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

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

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