96-26119. Displacement, Relocation Assistance, and Real Property Acquisition for HUD and HUD-Assisted Programs; Streamlining Rule  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 199 (Friday, October 11, 1996)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 53341-53342]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-26119]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
    
    24 CFR Parts 42, 92, 215, 219, 221, 236, 290, 511, 570, 574, 576, 
    582, 583, 585, 882, 885, 886, 889, 890, 906, 941, 950, 968, 970, 
    and 983
    
    [Docket No. FR-4122-P-01]
    RIN 2501-AC31
    Office of the Secretary
    
    
    Displacement, Relocation Assistance, and Real Property 
    Acquisition for HUD and HUD-Assisted Programs; Streamlining Rule
    
    AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD.
    
    ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This notice seeks public comment on a rulemaking HUD is 
    considering. In an effort to comply with the President's regulatory 
    reform initiatives, HUD is considering streamlining its regulations for 
    displacement, relocation assistance, and real property acquisition by 
    consolidating into one part similar provisions throughout title 24 of 
    the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and by eliminating provisions 
    that repeat statutory language or are otherwise unnecessary. Because of 
    the scope of this effort and the potential difficulties in preparing 
    one set of regulations that would be adapted for all HUD programs, HUD 
    is seeking comments from users of the program regulations to determine 
    whether a consolidated set of relocation regulations would be 
    preferable and feasible.
    
    DATES: Comments must be submitted by December 10, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding 
    this advance notice of proposed rulemaking to the Rules Docket Clerk, 
    Office of General Counsel, Room 10276, Department of Housing and Urban 
    Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410-0500. 
    Communications should refer to the above docket number and title. 
    Facsimile (FAX) comments are not acceptable. A copy of each 
    communication submitted will be available for public inspection and 
    copying between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays at the above address.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janice Petty, Relocation Specialist, 
    Relocation and Real Estate Division, Room 7168, telephone number (202) 
    708-1367 (this is not a toll-free number). For legal questions, 
    contact: David Polatsek, Attorney-Advisor, Community Development 
    Division, Room 8158, telephone number (202) 708-2027 (this is not a 
    toll-free number). For hearing- and speech-impaired persons, the 
    telephone numbers may be accessed via TTY by calling the Federal 
    Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. The address for both of 
    these persons is: Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 
    Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 4, 1995, President Clinton issued a 
    memorandum to all Federal departments and agencies regarding regulatory 
    reinvention. In response to this memorandum, HUD conducted a page-by-
    page review of its regulations to determine which can be eliminated, 
    consolidated, or otherwise improved.
        HUD is considering whether the regulations for displacement, 
    relocation, and real property acquisition can be improved and 
    streamlined by consolidating similar requirements throughout individual 
    program regulations in title 24 of the CFR. The major part of these 
    regulations would then refer to part 42 for relocation-related 
    requirements, which would continue to reference the Department of 
    Transportation's government-wide rule at 49 CFR part 24, as well as 
    include HUD-specific requirements. Through a final rule published on 
    October 3, 1996 (61 FR 51756), HUD moved into part 42 relocation 
    requirements implementing section 104(d) of the Housing and Community 
    Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5304(d)(4)) (Section 104(d)), which 
    requires a residential antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan 
    (RARAP) by State and local governments receiving funds under the 
    Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Urban Development Action 
    Grant (UDAG), and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) programs.
        Several provisions in HUD's regulations throughout title 24 of the
    
    [[Page 53342]]
    
    CFR repeat statutory language from the Uniform Relocation Assistance 
    and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Pub. L. 91-646, 84 
    Stat. 1894, 42 U.S.C. 4601) (URA). Other provisions repeat language 
    from the Department of Transportation's regulations implementing the 
    URA. Because the requirements apply to more than one program, HUD had 
    repeated the requirements in different program regulations. This 
    repetition is unnecessary, and updating these scattered provisions is 
    cumbersome and often creates confusion.
        HUD would like to remove language restating requirements already 
    imposed by statute and replace that language with citations to the 
    specific statutory provision. In addition, HUD would propose regulatory 
    language as necessary that would further develop the statutory 
    requirements, but that would be useful as a single-source reference for 
    all HUD programs. HUD anticipates that this proposed streamlining 
    effort could eliminate approximately 30 pages of unnecessary 
    regulations from the CFR.
        Because the subject is complex, HUD anticipates that it will 
    require considerable time and effort to craft a rule that addresses the 
    concerns of a multitude of different program areas. The development of 
    a streamlining proposal will require the involvement of HUD's various 
    program offices to resolve issues such as what constitutes ``initiation 
    of negotiations,'' what is meant by ``project'', and what should be the 
    dates from which eligibility for relocation benefits will be 
    recognized. Because the URA itself is so pervasive, the terms of the 
    statute--and those of the governmentwide rule--are necessarily broad. 
    HUD's job in streamlining its rules on relocation is to construct a 
    matrix for implementation that is concise, as uniform as practical, and 
    as program-specific as needed. Furthermore, any changes made in the 
    regulations would have to be consistent with statutory authority and 
    the Department of Transportation's government-wide rule.
        HUD's various program offices have raised a number of questions 
    about the practicality of this consolidation effort. HUD will try to 
    streamline current relocation provisions throughout its regulations as 
    described above; however, as part of its streamlining effort HUD is 
    seeking public input on the consolidation of the various relocation 
    provisions into a single part of its regulations. Therefore, by this 
    notice the public is invited to comment on the following questions that 
    HUD's offices have raised, and any other related matters or 
    suggestions, including whether such a consolidation would be helpful to 
    HUD's clients:
        (1) Should HUD change the definition of ``displaced person'' to 
    simplify its provisions or to expand or limit the circumstances under 
    which a person will be considered displaced?
        (2) In an effort to ensure some consistency between the eligibility 
    thresholds for relocation benefits at URA and Section 104(d) levels, 
    HUD has defined the thresholds using the same terminology, but with 
    slight differences in the requirements applicable under the alternative 
    (i.e., URA vs. Section 104(d)) levels of benefits. To the extent 
    possible under the statutes, should HUD standardize these eligibility 
    thresholds, and if so, what is the appropriate threshold: Total Tenant 
    Payment (TTP), 30 percent of gross income, Fair Market Rent (as defined 
    in HUD regulations), or some other threshold?
        (3) Can HUD standardize other terminology used in the various 
    program regulations on relocation? For example, can HUD define the 
    following, or substitute, terms in a manner that could apply to most or 
    all HUD programs: ``low-income person,'' ``low-income housing,'' 
    ``recipient,'' and ``initiation of negotiations''?
        (4) In particular, can HUD make the dates from which eligibility 
    for relocation benefits will be recognized (a concept currently 
    captured within the term ``initiation of negotiations'') clearer and 
    more uniform throughout HUD's programs?
        (5) Should HUD define the term ``project''?
        (6) Under the current rule, is there confusion about who may appeal 
    an agency's decision, and if so, how can HUD eliminate that confusion?
        (7) How should household income be computed for purposes of 
    calculating payments under the URA and of calculating payments and 
    determining eligibility for Section 104(d) relocation benefits?
        (8) How should HUD define ``eviction for cause'' when providing 
    that relocation benefits do not have to be extended to persons evicted 
    for cause?
        (9) Should HUD develop a uniform standard for measuring size of 
    units and determining replacement housing requirements?
        (10) Do the current regulations accurately reflect the role of 
    States that are CDBG grantees?
        (11) Are the regulations unclear about when benefits must be paid 
    for temporary relocation and about what constitutes a ``temporary 
    relocation''?
        (12) Should HUD reconsider its policy on minimizing displacement; 
    if so, how should HUD change the policy; if not, what assurances should 
    HUD require?
        (13) What is the effect and usefulness of the specific requirement 
    that displaced persons be advised of the availability of replacement 
    housing outside areas of minority concentration?
        (14) HUD is considering interpreting certain definitions in a way 
    that would impose requirements for replacement of housing units and 
    other relocation requirements when assisted activities result in 
    displacement and the removal or reduction of housing stock through such 
    events as reconfiguration of existing units and the placarding of units 
    as unfit for human habitation, pursuant to local housing and occupancy 
    codes under assisted code enforcement programs. Thus, for example, 
    should HUD define the term ``demolition'' to recognize that such events 
    may reduce the total available housing stock and displace occupants 
    just as effectively as would actually razing structures?
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 4601, 5304, and 12705(b).
    
        Dated: October 2, 1996.
    Henry G. Cisneros,
    Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 96-26119 Filed 10-10-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4210-32-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
10/11/1996
Department:
Housing and Urban Development Department
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
Document Number:
96-26119
Dates:
Comments must be submitted by December 10, 1996.
Pages:
53341-53342 (2 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. FR-4122-P-01
RINs:
2501-AC31: Revisions to Regulations Implementing Uniform Relocation Act and Other Relocation Requirements in HUD Programs (FR-4122)
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/2501-AC31/revisions-to-regulations-implementing-uniform-relocation-act-and-other-relocation-requirements-in-hu
PDF File:
96-26119.pdf
CFR: (11)
24 CFR 42
24 CFR 92
24 CFR 215
24 CFR 219
24 CFR 221
More ...