36 C.F.R. Subpart E—Post-Completion Compliance Responsibilities
Title 36 - Parks, Forests, and Public Property
Source: 51 FR 34186, Sept. 25, 1986, unless otherwise noted.
These post-completion responsibilities apply to each area or facility for which Urban Park and Recreation Recovery (UPARR) program assistance is obtained, regardless of the extent of participation of the program in the assisted area or facility. Responsibility for compliance with these provisions rests with the grant recipient. The responsibilities cited herein are applicable to the 1010 area depicted or otherwise described in the 1010 boundary map and/or as described in other project documentation approved by the Department of the Interior. In many instances, this area exceeds that actually receiving UPARR assistance so as to assure the protection of a viable recreation entity. For leased sites assisted under UPARR, compliance with post-completion requirements of the grant following lease expiration is dictated by the terms of the project agreement. The information collection requirements contained in §72.72 have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and assigned clearance number 1024–0048. The information is being collected to determine whether to approve a grant recipient's request to convert an assisted site or facility to other than public recreation uses. The information will be used to assure that the requirements of section 1010 of the UPARR Act would be met should the proposed conversion be implemented. Response is required in order to obtain the benefit of Department of the Interior approval. (a) Background and legal requirements. The UPARR program has made funds available for the renovation and rehabilitation of numerous urban parks and recreation facilities. In many cases, the UPARR funds were used only in a portion of a site or facility or were only a small percentage of the funds required to renovate or rehabilitate a property. Nevertheless, all recipients of funds for renovation and rehabilitation projects are obligated by the terms of the grant agreement to continually maintain the site or facility for public recreation use regardless of the percent of UPARR funds expended relative to the project and the facility as a whole. This provision is contained in the UPARR Program Administration Guideline (NPS–37) and is also referenced in §72.36. In accordance with section 1010 of the UPARR Act, no property improved or developed with UPARR assistance shall, without the approval of NPS, be converted to other than public recreation uses. A conversion will only be approved if it is found to be in accord with the current local park and recreation Recovery Action Program and/or equivalent recreation plans and only upon such conditions as deemed necessary to assure the provision of adequate recreation properties and opportunities of reasonably equivalent location and usefulness. Section 1010 is designed to ensure that areas or facilities receiving UPARR grant assistance are continually maintained in recreation use and available to the general public. (b) Prerequisites for conversion approval. Requests for permission to convert UPARR assisted properties in whole or in part to other than public recreation uses must be submitted by the recipient to the appropriate NPS Regional Director in writing. NPS will only consider conversion requests if the following prerequisites have been met: (1) All practical alternatives to the proposed conversion have been evaluated. (2) The proposed conversion and substitution are in accord with the current Recovery Action Program and/or equivalent recreation plans. (3) The proposal assures the provision of adequate recreation properties and opportunities of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location. Dependent upon the situation and at the discretion of NPS, the replacement property need not provide identical recreation experiences or be located at the same site, provided it is in a reasonably equivalent location. It must, however, be administered by the same political jurisdiction as the converted property. Equivalent usefulness and location will be determined based on the following criteria: (i) Property to be converted must be evaluated in order to determine what recreation needs are being fulfilled by the facilities which exist and the types of recreation resources and opportunities available. The property being proposed for substitution must then be evaluated in a similar manner to determine if it will meet recreation needs which are at least like in magnitude and impact to the user community as the converted site. (ii) Replacement property need not necessarily be directly adjacent to or close by the converted site. This policy provides the administrative flexibility to determine location recognizing that the property should meet existing public recreation needs. While generally this will involve the selection of a site serving the same community(ies) or area as the converted site, there may be exceptions. For example, if property being converted is in an area undergoing major demographic change and the area has no existing or anticipated future need for recreation facilities, then the project sponsor should seek to locate the substitute area in another location within the jurisdiction. (4) In the case of assisted sites which are partially rather than wholly converted, the impact of the converted portion on the remainder shall be considered. If such a conversion is approved, the unconverted area must remain recreationally viable or be replaced as well. (5) The guidelines for environmental evaluation have been satisfactorily completed and considered by NPS during its review of the proposed 1010 action. In cases where the proposed conversion arises from another Federal action, final review of the proposal shall not occur until NPS is assured that all environmental review requirements related to that other action have been met. (6) State intergovernmental clearinghouse review procedures have been adhered to if the proposed conversion and substitution constitute significant changes to the original grant. (c) Amendments for conversion. All conversions require amendments to the original grant agreement. Amendment requests should be submitted concurrently with conversion requests or at such time as all details of the conversion have been worked out with NPS. Section 1010 project boundary maps shall be submitted with the amendment request to identify the changes to the original area caused by the proposed conversion and to establish a new project area pursuant to the substitution. Once the conversion has been approved, replacement property should be immediately acquired. Exceptions to this rule would occur only when it is not possible for replacement property to be identified prior to the request for the conversion. It will, however, be NPS policy to avoid such a situation if at all possible and to agree only if warranted by exceptional circumstances. In such cases, express commitment to satisfy section 1010 substitution requirements within a specified period, normally not to exceed one year following conversion approval, must be received from the local government agency in the form of a grant amendment. (d) Obsolete facilities. Recipients are not required to continue operation of a particular facility beyond its useful life. However, when a facility is declared obsolete, the site must nonetheless be maintained in public recreation use following discontinuance of the assisted facility. Failure to so maintain is considered to be a conversion. Requests regarding changes from a UPARR funded facility to another otherwise eligible facility at the same site that significantly contravene the original plans for the area must be made in writing to the Regional Director. NPS approval must be obtained prior to the occurrence of the change. NPS approval is not necessarily required, however, for each and every facility use change. Rather, a project area should be viewed in the context of overall use and should be monitored in this context. A change from UPARR-developed tennis courts to basketball courts, for example, would not require NPS approval. A change from a swimming pool to a less intense area of limited development such as picnic facilities, or vice versa, would, however, require NPS review and approval. To assure that facility changes do not significantly contravene the original project agreement, NPS shall be notified by the recipient of all proposed changes in advance of their occurrence. A primary NPS consideration in the review of requests for changes in use will be the consistency of the proposal with the Recovery Action Program and/or equivalent recreation plans. Changes to other than public recreation use require NPS approval and the substitution of replacement land in accordance with section 1010 of the UPARR Act and paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section. (a) Background. UPARR policy prohibits discrimination on the basis of residence (refer to §72.65(b)) including preferential reservation or membership systems on properties improved with UPARR assistance. This prohibition applies to both regularly scheduled and special events. The general provisions regarding non-discrimination at sites assisted under Interior programs and, thereby, all other recreation facilities managed by the recipient, are covered in 43 CFR part 17 which implements the provisions of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for the Department. (b) Policy. There shall be no discrimination for UPARR assisted programs or services on the basis of residence, except in reasonable fee differentials. Post-completion compliance responsibilities of the recipient should continue to ensure that discrimination on the basis of residency is not occurring. (c) Fees. For parks or recreation properties or programs funded with UPARR assistance, fees charged to nonresidents cannot exceed twice that charged to residents. Where there is no charge for residents but a fee is charged to nonresidents, the nonresident fees cannot exceed fees charged at comparable State or local public facilities having fee systems. These fee provisions apply only to the approved 1010 areas applicable to the recipient. Reservation, membership, or annual permit systems available to residents must also be available to nonresidents and the period of availability must be the same for both residents and nonresidents. Recipients are prohibited from providing residents the option of purchasing annual or daily permits while at the same time restricting nonresidents to the purchase of annual permits only.
Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property
PART 72—URBAN PARK AND RECREATION RECOVERY ACT OF 1978
Subpart E—Post-Completion Compliance Responsibilities
§ 72.70 Applicability.
§ 72.71 Information collection.
§ 72.72 Conversion requirements.
§ 72.73 Residency requirements.
§§ 72.74-72.75 [Reserved]
Appendix A to Part 72—Criteria for Eligibility
Jurisdictions were considered for eligibility if they were functioning general purpose local governments in one of three categories:
1. Central cities of Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas in either 1970 or 1976 (1970 data derived from U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1970, 1976 data derived from U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1976 Revenue Sharing Estimates File).
2. Cities and townships with Populations of 40,000 or more in either 1970 or 1976 (1970 data derived from U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1970, 1976 data derived from U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1976 Revenue Sharing Estimates File).
3. Counties with populations of 250,000 or more in either 1970 or 1976 (1970 data derived from U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1970; 1976 data derived from 1976 Revenue Sharing Estimates File).
Indicators (variables) of distress and need were selected to determine eligibility for the program and were chosen for timeliness, reliability, and relevance to the Act. Certain variables were not used due to duplication, others because they were not available for all jurisdictions, and some because they were unrelated to the purposes of the Act. (Section 1002 of the Act states that the Congress finds that (a) the quality of life in urban areas is closely related to the availability of fully functional park and recreation systems including land, facilities, and service programs; (b) residents of cities need close-to-home recreational opportunities that are adequate to specialized urban demands, with parks and facilities properly located, developed, and well maintained; (c) the greatest recreational deficiencies with respect to land, facilities, and programs are found in many large cities, especially at the neighborhood level; (d) inadequate financing of urban recreation programs due to fiscal difficulties in many large cities has led to the deterioration of facilities, nonavailability of recreation services, and an inability to adapt recreational programs to changing circumstances; and (e) there is no existing Federal assistance program which fully addresses the needs for physical rehabilitation and revitalization of these park and recreation systems.)
The National Park Service asked the Bureau of the Census to assist in the analysis of national data in order to ensure that reliable, timely and applicable indicators of distress were used in determining eligibility for the program. NPS received comments from a number of interested individuals on what they considered, in their best judgment, to be the criteria that should be used in the program. NPS also received numerous position papers from national interest groups on what they thought were suitable indicators for the program. NPS then began a narrowing process intended to select the most appropriate criteria for eligibility in the program.
Listed below are the six variables selected for eligibility criteria:
Population Per Square Mile
This variable is commonly termed population density, and it is defined as the number of persons per square mile of land. It provides an indication of the extent to which an area is urbanized. Highly urbanized areas are most lacking in land set aside for recreation and park facilities and are experiencing difficulty in maintaining existing facilities. Highly dense areas tend to have the greatest need for assistance in revitalization of their neighborhood park and recreation facilities. Therefore, jurisdictions having high values for density would be favored by this variable, based on 1975 data of the U.S. Bureau of the Census.
Net Change in Per Capita Income 1969–75
Per capita income is the estimated average amount of total money income per person. It is derived by dividing the total income of a particular group by the total population in that group. Comparison of change in per capita income between urban jurisdictions provides an indication of each jurisdiction's economic growth. If the income of a city is growing more slowly than another city, the city with slower growth is in a relatively weaker economic position. As cited in the “Report on the Fiscal Impact of the Economic Stimulus Package on 48 Large Urban Governments (1978),” income growth is a determinant of taxable wealth and level of economic activity, and indicates a jurisdiction's capability to finance its own recreation and other projects. This measure of financial capacity is related to the Act which stipulates that the Secretary of the Interior consider factors related to economic distress. Therefore, jurisdictions with either negative or low relative growth in per capita income would be favored by this variable, based on 1976 data of the U.S. Bureau of the Census.
Percent Unemployed, 1977
Percent unemployed, commonly termed the unemployment rate is defined as the number of people unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor force. The unemployment data are the product of a Federal/State cooperative program in which State Employment Security agencies prepare labor force and unemployment estimates using concepts, definitions, and technical procedures established by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The National Urban Recreation Study found that recreation and leisure time opportunities are most limited for the economically disadvantaged, including the unemployed. The 17 field studies of the National Urban Recreation Study reveal that low-income neighborhoods have less program diversity, little, if any, commercial recreation opportunities, and fewer year-round programs than higher income neighborhoods. Consideration of this variable is consistent with the mandate of the Act which requires that criteria be considered related to physical and economic distress. Therefore, this variable would tend to favor jurisdictions having high unemployment rates.
Percent of Households Without Automobiles Available, 1970
Automobile availability, as defined by the Bureau of the Census, represents the number of passenger automobiles, including station wagons, which are owned or regularly used by any member of the household and which are ordinarily kept at home. Taxicabs, pickups, or larger trucks were not counted. Lack of automobile availability is closely related to lack of recreation opportunity. The Recreation Access Study (U.S. Department of Transportation, 1975) found that access to a diversity of recreation opportunities is generally assured for those who have automobiles and are willing to travel reasonable distances, but such opportunities are often severely limited for people without cars. In addition, the 17 field studies of the National Urban Recreation Study concluded that most recreation opportunities for those without access to a personal auto is limited to immediate neighborhoods or place of residence. This variable is relevant to the Act in that the transportation disadvantaged households are the group that has the greatest need for expanded opportunities to enjoy their close to home resources.
Therefore, jurisdictions having a high proportion of households without automobiles would be favored by this variable, based on 1970 data of the U.S. Bureau of the Census.
Total Population Under 18 Years of Age, and 60 Years and Over, 1970
This variable identifies those persons most likely to be the most frequent users of public park and recreation facilities. While many senior citizens have adequate incomes, they tend to be considerably less affluent and less mobile than the general population. Younger and older children also need public recreation facilities, especially in highly urbanized areas, where recreation facilities are most lacking. This variable was selected to favor areas with greater concentrations of the dependent population where need for recreation would be the greatest, and where rehabilitation of existing facilities the most pressing, in accordance with the Act. The variable was used in its absolute rate to give an indication of the size of the client populations in each jurisdiction, based on 1970 data of the U.S. Bureau of the Census.
Percent Persons With Income Below 125 Percent Poverty Level, 1970
In 1970, percent of population below poverty level was calculated by the Bureau of the Census as the proportion of the total population which reported income below the poverty level. This variable is the most current available indicator of poverty status for the jurisdictions in question. To accommodate the needs of economically disadvantaged people whose incomes are somewhat above the poverty level, such as those employed part-time, or those in very low-paid jobs, persons with incomes up to 125% of poverty are included in this variable. The poor and near-poor have the greatest need for public recreation opportunities and services in proximity to their homes. This variable is also related to that part of the Act which stipulates that the Secretary of the Interior consider “deficiencies in access to neighborhood recreation facilities, particularly for . . . low- and moderate-income residents,” and the extent to which park and recreation recovery efforts would provide employment opportunities for low- and moderate-income residents. Rehabilitation of parks is a relatively labor intensive activity having the potential for providing short-term jobs with low-skill requirements. Persons with poverty level incomes tend to lack skills and jobs. Therefore, this variable was selected to favor jurisdictions having a large percentage of its population in poverty. The poverty level of income is based on an index developed by the Social Security Administration in 1964 and subsequently modified by a Federal Interagency Committee. In 1969, the poverty thresholds ranged from $1,487 for a female unrelated individual 65 years old and over living on a farm to $6,116 for a nonfarm family with a male head and with seven or more persons. The average poverty threshold for a nonfarm family of four headed by a male was $3,745.
Determination of Eligibility
The method used to combine the variables had four steps. First, all values for each of the six variables were expressed in common or standard units. Second, for each jurisdiction, the standardized values for the six variables were added to produce a score. Third, the scores were ranked from high values (most eligible) to low values (least eligible). Fourth jurisdictions having scores above the median score for all jurisdictions were designated “eligible.”
County Eligibility
The Administration stated before the Senate Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation on June 27, 1978, that it would ensure fair consideration of urban counties for eligibility under the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program. The Administration has kept this commitment by subjecting urban county data to the same eligibility standards as cities and including urban counties which meet those standards on the eligibility list. All urban counties with a population over 250,000 were considered under the same criteria (indicators of distress and need) as the city counterparts. Counties within and SMSA not on the eligibility list may compete for assistance as discretionary applicants.
The history of the Administration's UPARR proposal clearly indicates that this program is part of an overall national urban policy. Therefore, in accordance with the legislative mandate, project selection criteria will require that county projects be justified in terms of direct service to identifiable urban neighborhoods (residential areas), and that there must be evidence of cooperation between a county and its major city.
Discretionary Grants
Section 1005(b) of the Bill states that at the Secretary's discretion, up to 15 percent of the program funds annually may be granted to local governments which do not meet eligibility criteria, but are located in Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, provided that these grants to general purpose governments are in accord with the intent of the program. These governments may apply for grants under the program regardless of whether or not they are included on the list of eligible jurisdictions.
[44 FR 58091, Oct. 9, 1979. Redesignated at 46 FR 34329, July 1, 1981, and correctly redesignated at 46 FR 43045, Aug. 26, 1981]
Appendix B to Part 72—List of Eligible Jurisdictions
The following are those jurisdictions eligible for the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program:
Cities Eligible for the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program
Akron, Ohio
Albany, Georgia
Albany, New York
Alexandria, Louisiana
Alhambra, California
Allentown, Pennsylvania
Altoona, Pennsylvania
Aguadilla, Puerto Rico
Anniston, Alabama
Arecibo, Puerto Rico
Asbury Park, New Jersey
Asheville, North Carolina
Athens, Georgia
Atlanta, Georgia
Atlantic City, New Jersey
Auburn, Maine
Augusta, Georgia
Babylon Township, New York
Baldwin Park, California
Baltimore, Maryland
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Battle Creek, Michigan
Bayamon, Puerto Rico
Bay City, Michigan
Bayonne, New Jersey
Bellflower, California
Bellingham, Washington
Berkeley, California
Biloxi, Mississippi
Binghamton, New York
Birmingham, Alabama
Bloomfield, New Jersey
Bloomington, Indiana
Boston, Massachusetts
Bradenton, Florida
Bridgeport, Connecticut
Bridgeton, New Jersey
Bristol, Tennessee
Brockton, Massachusetts
Brookline Township, Massachusetts
Brownsville, Texas
Buffalo, New York
Caguas, Puerto Rico
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Camden, New Jersey
Canton, Ohio
Carolina, Puerto Rico
Carson, California
Cayey, Puerto Rico
Charleston, South Carolina
Charlottesville, Virginia
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Chester, Pennsylvania
Chicago, Illinois
Chicago Heights, Illinois
Chicopee, Massachusetts
Chula Vista, California
Cicero, Illinois
Cincinnati, Ohio
Clarksville, Tennessee
Cleveland, Ohio
Cocoa, Florida
Columbia, South Carolina
Columbus, Georgia
Columbus, Ohio
Compton, California
Corpus Christi, Texas
Covington, Kentucky
Danville, Illinois
Danville, Virginia
Dayton, Ohio
Daytona Beach, Florida
Denison, Texas
Denver, Colorado
Detroit, Michigan
District of Columbia
Dothan, Alabama
Duluth, Minnesota
Durham, North Carolina
East Chicago, Indiana
East Lansing, Michigan
East Orange, New Jersey
East Providence, Rhode Island
East St. Louis, Illinois
Easton, Pennsylvania
Edinburg, Texas
El Monte, California
El Paso, Texas
Elizabeth, New Jersey
Elmira, New York
Erie, Pennsylvania
Evanston, Illinois
Evansville, Indiana
Everett, Massachusetts
Everett, Washington
Fall River, Massachusetts
Fayetteville, North Carolina
Fitchburg, Massachusetts
Flint, Michigan
Florence, Alabama
Ft. Myers, Florida
Freeport, New York
Fresno, California
Gadsden, Alabama
Gainesville, Florida
Galveston, Texas
Gary, Indiana
Gastonia, North Carolina
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Granite City, Illinois
Greenville, Mississippi
Greenville, South Carolina
Guayama, Puerto Rico
Guaynabo, Puerto Rico
Gulfport, Mississippi
Hamilton, Ohio
Harlingen, Texas
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Hartford, Connecticut
Hattiesburg, Mississippi
Haverhill, Massachusetts
Hawthorne, California
Hazelton, Pennsylvania
Hemstead Township, New York
Hialeah, Florida
High Point, North Carolina
Hoboken, New Jersey
Holyoke, Massachusetts
Hopkinsville, Kentucky
Humacao, Puerto Rico
Huntington, West Virginia
Indianapolis, Indiana
Inglewood, California
Irvington, New Jersey
Jackson, Michigan
Jackson, Mississippi
Jackson, Tennessee
Jacksonville, Florida
Jersey City, New Jersey
Johnson City, Tennessee
Johnstown, Pennsylvania
Joplin, Missouri
Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico
Kalamazoo, Michigan
Kankakee, Illinois
Kansas City, Kansas
Kansas City, Missouri
Kenner, Louisiana
Kenosha, Wisconsin
Killeen, Texas
Knoxville, Tennessee
Kokomo, Indiana
La Crosse, Wisconsin
Lafayette, Louisiana
Lake Charles, Louisiana
Lakeland, Florida
Lakewood, Ohio
Lancaster, Pennsylvania
Lansing, Michigan
Laredo, Texas
Las Cruces, New Mexico
Lawrence, Massachusetts
Lawton, Oklahoma
Lewiston, Maine
Lima, Ohio
Lompoc, California
Long Beach, California
Long Branch, New Jersey
Los Angeles, California
Louisville, Kentucky
Lowell, Massachusetts
Lynchburg, Virginia
Lynn, Massachusetts
Lynwood, California
Macon, Georgia
Maiden, Massachusetts
Manchester, New Hampshire
Mansfield, Ohio
Marietta, Ohio
Marion, Indiana
Marshall, Texas
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico
McAllen, Texas
Medford, Massachusetts
Melbourne, Florida
Memphis, Tennessee
Meriden, Connecticut
Meridian, Mississippi
Miami, Florida
Miami Beach, Florida
Middletown, Ohio
Millville, New Jersey
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Mobile, Alabama
Modesto, California
Monroe, Louisiana
Montgomery, Alabama
Moss Point, Mississippi
Mount Vernon, New York
Muncie, Indiana
Muskegon, Michigan
Muskegon Heights, Michigan
Muskogee, Oklahoma
National City, California
New Bedford, Massachusetts
New Britain, Connecticut
New Brunswick, New Jersey
New Haven, Connecticut
New London, Connecticut
New Orleans, Louisiana
New Rochelle, New York
New York, New York
Newark, New Jersey
Newark, Ohio
Newport News, Virginia
Niagara Falls, New York
Norfolk, Virginia
North Bergen Township, New Jersey
North Chicago, Illinois
Norwalk, California
Norwich, Connecticut
Oak Park, Illinois
Oakland, California
Oceanside, California
Ogden, Utah
Omaha, Nebraska
Ontario, California
Orange, Texas
Orlando, Florida
Oshkosh, Wisconsin
Oxnard, California
Panama City, Florida
Parkersburg, West Virginia
Pasco, Washington
Passaic, New Jersey
Paterson, New Jersey
Pawtucket, Rhode Island
Pensacola, Florida
Perth Amboy, New Jersey
Petersburg, Virginia
Pharr, Texas
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Phoenix, Arizona
Pico Rivera, California
Pine Bluff, Arkansas
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Pittsfield, Massachusetts
Plainfield, New Jersey
Pomona, California
Ponce, Puerto Rico
Pontiac, Michigan
Port Arthur, Texas
Portland, Maine
Portland, Oregon
Portsmouth, Virginia
Poughkeepsie, New York
Pritchard, Alabama
Providence, Rhode Island
Provo, Utah
Pueblo, Colorado
Quincy, Illinois
Quincy, Massachusetts
Rantoul, Illinois
Reading, Pennsylvania
Revere, Massachusetts
Richmond, California
Richmond, Indiana
Richmond, Virginia
Roanoke, Virginia
Rochester, New York
Rome, New York
Rosemead, California
Sacramento, California
Saginaw, Michigan
St. Joseph, Missouri
St. Louis, Missouri
St. Paul, Minnesota
St. Petersburg, Florida
Salem, Massachusetts
Salinas, California
San Antonio, Texas
San Benito, Texas
San Bernardino, California
San Diego, California
San Francisco, California
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Santa Ana, California
Santa Cruz, California
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Maria, California
Santa Monica, California
Sarasota, Florida
Savannah, Georgia
Schenectady, New York
Scranton, Pennsylvania
Seaside, California
Seattle, Washington
Shreveport, Louisiana
Somerville, Massachusetts
South Gate, California
Spartanburg, South Carolina
Spokane, Washington
Springfield, Massachusetts
Springfield, Ohio
Springfield, Oregon
Steubenville, Ohio
Stockton, California
Suffolk, Virginia
Superior, Wisconsin
Syracuse, New York
Tacoma, Washington
Tampa, Florida
Taunton, Massachusetts
Terre Haute, Indiana
Texarkana, Arkansas
Texarkana, Texas
Titusville, Florida
Toa Baja, Puerto Rico
Toledo, Ohio
Trenton, New Jersey
Troy, New York
Trujillo Alto, Puerto Rico
Tucson, Arizona
Tuscaloosa, Alabama
Union City, New Jersey
Upper Darby Township, Pennsylvania
Urbana, Illinois
Utica, New Jersey
Vega Baja, Puerto Rico
Vineland, New Jersey
Waco, Texas
Waltham, Massachusetts
Warren, Ohio
Waterbury, Connecticut
West Haven, Connecticut
West New York, New Jersey
West Palm Beach, Florida
Wheeling, West Virginia
Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania
Williamsport, Pennsylvania
Wilmington, Delaware
Wilmington, North Carolina
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Winter Haven, Florida
Woonsocket, Rhode Island
Worcester, Massachusetts
Wyandotte, Michigan
Yakima, Washington
Yauco, Puerto Rico
Yonkers, New York
York, Pennsylvania
Youngstown, Ohio
Counties Eligible for the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program
Alameda Co., California
Allegheny Co., Pennsylvania
Bernalillo Co., New Mexico
Bexar Co., Texas
Bristol Co., Massachusetts
Camden Co., New Jersey
Charleston Co., South Carolina
Cook Co., Illinois
Cuyahoga Co., Ohio
Dade Co., Florida
El Paso Co., Texas
Erie Co., New York
Essex Co., Massachusetts
Essex Co., New Jersey
Franklin Co., Ohio
Fresno Co., California
Fulton Co., Georgia
Hamilton Co., Ohio
Hamilton Co., Tennessee
Hampden Co., Massachusetts
Hillsborough Co., Florida
Hudson Co., New Jersey
Jackson Co., Missouri
Jefferson Co., Alabama
Kern Co., California
Los Angeles Co., California
Lucas Co., Ohio
Luzerne Co., Pennsylvania
Mahoning Co., Ohio
Maricopa Co., Arizona
Middlesex Co., Massachusetts
Milwaukee Co., Wisconsin
Mobile Co., Alabama
Nassau Co., New York
Nueces Co., Texas
Oneida Co., New York
Onondaga Co., New York
Orange Co., Florida
Passaic Co., New Jersey
Pinellas Co., Florida
Plymouth Co., Massachusetts
Polk Co., Florida
Riverside Co., California
St. Clair Co., Illinois
San Bernardino Co., California
San Diego Co., California
San Joaquin Co., California
Shelby Co., Tennessee
Sonoma Co., California
Suffolk Co., New York
Wayne Co., Michigan
Worcester Co., Massachusetts
[44 FR 58091, Oct. 9, 1979. Redesignated at 46 FR 34329, July 1, 1981, and correctly redesignated at 46 FR 43045, Aug. 26, 1981, and amended at 47 FR 15137, Apr. 8, 1982]
Browse Previous
