81_FR_64585 81 FR 64403 - Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands Regulations To Implement Executive Order 13690 and the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

81 FR 64403 - Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands Regulations To Implement Executive Order 13690 and the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management Agency

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 182 (September 20, 2016)

Page Range64403-64404
FR Document2016-22496

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is issuing this Notice of Data Availability (NODA) in connection with the proposed rule titled, ``Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands Regulations to Implement Executive Order 13690 and the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard'' that was published on August 22, 2016. Through this NODA, FEMA is making available to the public, and soliciting comment on, a draft report, 2016 Evaluation of the Benefits of Freeboard for Public and Nonresidential Buildings in Coastal Areas. The draft report has been added to the docket for the proposed rule.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 182 (Tuesday, September 20, 2016) 
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 20, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64403-64404]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22496]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 9

[Docket ID: FEMA-2015-0006]
RIN 1660-AA85


Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands 
Regulations To Implement Executive Order 13690 and the Federal Flood 
Risk Management Standard

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of data availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is issuing this 
Notice of Data Availability (NODA) in connection with the proposed rule 
titled, ``Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands 
Regulations to Implement Executive Order 13690 and the Federal Flood 
Risk Management Standard'' that was published on August 22, 2016. 
Through this NODA, FEMA is making available to the public, and 
soliciting comment on, a draft report, 2016 Evaluation of the Benefits 
of Freeboard for Public and Nonresidential Buildings in Coastal Areas. 
The draft report has been added to the docket for the proposed rule.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than October 21, 2016. Late 
comments will not be accepted.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket ID: FEMA-2015-
0006, by one of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.

[[Page 64404]]

    Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of 
Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 8NE-1604, 500 C 
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. All 
comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. If 
you submit a comment, identify the agency name and the Docket ID for 
this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of the document to which 
each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Fontenot, Director, Office of 
Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation, Federal Insurance and 
Mitigation Administration, DHS/FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Suite 313, 
Washington, DC 20472-3020. Phone: 202-646-2741; Email: 
Kristin.Fontenot@fema.dhs.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 22, 2016, at 81 FR 57402, the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) proposed to amend its 
regulations on ``Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands'' and 
proposed a supplementary policy that would further clarify how FEMA 
applies the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard. Through this Notice 
of Data Availability (NODA), FEMA is making available to the public, 
and soliciting comment on, a draft report, 2016 Evaluation of the 
Benefits of Freeboard for Public and Nonresidential Buildings in 
Coastal Areas that became available after publication of the proposed 
rule.
    As part of the rulemaking process, FEMA included in the docket a 
Regulatory Evaluation to estimate the potential costs and benefits of 
the proposed rule. The evaluation accompanying the proposed rule 
addressed costs associated with elevating and floodproofing FEMA 
Federally Funded Projects to specified freeboard levels. Cost and 
benefit estimates were made using the 2008 Supplement to the 2006 
Evaluation of the National Flood Insurance Program's Building Standards 
(2008 report), which evaluated the costs and benefits associated with 
elevating newly constructed residential structures, located in coastal 
areas.
    While the 2008 report was the best available data at the time, it 
was limited in scope to single-family residential structures. The 
proposed rule primarily affects non-residential structures owned by 
local government agencies and private non-profit organizations. The 
2008 report is also limited to new construction projects. Most of the 
projects affected by the proposed rule would be retrofitted structures. 
The draft report includes data and analysis specific to some of the 
types of projects most likely to be affected by the proposed rule.
    The purpose of this 2016 draft report, which is part of a broader 
effort related to FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program, was to 
determine if increased freeboard requirements would result in 
sufficient reductions in damages to be considered cost-effective. The 
results of this analysis provide some insight into the potential costs 
and benefits associated with constructing nonresidential and public 
buildings with higher freeboard requirements. The draft report provides 
cost and benefit estimates for elevating new construction buildings, as 
well as the costs and benefits of dry floodproofing both new and 
existing structures. The Regulatory Evaluation for the proposed rule 
discussed the differences in potential costs and benefits associated 
with elevation and floodproofing of new construction and existing 
buildings. However, because of a lack of data available to FEMA at the 
time that FEMA published the Regulatory Evaluation, the Evaluation does 
not quantify these costs separately. Additionally, the draft report 
includes significant additional discussion of the effects of sea level 
rise on the benefit-cost ratios of freeboard elevation. FEMA notes for 
the public's awareness that similar to the 2008 report, the draft 
report is limited, as riverine areas were not included in the analysis. 
Moreover, the report is still in draft form and is not peer-reviewed. 
FEMA welcomes comments on these and other aspects of the draft report. 
In particular, FEMA requests comments on whether the draft report 
contains enough information on which the public can base a conclusion 
on its use to quantify benefits for the proposed rule. For example, the 
study describes its methodology, outlines its basic assumptions, and 
provides summary statistics and overall benefit-cost ratios, but it 
does not show the inputs used for many of its calculations and 
assumptions.
    Because of the above-referenced differences between the 2008 report 
and the draft report, FEMA welcomes comment on whether it would be more 
appropriate to use the draft report to estimate the costs and benefits 
in a future regulatory evaluation of a final rule on this topic. FEMA 
seeks comments from the public about all aspects of the applicability 
of this draft report to the rulemaking, including how the data in this 
draft report may be applied in estimating costs and benefits associated 
with elevating and floodproofing structures to the proposed freeboard 
levels in the final rule.
    For example, data and analysis from the draft report could be used 
to estimate the costs and benefits associated with elevating and 
floodproofing FEMA Federally Funded projects involving nonresidential 
structures. The draft report includes data and analysis relevant to the 
following building types in coastal areas: elementary schools, 
hospitals, police stations, retail stores, and office buildings. The 
analysis suggests that for the above-referenced building types, 
evaluated costs could range from $1.03 to $16.29 per square foot, 
depending on the type of structure.
    In addition, FEMA did not monetize the benefits of the freeboard 
value approach in the Regulatory Evaluation, but FEMA did provide the 
cost-benefit ratios that the 2008 study described for various freeboard 
levels. The draft report includes updated cost-benefit ratios that 
might more accurately depict the benefits of freeboard levels for 
different types of non-residential structures in coastal areas. FEMA 
specifically requests comments from the public about the potential 
applicability of these cost-benefit ratios and whether and how they 
should be incorporated into the Regulatory Evaluation of a final rule.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 9

    Flood plains and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: E.O. 11988 of May 24, 1977. 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 117; 
E.O. 11990 of May 24 1977, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp. p. 121; Reorganization 
Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127 
of March 31, 1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148 
of July 20, 1979, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412, as amended.; 
E.O. 12127; E.O. 12148; 42 U.S.C. 5201.

    Dated: September 14, 2016.
W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-22496 Filed 9-19-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-66-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64403 List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 2 Subpart E—Responses to Requests (iii) If a court has determined that exceptional circumstances exist (as that Freedom of information. § 2.21 [Amended] term is defined in § 2.70 of this part), Kristen J. Sarri, ■ 5. In § 2.21(a), the second sentence, the noncompliance is excused for the remove the words ‘‘Office of length of time provided by the court Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Government Information Services order. Policy, Management, and Budget. (OGIS)’’ and add in their place ‘‘the * * * * * For the reasons stated in the OGIS’’. § 2.39 [Amended] preamble, the Department of the Interior § 2.24 [Amended] proposes to amend part 2 of title 43 of ■ 8. In § 2.39, remove the paragraph (a) the Code of Federal Regulations as ■ 6. Amend § 2.24 by: designation and remove paragraph (b). follows: a. In paragraph (b)(3), adding the words ‘‘, along with a statement that the Subpart H—Administrative Appeals PART 2—FREEDOM OF INFORMATION bureau reasonably foresees that § 2.58 [Amended] ACT; RECORDS AND TESTIMONY disclosure would harm an interest ■ 9. In § 2.58(a) and (b), remove the protected by the applied exemption(s) number ‘‘30’’ and add in its place the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 2 or disclosure is prohibited by law’’ after number ‘‘90’’. continues to read as follows: the words ‘‘or in part’’; and [FR Doc. 2016–22166 Filed 9–19–16; 8:45 am] b. In paragraph (b)(4), adding the Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 553; BILLING CODE 4334–63–P word ‘‘including’’ after the word 31 U.S.C. 3717; 43 U.S.C. 1460, 1461. ‘‘unless’’ and adding the words ‘‘and the bureau explains this harm to you’’ after Subpart B—How to Make a Request the words ‘‘withhold the records’’. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ■ 2. In § 2.4, revise paragraph (e) to read Subpart G—Fees as follows: Federal Emergency Management § 2.37 [Amended] Agency § 2.4 Does where you send your request affect its processing? ■ 7. In § 2.37, revise paragraph (f) to read as follows: 44 CFR Part 9 * * * * * [Docket ID: FEMA–2015–0006] § 2.37 What general principles govern (e) If your request is received by a fees? RIN 1660–AA85 bureau that believes it is not the appropriate bureau to process your * * * * * (f) If the bureau does not comply with Updates to Floodplain Management request, the bureau that received your and Protection of Wetlands request will attempt to contact you (if any time limit in the FOIA: (1) Except as provided in paragraph Regulations To Implement Executive possible, via telephone or email) to Order 13690 and the Federal Flood confirm that you deliberately sent your (f)(2) of this section, the bureau cannot assess any search fees (or, if you are in Risk Management Standard request to that bureau for processing. If you do not confirm this, the bureau will the fee category of a representative of AGENCY: Federal Emergency deem your request misdirected and the news media or an educational and Management Agency, DHS. route the misdirected request to the noncommercial scientific institution, ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of data appropriate bureau to respond under the duplication fees). availability. basic time limit outlined in § 2.17 of this (2)(i) If the bureau has determined part. that unusual circumstances apply (as SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency the term is defined in § 2.70 of this part) Management Agency (FEMA) is issuing * * * * * and the bureau provided you a timely this Notice of Data Availability (NODA) written notice to extend the basic time in connection with the proposed rule Subpart D—Timing of Responses to titled, ‘‘Updates to Floodplain Requests limit in accordance with § 2.19 of this part, the noncompliance is excused for Management and Protection of Wetlands § 2.15 [Amended] an additional 10 calendar days. If the Regulations to Implement Executive bureau fails to comply with the Order 13690 and the Federal Flood Risk ■ 3. In § 2.15, add paragraph (g) to read extended time limit, the bureau may not Management Standard’’ that was as follows: assess any search fees (or, if you are in published on August 22, 2016. Through the fee category of a representative of this NODA, FEMA is making available § 2.15 What is multitrack processing and how does it affect your request? the news media or an educational and to the public, and soliciting comment noncommercial scientific institution, on, a draft report, 2016 Evaluation of the * * * * * Benefits of Freeboard for Public and duplication fees). (g) You may track the status of your (ii) If the bureau has determined that Nonresidential Buildings in Coastal request, including its estimated unusual circumstances apply and more Areas. The draft report has been added processing completion date, at https:// than 5,000 pages are necessary to to the docket for the proposed rule. foia.doi.gov/requeststatus/. respond to the request, the DATES: Comments must be received no sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS noncompliance is excused if, in later than October 21, 2016. Late § 2.19 [Amended] accordance with § 2.19 of this part, the comments will not be accepted. ■ 4. In § 2.19(b)(2), add the words ‘‘, and bureau has provided you a timely ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, notify you of your right to seek dispute written notice and has discussed with identified by Docket ID: FEMA–2015– resolution from the Office of you via written mail, email, or 0006, by one of the following methods: Government Information Services telephone (or made not less than 3 good- Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// (OGIS)’’ after the words ‘‘you and the faith attempts to do so) how you could www.regulations.gov. Follow the bureau’’. effectively limit the scope of the request. instructions for submitting comments. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:30 Sep 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1

64404 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: by local government agencies and comments from the public about all Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of private non-profit organizations. The aspects of the applicability of this draft Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency 2008 report is also limited to new report to the rulemaking, including how Management Agency, 8NE–1604, 500 C construction projects. Most of the the data in this draft report may be Street SW., Washington, DC 20472– projects affected by the proposed rule applied in estimating costs and benefits 3100. would be retrofitted structures. The associated with elevating and To avoid duplication, please use only draft report includes data and analysis floodproofing structures to the proposed one of these methods. All comments specific to some of the types of projects freeboard levels in the final rule. received will be posted without change most likely to be affected by the to http://www.regulations.gov, including proposed rule. For example, data and analysis from any personal information provided. If The purpose of this 2016 draft report, the draft report could be used to you submit a comment, identify the which is part of a broader effort related estimate the costs and benefits agency name and the Docket ID for this to FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance associated with elevating and rulemaking, indicate the specific section Program, was to determine if increased floodproofing FEMA Federally Funded of the document to which each freeboard requirements would result in projects involving nonresidential comment applies, and give the reason sufficient reductions in damages to be structures. The draft report includes for each comment. considered cost-effective. The results of data and analysis relevant to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: this analysis provide some insight into following building types in coastal Kristin Fontenot, Director, Office of the potential costs and benefits areas: elementary schools, hospitals, Environmental Planning and Historic associated with constructing police stations, retail stores, and office nonresidential and public buildings buildings. The analysis suggests that for Preservation, Federal Insurance and with higher freeboard requirements. The the above-referenced building types, Mitigation Administration, DHS/FEMA, draft report provides cost and benefit evaluated costs could range from $1.03 400 C Street SW., Suite 313, estimates for elevating new construction Washington, DC 20472–3020. Phone: to $16.29 per square foot, depending on buildings, as well as the costs and 202–646–2741; Email: Kristin.Fontenot@ the type of structure. benefits of dry floodproofing both new fema.dhs.gov. In addition, FEMA did not monetize and existing structures. The Regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August Evaluation for the proposed rule the benefits of the freeboard value 22, 2016, at 81 FR 57402, the Federal discussed the differences in potential approach in the Regulatory Evaluation, Emergency Management Agency costs and benefits associated with but FEMA did provide the cost-benefit (FEMA) proposed to amend its elevation and floodproofing of new ratios that the 2008 study described for regulations on ‘‘Floodplain Management construction and existing buildings. various freeboard levels. The draft and Protection of Wetlands’’ and However, because of a lack of data report includes updated cost-benefit proposed a supplementary policy that available to FEMA at the time that ratios that might more accurately depict would further clarify how FEMA FEMA published the Regulatory the benefits of freeboard levels for applies the Federal Flood Risk Evaluation, the Evaluation does not different types of non-residential Management Standard. Through this quantify these costs separately. Notice of Data Availability (NODA), structures in coastal areas. FEMA Additionally, the draft report includes FEMA is making available to the public, specifically requests comments from the significant additional discussion of the and soliciting comment on, a draft public about the potential applicability effects of sea level rise on the benefit- report, 2016 Evaluation of the Benefits cost ratios of freeboard elevation. FEMA of these cost-benefit ratios and whether of Freeboard for Public and notes for the public’s awareness that and how they should be incorporated Nonresidential Buildings in Coastal similar to the 2008 report, the draft into the Regulatory Evaluation of a final Areas that became available after report is limited, as riverine areas were rule. publication of the proposed rule. not included in the analysis. Moreover, List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 9 As part of the rulemaking process, the report is still in draft form and is not FEMA included in the docket a peer-reviewed. FEMA welcomes Flood plains and Reporting and Regulatory Evaluation to estimate the comments on these and other aspects of recordkeeping requirements. potential costs and benefits of the the draft report. In particular, FEMA proposed rule. The evaluation requests comments on whether the draft Authority: E.O. 11988 of May 24, accompanying the proposed rule report contains enough information on 1977. 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 117; E.O. addressed costs associated with which the public can base a conclusion 11990 of May 24 1977, 3 CFR, 1977 elevating and floodproofing FEMA on its use to quantify benefits for the Comp. p. 121; Reorganization Plan No. Federally Funded Projects to specified proposed rule. For example, the study 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 freeboard levels. Cost and benefit describes its methodology, outlines its Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127 of March 31, estimates were made using the 2008 basic assumptions, and provides 1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., Supplement to the 2006 Evaluation of summary statistics and overall benefit- p. 376; E.O. 12148 of July 20, 1979, 44 the National Flood Insurance Program’s cost ratios, but it does not show the FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412, Building Standards (2008 report), which inputs used for many of its calculations as amended.; E.O. 12127; E.O. 12148; 42 evaluated the costs and benefits and assumptions. U.S.C. 5201. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS associated with elevating newly Because of the above-referenced constructed residential structures, differences between the 2008 report and Dated: September 14, 2016. located in coastal areas. the draft report, FEMA welcomes W. Craig Fugate, While the 2008 report was the best comment on whether it would be more Administrator, Federal Emergency available data at the time, it was limited appropriate to use the draft report to Management Agency. in scope to single-family residential estimate the costs and benefits in a [FR Doc. 2016–22496 Filed 9–19–16; 8:45 am] structures. The proposed rule primarily future regulatory evaluation of a final BILLING CODE 9111–66–P affects non-residential structures owned rule on this topic. FEMA seeks VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:30 Sep 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1


Document Created: 2018-02-09 13:20:20
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 13:20:20
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionProposed Rules
ActionProposed rule; notice of data availability.
DatesComments must be received no later than October 21, 2016. Late comments will not be accepted.
ContactKristin Fontenot, Director, Office of Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, DHS/FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Suite 313, Washington, DC 20472-3020. Phone: 202-646-2741; Email: [email protected]
FR Citation81 FR 64403 
RIN Number1660-AA85
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR