Proposed Rule2026-08406
HOME Investment Partnerships Program: Further Program Updates and Streamlining
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 30, 2026
Effective
May 29, 2024
Issuing agencies
Housing and Urban Development Department
Abstract
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking re-opens public comment for certain topics and provisions that were addressed in HUD's May 29, 2024, proposed rule entitled "HOME Investment Partnerships Program: Program Updates and Streamlining." Among other changes, this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking proposes to revise or revoke previously-proposed tenant protection provisions permitting participating jurisdictions to exceed the maximum per-unit subsidy for projects that met certain green building standards. This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking would also create additional flexibilities related to scattered site manufactured housing rental projects.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 83 (Thursday, April 30, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 83 (Thursday, April 30, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23194-23204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08406]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Parts 91 and 92
[Docket No. FR-6144-P-09]
RIN 2506-AC50
HOME Investment Partnerships Program: Further Program Updates and
Streamlining
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking; re-opening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking re-opens
public comment for certain topics and provisions that were addressed in
HUD's May 29, 2024, proposed rule entitled ``HOME Investment
Partnerships Program: Program Updates and Streamlining.'' Among other
changes, this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking proposes to
revise or revoke previously-proposed tenant protection provisions
permitting participating jurisdictions to exceed the maximum per-unit
subsidy for projects that met certain green building standards. This
supplemental notice of
[[Page 23195]]
proposed rulemaking would also create additional flexibilities related
to scattered site manufactured housing rental projects.
DATES: The comment period for specific topics in the proposed rule
published on May 29, 2024 (89 FR 46618), and topics discussed in this
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, is re-opened. The due date
for comments on the topics discussed in this supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking is June 1, 2026.
ADDRESSES: There are two methods for submitting public comments. All
submissions must refer to the above docket number and title.
1. Electronic Submission of Comments. Comments may be submitted
electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic submission of comments allows the
commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make comments immediately available
to the public. Comments submitted electronically through
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> can be viewed by other commenters and interested
members of the public. Commenters should follow the instructions
provided on that website to submit comments electronically.
2. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by
mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development, 2415 Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria, VA
22314.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Henrietta Owusu, Director, Program
Policy Division, Office of Affordable Housing Programs, Office of
Community Planning and Development, U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 2415 Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria, VA 22314;
telephone number (202) 708-2684 (this is not a toll-free number). HUD
welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from individuals who are deaf
or hard of hearing, as well as individuals with speech or communication
disabilities. To learn more about how to make an accessible telephone
call, visit <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs">https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs</a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The HOME Program
The HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME program or HOME) is
authorized by title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act \1\ (the Act) and has been in operation since 1992. The
HOME program provides grants to States, local jurisdictions, and
consortia of local jurisdictions (collectively, participating
jurisdictions) and is used, often in partnership with local nonprofit
groups, to fund a wide range of activities to build, buy, or
rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or homeownership or to fund
direct rental assistance to low-income people. Additional background on
the HOME program can be found in the HOME Investment Partnerships
Program: Program Updates and Streamlining proposed rule (HOME Proposed
Rule) available in the Federal Register at 89 FR 46618.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 42 U.S.C. 12721 et seq.
\2\ Published May 29, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The HOME Program Rulemaking
On May 29, 2024, HUD published the HOME Proposed Rule, which
proposed to revise the HOME program regulations to update, simplify, or
streamline requirements, better align the HOME program with other
Federal housing programs, and implement recent amendments to the HOME
program statute. HUD proposed numerous changes to 24 CFR part 92 in the
HOME Proposed Rule, including significant revisions to the Community
Housing Development Organization requirements, a change in the approach
to HOME rents, simplified requirements for small-scale rental projects,
enhanced flexibility in HOME tenant-based rental assistance programs,
and simplified provisions and new flexibilities for community land
trusts.
On January 6, 2025, HUD published the HOME Investment Partnerships
Program: Program Updates and Streamlining final rule (HOME Final Rule)
in the Federal Register, available at 90 FR 746. The HOME Final Rule
incorporated a majority of the proposed regulatory changes described in
the HOME Proposed Rule. The HOME Final Rule provided for the rule to
take effect on February 5, 2025.
On January 20, 2025, the President issued a memorandum entitled
``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review'' (Regulatory Freeze Pending Review
Memorandum) to executive departments and agencies.\3\ The Regulatory
Freeze Pending Review Memorandum, among other things, asks executive
departments and agencies to consider postponing the effective date of
rules that had been published in the Federal Register but had not yet
taken effect. The postponement allowed executive departments and
agencies time to review any questions of fact, law, and policy that the
rules may raise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Available at 90 FR 8249 (Jan. 28, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 3, 2025, consistent with the Regulatory Freeze Pending
Review Memorandum, HUD delayed the effective date of the HOME Final
Rule from February 5, 2025, until April 20, 2025.\4\ HUD's delay of the
effective date of the HOME Final Rule until April 20, 2025, provided
HUD with time to review the HOME Final Rule for any questions of fact,
law, and policy that arose in the HOME Final Rule, as directed by the
Regulatory Freeze Pending Review Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See HOME Investment Partnerships Program: Program Updates
and Streamlining-Delay of Effective Date at 90 FR 8780.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 17, 2025, HUD published the HOME Investment Partnerships
Program Updates and Streamlining--Delay of Effective Date, Withdrawal,
and Correction (Delay of Effective Date for Certain Provisions of the
HOME Final Rule Notice).\5\ The Delay of Effective Date for Certain
Provisions of the HOME Final Rule Notice further delayed the effective
date for the HOME Final Rule's addition of 24 CFR 92.250(c) and
revisions to 24 CFR 92.253 until October 30, 2025, while allowing a
majority of the HOME Final Rule to go into effect as of April 20, 2025.
The Delay of Effective Date for Certain Provisions of the HOME Final
Rule Notice also made certain technical revisions to the effective and
compliance dates in 24 CFR 92.3 of the HOME Final Rule. The effective
date was further delayed to April 30, 2026 (90 FR 48443). On April 29,
2026, the effective date was delayed indefinitely pending the
publication of a future final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 90 FR 16085.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. This Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Pursuant to HUD's review of the HOME Final Rule, HUD has determined
to seek further public comment on certain topics and provisions found
in the HOME Proposed and Final Rules, as detailed in this supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking. Among other changes, this supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking would revise provisions related to tenant
protections and would revoke the HOME Final Rule's unimplemented
provisions related to permitting participating jurisdictions to exceed
the maximum
[[Page 23196]]
per-unit subsidy for projects that meet certain green building
standards. This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking would also
create additional flexibilities related to scattered site manufactured
housing rental projects. HUD's proposed changes are described more
fully in each of the sections below.
Corrective and Remedial Actions: Life-Threatening Deficiencies
HUD is also proposing to change ``health and safety'' to ``life-
threatening'' throughout 24 CFR 92.251(f)(5)(i). The HOME Final Rule in
Sec. 92.251(f)(5)(i) requires that all health and safety deficiencies
be corrected immediately and that a participating jurisdiction adopt a
more frequent inspection schedule if such deficiencies are identified
during the triennial onsite physical inspection of rental housing
during the HOME period of affordability. The HOME Final Rule provides
an exception for small-scale housing, which permits but does not
require a participating jurisdiction to adopt a more frequent
inspection schedule. The requirement for immediate correction applied
only to life-threatening deficiencies in Sec. 92.251(f)(1)(ii) and
Sec. 92.504(d)(1)(ii)(B), as it existed prior to the HOME Final Rule
and was inadvertently applied to all health and safety deficiencies in
the HOME Final Rule. The proposed Sec. 92.251(f)(5)(i) would revert
this inadvertent broadening of the requirement by applying immediate
correction only to life-threatening deficiencies. In addition, the
proposed Sec. 92.251(f)(5)(i) would apply the requirement for a more
frequent inspection schedule. This proposed inspection schedule would
apply only to projects in which life-threatening deficiencies are
identified, while maintaining an exception for small-scale housing and
adding an exception for scattered site manufactured housing as
described below.
The HOME property standards in the rule as it existed prior to the
HOME Final Rule and the NSPIRE final rule (88 FR 30442) relied on the
deficiencies defined in HUD's Uniform Physical Condition Standards
(UPCS). Through the publication of the NSPIRE final rule, HUD
fundamentally changed the nature of its inspection standards. NSPIRE
removed superficial and cosmetic inspection deficiencies and frames all
deficiencies in terms of health and safety concerns. For each
deficiency, the NSPIRE inspection standards identify a health and
safety determination of ``low'', ``moderate'', ``severe'' or ``life-
threatening''. Although these tiers do not apply to HOME property
standards or inspections, the HOME Final Rule requires that
participating jurisdictions establish a list of life-threatening
deficiencies. Additionally, where state and local property condition
codes and standards do not exist, participating jurisdictions must
ensure that the housing remains free of the deficiencies established by
HUD based on NSPIRE inspection standards. Consequently, during an
onsite physical inspection of a HOME project, all deficiencies
identified will be health and safety deficiencies even though some may
be defined as a ``low'' health and safety deficiency under the NSPIRE
inspection standards.
Immediate correction of all health and safety deficiencies, and
therefore, all deficiencies identified during an onsite inspection is
an unreasonable and infeasible standard for participating jurisdictions
and property owners. Similarly, requiring more frequent inspections
when any deficiency is identified creates an undue administrative
burden on participating jurisdictions when the risk to tenants is low.
Reversing the unintended change to ``health and safety'' in the HOME
Final Rule at 24 CFR 92.251(f)(5)(i) and replacing it with ``life-
threatening'' will remove the inconsistency between projects subject to
different versions of the HOME rule, clarify the inspection procedure
requirements, and provide a realistic timeline for correction of
deficiencies. HUD believes this change also provides adequate
protection for tenants. Property owners must still inspect every three
years and correct all deficiencies identified although they may do so
over a longer timeframe. This change is consistent with the rest of the
programs covered by NSPIRE.
Scattered Site Manufactured Housing Rental Projects
HUD is proposing to add the definition of ``scattered site
manufactured housing rental project'' to 24 CFR 92.2. HUD would define
``scattered site manufactured housing rental project'' to mean a rental
project of individually leased manufactured housing units owned by a
single project owner. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 12756(c), HUD may provide
streamlined procedures for monitoring compliance of ``small-scale or
scattered site [rental] housing'' projects.
This proposed definition is consistent with the Act because
manufactured housing may consist of contiguous or non-contiguous
parcels under common ownership. This definition covers a manufactured
housing project if the units are contiguous only. This definition will
also cover non-contiguous parcels where certain manufactured housing
units or lots are owner-occupied and some are renter-occupied, or where
the owner intended to intersperse manufactured housing units for rent
within a community. This definition and the flexibility provided would
also apply to existing HOME projects to the extent that they meet the
definition and that the written agreement allows for the reduction of
frequency of monitoring performance.
Manufactured housing represents a cost-effective strategy to
quickly increase the availability of affordable housing. Compared to
site-built homes, manufactured homes offer substantial cost savings,
largely due to efficiencies in procurement, production, and
installation processes. According to the Harvard Joint Center for
Housing Studies, the average price of a manufactured home in 2021 was
$108,100, while the average cost of a new site-built home was $365,900.
On a per-square-foot basis, manufactured housing averaged $72, compared
to $144 for site-built housing, highlighting its affordability
advantage.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, Comparison of the
Costs of Manufactured and Site-Built Housing July 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite these advantages, owners and developers of manufactured
housing may not be fully participating in the HOME Program due to the
complexity of program requirements and the administrative burden of
compliance. The public comments support this conclusion. The
Manufactured Housing Institute requested in their comment submission to
the HOME Proposed Rule that HUD undertake research to determine the
extent of the use of HOME funds for affordable manufactured housing and
identify barriers to more use for this purpose.\7\ They also noted in
the comments that there was ``compliance complexity'' in the HOME Final
Rule requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Comment HUD-2024-0045-0039.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, HUD is proposing to define ``scattered site manufactured
housing rental project'' to streamline the procedures for monitoring
compliance of these housing units to reduce the costs associated with
owning rental projects composed of manufactured housing units. This
proposal is intended to incentivize participating jurisdictions to fund
a form of housing that can be easily scalable, faster to build, and
less expensive than traditional brick and mortar housing.
Related to the proposed definition of ``scattered site manufactured
housing rental project,'' HUD is proposing to
[[Page 23197]]
revise 24 CFR 92.251(f)(5)(i) to state that a participating
jurisdiction is not required to adopt a more frequent inspection
schedule for scattered site manufactured housing rental projects that
have been found to have life-threatening deficiencies. Instead, HUD is
proposing to permit participating jurisdictions to determine whether a
more frequent inspection schedule is warranted, thereby providing
participating jurisdictions with additional autonomy and encouraging
the use of manufactured housing in the HOME program. This proposal is
consistent with the requests made by commenters to the HOME Proposed
Rule that HUD further encourage the use of manufactured housing in the
HOME program and expand monitoring flexibilities to include scattered
site projects with more units.\8\ This proposal is consistent with the
addition of the ``small-scale housing'' definition that HUD added
through the HOME Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 90 FR 769, 779, and 783.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD is also proposing to revise 24 CFR 92.252(g) to reduce the
frequency of income examinations for scattered site manufactured
housing rental projects to triennial income examinations for occupants
of such housing instead of the more frequent income examination
schedule defined in Sec. 92.252. This proposed reduction in income
examinations is intended to encourage the use of manufactured housing
in the HOME program and to reduce the costs associated with owning and
managing scattered site manufactured housing rental projects. This
proposal is consistent with the addition of the ``small-scale housing''
definition that HUD added through the HOME Final Rule.
In addition, HUD is proposing certain revisions to 24 CFR
92.253(d)(5) that would permit participating jurisdictions to establish
an alternative procedure to a written waiting list for the selection of
tenants in scattered site manufactured housing rental projects, the
same as HUD permitted for small-scale housing in the HOME Final Rule.
HUD is proposing to allow participating jurisdictions to establish an
alternative procedure to a written waiting list for the selection of
tenants in scattered site manufactured housing rental projects because
HUD believes that this flexibility will further incentivize the use of
manufactured housing in HOME rental housing projects and will help to
increase the availability and supply of affordable housing nationwide.
Proposed Removal of the HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR 92.250(c) Regarding
Permitting Participating Jurisdictions To Exceed the Maximum Per-Unit
Subsidy for a Project That Meets Certain Green Building Standards
In the HOME Proposed Rule, HUD proposed to add a new paragraph (c)
to 24 CFR 92.250 to permit a participating jurisdiction to exceed the
maximum per-unit subsidy described in 24 CFR 92.250 by 5 percent for a
project that met one of the acceptable green building standards that
HUD would describe in a separate Federal Register notice. In the HOME
Final Rule, HUD maintained24 CFR 92.250(c) that was proposed in the
HOME Proposed Rule; however, after consideration of public comments,
HUD revised the maximum per-unit subsidy increase to 10 percent through
the HOME Final Rule instead of the proposed 5 percent.
On further consideration, HUD is proposing through this
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking to remove the HOME Final
Rule's 24 CFR 92.250(c) because the increased HOME maximum per-unit
investment for green projects would allow for increased spending on
projects with higher per-unit costs, potentially leading to the
production of fewer affordable housing units. Although commenters made
this argument in response to the HOME Proposed Rule and HUD elected to
retain this provision in the HOME Final Rule (90 FR 807), HUD
subsequently reconsidered these concerns in light of the President's
direction to lower the cost of housing and expand housing supply \9\
and to end programs that provide ``green'' subsidies.\10\ Furthermore,
from 2022-2024, the vast majority of HOME units (98.03%) were developed
or preserved using less than 95% of the current maximum allowable per
unit cost. Only 1.97% of HOME units' actual costs were within 5% of the
current per unit cost limit, so there is little evidence that
permitting increased subsidy would change behavior. In addition, given
that HUD has not published a subsequent Federal Register notice that
describes what constitutes acceptable green building standards, the
HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR 92.250(c) remains inoperative and is therefore
unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/delivering-emergency-price-relief-for-american-families-and-defeating-the-cost-of-living-crisis/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/delivering-emergency-price-relief-for-american-families-and-defeating-the-cost-of-living-crisis/</a>.
\10\ <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/unleashing-american-energy/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/unleashing-american-energy/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of this proposed removal of the HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR
92.250(c), HUD is proposing conforming revisions to 24 CFR 92.251 to
remove references relating to permitting a participating jurisdiction
to exceed the 24 CFR 92.250 maximum per-unit subsidy for a project that
meets certain green building standards. These proposed revisions would
remove 24 CFR 92.251(a)(3)(vii) and (b)(1)(xii). HUD is also proposing
to revise the HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR 92.508(a)(3)(iii) to conform
with the proposed elimination of the HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR
92.250(c).
Tenant Protections and Selection
24 CFR 92.253 of the HOME rule as it existed prior to the HOME
Final Rule provided substantive due process rights and prohibited lease
terms to tenants in HOME rental housing or assisted with HOME tenant-
based rental assistance and/or security deposit assistance. These
protections included a list of prohibited lease terms, which were
contained in 24 CFR 92.253(b), that derived from the Act, other
applicable laws, and relevant case law. In the HOME Proposed Rule, HUD
proposed significant revisions to the tenant protections and selection
provisions in 24 CFR 92.253. The HOME Final Rule incorporated a
majority of the proposed changes to 24 CFR 92.253 but with certain
revisions in response to public comments. In the HOME Final Rule, HUD
required three tenancy addenda be added to the leases of tenants living
in HOME rental housing units or assisted with HOME funds:
<bullet> 24 CFR 92.253(b) described the requirements for the HOME
rental housing tenancy addendum.
<bullet> 24 CFR 92.253(c) described the requirements for the HOME
tenant-based rental assistance addendum.
<bullet> 24 CFR 92.253(d) described the requirements for the HOME
security deposit assistance addendum.
While the tenancy addendum for tenants that only received security
deposit assistance contained the same substantive due process rights
found in the prohibited lease terms contained in the 24 CFR 92.253(b)
as it existed prior to the HOME Final Rule, the HOME rental housing
tenancy addendum and the HOME tenant-based rental assistance addendum
each contained a variety of new tenant protections that departed
significantly from the prior text. The extent of the revisions,
including how HUD had grouped the tenant protections by topic area,
make comparing the prior rule's tenant protections and the HOME Final
Rule's tenant protections extremely difficult. It also could lead to
significant confusion among the public.
[[Page 23198]]
Below, the Department provides examples of how the HOME Final
Rule's tenant protections created additional costs, increased burden,
and deviated significantly from the requirements of the Act and case
law. The Department also explains how it is revising the tenant
protection provisions of 24 CFR 92.253 in the language of the prior
rule with certain exceptions.
a. Examples of tenant protections in the HOME Final Rule that
created additional costs, increased owner or participating jurisdiction
burdens, or deviated significantly from the Act.
Unreasonable Interference and Retaliation
One of the new tenant protections created a new regulatory test:
the prohibition against unreasonable interference or retaliation. This
provision, which was contained in both 24 CFR 92.253(b)(5) and 24 CFR
92.253(c)(5) of the HOME Final Rule, has no basis in the Act. It would
have prohibited owners from unreasonably interfering with a tenant's
safety or peaceful enjoyment of their rental housing unit and
prohibited an owner from retaliating against a tenant for taking an
action allowable under the lease. Commenters were very concerned that
this new test could have a chilling effect on owner participation
because determining whether an owner had retaliated against a tenant or
had interfered with a tenant's peaceful enjoyment of their unit is
subjective. Some commenters were concerned that HUD was substituting
its own judgment for or supplanting the role of state and local law.
Commenters also believed that the courts were the more appropriate
authority to rule on landlord-tenant disputes, and that participating
jurisdictions should not be injected into this role.
Unconditional Relocation of Tenants During Repairs to the Unit
Another new provision in the tenant protections for HOME rental
housing imposed an additional cost on HOME rental housing owners. In 24
CFR 92.253(b)(1)(iii) of the HOME Final Rule, if an owner is required
to repair a life-threatening deficiency impacting the tenant and the
repairs cannot be completed on the day the deficiency is identified,
the owner would have been required to relocate the tenant to another
decent, safe, and sanitary unit in good repair or another form of
physically suitable lodging at no additional cost to the tenant until
the repairs were completed. This provision directly adds additional
costs to owners that are not paid for by any HOME assistance without
allowing owners other mitigation strategies. The provision also fails
to consider whether the tenant may have caused the underlying
deficiency, which could be necessary in determining whether an owner
must pay for the costs of relocating a tenant under state or local
landlord-tenant law.
New and Confusing Notice Requirements
The HOME Final Rule imposed notice requirements that provided no
meaningful benefit to tenants and were not required under the Act.
These include providing notices on changes in ownership and property
management (See 24 CFR 92.253(b)(3)(ii) and 24 CFR 92.253(c)(3)(ii) of
the HOME Final Rule), and notice of environmental, health, or safety
hazards affecting the project (See 24 CFR 92.253(f) of the HOME Final
Rule). Tenants have no meaningful method of objecting to changes in
property ownership or management and requiring notice there serves only
to create a potential liability for owners or participating
jurisdictions that fail to comply with the requirement. For
environmental, health, or safety hazards outside of the control of the
participating jurisdiction or owner, requiring they provide notice to
tenants or each other may be confusing or create a duty of care that
currently does not exist. If an owner and participating jurisdiction
failed to provide notice and a tenant was harmed by a safety hazard
that was beyond an owner or participating jurisdiction's control, a
tenant may attempt to bring legal action against the owner and
participating jurisdiction for failing to comply with the regulation,
even if the owner or participating jurisdiction had nothing to do with
the safety hazard.
New Requirements To Accept Holders of All Federal, State, and Local
Tenant-Based Rental Assistance
The HOME Final Rule also included expansions of existing statutory
requirements that deviated from the plain language of the Act and may
have created significant program design issues. In the HOME Final Rule,
HUD had expanded a provision through 24 CFR 92.253(e)(4) to require
owners to accept all forms of Federal, State, or local tenant-based
rental assistance. This change unnecessarily deviates from the plain
language in 42 U.S.C. 12745(a)(1)(D), which only prohibits denying the
selection of a holder of a voucher under section 8 of the U.S. Housing
Act of 1937. The Department had construed the statute as applying to
all forms of Federal, state and local tenant-based rental assistance
even though these forms of assistance may have different rules, program
designs, income targeting, and protections than the Housing Choice
Voucher and HOME programs. These differences in programs could have led
to conflicts. Reverting back to the prior language is closer to the
statutory intent of the drafters of the Act and will remove a potential
disincentive to owner participation in the HOME program.
Additional Provisions Proposed for Removal
In addition to the provisions highlighted above, except as
otherwise explained in this preamble, HUD is proposing to revert to
tenant protections as they existed prior to the 2025 Final Rule. A
selection of the provisions proposed for removal include:
--Requirements at Sec. 92.253(a)(1) that all leases be provided to the
participating jurisdiction prior to execution;
--Requirements at Sec. 92.253(b)(1) that the lease contain provisions
requiring owners to follow the HOME requirements that they maintain
physical condition of the unit and project to the participating
jurisdiction's property standards and State and local code
requirements; that owners professionally maintain and repair units; and
that owners, when controllable, provide continued, uninterrupted
utility service;
--Requirements at Sec. 92.253(b)(1) that owners must provide written
time frames for maintenance and repairs as soon as practicable and that
owners not charge tenants for reasonable wear and tear;
--Requirements at Sec. 92.253(b)(2) that the lease explicitly describe
use and occupancy protections that include rights for the family to
reside with a foster child, foster adult, or live-in aide and rights
that a tenant be able to reasonably access common areas of the project;
--Requirements at Sec. 92.253(b)(2) that owners provide reasonable
written notice prior to entering the unit and that they extend
protections to allow tenants to organize tenant associations and
associated activities;
--Requirements at Sec. 92.253(b)(7) that a tenant lease include a
requirement that owners must keep the personally identifiable
information of assisted families secure and confidential.
--Requirements at Sec. 92.253(b)(9) that security deposits be
refundable, not be more than two months' rent, and that owners provide
an itemized list of deductions for any charges against the security
deposit.
[[Page 23199]]
b. Returning to the tenant protections required by the Act and
relevant case law.
The statutory and substantive due process requirements included in
the tenant protections were first required under the HOME regulations
in 1991.\11\ An additional protection was added in 2013 \12\ to comply
with section 504 of the of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C.
794).\13\ The HOME Final Rule incorporated a new protection for
tenants, owners, and employees of owners that was required under Public
Law 114-113. This provision permitted an owner to terminate a tenancy
or refuse to renew the tenancy of a tenant that posed a direct threat
to the health and safety of other tenants in the project, employees of
the owner, or an imminent and serious threat to the property. This
protection ensured that other tenants of the housing and employees of
the owner would be safe from harm, and that owners would not incur
liability for terminating a tenant's lease when they posed a danger to
others in the project or to the housing itself. This new protection
permitted termination of tenancy or refusal to renew tenancy when it
was in accordance with the requirements of State or local law, and
permitted the owner to do so without need for a 30-day waiting period
to ensure that the danger posed to tenants, employees, and the housing
was removed as quickly as legally possible,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Home Investment Partnerships Program at 56 FR 65312,
65354 (Dec. 16, 1991).
\12\ See HOME Investment Partnerships Program: Improving
Performance and Accountability; Updating Property Standards at 78 FR
44628, 44674 (July 24, 2013).
\13\ See the version of 24 CFR 92.253(b)(9) that existed prior
to the publication of the HOME Final Rule, which prohibited the
following lease term: ``Mandatory supportive services. Agreement by
the tenant (other than a tenant in transitional housing) to accept
supportive services that are offered.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beyond these statutorily required tenant protections, the Act does
not require HUD to further expand tenant protections under the HOME
program. Expanding tenant protections beyond those that are statutorily
required may increase HOME rental project owners' compliance costs and
could create new barriers to the development of affordable housing by
deterring owner participation in the HOME program.
In accordance with the Executive Order 14192 entitled ``Unleashing
Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' the Department was directed to
identify regulations that ``increase the incremental cost'' of doing
business. That same Executive Order 14192 expressly stated that the
policy of the Administration is to ``significantly reduce the private
expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations to secure
America's economic prosperity.'' Executive Order 14219 likewise
requires that Agencies identify ``regulations that are based on
anything other than the best reading of the underlying statutory
authority or prohibition'' and ``regulations that impose significant
costs upon private parties that are not outweighed by public
benefits.''
In furtherance of Executive Order 14192 and Executive Order 14219
and giving appropriate consideration to the public comments submitted
in response to the HOME Proposed Rule language in 24 CFR 92.253, HUD is
proposing to revise 24 CFR 92.253 to more closely match the language
that is statutorily mandated and substantively return 24 CFR 92.253 to
the language that existed prior to the publication of the HOME Final
Rule. HUD is still proposing some revisions to 24 CFR 92.253 as it
existed prior to publication of the HOME Final Rule because the
Department believes they add greater clarity to the requirements,
incorporate certain statutory protections, align HOME with other HUD
programs, and provide owners and participating jurisdictions with
greater flexibility. Below, please find a description of proposed
revisions to 24 CFR 92.253 as it existed prior to the HOME Final Rule
24 CFR 92.253(a)
HUD is proposing to revise the HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR 92.253(a)
to state that a lease between the tenant and the owner of rental
housing assisted with HOME funds, tenant-based rental assistance, or
security deposit assistance must be in writing, for a period of not
less than one year, unless by mutual agreement between the tenant and
the owner a shorter period is specified. HUD is also proposing to
clarify that the lease for tenants in rental housing assisted with HOME
funds or tenants receiving either tenant-based rental assistance or
security deposit assistance shall not contain any of the prohibited
lease terms in 24 CFR 92.253(b). These are clarifications of the
application of the existing requirements for tenant leases and are not
substantive revisions to the requirements. HUD had already interpreted
the lease requirements in 24 CFR 92.253 to apply to tenants with
tenant-based rental assistance and security deposit assistance.
HUD is proposing to remove the HOME Final Rule's new requirements
to include contact information for the owner, property management
staff, and participating jurisdiction in the written lease. HUD defers
to participating jurisdictions and owners to determine the best way to
ensure that tenants have the relevant contact information they may
need. HUD is also declining to propose requiring that each tenant lease
include a tenancy addendum. While HUD is aware that some participating
jurisdictions do require tenancy addenda to eliminate any prohibited
lease terms from tenant leases, HUD is deferring to participating
jurisdictions and owners in determining how best to ensure that
prohibited lease terms are not included in tenant leases.
Section 24 CFR 92.253(b)
HUD is proposing to retain the change made to 24 CFR 92.253(b)(8)
by the HOME Final Rule to add the words ``and the court so orders'' at
the end of 24 CFR 92.253(b)(8) to ensure that a tenant is only charged
with the costs of legal actions if the tenant loses and the court
orders the tenant to pay costs. HUD believes it is appropriate to
maintain this language because the determination of whether a tenant
should pay court costs is more appropriately determined by the court
and not through a provision described within the HOME regulation. HUD
believes it is an overreach for it to state unequivocally in a
regulation that a tenant may be obligated to pay the costs of a case if
the tenant loses at trial. This is especially true when such costs may
not be required under applicable state or local law or where a tenant
loses on one ground but not another. The court of competent
jurisdiction that is deciding the matter is also better situated in
determining whether a tenant must pay court costs, as it has heard the
relevant facts pertaining to the case and has determined the
culpability of the parties.
24 CFR 92.253(c)
HUD is proposing to revise 24 CFR 92.253(c) of the HOME rule as it
existed prior to the HOME Final Rule to include a clarification that
the termination of tenancy provisions apply to tenants receiving
tenant-based rental assistance and tenants receiving security deposit
assistance. This is a nonsubstantive clarification of existing
requirements that was included in the HOME Final Rule
In addition, HUD is proposing to add the statutorily required
language from the HOME Final Rule providing that a minimum 30-day
notice period is not required for the termination of tenancy or refusal
to renew tenancy of a tenant in rental housing or a tenant receiving
tenant-based rental assistance and security deposit assistance when it
is due to a direct threat to the safety of the
[[Page 23200]]
tenants or employees of the housing or an imminent and serious threat
to the property, as long as the termination of tenancy or refusal to
renew tenancy is in accordance with Federal, State, and local law, and
the requirements of 24 CFR part 92.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 42 U.S.C. 12755(b), as amended by Public Law 114-113.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD is also proposing to maintain the addition of the language from
the HOME Final Rule describing what constitutes ``good cause'' for the
termination of tenancy or the refusal to renew tenancy, which includes
the following situations:
<bullet> The owner is permitted to do so pursuant to the provisions
contained in 24 CFR part 5, subpart I; 24 CFR 882.511; or 24 CFR
982.310;
<bullet> A tenant or household member is a direct threat to the
safety of the tenants or employees of the housing or an imminent and
serious threat to the property;
<bullet> A tenant unreasonably refuses to provide the owner with
access to the unit to allow the owner to repair the unit;
<bullet> An owner must terminate a tenancy to comply with an order
issued by a governmental entity or court that requires the tenant to
vacate the project or unit;
<bullet> An owner must terminate a tenancy to comply with a local
ordinance that necessitates vacating the project or unit;
<bullet> A tenant fails to purchase a housing unit within the
timeframes listed within the tenant's lease-purchase agreement; or
<bullet> For tenants with tenant-based rental assistance only, when
an owner intends to withdraw the unit from the rental market to occupy
the unit; allow an owner's family member to occupy the unit; or
demolish or substantially rehabilitate the unit.
HUD is proposing to maintain these ``good cause'' reasons to
terminate tenancy or refuse to renew tenancy because HUD believes that
maintaining these ``good cause'' reasons will better incentivize the
production of affordable housing and improve private landlord
participation in HOME tenant-based rental assistance.
d. 24 CFR 92.253(d) (24 CFR 92.253(e) of the HOME Final Rule).
HUD is proposing to revise 24 CFR 92.253(d) of the HOME rule, which
was 24 CFR 92.253(e) in the HOME Final Rule. 24 CFR 92.253(d)(3) of the
HOME rule describes when an owner may limit eligibility or give
preference to a particular segment of the population. 24 CFR
92.253(e)(3)(ii) limits an owner's authority to add a limitation to or
preference for a person with disabilities who requires services offered
at a project when the project does not receive funding from a Federal
program that limits eligibility to a particular segment of the
population. The first sentence of 24 CFR 92.253(d)(3)(ii)(C) permits
limiting to or providing a preference for persons with disabilities who
need services at a project only if the services cannot be provided in a
nonsegregated setting. HUD believed at the time that this provision
struck the balance between providing care for individuals with
disabilities and avoiding unnecessary segregation on the basis of
disability. The HOME Final Rule removed this restriction. HUD has
determined that this provision is not required by any applicable law
and is an unreasonable restriction on owners, participating
jurisdictions, and persons with disabilities. Removing this restriction
will make it easier for owners to better target assistance to persons
with disabilities that need supportive services. HUD is therefore
proposing, consistent with the HOME Final Rule, to delete the first
sentence of this provision to permit owners to limit or provide a
preference to persons with disabilities even if the services provided
at the HOME project can be provided in a nonsegregated setting.
HUD is also proposing a clarification to that same 24 CFR
92.253(d)(3)(ii)(C) about how an owner may advertise the project as
offering various supportive services, including a description of the
specific supportive services available. That rule text at 24 CFR
92.253(d)(3)(ii)(C) states that the owner may advertise the project as
offering services for a particular type of disability but must permit
all eligible persons with disabilities who may benefit from the
services provided in the project to participate. This description
appears to indicate that owners can advertise that a project is only
for persons with specific disabilities even when all persons with
disabilities may obtain the benefit of supportive services offered in a
HOME project. The provisions are not written in plain language and are
difficult to follow. HUD is proposing to break up the sentence into two
short, declarative sentences. The first sentence states that an owner
may advertise a project's supportive services, including a description
of the specific supportive services available. The second sentence
explains that the project must be open to all eligible persons with
disabilities. This language is identical to the language in the HOME
Final Rule's 24 CFR 92.253(e)(3)(ii)(C).
In addition, HUD is proposing to remove the language from 24 CFR
92.253(d)(4) that existed prior to the publication of the HOME Final
Rule relating to Section 8 Tenant Based Assistance and instead only
reference the Housing Choice Voucher Program and HOME tenant-based
rental assistance. This is a minor clarification, as the name of the
program is the Housing Choice Voucher Program and it is unnecessary to
maintain the wording ``Section 8 Tenant-Based Assistance.'' As
discussed in the example section above, HUD is declining to propose an
expansion of 24 CFR 92.253(d)(4)'s requirements to include additional
Federal, state, and local tenant-based rental assistance programs other
than what is required under the Act. As discussed earlier, the
Department is also proposing to revise 24 CFR 92.253(d)(5) to state
that except for small-scale housing and scattered site manufactured
housing rental projects, all selection of tenants to HOME rental
housing projects must be from a written waiting list in chronological
order of their application, insofar as practicable. HUD is permitting
participating jurisdiction the discretion to establish alternatives to
requiring owners to maintain a written waiting list for the selection
of tenants in these types of projects. This could allow participating
jurisdictions the discretion to maintain jurisdiction-wide waiting
lists on behalf of small-scale housing and scattered site manufactured
housing project owners, or to utilize other nondiscriminatory methods
of placing income-eligible tenants in HOME-assisted rental housing
projects.
Other Conforming Revisions Related to the Proposed Changes in 24 CFR
92.253
HUD is proposing to revise the HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR 92.209(g)
and 92.504(c)(2)(xii) to remove reference to the HOME tenant-based
rental assistance tenancy addendum. This is a conforming revision due
to HUD's proposed revisions to 24 CFR 92.253. For additional background
on HUD's proposed removal of the tenancy addenda requirements of the
HOME Final Rule, see the description of the proposed changes to the
HOME Final Rule's 24 CFR 92.253(a) found earlier in this supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking.
Carbon Monoxide Detection
In the HOME Proposed Rule, 89 FR 46630, and the HOME Final Rule, 90
FR 755, HUD stated that it would more fully describe carbon monoxide
requirements applicable to the HOME program in a separate publication
in the Federal Register. Instead, HUD is proposing through this
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking to
[[Page 23201]]
include carbon monoxide detector requirements in HOME program
regulations. As explained in HUD's NSPIRE final rule, certain carbon
monoxide detector standards apply to other HUD programs, not including
HOME, pursuant to Section 101, ``Carbon Monoxide Alarms or Detectors in
Federally Assisted Housing'' of Title I of Division Q, Financial
Services Provisions and Intellectual Property, of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 116-260, 134 Stat. 2162 (2020).
See 88 FR 30445. The required standards include chapters 9 and 11 of
the 2018 International Fire Code. 134 Stat. 2163-65. Therefore, HUD is
proposing to revise 24 CFR 92.251(a)(3)(vi)(A) to state that housing
units must have a carbon monoxide detector installed in a manner that
meets or exceeds standards described in chapters 9 and 11 of the 2018
International Fire Code, consistent with the inspection requirements of
other HUD programs.
24 CFR Parts 91 and 92--Technical Revisions and Correction
HUD is proposing a technical correction to 24 CFR 92.207(h) to
replace the citation to Sec. 92.254(a)(9) with a citation to Sec.
92.254(b)(2), as paragraph (a)(9) does not exist in Sec. 92.254 and
the specified costs related to preserving affordability of housing
assisted with HOME funds that HUD intends to cross reference are in
Sec. 92.254(b)(2). HUD is proposing to make certain technical
revisions in the HOME Final Rule's paragraphs 24 CFR
91.220(1)(2)(vii)(D), 91.320(k)(2)(vii)(D), 92.252(k), 92.351(a)(1),
and 92.504(c)(3)(iii) to replace the citation to ``24 CFR 92.253(e)''
with ``24 CFR 92.253.'' This proposal is a conforming revision because
HUD is proposing to remove the HOME Final Rule's paragraph 24 CFR
92.253(e), as discussed earlier in this supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking. HUD is also proposing a technical correction to paragraph
24 CFR 92.254(a)(4) to change the citation to applicable property
standards from ``Sec. 92.251(c)(3)'' to ``Sec. 92.251'' because the
provision should have cited to the property standards more broadly and
not to the property standards for existing housing that is acquired for
homeownership alone. Homeownership assistance can be used on projects
involving new construction, rehabilitation, or manufactured housing
which are covered under 24 CFR 92.251(a), (b), and (e) respectively.
III. Application of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 to the HOME Program
HUD reminds HOME program recipients that grants must be
administered in accordance with all applicable immigration restrictions
and requirements, including the eligibility and verification
requirements that apply under title IV of the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, as amended (8 U.S.C.
1601-1646) (PRWORA) and any applicable requirements that HUD, the
Attorney General, or the U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services may
establish from time to time to comply with PRWORA.
IV. Findings and Certifications
Regulatory Review--Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), a
determination must be made regarding whether a regulatory action is
significant and, therefore, subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget in accordance with the requirements of the order.
Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review)
directs executive agencies to analyze regulations that are ``outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify,
streamline, expand, or repeal them in accordance with what has been
learned.'' Executive Order 13563 also directs that, where relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives, and to the extent
permitted by law, agencies identify and consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public.
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking re-opens public
comment for certain topics and provisions that were addressed in HUD's
May 29, 2024, proposed rule entitled ``HOME Investment Partnerships
Program: Program Updates and Streamlining,'' as described throughout
this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking was developed in a
manner that is consistent with Executive Order 12866 and 13563. This
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking was determined to be a
significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 but was not deemed to be significant under section 3(f)(1).
Executive Order 14192, Regulatory Costs
Executive Order 14192, entitled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation,'' was issued on January 31, 2025. Section 3(c) of
Executive Order 14192 requires that any new incremental costs
associated with new regulations shall, to the extent permitted by law,
be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least
10 prior regulations. The current burden estimate for HOME Investment
Partnerships Program: Further Program Updates and Streamlining would
result in an overall net decrease of 22,377 annual burden hours. This
consists largely of an estimated decrease of 20,001 annual burden hours
due to the revisions of tenant protections in Sec. 92.253; an
estimated decrease of 376 annual burden hours due to the removal of
increases to maximum subsidy limits for green buildings in Sec.
92.250; and a decrease of 2,000 annual burden hours due to the
reduction of income-determinations in scattered site manufactured
housing rental projects.
OMB has determined that this proposed rule would be a repeal of a
regulation resulting in reduced regulatory costs for purposes of
Executive Order 14192 by providing flexibility and reduced burdens for
all of the parties affected by this proposed rule.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
HUD prepared a regulatory impact analysis (RIA) that addresses the
costs and benefits of this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
HUD's RIA is part of the docket file for this supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
As described in the RIA, HUD anticipates that the economic impact
of this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking will be almost
entirely within the HOME program. In other words, the changes to the
HOME program will affect what participating jurisdictions do with the
HOME funds they receive from HUD and how projects that accept this
funding source operate. HUD strongly encourages the public to view the
docket file.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking
requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking aims to improve the
HOME program by making certain changes related to those incorporated
through
[[Page 23202]]
the HOME Final Rule. As described in the RIA, HUD anticipates that the
economic impacts of this rule will be almost entirely within the HOME
program. In other words, the changes to the HOME program will affect
what participating jurisdictions do with the HOME funds they receive
from HUD and how projects that accept this funding source operate. For
the reasons presented, the undersigned certifies that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Environmental Impact
A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the
environment has been made in accordance with HUD regulations in 24 CFR
part 50 that implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). The FONSI is available
through the docket file at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. The FONSI is
also available for public inspection during regular business hours in
the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Room 10276,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW,
Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD
Headquarters building, you must schedule an appointment in advance to
review the FONSI by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-3055
(this is not a toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is prepared to
receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well
as individuals with speech or communication disabilities. To learn more
about how to make an accessible telephone call, please visit <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs">https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs</a>.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) prohibits an agency from
publishing any rule that has Federalism implications if the rule
either: (i) imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and
local governments and is not required by statute, or (ii) preempts
State law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding
requirements of section 6 of the Executive order. This supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking does not have Federalism implications and
does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local
governments or preempt State law within the meaning of the Executive
Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and
Tribal governments, and on the private sector. This supplemental notice
of proposed rulemaking does not impose any Federal mandates on any
State, local, or Tribal governments, or on the private sector, within
the meaning of the UMRA.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements contained in this final
rule have been approved by OMB in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned the OMB
control number 2506-0171. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information, unless the collection
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking proposes to remove
a provision in the HOME Final Rule's paragraph 24 CFR 92.250(c) that
would have permitted a participating jurisdiction to exceed the maximum
per-unit subsidy described in 24 CFR 92.250 for projects that met one
of the acceptable green building standards that HUD would describe in a
separate Federal Register notice. If finalized, this proposed removal
of the HOME Final Rule's24 CFR 92.250(c) will lead to a slight decrease
in burden for participating jurisdictions with qualified projects.
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking also proposes to
add paragraph (g)(1) to 24 CFR 92.252, which would permit an owner of a
scattered site manufactured housing rental project to re-examine annual
income every three years, rather than annually. This addition of 24 CFR
92.252(g)(1) will reduce the burden of performing income determinations
in scattered site manufactured housing rental projects.
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking also removes the
various tenancy lease addenda found in the HOME Final Rule's paragraphs
24 CFR 92.253(b), (c), and (d), which will reduce the burden on owners
of rental housing and private landlords participating in the HOME
program.
Overall, the proposals in this supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking would, if finalized, result in a net decrease of burden by
22,377 total estimated annual burden hours.
The burden of the information collections in this final rule is
estimated as follows:
Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
Number of average time Total
24 CFR section reference Number of Frequency of responses for estimated
parties responses per party requirements annual burden
(hours) (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 92.252(g)(1) scattered 1,000 Annual............... 1 2 (2,000)
site manufactured housing
rental project income
determination.
Removal of Sec. 92.250 to 188 Annual............... 1 2 (376)
increase maximum subsidy
limits for green buildings.
Removal and replacing Sec. 6,667 Annual............... 1 3 (20,001)
92.253 tenant protections
(including lease addendum
requirement).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Electronic Access and Filing
Comments submitted electronically through the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a> website can be viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public. Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to submit comments electronically.
All comments and communications properly submitted to HUD will be
available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
weekdays at the address provided in the ADDRESSES section of this
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking. Due to security measures at
the HUD Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the
public
[[Page 23203]]
comments must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at (202)
708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is prepared
to receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as
well as from individuals with speech or communication disabilities. To
learn more about how to make an accessible telephone call, please visit
<a href="https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs">https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs</a>.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking may be found at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.
List of Subjects
24 CFR Part 91
Aged; Grant programs--housing and community development; Homeless;
Individuals with disabilities; Low and moderate income housing;
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
24 CFR Part 92
Administrative practice and procedure; Low and moderate income
housing; Manufactured homes; Rent subsidies; Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, HUD proposes to amend 24
CFR parts 91 and 92 as follows:
PART 91--CONSOLIDATED SUBMISSIONS FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 3601-3619, 5301-5315, 11331-
11388, 12701-12711, 12741-12756, and 12901-12912.
Sec. 91.220 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 91.220, amend paragraph (l)(2)(vii)(D) by removing the
citation to ``24 CFR 92.253(e)'' and adding in its place a citation to
``24 CFR 92.253''.
Sec. 91.320 [Amended]
0
3. In Sec. 91.320, amend paragraph (k)(2)(vii)(D) by removing the
citation to ``24 CFR 92.253(e)'' and adding in its place a citation to
``24 CFR 92.253''.
PART 92--[AMENDED]
0
4. The authority citation for part 92 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 12701-12839; 12 U.S.C. 1701x.
0
5. In FR Doc. 2024-29824, the amendment to add paragraph (c) to Sec.
92.250 (amendment 24.c) and the amendment to revise Sec. 92.253
(amendment 27), published on January 6, 2025 (90 FR 746), are
withdrawn.
0
6. In Sec. 92.2, add the definition of ``scattered site manufactured
housing rental project'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 92.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Scattered site manufactured housing rental project means a rental
project of individually leased manufactured housing units owned by a
single project owner.
* * * * *
Sec. 92.3 [Amended]
0
7. Amend Sec. 92.3 by removing paragraph (e).
Sec. 92.207 [Amended]
0
8. In Sec. 92.207, amend paragraph (h) by removing the citation
``Sec. 92.254(a)(9)'' wherever it appears and adding in its place the
citation ``Sec. 92.254(b)(2)''.
Sec. 92.209 [Amended]
0
8. In Sec. 92.209, remove the last sentence of paragraph (g).
Sec. 92.251 [Amended]
0
9. Amend Sec. 92.251 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(3)(vi)(A);
0
b. Removing paragraph (a)(3)(vii);
0
c. Removing paragraph (b)(1)(xii); and
0
d. Revising paragraph (f)(5)(i).
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 92.251 Property Standards and inspections.
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(vi) * * *
(A) A carbon monoxide alarm must be installed in the housing unit
in a manner that meets or exceeds the carbon monoxide detection
standards described in chapters 9 and 11 of the 2018 publication of the
International Fire Code.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(5) * * *
(i) Life-threatening deficiencies. Life-threatening deficiencies
must be corrected immediately. Except for small-scale housing or
scattered site manufactured housing rental projects, the participating
jurisdiction must adopt a more frequent inspection schedule for
properties that have been found to have life-threatening deficiencies.
For small-scale housing or scattered site manufactured housing rental
projects, the participating jurisdiction may adopt a more frequent
inspection schedule if the small-scale housing or scattered site
manufactured housing rental project is found to have life-threatening
deficiencies, as described in its inspection procedures.
* * * * *
Sec. 92.252 [Amended]
0
10. Amend Sec. 92.252 by:
0
a. Removing the words ``small-scale housing'', wherever they appear in
paragraph (g)(1), and adding in their place the words ``small-scale
housing or a scattered site manufactured housing rental project'';
0
b. Removing the words ``Small-Scale Rental Housing Projects'' from the
title of Table 2 to Paragraph (g)(1), and adding in their place the
words ``Small-Scale Housing or Scattered Site Manufactured Housing
Rental Projects'';
0
c. Removing the words ``small-scale housing projects'', wherever they
appear in paragraph (g)(2), and adding in their place the words
``small-scale housing or scattered site manufactured housing rental
projects''; and
0
d. Removing the citation ``Sec. 92.253(e)'', wherever it appears in
paragraph (k), and adding in its place the citation ``Sec. 92.253''.
0
11. Amend Sec. 92.253 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a);
0
b. Revising paragraph (b)(8) by adding the words ``and the court so
orders'' immediately after the word ``loses'';
0
c. Revising paragraph (c);
0
d. Revising paragraphs (d)(3)(ii)(C), (d)(4), and (d)(5).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 92.253 Tenant protections and selection.
(a) Lease. There must be a written lease between the tenant and the
owner of rental housing assisted with HOME funds, tenant-based rental
assistance, and security deposit assistance. The lease must be for a
period of not less than 1 year, unless by mutual agreement between the
tenant and the owner, a shorter period is specified. The lease must
incorporate the VAWA lease term/addendum required under Sec.
92.359(e), except as otherwise provided by Sec. 92.359(b). The lease
must not contain any of the prohibited lease terms in paragraph (b) of
this section.
* * * * *
(c) Termination of tenancy.
(1) An owner may not terminate the tenancy or refuse to renew the
lease of a tenant of rental housing assisted with HOME funds or a
tenant assisted with tenant-based rental assistance, or security
deposit assistance except for serious or repeated violation of the
terms and conditions of the lease; for violation of applicable Federal,
State, or local law; for completion of the tenancy period for
transitional housing or failure to follow any required transitional
housing supportive services plan; or for
[[Page 23204]]
other good cause. Good cause does not include an increase in the
tenant's income or refusal of the tenant to purchase the housing. To
terminate or refuse to renew tenancy, the owner must serve written
notice upon the tenant specifying the grounds for the action at least
30 days before the termination of tenancy or refusal to renew tenancy.
The minimum 30-day period is not required if the termination of tenancy
or refusal to renew is due to a direct threat to the safety of the
tenants or employees of the housing or an imminent and serious threat
to the property and the termination of tenancy or refusal to renew is
in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (c)(2) of this
section. Good cause includes when:
(i) The owner is permitted to do so pursuant to the provisions
contained in 24 CFR part 5, subpart I; 24 CFR 882.511; or 24 CFR
982.310;
(ii) A tenant or household member is a direct threat to the safety
of the tenants or employees of the housing or an imminent and serious
threat to the property;
(iii) A tenant unreasonably refuses to provide the owner access to
the unit to allow the owner to repair the unit;
(iv) An owner must terminate a tenancy to comply with an order
issued by a governmental entity or court that requires the tenant to
vacate the project or unit;
(v) An owner must terminate a tenancy to comply with a local
ordinance that necessitates vacating the project or unit;
(vi) A tenant fails to purchase a housing unit within the
timeframes listed within the tenant's lease-purchase agreement; or
(vii) For tenants with tenant-based rental assistance only, when an
owner intends to: withdraw the unit from the rental market to occupy
the unit; allow an owner's family member to occupy the unit; or
demolish or substantially rehabilitate the unit.
(2) The termination of tenancy or refusal to renew must be in
accordance with Federal, State, local law, and the requirements of this
part, including but not limited to requirements regarding fair housing,
nondiscrimination, and VAWA.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The families must not be required to accept the services
offered at the project. The owner may advertise the project as offering
various supportive services, including a description of the specific
supportive services available. The project must be open to all eligible
persons with disabilities.
(4) The limitation does not exclude an applicant with a voucher
under the Housing Choice Voucher Program (24 CFR part 982) or an
applicant participating in a HOME tenant-based rental assistance
program because of the status of the applicant as a holder of such type
of assistance;
(5) Except for small-scale housing and scattered site manufactured
housing rental projects, provides for the selection of tenants from a
written waiting list in the chronological order of their application,
insofar as is practicable. The participating jurisdiction may establish
alternative procedures to a written waiting list for the selection of
tenants in small-scale housing and scattered site manufactured housing
rental projects;
* * * * *
Sec. 92.254 [Amended]
0
12. Amend Sec. 92.254 by removing the citation to ``Sec.
92.251(c)(3)'' in paragraph (a)(4) and adding in its place a citation
to ``Sec. 92.251''.
Sec. 92.351 [Amended]
0
13. In Sec. 92.351, amend paragraph (a)(1) by removing the citation to
``Sec. 92.253(e)(3)'' and adding in its place a citation to ``Sec.
92.253''.
0
14. Amend Sec. 92.504 by:
0
a. Revising the last sentence of paragraph (c)(2)(xii); and
0
b. Removing the citation to ``Sec. 92.253(e)'' in paragraph
(c)(3)(iii) and adding in its place a citation to ``Sec. 92.253''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 92.504 Participating jurisdiction responsibilities; written
agreements.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(xii) * * * For any projects involving HOME rental housing, tenant-
based rental assistance, or security deposit assistance, the agreement
must require that the tenant leases comply with Sec. 92.253 for all
HOME-assisted rental housing units or tenants.
* * * * *
0
15. In Sec. 92.508, revise paragraph (a)(3)(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 92.508 Recordkeeping.
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) Records demonstrating that each rental housing or
homeownership project meets the minimum per-unit subsidy amount of
Sec. 92.205(c), the maximum per-unit subsidy amount in accordance with
the requirement in Sec. 92.250(a), and the subsidy layering and
underwriting evaluation adopted in accordance with Sec. 92.250(b).
* * * * *
Ronald J. Kurtz,
Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development.
[FR Doc. 2026-08406 Filed 4-29-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 30, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.