the Service worked with the
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov; or via any other analysis of the Guidelines
facsimile to (202) 395–5806. Please wind energy industry, conservation
going forward. Rather than have nongovernmental organizations, Federal
provide a copy of your comments to the individual companies submit their
Service Information Collection and State agencies, Tribes, and
respective data with respect to the academia to develop the voluntary
Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and estimate burden hours related to the
Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Guidelines, AWEA submitted (Guidelines; http://www.fws.gov/
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– aggregated data and, therefore, chose not
3803 (mail); or by email to Info_Coll@ windenergy) to provide a structured,
to include identifying information for scientific process for addressing wildlife
fws.gov. Please reference OMB Control any of their members that supplied the
Number 1018–0148 in the subject line of conservation concerns at all stages of
data. land-based wind energy development.
your comments.
FWS Response to Comment #1: The Released in 2012, the Guidelines
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Service thanks AWEA for the useful promote effective communication
request additional information about comments that they provided on this among wind energy developers and
this ICR, contact Madonna L. Baucum, information collection, and specifically Federal, State, Tribal, and local
Service Information Collection on the estimate of the burden hours and conservation agencies. When used in
Clearance Officer, by email at Info_ expenditures necessary to adhere to the concert with appropriate regulatory
Coll@fws.gov, or by telephone at (703) voluntary Guidelines. We used this tools, the Guidelines are the best
358–2503. You may also view the ICR information to update the estimated practical approach for conserving
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ burden, noting that there are significant species of concern.
PRAMain. differences between the Service’s The Guidelines discuss various risks
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In burden estimate developed several years to species of concern from wind energy
accordance with the Paperwork ago, and AWEA’s current estimate. We projects, including collisions with wind
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the assume that these differences are a turbines and associated infrastructure;
general public and other Federal reflection of the wide range and loss and degradation of habitat from
agencies with an opportunity to variability in the size and degree of turbines and infrastructure;
comment on new, proposed, revised, complexity of commercial-scale wind fragmentation of large habitat blocks
and continuing collections of energy projects, and that changes in cost into smaller segments that may not
information. This helps us assess the reflect that variability. We attempted to support sensitive species; displacement
impact of our information collection obtain further clarification and feedback and behavioral changes; and indirect
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:54 Mar 22, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_12863/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-11-01 08:53:49
Document Modified: 2018-11-01 08:53:49
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice. | |
| Dates | Comments Due Date: May 22, 2018. | |
| Contact | Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410-5000; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone (202) 402-5535 (this is not a toll- free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 12806 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR