83 FR 53282 - Statutorily Mandated Designation of Difficult Development Areas and Qualified Census Tracts for 2019
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 204 (October 22, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 204 (October 22, 2018)
| Page Range | 53282-53288 | |
| FR Document | 2018-23000 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 204 (Monday, October 22, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 53282-53288] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-23000] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-6129-N-01] Statutorily Mandated Designation of Difficult Development Areas and Qualified Census Tracts for 2019 AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research, HUD. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This document designates ``Difficult Development Areas'' (DDAs) and ``Qualified Census Tracts'' (QCTs) for purposes of the Low- Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 42, as enacted by the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) makes new DDA and QCT designations annually. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on how areas are designated and on geographic definitions, contact Michael K. Hollar, Senior Economist, Economic Development and Public Finance Division, Office of Policy Development and Research, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 8216, Washington, DC 20410-6000; telephone number 202-402-5878, or send an email to Michael.K.Hollar@hud.gov. For specific legal questions pertaining to Section 42, contact Branch 5, Office of the Associate Chief Counsel, Passthroughs and Special Industries, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224; telephone number 202-317- 4137, fax number 202-317-6731. For questions about the ``HUBZone'' program, contact Mariana Pardo, Director, HUBZone Program, Office of Government Contracting and Business Development, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW, Suite 8800, Washington, DC 20416; telephone number 202-205-2985, fax number 202-481-6443, or send an email to hubzone@sba.gov. (These are not toll-free telephone numbers.) A text telephone is available for persons with hearing or speech impairments at 800-877-8339. Additional copies of this [[Page 53283]] notice are available through HUD User at 800-245-2691 for a small fee to cover duplication and mailing costs. Copies Available Electronically: This notice and additional information about DDAs and QCTs are available electronically on the internet at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/qct.html. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. This Notice Under 26 U.S.C. 42(d)(5)(B)(iii), for purposes of the LIHTC, the Secretary of HUD must designate DDAs, which are areas with high construction, land, and utility costs relative to area median gross income. This notice designates DDAs for each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The designations of DDAs in this notice are based on modified Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Small Area Fair Market Rents (Small Area FMRs), FY2018 nonmetropolitan county FMRs, FY2018 income limits, and 2010 Census population counts, as explained below. Similarly, under 26 U.S.C. 42(d)(5)(B)(ii), the Secretary of HUD must designate QCTs, which are areas where either 50 percent or more of the households have an income less than 60 percent of the area median gross income for such year or have a poverty rate of at least 25 percent. This notice designates QCTs based on new income and poverty data released in the American Community Survey (ACS). Specifically, HUD relies on the most recent three sets of ACS data to ensure that anomalous estimates, due to sampling, do not affect the QCT status of tracts. II. Data Used To Designate DDAs Data from the 2010 Census on total population of metropolitan areas, metropolitan Zip Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs), and nonmetropolitan areas are used in the designation of DDAs. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) first published new metropolitan area definitions incorporating 2010 Census data in OMB Bulletin No. 15-01 on July 15, 2015. FY2018 FMRs and FY2018 income limits used to designate DDAs are based on these metropolitan statistical area (MSA) definitions, with modifications to account for substantial differences in rental housing markets (and, in some cases, median income levels) within MSAs. Small Area FMRs are calculated for the ZCTAs, or portions of ZCTAs within the metropolitan areas defined by OMB Bulletin No. 15- 01. III. Data Used To Designate QCTs Data from the 2010 Census on total population of census tracts, metropolitan areas, and the nonmetropolitan parts of states are used in the designation of QCTs. The FY2018 income limits used to designate QCTs are based on these MSA definitions with modifications to account for substantial differences in rental housing markets (and in some cases median income levels) within MSAs. This QCT designation uses the OMB metropolitan area definitions published in OMB Bulletin No. 15-01 on July 15, 2015, without modification for purposes of evaluating how many census tracts can be designated under the population cap, but uses the HUD-modified definitions and their associated area median incomes for determining QCT eligibility. Because the 2010 Decennial Census did not include questions on respondent household income, HUD uses ACS data to designate QCTs. The ACS tabulates data collected over 5 years to provide estimates of socioeconomic variables for small areas containing fewer than 65,000 persons, such as census tracts. Due to sample-related anomalies in estimates from year to year, HUD utilizes three sets of ACS tabulations to ensure that anomalous estimates do not affect QCT status. IV. Background The U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and its Internal Revenue Service (IRS) are authorized to interpret and enforce the provisions of the LIHTC found at IRC Section 42. In order to assist in understanding HUD's mandated designation of DDAs and QCTs for use in administering IRC Section 42, a summary of the section is provided below. The following summary does not purport to bind Treasury or the IRS in any way, nor does it purport to bind HUD, since HUD has authority to interpret or administer the IRC only in instances where it receives explicit statutory delegation. V. Summary of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit A. Determining Eligibility The LIHTC is a tax incentive intended to increase the availability of low-income rental housing. IRC Section 42 provides an income tax credit to certain owners of newly constructed or substantially rehabilitated low-income rental housing projects. The dollar amount of the LIHTC available for allocation by each state (credit ceiling) is limited by population. Each state is allowed a credit ceiling based on a statutory formula indicated at IRC Section 42(h)(3). States may carry forward unallocated credits derived from the credit ceiling for one year; however, to the extent such unallocated credits are not used by then, the credits go into a national pool to be redistributed to states as additional credit. State and local housing agencies allocate the state's credit ceiling among low-income housing buildings whose owners have applied for the credit. Besides IRC Section 42 credits derived from the credit ceiling, states may also provide IRC Section 42 credits to owners of buildings based on the percentage of certain building costs financed by tax-exempt bond proceeds. Credits provided under the tax-exempt bond ``volume cap'' do not reduce the credits available from the credit ceiling. The credits allocated to a building are based on the cost of units placed in service as low-income units under particular minimum occupancy and maximum rent criteria. Prior to the enactment of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 (Act), under IRC Section 42(h), a building was required to meet one of two tests to be eligible for the LIHTC; either: (1) 20 percent of the units must be rent-restricted and occupied by tenants with incomes no higher than 50 percent of the Area Median Gross Income (AMGI), or (2) 40 percent of the units must be rent-restricted and occupied by tenants with incomes no higher than 60 percent of AMGI. A unit is ``rent-restricted'' if the gross rent, including an allowance for tenant-paid utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the imputed income limitation (i.e., 50 percent or 60 percent of AMGI) applicable to that unit. The rent and occupancy thresholds remain in effect for at least 15 years, and building owners are required to enter into agreements to maintain the low-income character of the building for at least an additional 15 years. The Act added a third test, the average income test. See Sec. 42(g)(1), as amended by section 103(a)(1), Division T, of the Act. A building meets the minimum requirements of the average income test if 40 percent or more (25 percent or more in the case of a project located in a high cost housing area as described in IRS Section 142(d)(6)) of the residential units in such project are both rent-restricted and occupied by individuals whose income does not exceed the imputed income limitation designated by the taxpayer with respect to the respective unit. The taxpayer designates the imputed income limitation for each unit. The designated imputed income limitation of any unit is determined in 10-percentage-point increments, and may be designated as [[Page 53284]] 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, or 80 percent of area median gross income. The average of the imputed income limitations designated must not exceed 60 percent of area median gross income. See Sec. 42(g)(1)(C), as amended by section 103(a)(2), Division T, of the Act. B. Calculating the LIHTC The LIHTC reduces income tax liability dollar-for-dollar. It is taken annually for a term of 10 years and is intended to yield a present value of either: (1) 70 percent of the ``qualified basis'' for new construction or substantial rehabilitation expenditures that are not federally subsidized (as defined in IRC Section 42(i)(2)), or (2) 30 percent of the qualified basis for the cost of acquiring certain existing buildings or projects that are federally subsidized. The tax credit rates are determined monthly under procedures specified in IRC Section 42 and cannot be less than 9 percent for new buildings that are not federally subsidized. Individuals can use the credits up to a deduction equivalent of $25,000 (the actual maximum amount of credit that an individual can claim depends on the individual's marginal tax rate). For buildings placed in service after December 31, 2007, individuals can use the credits against the alternative minimum tax. Corporations, other than S or personal service corporations, can use the credits against ordinary income tax, and, for buildings placed in service after December 31, 2007, against the alternative minimum tax. These corporations also can deduct losses from the project. The qualified basis represents the product of the building's ``applicable fraction'' and its ``eligible basis.'' The applicable fraction is based on the number of low-income units in the building as a percentage of the total number of units, or based on the floor space of low-income units as a percentage of the total floor space of residential units in the building. The eligible basis is the adjusted basis attributable to acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction costs (depending on the type of LIHTC involved). These costs include amounts chargeable to a capital account that are incurred prior to the end of the first taxable year in which the qualified low-income building is placed in service or, at the election of the taxpayer, the end of the succeeding taxable year. In the case of buildings located in designated DDAs or designated QCTs, or buildings designated by the state agency, eligible basis can be increased up to 130 percent from what it would otherwise be. This means that the available credits also can be increased by up to 30 percent. For example, if a 70 percent credit is available, it effectively could be increased to as much as 91 percent (70 percent x 130 percent). C. Defining Difficult Development Areas (DDAs) and Qualified Census Tracts (QCTs) As stated above, IRC Section 42 defines a DDA as an area designated by the Secretary of HUD that has high construction, land, and utility costs relative to the AMGI. All designated DDAs in metropolitan areas (taken together) may not contain more than 20 percent of the aggregate population of all metropolitan areas, and all designated areas not in metropolitan areas may not contain more than 20 percent of the aggregate population of all nonmetropolitan areas. See 26 U.S.C. 42(d)(5)(B)(iii). Similarly, IRC Section 42 defines a QCT as an area designated by the Secretary of HUD where, for the most recent year for which census data are available on household income in such tract, either 50 percent or more of the households in the tract have an income which is less than 60 percent of the area median gross income or the tract's poverty rate is at least 25 percent. All designated QCTs in a single metropolitan area or nonmetropolitan area (taken together) may not contain more than 20 percent of the population of that metropolitan or nonmetropolitan area. Thus, unlike the restriction on DDA designations, QCTs are restricted by the total population of each individual area as opposed to the aggregate population across all metropolitan areas and nonmetropolitan areas. See 26 U.S.C. 42(d)(5)(B)(ii). IRC Section 42(d)(5)(B)(v) allows states to award an increase in basis up to 30 percent to buildings located outside of federally designated DDAs and QCTs if the increase is necessary to make the building financially feasible. This state discretion applies only to buildings allocated credits under the state housing credit ceiling and is not permitted for buildings receiving credits in connection with tax-exempt bonds. Rules for such designations shall be set forth in the LIHTC-allocating agencies' qualified allocation plans (QAPs). See 26 U.S.C. 42(m). VI. Explanation of HUD Designation Method A. 2019 Difficult Development Areas In developing the 2019 list of DDAs, as required by 26 U.S.C. 42(d)(5)(B)(iii), HUD compared housing costs with incomes. HUD used 2010 Census population for ZCTAs, and nonmetropolitan areas, and the MSA definitions, as published in OMB Bulletin 15-01 on July 15, 2015, with modifications, as described below. In keeping with past practice of basing the coming year's DDA designations on data from the preceding year, the basis for these comparisons is the FY2018 HUD income limits for very low-income households (very low-income limits, or VLILs), which are based on 50 percent of AMGI, and modified FMRs based on the FY2018 FMRs used for the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program. For metropolitan DDAs, HUD used Small Area FMRs based on three annual releases of ACS data, to compensate for statistical anomalies which affect estimates for some ZCTAs. For non-metropolitan DDAs, HUD used the FY2018 FMRs published on October 2, 2017 (83 FR 7205) as updated through February 20, 2018 (83 FR 7205). In formulating the FY2018 FMRs and VLILs, HUD modified the current OMB definitions of MSAs to account for differences in rents among areas within each current MSA that were in different FMR areas under definitions used in prior years. HUD formed these ``HUD Metro FMR Areas'' (HMFAs) in cases where one or more of the parts of newly defined MSAs were previously in separate FMR areas. All counties added to metropolitan areas are treated as HMFAs with rents and incomes based on their own county data, where available. HUD no longer requires recent-mover rents to differ by five percent or more in order to form a new HMFA. All HMFAs are contained entirely within MSAs. All nonmetropolitan counties are outside of MSAs and are not broken up by HUD for purposes of setting FMRs and VLILs. (Complete details on HUD's process for determining FY2018 FMR areas and FMRs are available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr.html#2018. Complete details on HUD's process for determining FY2018 income limits are available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html#2018.) HUD's unit of analysis for designating metropolitan DDAs consists of ZCTAs, whose Small Area FMRs are compared to metropolitan VLILs. For purposes of computing VLILs in metropolitan areas, HUD considers entire MSAs in cases where these were not broken up into HMFAs for purposes of computing VLILs; and HMFAs within the MSAs that were broken up for such purposes. Hereafter in this notice, the unit of analysis for designating metropolitan DDAs will be called the ZCTA, and the unit of analysis for nonmetropolitan [[Page 53285]] DDAs will be the nonmetropolitan county or county equivalent area. The procedure used in making the DDA designations follows: 1. Calculate FMR-to-Income Ratios. For each metropolitan ZCTA and each nonmetropolitan county, HUD calculated a ratio of housing costs to income. HUD used a modified FY2018 two-bedroom Small Area FMR for ZCTAs, the FY2018 two-bedroom FMR as published for non-metropolitan counties, and the FY2018 four-person VLIL for this calculation. The modified FY2018 two-bedroom Small Area FMRs for ZCTAs differ from the FY2018 Small Area FMRs in four ways. First, HUD did not limit the Small Area FMR to 150 percent of its metropolitan area FMR. Second, HUD did not limit annual decreases in Small Area FMRs to ten percent, which was first applied in the FY2018 FMR calculations. Third, HUD adjusted the Small Area FMRs in New York City using the New York City Housing and Vacancy Survey, which is conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, to adjust for the effect of local rent control and stabilization regulations. No other jurisdictions have provided HUD with data that could be used to adjust Small Area FMRs for rent control or stabilization regulations.\1\ Finally, the Small Area FMRs are not limited to the State non-metropolitan minimum FMR. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ HUD encourages other jurisdictions with rent control laws that affect rents paid by recent movers into existing units to contact HUD about what data might be provided or collected to adjust Small Area FMRs in those jurisdictions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The numerator of the ratio, representing the development cost of housing, was the area's FY2018 FMR, or Small Area FMR in metropolitan areas. In general, the FMR is based on the 40th-percentile gross rent paid by recent movers to live in a two-bedroom rental unit. The denominator of the ratio, representing the maximum income of eligible tenants, was the monthly LIHTC income-based rent limit, which was calculated as 1/12 of 30 percent of 120 percent of the area's VLIL (where the VLIL was rounded to the nearest $50 and not allowed to exceed 80 percent of the AMGI in areas where the VLIL is adjusted upward from its 50 percent-of-AMGI base). 2. Sort Areas by Ratio and Exclude Unsuitable Areas. The ratios of the FMR, or Small Area FMR, to the LIHTC income-based rent limit were arrayed in descending order, separately, for ZCTAs and for nonmetropolitan counties. ZCTAs with populations less than 100 were excluded in order to avoid designating areas unsuitable for residential development, such as ZCTAs containing airports. 3. Select Areas with Highest Ratios and Exclude QCTs. The DDAs are those areas with the highest ratios that cumulatively comprise 20 percent of the 2010 population of all metropolitan areas and all nonmetropolitan areas. For purposes of applying this population cap, HUD excluded the population in areas designated as 2019 QCTs. Thus, an area can be designated as a QCT or DDA, but not both. B. Application of Population Caps to DDA Determinations In identifying DDAs, HUD applied caps, or limitations, as noted above. The cumulative population of metropolitan DDAs cannot exceed 20 percent of the cumulative population of all metropolitan areas, and the cumulative population of nonmetropolitan DDAs cannot exceed 20 percent of the cumulative population of all nonmetropolitan areas. In applying these caps, HUD established procedures to deal with how to treat small overruns of the caps. The remainder of this section explains those procedures. In general, HUD stops selecting areas when it is impossible to choose another area without exceeding the applicable cap. The only exceptions to this policy are when the next eligible excluded area contains either a large absolute population or a large percentage of the total population, or the next excluded area's ranking ratio, as described above, was identical (to four decimal places) to the last area selected, and its inclusion resulted in only a minor overrun of the cap. Thus, for both the designated metropolitan and nonmetropolitan DDAs, there may be minimal overruns of the cap. HUD believes the designation of additional areas in the above examples of minimal overruns is consistent with the intent of the IRC. As long as the apparent excess is small due to measurement errors, some latitude is justifiable, because it is impossible to determine whether the 20 percent cap has been exceeded. Despite the care and effort involved in a Decennial Census, the Census Bureau and all users of the data recognize that the population counts for a given area and for the entire country are not precise. Therefore, the extent of the measurement error is unknown. There can be errors in both the numerator and denominator of the ratio of populations used in applying a 20 percent cap. In circumstances where a strict application of a 20 percent cap results in an anomalous situation, recognition of the unavoidable imprecision in the census data justifies accepting small variances above the 20 percent limit. C. Qualified Census Tracts In developing the list of QCTs, HUD used 2010 Census 100-percent count data on total population, total households, and population in households; the median household income and poverty rate as estimated in the 2010-2014, 2011-2015 and 2012-2016, ACS tabulations; the FY2018 Very Low-Income Limits (VLILs) computed at the HUD Metropolitan FMR Area (HMFA) level to determine tract eligibility; and the MSA definitions published in OMB Bulletin No. 15-01 on July 15, 2015, for determining how many eligible tracts can be designated under the statutory 20 percent population cap. HUD uses the HMFA-level AMGIs to determine QCT eligibility because the statute, specifically IRC Section 42(d)(5)(B)(iv)(II), refers to the same section of the IRC that defines income for purposes of tenant eligibility and unit maximum rent, specifically IRC Section 42(g)(4). By rule, the IRS sets these income limits according to HUD's VLILs, which, starting in FY2006 and thereafter, are established at the HMFA level. HUD uses the entire MSA to determine how many eligible tracts can be designated under the 20 percent population cap as required by the statute (IRC Section 42(d)(5)(B)(ii)(III)), which states that MSAs should be treated as singular areas. The QCTs were determined as follows: 1. Calculate 60 percent AMGI. To be eligible to be designated a QCT, a census tract must have 50 percent of its households with incomes below 60 percent of the AMGI or have a poverty rate of 25 percent or more. Due to potential statistical anomalies in the ACS 5-year estimates, one of these conditions must be met in at least 2 of the 3 ACS 5-year tabulations for a tract to be considered eligible for QCT designation. HUD calculates 60 percent of AMGI by multiplying by a factor of 1.2 the HMFA or nonmetropolitan county FY2017 VLIL adjusted for inflation to match the ACS estimates, which are adjusted to the value of the dollar in the last year of the 5-year group. 2. Determine Whether Census Tracts Have Less than 50 percent of Households Below 60 percent AMGI. For each census tract, whether or not 50 percent of households have incomes below the 60 percent income standard (income criterion) was determined by: (a) Calculating the average household size of the census tract, (b) adjusting the [[Page 53286]] income standard to match the average household size, and (c) comparing the average-household-size-adjusted income standard to the median household income for the tract reported in each of the three years of ACS tabulations (2010-2014, 2011-2015 and 2012-2016). HUD did not consider estimates of median household income to be statistically reliable unless the margin of error was less than half of the estimate (or a Margin of Error Ratio, MoER, of 50 percent or less). If at least two of the three estimates were not statistically reliable by this measure, HUD determined the tract to be ineligible under the income criterion due to lack of consistently reliable median income statistics across the three ACS tabulations. Since 50 percent of households in a tract have incomes above and below the tract median household income, if the tract median household income is less than the average- household-size-adjusted income standard for the tract, then more than 50 percent of households have incomes below the standard. 3. Estimate Poverty Rate. For each census tract, the poverty rate was determined in each of the three releases of ACS tabulations (2010- 2014, 2011-2015 and 2012-2016) by dividing the population with incomes below the poverty line by the population for whom poverty status has been determined. As with the evaluation of tracts under the income criterion, HUD applies a data quality standard for evaluating ACS poverty rate data in designating the 2019 QCTs. HUD did not consider estimates of the poverty rate to be statistically reliable unless both the population for whom poverty status has been determined and the number of persons below poverty had MoERs of less than 50 percent of the respective estimates. If at least two of the three poverty rate estimates were not statistically reliable, HUD determined the tract to be ineligible under the poverty rate criterion due to lack of reliable poverty statistics across the ACS tabulations. 4. Designate QCTs Where 20 percent or Less of Population Resides in Eligible Census Tracts. QCTs are those census tracts in which 50 percent or more of the households meet the income criterion in at least two of the three years evaluated, or 25 percent or more of the population is in poverty in at least two of the three years evaluated, such that the population of all census tracts that satisfy either one or both of these criteria does not exceed 20 percent of the total population of the respective area. 5. Designate QCTs Where More than 20 percent of Population Resides in Eligible Census Tracts. In areas where more than 20 percent of the population resides in eligible census tracts, census tracts are designated as QCTs in accordance with the following procedure: a. The statistically reliable income and poverty criteria are each averaged over the three ACS tabulations (2010-2014, 2011-2015 and 2012- 2016). Statistically reliable values that did not exceed the income and poverty rate thresholds were included in the average. b. Eligible tracts are placed in one of two groups based on the averaged values of the income and poverty criteria. The first group includes tracts that satisfy both the income and poverty criteria for QCTs for at least two of the three evaluation years; a different pair of years may be used to meet each criterion. The second group includes tracts that satisfy either the income criterion in at least two of the three years, or the poverty criterion in at least two of three years, but not both. A tract must qualify by at least one of the criteria in at least two of the three evaluation years to be eligible. c. Tracts in the first group are ranked from highest to lowest by the average of the ratios of the tract average-household-size-adjusted income limit to the median household income. Then, tracts in the first group are ranked from highest to lowest by the average of the poverty rates. The two ranks are averaged to yield a combined rank. The tracts are then sorted on the combined rank, with the census tract with the highest combined rank being placed at the top of the sorted list. In the event of a tie, more populous tracts are ranked above less populous ones. d. Tracts in the second group are ranked from highest to lowest by the average of the ratios of the tract average-household-size-adjusted income limit to the median household income. Then, tracts in the second group are ranked from highest to lowest by the average of the poverty rates. The two ranks are then averaged to yield a combined rank. The tracts are then sorted on the combined rank, with the census tract with the highest combined rank being placed at the top of the sorted list. In the event of a tie, more populous tracts are ranked above less populous ones. e. The ranked first group is stacked on top of the ranked second group to yield a single, concatenated, ranked list of eligible census tracts. f. Working down the single, concatenated, ranked list of eligible tracts, census tracts are identified as designated until the designation of an additional tract would cause the 20 percent limit to be exceeded. If a census tract is not designated because doing so would raise the percentage above 20 percent, subsequent eligible census tracts are then considered to determine if one or more eligible census tract(s) with smaller population(s) could be designated without exceeding the 20 percent limit. D. Exceptions to OMB Definitions of MSAs and Other Geographic Matters As stated in OMB Bulletin 15-01, defining metropolitan areas: ``OMB establishes and maintains the delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, . . . solely for statistical purposes. . . . OMB does not take into account or attempt to anticipate any non- statistical uses that may be made of the delineations, [.] In cases where . . . an agency elects to use the Metropolitan . . . Area definitions in nonstatistical programs, it is the sponsoring agency's responsibility to ensure that the delineations are appropriate for such use. An agency using the statistical delineations in a nonstatistical program may modify the delineations, but only for the purposes of that program. In such cases, any modifications should be clearly identified as delineations from the OMB statistical area delineations in order to avoid confusion with OMB's official definitions of Metropolitan . . . Statistical Areas.'' Following OMB guidance, the estimation procedure for the FMRs and income limits incorporates the current OMB definitions of metropolitan areas based on the CBSA standards, as implemented with 2010 Census data, but makes adjustments to the definitions, in order to separate subparts of these areas in cases where counties were added to an existing or newly defined metropolitan area. In CBSAs where subareas are established, it is HUD's view that the geographic extent of the housing markets are not the same as the geographic extent of the CBSAs. In the New England states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont), HMFAs are defined according to county subdivisions or minor civil divisions (MCDs), rather than county boundaries. However, since no part of an HMFA is outside an OMB- defined, county-based MSA, all New England nonmetropolitan counties are kept intact for purposes of designating Nonmetropolitan DDAs. Future Designations DDAs are designated annually as updated income and FMR data are made public. QCTs are designated annually as new income and poverty rate data are released. [[Page 53287]] Effective Date The 2019 lists of QCTs and DDAs are effective: (1) for allocations of credit after December 31, 2018; or (2) for purposes of IRC Section 42(h)(4), if the bonds are issued and the building is placed in service after December 31, 2018. If an area is not on a subsequent list of QCTs or DDAs, the 2019 lists are effective for the area if: (1) the allocation of credit to an applicant is made no later than the end of the 730-day period after the applicant submits a complete application to the LIHTC-allocating agency, and the submission is made before the effective date of the subsequent lists; or (2) for purposes of IRC Section 42(h)(4), if: (a) The bonds are issued or the building is placed in service no later than the end of the 730-day period after the applicant submits a complete application to the bond-issuing agency, and (b) the submission is made before the effective date of the subsequent lists, provided that both the issuance of the bonds and the placement in service of the building occur after the application is submitted. An application is deemed to be submitted on the date it is filed if the application is determined to be complete by the credit-allocating or bond-issuing agency. A ``complete application'' means that no more than de minimis clarification of the application is required for the agency to make a decision about the allocation of tax credits or issuance of bonds requested in the application. In the case of a ``multiphase project,'' the DDA or QCT status of the site of the project that applies for all phases of the project is that which applied when the project received its first allocation of LIHTC. For purposes of IRC Section 42(h)(4), the DDA or QCT status of the site of the project that applies for all phases of the project is that which applied when the first of the following occurred: (a) The building(s) in the first phase were placed in service, or (b) the bonds were issued. For purposes of this notice, a ``multiphase project'' is defined as a set of buildings to be constructed or rehabilitated under the rules of the LIHTC and meeting the following criteria: (1) The multiphase composition of the project (i.e., total number of buildings and phases in project, with a description of how many buildings are to be built in each phase and when each phase is to be completed, and any other information required by the agency) is made known by the applicant in the first application of credit for any building in the project, and that applicant identifies the buildings in the project for which credit is (or will be) sought; (2) the aggregate amount of LIHTC applied for on behalf of, or that would eventually be allocated to, the buildings on the site exceeds the one-year limitation on credits per applicant, as defined in the Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP) of the LIHTC-allocating agency, or the annual per-capita credit authority of the LIHTC allocating agency, and is the reason the applicant must request multiple allocations over 2 or more years; and (3) all applications for LIHTC for buildings on the site are made in immediately consecutive years. Members of the public are hereby reminded that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, or the Secretary's designee, has legal authority to designate DDAs and QCTs, by publishing lists of geographic entities as defined by, in the case of DDAs, the Census Bureau, the several states and the governments of the insular areas of the United States and, in the case of QCTs, by the Census Bureau; and to establish the effective dates of such lists. The Secretary of the Treasury, through the IRS thereof, has sole legal authority to interpret, and to determine and enforce compliance with the IRC and associated regulations, including Federal Register notices published by HUD for purposes of designating DDAs and QCTs. Representations made by any other entity as to the content of HUD notices designating DDAs and QCTs that do not precisely match the language published by HUD should not be relied upon by taxpayers in determining what actions are necessary to comply with HUD notices. Interpretive Examples of Effective Date For the convenience of readers of this notice, interpretive examples are provided below to illustrate the consequences of the effective date in areas that gain or lose QCT or DDA status. The examples covering DDAs are equally applicable to QCT designations. (Case A) Project A is located in a 2019 DDA that is NOT a designated DDA in 2020 or 2021. A complete application for tax credits for Project A is filed with the allocating agency on November 15, 2019. Credits are allocated to Project A on October 30, 2021. Project A is eligible for the increase in basis accorded a project in a 2019 DDA because the application was filed BEFORE January 1, 2020 (the assumed effective date for the 2020 DDA lists), and because tax credits were allocated no later than the end of the 730-day period after the filing of the complete application for an allocation of tax credits. (Case B) Project B is located in a 2019 DDA that is NOT a designated DDA in 2020 or 2021. A complete application for tax credits for Project B is filed with the allocating agency on December 1, 2019. Credits are allocated to Project B on March 30, 2022. Project B is NOT eligible for the increase in basis accorded a project in a 2019 DDA because, although the application for an allocation of tax credits was filed BEFORE January 1, 2020 (the assumed effective date of the 2020 DDA lists), the tax credits were allocated later than the end of the 730-day period after the filing of the complete application. (Case C) Project C is located in a 2019 DDA that was not a DDA in 2018. Project C was placed in service on November 15, 2018. A complete application for tax-exempt bond financing for Project C is filed with the bond-issuing agency on January 15, 2019. The bonds that will support the permanent financing of Project C are issued on September 30, 2019. Project C is NOT eligible for the increase in basis otherwise accorded a project in a 2019 DDA, because the project was placed in service BEFORE January 1, 2019. (Case D) Project D is located in an area that is a DDA in 2019 but is NOT a DDA in 2020 or 2021. A complete application for tax-exempt bond financing for Project D is filed with the bond-issuing agency on October 30, 2019. Bonds are issued for Project D on April 30, 2021, but Project D is not placed in service until January 30, 2022. Project D is eligible for the increase in basis available to projects located in 2019 DDAs because: (1) one of the two events necessary for triggering the effective date for buildings described in Section 42(h)(4)(B) of the IRC (the two events being bonds issued and buildings placed in service) took place on April 30, 2021, within the 730-day period after a complete application for tax-exempt bond financing was filed, (2) the application was filed during a time when the location of Project D was in a DDA, and (3) both the issuance of the bonds and placement in service of Project D occurred after the application was submitted. (Case E) Project E is a multiphase project located in a 2019 DDA that is NOT a designated DDA or QCT in 2020. The first phase of Project E received an allocation of credits in 2019, pursuant to an application filed March 15, 2019, [[Page 53288]] which describes the multiphase composition of the project. An application for tax credits for the second phase of Project E is filed with the allocating agency by the same entity on March 15, 2020. The second phase of Project E is located on a contiguous site. Credits are allocated to the second phase of Project E on October 30, 2020. The aggregate amount of credits allocated to the two phases of Project E exceeds the amount of credits that may be allocated to an applicant in one year under the allocating agency's QAP and is the reason that applications were made in multiple phases. The second phase of Project E is, therefore, eligible for the increase in basis accorded a project in a 2019 DDA, because it meets all of the conditions to be a part of a multiphase project. (Case F) Project F is a multiphase project located in a 2019 DDA that is NOT a designated DDA in 2020 or 2021. The first phase of Project F received an allocation of credits in 2019, pursuant to an application filed March 15, 2019, which does not describe the multiphase composition of the project. An application for tax credits for the second phase of Project F is filed with the allocating agency by the same entity on March 15, 2021. Credits are allocated to the second phase of Project F on October 30, 2021. The aggregate amount of credits allocated to the two phases of Project F exceeds the amount of credits that may be allocated to an applicant in one year under the allocating agency's QAP. The second phase of Project F is, therefore, NOT eligible for the increase in basis accorded a project in a 2019 DDA, since it does not meet all of the conditions for a multiphase project, as defined in this notice. The original application for credits for the first phase did not describe the multiphase composition of the project. Also, the application for credits for the second phase of Project F was not made in the year immediately following the first phase application year. Findings and Certifications Environmental Impact This notice involves the establishment of fiscal requirements or procedures that are related to rate and cost determinations and do not constitute a development decision affecting the physical condition of specific project areas or building sites. Accordingly, under 40 CFR 1508.4 of the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality and 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6) of HUD's regulations, this notice is categorically excluded from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321). Federalism Impact Executive Order 13132 (entitled ``Federalism'') prohibits an agency from publishing any policy document that has federalism implications if the document either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments and is not required by statute, or the document preempts state law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the executive order. This notice merely designates DDAs and QCTs as required under IRC Section 42, as amended, for the use by political subdivisions of the states in allocating the LIHTC. This notice also details the technical methods used in making such designations. As a result, this notice is not subject to review under the order. Dated: September 26, 2018. Todd M. Richardson, General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research. [FR Doc. 2018-23000 Filed 10-19-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
![53282 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 204 / Monday, October 22, 2018 / Notices
governments or to the owner or operator You are authorized to provide appropriate Disaster Grants—Public Assistance
of an eligible private nonprofit facility assistance for required emergency measures, (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039,
under section 422 of the Stafford Act for authorized under Title V of the Stafford Act, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
to save lives and to protect property and
all major disasters or emergencies Brock Long,
public health and safety, and to lessen or
declared on or after October 1, 2018. avert the threat of a catastrophe in the Administrator, Federal Emergency
FEMA bases the adjustment on an designated areas. Specifically, you are Management Agency.
increase in the Consumer Price Index authorized to provide assistance for debris [FR Doc. 2018–22885 Filed 10–19–18; 8:45 am]
for All Urban Consumers of 2.7 percent removal and emergency protective measures BILLING CODE 9111–11–P
for the 12-month period that ended in (Categories A and B), including direct
August 2018. This is based on Federal assistance, under the Public
information released by the Bureau of Assistance program in selected areas and
Labor Statistics at the U.S. Department emergency protective measures (Category B), DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
of Labor on September 13, 2018.
limited to direct Federal assistance, under URBAN DEVELOPMENT
the Public Assistance program in selected
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. areas. [Docket No. FR–6129–N–01]
97.036, Disaster Grants–Public Assistance Consistent with the requirement that
(Presidentially Declared Disasters) Federal assistance be supplemental, any Statutorily Mandated Designation of
Federal funds provided under the Stafford Difficult Development Areas and
Brock Long,
Act for Public Assistance will be limited to Qualified Census Tracts for 2019
Administrator, Federal Emergency 75 percent of the total eligible costs. In order
Management Agency. to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby AGENCY: Office of the Assistant
[FR Doc. 2018–22890 Filed 10–19–18; 8:45 am] authorized to allocate from funds available Secretary for Policy Development and
BILLING CODE 9111–11–P for these purposes such amounts as you find Research, HUD.
necessary for Federal emergency assistance ACTION: Notice.
and administrative expenses.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Further, you are authorized to make SUMMARY: This document designates
SECURITY changes to this declaration for the approved ‘‘Difficult Development Areas’’ (DDAs)
assistance to the extent allowable under the and ‘‘Qualified Census Tracts’’ (QCTs)
Stafford Act. for purposes of the Low-Income
Federal Emergency Management
Agency The Federal Emergency Management Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) under
Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 42,
[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–3405–
EM; Docket ID FEMA–2018–0001]
pursuant to the authority vested in the as enacted by the Tax Reform Act of
Administrator, Department of Homeland 1986. The United States Department of
Florida; Emergency and Related Security, under Executive Order 12148, Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Determinations as amended, Thomas J. McCool, of makes new DDA and QCT designations
FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal annually.
AGENCY: Federal Emergency Coordinating Officer for this declared FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
Management Agency, DHS. emergency. questions on how areas are designated
ACTION: Notice. The following areas of the State of and on geographic definitions, contact
Florida have been designated as Michael K. Hollar, Senior Economist,
SUMMARY: This is a notice of the adversely affected by this declared
Presidential declaration of an Economic Development and Public
emergency: Finance Division, Office of Policy
emergency for the State of Florida
(FEMA–3405–EM), dated October 9, Debris removal and emergency protective Development and Research, Department
2018, and related determinations. measures (Categories A and B), including of Housing and Urban Development,
direct federal assistance, under the Public 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 8216,
DATES: The declaration was issued Assistance program for Bay, Calhoun, Washington, DC 20410–6000; telephone
October 9, 2018. Franklin, Gadsden, Gulf, Hamilton, Jackson,
number 202–402–5878, or send an email
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jefferson, Leon, Liberty, Madison, Suwannee,
Taylor, and Wakulla Counties. to Michael.K.Hollar@hud.gov. For
Dean Webster, Office of Response and specific legal questions pertaining to
Recovery, Federal Emergency Emergency protective measures (Category
B), limited to direct federal assistance, under Section 42, contact Branch 5, Office of
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, the Associate Chief Counsel,
the Public Assistance program for Alachua,
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2833. Baker, Bradford, Citrus, Columbia, Dixie, Passthroughs and Special Industries,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Escambia, Gilchrist, Hernando, Hillsborough, Internal Revenue Service, 1111
hereby given that, in a letter dated Holmes, Lafayette, Levy, Manatee, Okaloosa, Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
October 9, 2018, the President issued an Pasco, Pinellas, Santa Rosa, Union, Walton, DC 20224; telephone number 202–317–
emergency declaration under the and Washington Counties.
4137, fax number 202–317–6731. For
authority of the Robert T. Stafford The following Catalog of Federal Domestic
questions about the ‘‘HUBZone’’
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used
for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, program, contact Mariana Pardo,
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121–5207 Director, HUBZone Program, Office of
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora
(the Stafford Act), as follows: Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; Government Contracting and Business
I have determined that the emergency 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Development, U.S. Small Business
conditions in certain areas of the State of Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); Administration, 409 Third Street, SW,
Florida resulting from Hurricane Michael 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; Suite 8800, Washington, DC 20416;
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
beginning on October 7, 2018, and 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to telephone number 202–205–2985, fax
continuing, are of sufficient severity and Individuals and Households In Presidentially
number 202–481–6443, or send an email
magnitude to warrant an emergency Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— to hubzone@sba.gov. (These are not toll-
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals free telephone numbers.) A text
Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (‘‘the Stafford and Households; 97.050, Presidentially telephone is available for persons with
Act’’). Therefore, I declare that such an Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals hearing or speech impairments at 800–
emergency exists in the State of Florida. and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, 877–8339. Additional copies of this
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Oct 19, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM 22OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_53486/page/1.svg)
![53286 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 204 / Monday, October 22, 2018 / Notices
income standard to match the average 5. Designate QCTs Where More than additional tract would cause the 20
household size, and (c) comparing the 20 percent of Population Resides in percent limit to be exceeded. If a census
average-household-size-adjusted income Eligible Census Tracts. In areas where tract is not designated because doing so
standard to the median household more than 20 percent of the population would raise the percentage above 20
income for the tract reported in each of resides in eligible census tracts, census percent, subsequent eligible census
the three years of ACS tabulations tracts are designated as QCTs in tracts are then considered to determine
(2010–2014, 2011–2015 and 2012– accordance with the following if one or more eligible census tract(s)
2016). HUD did not consider estimates procedure: with smaller population(s) could be
of median household income to be a. The statistically reliable income designated without exceeding the 20
statistically reliable unless the margin of and poverty criteria are each averaged percent limit.
error was less than half of the estimate over the three ACS tabulations (2010–
2014, 2011–2015 and 2012–2016). D. Exceptions to OMB Definitions of
(or a Margin of Error Ratio, MoER, of 50
Statistically reliable values that did not MSAs and Other Geographic Matters
percent or less). If at least two of the
three estimates were not statistically exceed the income and poverty rate As stated in OMB Bulletin 15–01,
reliable by this measure, HUD thresholds were included in the average. defining metropolitan areas:
determined the tract to be ineligible b. Eligible tracts are placed in one of
two groups based on the averaged ‘‘OMB establishes and maintains the
under the income criterion due to lack delineations of Metropolitan Statistical
of consistently reliable median income values of the income and poverty
Areas, . . . solely for statistical purposes.
statistics across the three ACS criteria. The first group includes tracts . . . OMB does not take into account or
tabulations. Since 50 percent of that satisfy both the income and poverty attempt to anticipate any non-statistical uses
households in a tract have incomes criteria for QCTs for at least two of the that may be made of the delineations, [.] In
above and below the tract median three evaluation years; a different pair of cases where . . . an agency elects to use the
household income, if the tract median years may be used to meet each Metropolitan . . . Area definitions in
household income is less than the criterion. The second group includes nonstatistical programs, it is the sponsoring
tracts that satisfy either the income agency’s responsibility to ensure that the
average-household-size-adjusted income delineations are appropriate for such use. An
standard for the tract, then more than 50 criterion in at least two of the three
years, or the poverty criterion in at least agency using the statistical delineations in a
percent of households have incomes nonstatistical program may modify the
below the standard. two of three years, but not both. A tract
delineations, but only for the purposes of that
must qualify by at least one of the program. In such cases, any modifications
3. Estimate Poverty Rate. For each
criteria in at least two of the three should be clearly identified as delineations
census tract, the poverty rate was
evaluation years to be eligible. from the OMB statistical area delineations in
determined in each of the three releases c. Tracts in the first group are ranked order to avoid confusion with OMB’s official
of ACS tabulations (2010–2014, 2011– from highest to lowest by the average of definitions of Metropolitan . . . Statistical
2015 and 2012–2016) by dividing the the ratios of the tract average- Areas.’’
population with incomes below the household-size-adjusted income limit to
poverty line by the population for the median household income. Then, Following OMB guidance, the
whom poverty status has been tracts in the first group are ranked from estimation procedure for the FMRs and
determined. As with the evaluation of highest to lowest by the average of the income limits incorporates the current
tracts under the income criterion, HUD poverty rates. The two ranks are OMB definitions of metropolitan areas
applies a data quality standard for averaged to yield a combined rank. The based on the CBSA standards, as
evaluating ACS poverty rate data in tracts are then sorted on the combined implemented with 2010 Census data,
designating the 2019 QCTs. HUD did rank, with the census tract with the but makes adjustments to the
not consider estimates of the poverty highest combined rank being placed at definitions, in order to separate subparts
rate to be statistically reliable unless the top of the sorted list. In the event of of these areas in cases where counties
both the population for whom poverty a tie, more populous tracts are ranked were added to an existing or newly
status has been determined and the above less populous ones. defined metropolitan area. In CBSAs
number of persons below poverty had d. Tracts in the second group are where subareas are established, it is
MoERs of less than 50 percent of the ranked from highest to lowest by the HUD’s view that the geographic extent
respective estimates. If at least two of average of the ratios of the tract average- of the housing markets are not the same
the three poverty rate estimates were not household-size-adjusted income limit to as the geographic extent of the CBSAs.
statistically reliable, HUD determined the median household income. Then, In the New England states
the tract to be ineligible under the tracts in the second group are ranked (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,
poverty rate criterion due to lack of from highest to lowest by the average of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and
reliable poverty statistics across the ACS the poverty rates. The two ranks are Vermont), HMFAs are defined according
tabulations. then averaged to yield a combined rank. to county subdivisions or minor civil
4. Designate QCTs Where 20 percent The tracts are then sorted on the divisions (MCDs), rather than county
or Less of Population Resides in Eligible combined rank, with the census tract boundaries. However, since no part of
Census Tracts. QCTs are those census with the highest combined rank being an HMFA is outside an OMB-defined,
tracts in which 50 percent or more of placed at the top of the sorted list. In the county-based MSA, all New England
the households meet the income event of a tie, more populous tracts are nonmetropolitan counties are kept
criterion in at least two of the three ranked above less populous ones. intact for purposes of designating
years evaluated, or 25 percent or more e. The ranked first group is stacked on Nonmetropolitan DDAs.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
of the population is in poverty in at top of the ranked second group to yield Future Designations
least two of the three years evaluated, a single, concatenated, ranked list of
such that the population of all census eligible census tracts. DDAs are designated annually as
tracts that satisfy either one or both of f. Working down the single, updated income and FMR data are made
these criteria does not exceed 20 percent concatenated, ranked list of eligible public. QCTs are designated annually as
of the total population of the respective tracts, census tracts are identified as new income and poverty rate data are
area. designated until the designation of an released.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Oct 19, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM 22OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_53486/page/5.svg)
![53288 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 204 / Monday, October 22, 2018 / Notices
which describes the multiphase National Environmental Policy Act of the proposed forms or other available
composition of the project. An 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321). information. Persons with hearing or
application for tax credits for the second speech impairments may access this
Federalism Impact
phase of Project E is filed with the number through TTY by calling the toll-
allocating agency by the same entity on Executive Order 13132 (entitled free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–
March 15, 2020. The second phase of ‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits an agency from 8339.
Project E is located on a contiguous site. publishing any policy document that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Credits are allocated to the second has federalism implications if the Ivery Himes, Director, Office of Single
phase of Project E on October 30, 2020. document either imposes substantial Family Asset Management, Department
The aggregate amount of credits direct compliance costs on state and of Housing and Urban Development,
allocated to the two phases of Project E local governments and is not required 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC
exceeds the amount of credits that may by statute, or the document preempts 20410, telephone 202–708–1672,
be allocated to an applicant in one year state law, unless the agency meets the extension 5628 (this is not a toll-free
under the allocating agency’s QAP and consultation and funding requirements number) or email Colette Pollard at
is the reason that applications were of section 6 of the executive order. This Colette.Pollard@hud.gov. Persons with
made in multiple phases. The second notice merely designates DDAs and hearing or speech impairments may
phase of Project E is, therefore, eligible QCTs as required under IRC Section 42, access this number through TTY by
for the increase in basis accorded a as amended, for the use by political calling the toll-free Federal Relay
project in a 2019 DDA, because it meets subdivisions of the states in allocating Service at (800) 877–8339.
all of the conditions to be a part of a the LIHTC. This notice also details the Copies of available documents
multiphase project. technical methods used in making such submitted to OMB may be obtained
(Case F) Project F is a multiphase designations. As a result, this notice is from Ms. Pollard.
project located in a 2019 DDA that is not subject to review under the order.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
NOT a designated DDA in 2020 or 2021. Dated: September 26, 2018. notice informs the public that HUD is
The first phase of Project F received an Todd M. Richardson, seeking approval from OMB for the
allocation of credits in 2019, pursuant to General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy information collection described in
an application filed March 15, 2019, Development and Research. Section A.
which does not describe the multiphase [FR Doc. 2018–23000 Filed 10–19–18; 8:45 am]
composition of the project. An A. Overview of Information Collection
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
application for tax credits for the second Title of Information Collection:
phase of Project F is filed with the Revitalization Area Designation and
allocating agency by the same entity on DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Management.
March 15, 2021. Credits are allocated to URBAN DEVELOPMENT OMB Approval Number: 2502–0566.
the second phase of Project F on Type of Request: Extension.
October 30, 2021. The aggregate amount [Docket No. FR–7005–N–22]
Form Number: None.
of credits allocated to the two phases of Description of the need for the
60-Day Notice of Proposed Information
Project F exceeds the amount of credits information and proposed use: The
Collection: Revitalization Area
that may be allocated to an applicant in Department accepts request from state,
Designation and Management
one year under the allocating agency’s local, or tribal governments or HUD-
QAP. The second phase of Project F is, AGENCY: Office of the Assistant approved Nonprofit organizations to
therefore, NOT eligible for the increase Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing designate a geographic area as a
in basis accorded a project in a 2019 Commissioner, HUD. Revitalization Area by sending a written
DDA, since it does not meet all of the ACTION: Notice. Requesting Letter to HUD. Revitalization
conditions for a multiphase project, as Areas are intended to promote
defined in this notice. The original SUMMARY: HUD is seeking approval from
community revitalization through
application for credits for the first phase the Office of Management and Budget
expanded homeownership
did not describe the multiphase (OMB) for the information collection
opportunities of revitalization areas.
composition of the project. Also, the described below. In accordance with the
Respondents (i.e. affected public):
application for credits for the second Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is
State, local, or tribal governments or
phase of Project F was not made in the requesting comment from all interested
HUD-approved Nonprofit organizations.
year immediately following the first parties on the proposed collection of
Estimated Number of Respondents:
phase application year. information. The purpose of this notice
42.
is to allow for 60 days of public
Findings and Certifications Estimated Number of Responses: 42.
comment.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Environmental Impact DATES: Comments Due Date: December Average Hours per Response: 2.
This notice involves the 21, 2018. Total Estimated Burdens: 84.
establishment of fiscal requirements or ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
procedures that are related to rate and invited to submit comments regarding B. Solicitation of Public Comment
cost determinations and do not this proposal. Comments should refer to This notice is soliciting comments
constitute a development decision the proposal by name and/or OMB from members of the public and affected
affecting the physical condition of Control Number and should be sent to: parties concerning the collection of
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
specific project areas or building sites. Colette Pollard, Reports Management information described in Section A on
Accordingly, under 40 CFR 1508.4 of Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing the following:
the regulations of the Council on and Urban Development, 451 7th Street (1) Whether the proposed collection
Environmental Quality and 24 CFR SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC of information is necessary for the
50.19(c)(6) of HUD’s regulations, this 20410–5000; telephone 202–402–3400 proper performance of the functions of
notice is categorically excluded from (this is not a toll-free number) or email the agency, including whether the
environmental review under the at Colette.Pollard@hud.gov for a copy of information will have practical utility;
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Oct 19, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM 22OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_53486/page/7.svg)
Document Created: 2018-10-20 01:50:06
Document Modified: 2018-10-20 01:50:06
| 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. | |
| Contact | For questions on how areas are designated and on geographic definitions, contact Michael K. Hollar, Senior Economist, Economic Development and Public Finance Division, Office of Policy Development and Research, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 8216, Washington, DC 20410-6000; telephone number 202-402-5878, or send an email to [email protected] For specific legal questions pertaining to Section 42, contact Branch 5, Office of the Associate Chief Counsel, Passthroughs and Special Industries, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224; telephone number 202-317- 4137, fax number 202-317-6731. For questions about the ``HUBZone'' program, contact Mariana Pardo, Director, HUBZone Program, Office of Government Contracting and Business Development, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW, Suite 8800, Washington, DC 20416; telephone number 202-205-2985, fax number 202-481-6443, or send an email to [email protected] (These are not toll-free telephone numbers.) A text telephone is available for persons with hearing or speech impairments at 800-877-8339. Additional copies of this notice are available through HUD User at 800-245-2691 for a small fee to cover duplication and mailing costs. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 53282 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR