81 FR 3082 - Establishing a Deductible for FEMA's Public Assistance Program
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 12 (January 20, 2016)
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 12 (January 20, 2016)
| Page Range | 3082-3085 | |
| FR Document | 2016-00997 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 20, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 3082-3085] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-00997] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 206 [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0003] RIN 1660-AA84 Establishing a Deductible for FEMA's Public Assistance Program AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is considering the establishment of a disaster deductible, requiring a predetermined level of financial or other commitment from a Recipient (Grantee), generally the State, Tribal, or Territorial government, before FEMA will provide assistance under the Public Assistance Program when authorized by a Presidential major disaster declaration. FEMA believes the deductible model would incentivize Recipients to make meaningful improvements in disaster planning, fiscal capacity for disaster response and recovery, and risk mitigation, while contributing to more effective stewardship of taxpayer dollars. For example, Recipients could potentially receive credit toward their deductible requirement through proactive pre-event actions such as adopting enhanced building codes, establishing and maintaining a disaster relief fund or self- insurance plan, or adoption of other measures that reduce the Recipient's risk from disaster events. The deductible model would increase stakeholder investment and participation in disaster recovery and building for future risk, thereby strengthening our nation's resilience to disaster events and reducing the cost of disasters long term. FEMA seeks comment on all aspects of the deductible concept. DATES: Comments must be received by March 21, 2016. ADDRESSES: Comments must be identified by docket ID FEMA-2016-0003 and may be submitted by one of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 8NE, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jotham Allen, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, 202-646- 1957. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Public Participation Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include [[Page 3083]] any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act notice, which can be viewed by clicking on the ``Privacy Notice'' link in the footer of www.regulations.gov. You may submit your comments and material by the methods specified in the ADDRESSES section of this Notice. Please submit your comments and any supporting material by only one means to avoid the receipt and review of duplicate submissions. Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov and search for the docket ID. Submitted comments may also be inspected at FEMA, Office of Chief Counsel, 8NE, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472. II. Background The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207, provides an orderly and continuing means of assistance by the Federal Government to State, Tribal, Territorial, and local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to alleviate the suffering and damage which result from disasters. 42 U.S.C. 5121(b). A ``major disaster,'' as defined by the Stafford Act, is ``any natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, winddriven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance . . . to supplement the efforts and available resources of [State, Tribal, Territorial, and local governments], and disaster relief organizations, in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby.'' 42 U.S.C. 5122(2). The declaration process is governed by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regulations at 44 CFR part 206, subpart B. Upon receipt of a declaration request, FEMA formulates a recommendation which is forwarded to the President along with the request. 44 CFR 206.37(c). In developing its recommendation, FEMA considers such factors as the amount and type of damages, the impact of damages on affected individuals, the State, Tribal, Territorial, and local governments, the available resources of the State, Tribal, Territorial, and local governments, and other disaster relief organizations, the extent and type of insurance in effect to cover losses, assistance available from other Federal programs and other sources, imminent threats to public health and safety, recent disaster history, hazard mitigation measures taken by the State, Tribal, Territorial, or local governments (especially implementation of measures required as a result of previous major disaster declarations), and other factors pertinent to a given incident. 44 CFR 206.37(c)(1). A disaster declaration specifies the types of assistance that may be awarded under the Stafford Act, such as Public Assistance, Individual Assistance, or Hazard Mitigation assistance. Public Assistance provides assistance for debris removal, emergency protective measures, and permanent restoration of infrastructure to State, Tribal, Territorial, and local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations. 44 CFR part 206, subparts G and H. When evaluating the need for Public Assistance in a major disaster request FEMA evaluates the following factors: Estimated cost of assistance, localized impacts, insurance coverage in force, hazard mitigation, recent multiple disasters, and the availability of other Federal assistance programs. 44 CFR 206.48(a). FEMA evaluates the estimated cost of assistance on a per capita basis using the State population (using the most recent decennial Census population), and has established a per capita indicator of $1 (adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers, the indicator is $1.41 for events occurring in Fiscal Year 2015) as a level at which an event might warrant Federal assistance. 44 CFR 206.48(a)(1). Currently, once Public Assistance is authorized, FEMA documents all projects, including debris removal, emergency protective measures, and repair and replacement of eligible facilities, on Project Worksheets to reimburse the Recipient (formerly known as the Grantee, this is the State, Tribal, or Territorial government that received the disaster declaration) and Subrecipients (formerly known as Subgrantees, these are local and Tribal governments, and certain private nonprofit organizations that apply for and receive funding through the Recipient) for all of their eligible costs at the level of the Federal cost share designated by the President. 44 CFR part 206, subpart G. This practice of funding all eligible costs is somewhat at odds with the principle underlying the Stafford Act that there is a level of disaster activity which the affected State, Tribal, or Territorial government can handle on its own. For simplicity, consider a State that is subject to the $1 million minimum threshold. 44 CFR 206.48(a)(1). An event that causes $999,999 in Public Assistance-eligible damage will most likely not warrant a major disaster declaration and the State and affected Tribal and local governments will need to fund all $999,999 in disaster costs without any supplemental Federal assistance. However, an incident that causes exactly $1 million in damage in the same State likely will result in a major disaster declaration. Once declared, FEMA will reimburse $750,000 under the typical 75% Federal cost share arrangement and the State will only need to fund $250,000. FEMA is arguably supplanting $750,000 that the State should be fully capable to handle itself. III. Deductible Consistent with the principles of the Stafford Act that assistance from the Federal Government is supplemental in nature and that every recipient of disaster assistance has some measureable capacity to independently respond, FEMA is considering the establishment of a disaster ``deductible.'' To ensure a Recipient's participation in recovery from disaster losses, following receipt of a major disaster declaration authorizing the Public Assistance Program, the Recipient(s) would be required to demonstrate it has satisfied a predetermined deductible amount before FEMA would provide assistance through a Project Worksheet for eligible Public Assistance work. FEMA would intend for the calculation of the deductible level for each Recipient to be published periodically and to be representative of Recipient capability. In addition to considering how to calculate a deductible amount, FEMA is considering what means by which a Recipient could demonstrate it has satisfied a deductible requirement, including through completion of FEMA-eligible projects entirely with its own funding, or through other Recipient activities for which FEMA would calculate an appropriate credit against the deductible. FEMA might provide a credit toward the deductible, for example, for a Recipient's prior adoption of a building code that reduces risk; for adoption of proactive fiscal planning such as establishing a disaster relief fund or a self-insurance fund; or investment in programs of assistance available when there is not a federal declaration. [[Page 3084]] FEMA anticipates a deductible would be calculated and applied at the Recipient (i.e., State, Tribal, or Territorial level), not Subrecipient, level. However, the deductible would need to be satisfied before any project, at either the Recipient or Subrecipient level, would be eligible for assistance. FEMA believes that a deductible could result in more effective use of taxpayer resources. It could incentivize proactive fiscal planning by Recipients for disasters, encouraging them to set aside funding specifically reserved for disaster response and recovery. The availability of credits toward the deductible could incentivize increased planning and adoption of specific mitigation activities which will result in risk-informed mitigation strategies on a broad scale. States may be encouraged to develop and fund special programs such as emergency management programs and individual assistance programs, as such plans may be credited toward satisfaction of the deductible. Recipients that adopt standardized and enhanced building codes could be rewarded with a credit toward their deductible amount. The results of these efforts may in turn increase our nation's resiliency to disaster events: Increased self-sufficiency on the part of State and local governments and their ability to support their citizens during and after a disaster, and a decrease in the negative effects of a disaster on our citizens. IV. Public Comment FEMA welcomes public comment on all aspects of the deductible concept, but would derive particular benefit from commenters addressing one or more of the following questions (``Recipient'' in these questions refers to any possible entity that might be a Grantee for Public Assistance, including States, Tribes, and Territories): 1. Calculating the Deductible: How should FEMA calculate the deductible amount for each Recipient to adequately reflect individual Recipient capacity? a. Using the Public Assistance per capita indicator established by 44 CFR 206.48(a)(1)? Why? b. Using population estimates? Why? i. If so, should FEMA continue to rely upon the decennial census population calculations, consider population estimates, or consider other population calculation sources and why? c. Using the Recipient's fiscal capacity? Why? i. If so, how should FEMA measure fiscal capacity? Which metrics should be used to assess it and why? Please also identify preferred sources for suggested metrics. Potential metrics include, but are not limited to: 1. Actual revenue. 2. Potential revenue. 3. Total Taxable Resources. 4. Gross Domestic Product. 5. Budget surplus/deficit. 6. Economic projections. 7. Bond ratings. 8. Unemployment rate. 9. Other. d. Using a measurement of disaster risk? Why? i. If so, how should FEMA measure disaster risk? Which metrics should be used to assess it and why? Potential metrics include, but are not limited to: 1. Past presidential declarations. 2. Past FEMA disaster relief. 3. Insurance industry data. 4. Climatological data, including projected future risk. 5. Priority placed on mitigation in the State or local budget. 2. Scope of Deductible: How should FEMA define the applicability of the deductible to ensure it incentivizes meaningful improvements in planning, fiscal capacity, and risk mitigation? a. Should the deductible apply to State governments, Territorial governments, Tribal governments, or all of the above? b. To which of the following types of FEMA Public Assistance should the deductible apply and why? i. Direct Federal Assistance (emergency work performed, or contracted for, by the Federal government at the request of the Recipient). ii. Emergency Work (debris removal and emergency protective measures). iii. Permanent Work (infrastructure repair and replacement). iv. Management Costs. v. Other. 3. Satisfying the Deductible: How should a Recipient be able to satisfy its deductible? a. Should only Recipient actions be allowed to satisfy the deductible, or should Subrecipient actions be considered as well and why? i. If Subrecipient actions should be considered, which of the following Subrecipients should be included and why? 1. Local governments. 2. Indian Tribal governments. 3. Private nonprofit organizations. b. What of the following types of actions should qualify towards satisfying the deductible and why? i. Work that would be eligible for FEMA assistance but for the deductible. ii. Management costs for work that would be eligible for FEMA assistance but for the deductible. iii. Spending on incidents that do not receive a Presidential declaration and supplemental FEMA assistance (for example, emergencies declared by the Governor). iv. For incidents that do receive a Presidential declaration, spending in jurisdictions that were not designated for supplemental FEMA assistance. v. Cost-share requirements for FEMA programs. 1. If so, which programs and why? vi. Spending on projects beyond the cost-share required amount. vii. Investments in emergency management programs using non-Federal funds. viii. Establishment of a disaster relief fund or ``rainy day'' fund. ix. Expenditures from a disaster relief fund or ``rainy day'' fund. x. Establishment of an individual assistance program. xi. Expenditures from an individual assistance program. xii. Planning, preparedness, or mitigation programs supported by non-Federal funding. xiii. Adoption of standardized or enhanced building codes. xiv. Proportion of the jurisdiction which is covered by standardized and/or enhanced building codes. xv. Other. c. How much of an administrative burden would it be for Recipients to track, and submit for verification, documentation related to each manner of satisfying the deductible? i. How would Recipients track the documentation? ii. How should FEMA verify the information? d. How should these actions be counted or credited toward satisfaction the deductible? Why? i. Dollar-for-dollar reductions in the deductible. For example, each dollar spent through a Recipient's own individual assistance program could count as a dollar toward meeting the deductible. ii. Percentage credits toward the deductible. For example, a Recipient may receive a credit of X percent of the deductible for establishing its own individual assistance program. iii. Other. If so, please provide details regarding these other actions. 4. Incentivizing Change: FEMA believes a deductible could improve the United States' disaster management system and increase disaster resilience nationally by driving Recipient legislative action, budgeting, planning and other measures that further greater resilience. FEMA seeks comment on this, as follows: a. Will a deductible requirement incentivize potential future Recipients of disaster assistance to adopt measures [[Page 3085]] that make them more resilient or more capable to respond to future disasters? If so, how? b. In which of the following areas should FEMA focus the incentives of a deductible approach in order to achieve those improvements in disaster management and resilience and why? i. Increased fiscal capacity to address disasters at the Recipient level. ii. Better planning by Recipients for the financial costs of disaster. iii. Reduced long-term impact of disasters. iv. Reduced risk of loss from disaster. v. Decreased future disaster costs. vi. Better levels of cooperation among neighboring jurisdictions. vii. Increased State emergency management staffing and funding. viii. Other. c. What specific actions should FEMA seek to incentivize and why? Potential actions include: i. Acceptance of greater financial responsibility for disaster costs by non-Federal entities. ii. Increased non-Federal investment in emergency management programs generally. iii. Increased investment in mitigation strategies at Recipient levels. iv. Establishment of Recipient disaster relief funds or ``rainy day'' funds. 1. Increased spending from such funds where they already exist. v. Establishment of Recipient individual assistance programs. 1. Increased spending from such funds where they already exist. vi. Increased level of Recipient financial relief provided for incidents that do not receive a Presidential declaration pursuant to the Stafford Act. vii. Other. d. How could a deductible incentivize the actions necessary to achieve improvements in the selected areas and how should FEMA design the deductible to provide that incentive? e. Are there alternatives to a deductible that could serve as a better incentive to the selected improvements and actions? i. If so, what are those alternatives? ii. Why would those alternatives be more effective than a deductible? 5. Implementation Considerations: How could FEMA design deductible implementation so as to maximize effectiveness of the deductible as an incentive, but also ensure Recipients have sufficient opportunity to adjust to it? a. What specific actions might Recipients take if a deductible were introduced to FEMA's Public Assistance Program? What specific types of actions should we seek to incentivize through the establishment of a deductible? b. How would Recipients meet the deductible? i. Would Recipients seek to pass the costs of the deductible on to Subrecipients? How? ii. Would the passing on of costs to Subrecipients be appropriate? Why or why not? iii. Should FEMA seek to prevent Recipients from passing the costs on to Subrecipients? Why? iv. If so, what methods could FEMA use to prevent the transfer of responsibility for costs from Recipients to Subrecipients? c. Should the deductible be applied on an annual basis or per disaster? i. If annual, how should FEMA define the year? Why? ii. If per disaster, should there be a cap on the number of deductibles, or total deductible amount, that a Recipient should be responsible for in a given year? Why? In what way can FEMA be sensitive to problems caused by recurrent disasters through a deductible policy? iii. If appropriate, how should FEMA set the cumulative annual deductible cap for repetitive disasters? d. Should FEMA ever consider waiving all or part of the deductible? Why? i. If so, under what circumstances should FEMA consider waiving all or part of the deductible? ii. If so, how should FEMA determine what portion of the deductible should be waived? iii. How frequently should FEMA consider waiving all or a portion of the deductible? Why? e. If FEMA introduced a deductible concept to the Public Assistance Program, what steps would Recipients take to adjust? i. How long would it take Recipients, working with relevant stakeholders, to appropriately adjust to the introduction of a deductible? ii. Should FEMA consider a phased implementation approach through which the deductible would be applied over time? Why? iii. If so, over how much time should the deductible concept be phased in and in what way? Why? 6. Estimating Impacts: Implementation of a deductible as a prerequisite for receiving Public Assistance would have an economic impact on future Recipients of disaster assistance. a. Do Recipients currently maintain a disaster relief or ``rainy day'' fund? b. If not, how much would it cost to establish and administer a disaster relief or ``rainy day'' fund? c. If a Recipient could satisfy its deductible through provision of its own individual assistance program, would Recipients establish or expand existing individual assistance programs? d. What are the costs of establishing and running various individual assistance programs? e. If a Recipient could satisfy its deductible through an increase in planning, preparedness, or mitigation programs, would Recipients increase the level of such activities or programs? f. If a Recipient could satisfy its deductible through adoption of enhanced building codes, would Recipients or Recipient communities adopt such codes? g. What are the costs associated with adoption of such building codes? h. What are the costs associated with the specific actions Recipients might take if a deductible were introduced to FEMA's disaster relief programs? i. What, if any, disproportionate impacts might be borne by small nonprofit entities or small government jurisdictions (populations less than 50,000)? Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. Dated: January 13, 2016. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. 2016-00997 Filed 1-19-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
![3082 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules
of the NAAQS if any events occur affect small governments, as described ACTION:Advance notice of proposed
interfering with attainment. EPA finds in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act rulemaking.
PADEP’s SIP submittal contains of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
adequate contingency measures if the • Does not have Federalism SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency
Area fails to attain the NAAQS or fails implications as specified in Executive Management Agency (FEMA) is
to achieve RFP because the only Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, considering the establishment of a
significant stationary source of lead 1999); disaster deductible, requiring a
emissions is no longer in operation, • Is not an economically significant predetermined level of financial or other
Pennsylvania’s existing rules related to regulatory action based on health or commitment from a Recipient (Grantee),
control of fugitive dusts and permitting safety risks subject to Executive Order generally the State, Tribal, or Territorial
are sufficient to minimize emissions and 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); government, before FEMA will provide
prevent NAAQS violations, and • Is not a significant regulatory action assistance under the Public Assistance
additional measures are not reasonably subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Program when authorized by a
available to serve as contingency 28355, May 22, 2001); Presidential major disaster declaration.
measures. • Is not subject to requirements of FEMA believes the deductible model
Section 12(d) of the National would incentivize Recipients to make
III. Proposed Action Technology Transfer and Advancement meaningful improvements in disaster
EPA finds the January 15, 2015 SIP Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because planning, fiscal capacity for disaster
submittal attainment plan for the Lower application of those requirements would response and recovery, and risk
Beaver Valley Area meets the applicable be inconsistent with the CAA; and mitigation, while contributing to more
requirements of the CAA for attainment • Does not provide EPA with the effective stewardship of taxpayer
plans in section 172 and 192 of the CAA discretionary authority to address, as dollars. For example, Recipients could
and in implementing regulations appropriate, disproportionate human potentially receive credit toward their
including 40 CFR 51.112 and 51.117. health or environmental effects, using deductible requirement through
EPA is proposing to approve the practicable and legally permissible proactive pre-event actions such as
Pennsylvania SIP revision attainment methods, under Executive Order 12898 adopting enhanced building codes,
plan for the Lower Beaver Valley Area (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). establishing and maintaining a disaster
for the 2008 lead NAAQS including the In addition, this proposed rule to relief fund or self-insurance plan, or
attainment demonstration, base year approve Pennsylvania’s SIP revision adoption of other measures that reduce
emissions inventory, RACM/RACT and containing the attainment plan for the the Recipient’s risk from disaster events.
RFP analyses, and contingency 2008 lead NAAQS in the Lower Beaver The deductible model would increase
measures. Valley Area, does not have tribal stakeholder investment and
EPA is soliciting public comments on implications as specified by Executive participation in disaster recovery and
the issues discussed in this document. Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, building for future risk, thereby
These comments will be considered 2000), because the SIP is not approved strengthening our nation’s resilience to
before taking final action. to apply in Indian country located in the disaster events and reducing the cost of
state, and EPA notes that it will not disasters long term. FEMA seeks
IV. Statutory and Executive Order impose substantial direct costs on tribal comment on all aspects of the
Reviews governments or preempt tribal law. deductible concept.
Under the CAA, the Administrator is List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 DATES: Comments must be received by
required to approve a SIP submission March 21, 2016.
that complies with the provisions of the Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by ADDRESSES: Comments must be
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
reference, Intergovernmental relations, identified by docket ID FEMA–2016–
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Lead. 0003 and may be submitted by one of
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
the following methods:
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
provided that they meet the criteria of Dated: December 30, 2015. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
the CAA. Accordingly, this action Shawn M. Garvin, instructions for submitting comments.
merely approves state law as meeting
Regional Administrator, Region III. Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier:
Federal requirements and does not
[FR Doc. 2016–00871 Filed 1–19–16; 8:45 am] Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of
impose additional requirements beyond
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency
those imposed by state law. For that
Management Agency, 8NE, 500 C Street
reason, this proposed action:
SW., Washington, DC 20472–3100.
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
of Management and Budget under SECURITY Jotham Allen, Federal Emergency
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
October 4, 1993); Federal Emergency Management Washington, DC 20472, 202–646–1957.
• Does not impose an information Agency SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
collection burden under the provisions
44 CFR Part 206 I. Public Participation
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); [Docket ID FEMA–2016–0003] Instructions: All submissions received
• Is certified as not having a must include the agency name and
significant economic impact on a RIN 1660–AA84 docket ID. Regardless of the method
substantial number of small entities used for submitting comments or
Establishing a Deductible for FEMA’s
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 material, all submissions will be posted,
Public Assistance Program
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); without change, to the Federal
• Does not contain any unfunded AGENCY:Federal Emergency eRulemaking Portal at http://
mandate or significantly or uniquely Management Agency, DHS. www.regulations.gov, and will include
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:49 Jan 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JAP1.SGM 20JAP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_3094/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules 3083
any personal information you provide. other disaster relief organizations, the which the affected State, Tribal, or
Therefore, submitting this information extent and type of insurance in effect to Territorial government can handle on its
makes it public. You may wish to read cover losses, assistance available from own. For simplicity, consider a State
the Privacy Act notice, which can be other Federal programs and other that is subject to the $1 million
viewed by clicking on the ‘‘Privacy sources, imminent threats to public minimum threshold. 44 CFR
Notice’’ link in the footer of health and safety, recent disaster 206.48(a)(1). An event that causes
www.regulations.gov. history, hazard mitigation measures $999,999 in Public Assistance-eligible
You may submit your comments and taken by the State, Tribal, Territorial, or damage will most likely not warrant a
material by the methods specified in the local governments (especially major disaster declaration and the State
ADDRESSES section of this Notice. Please implementation of measures required as and affected Tribal and local
submit your comments and any a result of previous major disaster governments will need to fund all
supporting material by only one means declarations), and other factors $999,999 in disaster costs without any
to avoid the receipt and review of pertinent to a given incident. 44 CFR supplemental Federal assistance.
duplicate submissions. 206.37(c)(1). However, an incident that causes
Docket: For access to the docket to A disaster declaration specifies the exactly $1 million in damage in the
read background documents or types of assistance that may be awarded same State likely will result in a major
comments received, go to the Federal under the Stafford Act, such as Public disaster declaration. Once declared,
eRulemaking Portal at http:// Assistance, Individual Assistance, or FEMA will reimburse $750,000 under
www.regulations.gov and search for the Hazard Mitigation assistance. Public the typical 75% Federal cost share
docket ID. Submitted comments may Assistance provides assistance for arrangement and the State will only
also be inspected at FEMA, Office of debris removal, emergency protective need to fund $250,000. FEMA is
Chief Counsel, 8NE, 500 C Street SW., measures, and permanent restoration of arguably supplanting $750,000 that the
Washington, DC 20472. infrastructure to State, Tribal, State should be fully capable to handle
II. Background Territorial, and local governments and itself.
certain private nonprofit organizations.
The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 44 CFR part 206, subparts G and H. III. Deductible
and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford When evaluating the need for Public Consistent with the principles of the
Act), 42 U.S.C. 5121–5207, provides an Assistance in a major disaster request Stafford Act that assistance from the
orderly and continuing means of FEMA evaluates the following factors: Federal Government is supplemental in
assistance by the Federal Government to Estimated cost of assistance, localized nature and that every recipient of
State, Tribal, Territorial, and local impacts, insurance coverage in force, disaster assistance has some
governments in carrying out their hazard mitigation, recent multiple measureable capacity to independently
responsibilities to alleviate the suffering disasters, and the availability of other respond, FEMA is considering the
and damage which result from disasters. Federal assistance programs. 44 CFR establishment of a disaster
42 U.S.C. 5121(b). A ‘‘major disaster,’’ as 206.48(a). FEMA evaluates the ‘‘deductible.’’ To ensure a Recipient’s
defined by the Stafford Act, is ‘‘any estimated cost of assistance on a per participation in recovery from disaster
natural catastrophe (including any capita basis using the State population losses, following receipt of a major
hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, (using the most recent decennial Census disaster declaration authorizing the
winddriven water, tidal wave, tsunami, population), and has established a per Public Assistance Program, the
earthquake, volcanic eruption, capita indicator of $1 (adjusted annually Recipient(s) would be required to
landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or based on the Consumer Price Index for demonstrate it has satisfied a
drought), or, regardless of cause, any all Urban Consumers, the indicator is predetermined deductible amount
fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of $1.41 for events occurring in Fiscal Year before FEMA would provide assistance
the United States, which in the 2015) as a level at which an event might through a Project Worksheet for eligible
determination of the President causes warrant Federal assistance. 44 CFR Public Assistance work. FEMA would
damage of sufficient severity and 206.48(a)(1). intend for the calculation of the
magnitude to warrant major disaster Currently, once Public Assistance is deductible level for each Recipient to be
assistance . . . to supplement the efforts authorized, FEMA documents all published periodically and to be
and available resources of [State, Tribal, projects, including debris removal, representative of Recipient capability. In
Territorial, and local governments], and emergency protective measures, and addition to considering how to calculate
disaster relief organizations, in repair and replacement of eligible a deductible amount, FEMA is
alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, facilities, on Project Worksheets to considering what means by which a
or suffering caused thereby.’’ 42 U.S.C. reimburse the Recipient (formerly Recipient could demonstrate it has
5122(2). known as the Grantee, this is the State, satisfied a deductible requirement,
The declaration process is governed Tribal, or Territorial government that including through completion of FEMA-
by Federal Emergency Management received the disaster declaration) and eligible projects entirely with its own
Agency (FEMA) regulations at 44 CFR Subrecipients (formerly known as funding, or through other Recipient
part 206, subpart B. Upon receipt of a Subgrantees, these are local and Tribal activities for which FEMA would
declaration request, FEMA formulates a governments, and certain private calculate an appropriate credit against
recommendation which is forwarded to nonprofit organizations that apply for the deductible. FEMA might provide a
the President along with the request. 44 and receive funding through the credit toward the deductible, for
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
CFR 206.37(c). In developing its Recipient) for all of their eligible costs example, for a Recipient’s prior
recommendation, FEMA considers such at the level of the Federal cost share adoption of a building code that reduces
factors as the amount and type of designated by the President. 44 CFR part risk; for adoption of proactive fiscal
damages, the impact of damages on 206, subpart G. planning such as establishing a disaster
affected individuals, the State, Tribal, This practice of funding all eligible relief fund or a self-insurance fund; or
Territorial, and local governments, the costs is somewhat at odds with the investment in programs of assistance
available resources of the State, Tribal, principle underlying the Stafford Act available when there is not a federal
Territorial, and local governments, and that there is a level of disaster activity declaration.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:49 Jan 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JAP1.SGM 20JAP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_3094/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules 3085
that make them more resilient or more b. How would Recipients meet the individual assistance program, would
capable to respond to future disasters? deductible? Recipients establish or expand existing
If so, how? i. Would Recipients seek to pass the individual assistance programs?
b. In which of the following areas costs of the deductible on to d. What are the costs of establishing
should FEMA focus the incentives of a Subrecipients? How? and running various individual
deductible approach in order to achieve ii. Would the passing on of costs to assistance programs?
those improvements in disaster Subrecipients be appropriate? Why or e. If a Recipient could satisfy its
management and resilience and why? why not? deductible through an increase in
i. Increased fiscal capacity to address iii. Should FEMA seek to prevent planning, preparedness, or mitigation
disasters at the Recipient level. Recipients from passing the costs on to programs, would Recipients increase the
ii. Better planning by Recipients for Subrecipients? Why? level of such activities or programs?
the financial costs of disaster. iv. If so, what methods could FEMA f. If a Recipient could satisfy its
iii. Reduced long-term impact of use to prevent the transfer of deductible through adoption of
disasters. responsibility for costs from Recipients enhanced building codes, would
iv. Reduced risk of loss from disaster. to Subrecipients? Recipients or Recipient communities
v. Decreased future disaster costs. c. Should the deductible be applied
adopt such codes?
vi. Better levels of cooperation among on an annual basis or per disaster?
i. If annual, how should FEMA define g. What are the costs associated with
neighboring jurisdictions.
vii. Increased State emergency the year? Why? adoption of such building codes?
management staffing and funding. ii. If per disaster, should there be a h. What are the costs associated with
viii. Other. cap on the number of deductibles, or the specific actions Recipients might
c. What specific actions should FEMA total deductible amount, that a take if a deductible were introduced to
seek to incentivize and why? Potential Recipient should be responsible for in a FEMA’s disaster relief programs?
actions include: given year? Why? In what way can i. What, if any, disproportionate
i. Acceptance of greater financial FEMA be sensitive to problems caused impacts might be borne by small
responsibility for disaster costs by non- by recurrent disasters through a nonprofit entities or small government
Federal entities. deductible policy? jurisdictions (populations less than
ii. Increased non-Federal investment iii. If appropriate, how should FEMA 50,000)?
in emergency management programs set the cumulative annual deductible Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.
generally. cap for repetitive disasters?
Dated: January 13, 2016.
iii. Increased investment in mitigation d. Should FEMA ever consider
strategies at Recipient levels. waiving all or part of the deductible? W. Craig Fugate,
iv. Establishment of Recipient disaster Why? Administrator, Federal Emergency
relief funds or ‘‘rainy day’’ funds. i. If so, under what circumstances Management Agency.
1. Increased spending from such should FEMA consider waiving all or [FR Doc. 2016–00997 Filed 1–19–16; 8:45 am]
funds where they already exist. part of the deductible? BILLING CODE 9111–23–P
v. Establishment of Recipient ii. If so, how should FEMA determine
individual assistance programs. what portion of the deductible should
1. Increased spending from such be waived?
funds where they already exist. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
iii. How frequently should FEMA
vi. Increased level of Recipient COMMISSION
consider waiving all or a portion of the
financial relief provided for incidents deductible? Why? 47 CFR Part 64
that do not receive a Presidential e. If FEMA introduced a deductible
declaration pursuant to the Stafford Act. concept to the Public Assistance [CG Docket No. 03–123; DA 15–1453]
vii. Other. Program, what steps would Recipients
d. How could a deductible incentivize take to adjust? Request for Comment on Petition for
the actions necessary to achieve i. How long would it take Recipients, Rulemaking Filed by IDT Telecom, Inc.,
improvements in the selected areas and working with relevant stakeholders, to Regarding Interstate
how should FEMA design the appropriately adjust to the introduction Telecommunications Relay Service
deductible to provide that incentive? of a deductible? Fund Contribution
e. Are there alternatives to a ii. Should FEMA consider a phased
deductible that could serve as a better implementation approach through AGENCY: Federal Communications
incentive to the selected improvements which the deductible would be applied Commission.
and actions? over time? Why? ACTION: Proposed rule.
i. If so, what are those alternatives? iii. If so, over how much time should
ii. Why would those alternatives be the deductible concept be phased in and SUMMARY: In this document, the
more effective than a deductible? in what way? Why? Commission seeks comment on a
5. Implementation Considerations: 6. Estimating Impacts: Petition for Rulemaking (Petition) filed
How could FEMA design deductible Implementation of a deductible as a by IDT Telecom, Inc. (IDT) requesting
implementation so as to maximize prerequisite for receiving Public that the Commission issue a Notice of
effectiveness of the deductible as an Assistance would have an economic Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to review
incentive, but also ensure Recipients impact on future Recipients of disaster and revise its rules and policies on the
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
have sufficient opportunity to adjust to assistance. contribution methodology for the
it? a. Do Recipients currently maintain a Interstate Telecommunications Relay
a. What specific actions might disaster relief or ‘‘rainy day’’ fund? Service (TRS) Fund to include intrastate
Recipients take if a deductible were b. If not, how much would it cost to revenue within the TRS Fund
introduced to FEMA’s Public Assistance establish and administer a disaster relief contribution base. Additionally IDT
Program? What specific types of actions or ‘‘rainy day’’ fund? requests that the Commission remove
should we seek to incentivize through c. If a Recipient could satisfy its the rule provision requiring that video
the establishment of a deductible? deductible through provision of its own relay service (VRS) costs be recovered
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:49 Jan 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JAP1.SGM 20JAP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_3094/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2016-01-19 23:44:23
Document Modified: 2016-01-19 23:44:23
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Advance notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | Comments must be received by March 21, 2016. | |
| Contact | Jotham Allen, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, 202-646- 1957. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 3082 | |
| RIN Number | 1660-AA84 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR