[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61070-61071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25102]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management Agency
44 CFR Part 206
[Docket ID FEMA-2011-0004]
RIN 1660-AA02;Formerly 3067-AC69
Disaster Assistance; Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 1, 1998, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the
categories of projects eligible for funding under the Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program (HMGP). The NPRM proposed to define eligible mitigation
activities under the HMGP to include minor flood control projects that
do not duplicate the efforts and authorities of other Federal agencies.
It proposed to include vegetation management programs for wildfire
hazard mitigation and erosion hazard mitigation in the list of eligible
activities; it proposed to remove development or improvement of warning
systems from the list of eligible project types; and modified language
relating to general, allowable open space, recreational, and wetlands
management uses. FEMA is withdrawing the NPRM so that relevant issues
involved in the NPRM may be further considered and because portions of
it are redundant or outdated.
DATES: The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on May 1, 1998 (63
FR 24143), is withdrawn as of October 3, 2011.
ADDRESSES: The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and this withdrawal notice
may be found under Docket ID: FEMA-2011-0004 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting FEMA-2011-0004 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' The Docket is also
available for inspection or copying at FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., Room
840, Washington, DC 20472.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cecelia Rosenberg, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation, DHS/FEMA, 1800 South Bell Street, Arlington, VA 20598-
3015. Phone: (202) 646-3321. Facsimile: (202) 646-2880. E-mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Authorized by section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C. 5170c, the
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) provides States, Tribes, and
local governments financial assistance to implement measures that
permanently reduce or eliminate future damages and losses from natural
hazards.
The HMGP regulations at 44 CFR part 206, subpart N, address the
eligibility of multi-hazard mitigation projects through a list of
general eligibility criteria: a project must be cost-effective, be
environmentally sound, must address a repetitive problem, and must
contribute to a long-term solution. Further, HMGP funds cannot be used
to fund projects that are available under other Federal authorities.
The regulations also provide a list of eligible types of projects. The
project-type listing is not all-inclusive. FEMA published a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (63 FR 24143, May 1, 1998) proposing the
following revisions to the HMGP regulations.
Minor Flood Control Projects
Under the NPRM, minor flood control projects that do not duplicate
the flood prevention activities of other Federal agencies would be
eligible for HMGP
[[Page 61071]]
funding. Major flood control projects, such as dikes, levees, dams,
channelization, channel widening, stream realignment, seawalls, groins,
and jetties, would be distinguished from minor flood control
activities. Typically, funding for major flood control projects would
fall under the water resources design and construction authorities of
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Natural Resources Conservation
Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Wildfire and Erosion
Under the NPRM, vegetation management related to wildfire and
erosion hazard mitigation measures would be eligible for HMGP funding.
This would reflect FEMA's multi-hazard HMGP objectives and priorities
authorized by section 404 of the Stafford Act.
Warning Systems
The NPRM sought to minimize an emphasis on warning systems by
removing them from the list of eligible projects. This was due to
benefit/cost considerations. The benefits of some hazard mitigation
project types can be difficult to show using FEMA's conventional
benefit/cost calculation methodology. Because of this in certain
circumstances FEMA will allow applicants to demonstrate project cost-
effectiveness using means other than the conventional benefit/cost
methodology. The NPRM proposed to remove warning systems from the
example list of eligible project types because the project type does
not lend itself to use of the conventional benefit/cost methodology.
Allowable Open Space Uses
The NPRM proposed a revision to the list of allowable open space
uses for previously funded and acquired open space land by replacing
the word ``previous'' (which was actually a typo in the regulation that
should have been ``pervious'') with the more widely familiar term of
permeable.
II. Summary of Comments
FEMA received 12 comments on the NPRM from State and local
governments. Several commenters had reservations about the NPRM's
possible effects on the eligibility of certain flood control projects
because these projects were viewed as good hazard mitigation activities
that should be funded by FEMA. Some commenters expressed concern
regarding the term ``minor flood control'' and the criteria used to
define it. Two commenters were concerned that major flood control
projects may become ineligible due to concerns of duplicating other
Federal assistance, and were concerned about the applicability of this
rationale to the practice of partnering with other Federal agencies.
One commenter urged FEMA to recognize the importance of allowing HMGP
funding to be used for mitigation activities related to facilities that
would be regarded as major structural flood control facilities.
One commenter expressed support for the wildfire and erosion
vegetation management provisions in the NPRM, and was concerned that
vegetation management activities were not extended to other project
types. Another commenter expressed concern that wildfire and erosion
vegetation provisions may conflict with other pre-existing regulatory
requirements.
Two commenters expressed dissatisfaction with the NPRM's removal of
warning systems from the list of ``traditionally'' eligible HMGP
activities.
One commenter requested consideration of allowable open space
activities beyond the scope of the NPRM.
III. Reason for Withdrawal
FEMA is withdrawing the NPRM so that relevant issues involved in
the NPRM may be further considered and because portions of it are
redundant. The definition of minor flood control projects is being
examined in greater detail relative to the HMGP eligibility criteria of
the regulations at 44 CFR 206.434(c). Further, the distinction that
minor flood control projects not duplicate the activities of other
Federal agencies is redundant because the existing program regulations,
at 44 CFR 206.434(f), clearly state that HMGP funds cannot be used as a
substitute or replacement to fund projects or programs that are
available under other Federal authorities. Therefore, to state the
requirement again is redundant, and to highlight it for minor flood
control projects over other project types may lead to some confusion
regarding its applicability to all project types.
FEMA considers the other provisions of the NPRM to be outdated.
Eligibility considerations of vegetation management are addressed
through FEMA's existing HMGP regulations identifying general
eligibility considerations, and there is no significant benefit derived
from listing them specifically. Removing warning systems from the list
of eligible projects could create the impression that they are not
eligible for funding.
The remaining proposed revision, to replace the word ``previous''
(a typo for ``pervious'') with ``permeable'' is not sufficient reason
for continuing the NPRM as the original word and the word proposed to
replace it mean essentially the same thing.
IV. Conclusion
FEMA is withdrawing the May 1, 1998 NPRM for the reasons stated in
this notice.
W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-25102 Filed 9-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P