60662 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 64

[Docket No. FEMA–7676]

Suspension of Community Eligibility

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency, FEMA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule identifies

communities, where the sale of flood

insurance has been authorized under

the National Flood Insurance Program

(NFIP), that are suspended on the

effective dates listed within this rule

because of noncompliance with the

floodplain management requirements of

the program. If the Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA) receives

documentation that the community has

adopted the required floodplain

management measures prior to the

effective suspension date given in this

rule, the suspension will be withdrawn

by publication in the Federal Register.

EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective date of

each community’s suspension is the

third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the third

column of the following tables.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to determine

whether a particular community was

suspended on the suspension date,

contact the appropriate FEMA Regional

Office or the NFIP servicing contractor.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert F. Shea Jr., Division Director,

Program Implementation Division,

Mitigation Directorate, 500 C Street,

SW., Room 417, Washington, DC 20472,

(202) 646–3619.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP

enables property owners to purchase

flood insurance which is generally not

otherwise available. In return,

communities agree to adopt and

administer local floodplain management

aimed at protecting lives and new

construction from future flooding.

Section 1315 of the National Flood

Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42

U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance

coverage as authorized under the

National Flood Insurance Program, 42

U.S.C. 4001 et seq., unless an

appropriate public body adopts

adequate floodplain management

measures with effective enforcement

measures. The communities listed in

this document no longer meet that

statutory requirement for compliance

with program regulations, 44 CFR part

59 et seq. Accordingly, the communities

will be suspended on the effective date

in the third column. As of that date,

flood insurance will no longer be

available in the community. However,

some of these communities may adopt

and submit the required documentation

of legally enforceable floodplain

management measures after this rule is

published but prior to the actual

suspension date. These communities

will not be suspended and will continue

their eligibility for the sale of insurance.

A notice withdrawing the suspension of

the communities will be published in

the Federal Register.

In addition, the Federal Emergency

Management Agency has identified the

special flood hazard areas in these

communities by publishing a Flood

Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The date of

the FIRM if one has been published, is

indicated in the fourth column of the

table. No direct Federal financial

assistance (except assistance pursuant to

the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief

and Emergency Assistance Act not in

connection with a flood) may legally be

provided for construction or acquisition

of buildings in the identified special

flood hazard area of communities not

participating in the NFIP and identified

for more than a year, on the Federal

Emergency Management Agency’s

initial flood insurance map of the

community as having flood-prone areas

(section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster

Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.

4106(a), as amended). This prohibition

against certain types of Federal

assistance becomes effective for the

communities listed on the date shown

in the last column.

The Associate Director finds that

notice and public comment under 5

U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and

unnecessary because communities listed

in this final rule have been adequately

notified.

Each community receives a 6-month,

90-day, and 30-day notification

addressed to the Chief Executive Officer

that the community will be suspended

unless the required floodplain

management measures are met prior to

the effective suspension date. Since

these notifications have been made, this

final rule may take effect within less

than 30 days.

National Environmental Policy Act

This rule is categorically excluded

from the requirements of 44 CFR part

10, Environmental Considerations. No

environmental impact assessment has

been prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Associate Director has

determined that this rule is exempt from

the requirements of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act because the National

Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as

amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits

flood insurance coverage unless an

appropriate public body adopts

adequate floodplain management

measures with effective enforcement

measures. The communities listed no

longer comply with the statutory

requirements, and after the effective

date, flood insurance will no longer be

available in the communities unless

they take remedial action.

Regulatory Classification

This final rule is not a significant

regulatory action under the criteria of

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of

September 30, 1993, Regulatory

Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not involve any

collection of information for purposes of

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.

Executive Order 12612, Federalism

This rule involves no policies that

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 12612, Federalism,

October 26, 1987, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.,

p. 252.

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform

This rule meets the applicable

standards of section 2(b)(2) of Executive

Order 12778, October 25, 1991, 56 FR

55195, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 309.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

Flood insurance, Floodplains.

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is

amended as follows:

PART 64—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 64

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.;

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,

1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,

3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.

§ 64.6 [Amended]

2. The tables published under the

authority of § 64.6 are amended as

follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 60663

State/location Community

No. Effective date of eligibility Current effectivemap date

Date certain federal assistane

no longer available in special

flood hazard

areas

Region II

New Jersey: Roselle Park, borough of, Union

County.

340472 Dec. 17, 1971, Emerg; July 17, 1978, Reg.;

Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

Nov. 5, 1997 ..... Nov. 5, 1997.

New York: Fort Ann, town of, Washington

County.

361231 Feb. 2, 1976, Emerg.; Apr. 17, 1985, Reg.;

Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Region III

Virginia:

Chilhowie, town of, Smyth County .......... 510185 Jan. 15, 1974, Emerg.; June 15, 1978, Reg.;

Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Louisa County, unincorporated areas ..... 510092 Mar. 1, 1974, Emerg.; June 1, 1989, Reg.;

Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Smyth County, unincorporated areas ..... 510184 Dec. 26, 1973, Emerg.; May 15, 1980, Reg.;

Nov. 5 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Region VI

Oklahoma: Piedmont, city of, Canadian and

Kingfisher Counties.

400027 Feb. 4, 1985, Reg.; Nov. 5, 1997, Susp ....... ......do ............... Do.

Texas: Junction, city of, Kimble County ........ 480421 Feb. 27, 1975, Emerg.; Sept. 26, 1979,

Reg.; Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Region IX

California:

Grover, city of, San Luis Obispo County 060306 Mar. 27, 1975, Emerg.; Aug. 1, 1984, Reg.;

Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Pismo Beach, city of, San Luis Obispo

County.

060309 Feb. 25, 1977, Emerg.; Aug 1, 1984, Reg.;

Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Region X

Oregon: Marion County, unincorporated

areas.

410154 Dec. 10, 1971, Emerg.; Aug 15, 1979, Reg.;

Nov. 5, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Region I

Maine: Bowdoinham, town of, Sagadahoc

County.

230119 Apr. 16, 1981, Emerg.; May 19, 1987, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

Nov. 19, 1997..

Vermont: Duxbury, town of, Washington

County.

500110 June 10, 1975, Emerg.; Mar. 15, 1982,

Reg.; Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Region IV

Florida:

Melbourne, city of, Brevard County ........ 120025 Aug. 30, 1974, Emerg.; July 1, 1979, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Tallahassee, city of, Leon County .......... 120144 Mar. 10, 1972, Emerg.; Dec. 6, 1976, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Region V

Indiana:

LaFontaine, town of, Wabash County .... 180267 June 4, 1975, Emerg.; Apr. 17, 1987, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

LaGro, town of, Wabash County ............ 180268 Aug. 15, 1975, Emerg.; June 18, 1987,

Reg.; Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

North Manchester, town of, Wabash

County.

180269 Mar. 24, 1975, Emerg.; Aug. 19, 1985, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Wabash, city of, Wabash County ........... 180271 Oct. 28, 1975, Emerg.; Jan. 18, 1984, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Wabash County, unincorporated areas .. 180266 Apr. 3, 1975, Emerg.; Aug. 19, 1986, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Michigan: Albee, township of, Saginaw

County.

260498 Apr. 22, 1976, Emerg.; Aug. 1, 1986, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Minnesota: Prior Lake, city of, Scott County 270432 Feb. 6, 1974, Emerg.; Sept. 29, 1978, Reg.;

Nov. 19, 1997, Susp.

......do ............... Do.

Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Rein.—Reinstatement; Susp.—Suspension.
60664 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’)

Issued: November 3, 1997.

Michael J. Armstrong,

Associate Director for Mitigation.

[FR Doc. 97–29753 Filed 11–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–05–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 5, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26,

27, 73, 74, 78, 80, 87, 90, 95, 97, and

101

[ET Docket No. 96–2; FCC 97–347]

Arecibo Coordination Zone

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This document contains a

correction to one of the final rules

adopted in ‘‘Amendment of the

Commission’s Rules to Establish a Radio

Astronomy Coordination Zone in Puerto

Rico’’, which was published Monday,

October 27, 1997 (62 FR 55525).

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 26, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rodney Small, Office of Engineering

and Technology, (202) 418–2452.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

This document corrects Section

101.123(d) of the Commission’s rules, as

modified in ‘‘Amendment of the

Commission’s Rules to Establish a Radio

Astronomy Coordination Zone in Puerto

Rico,’’ ET Docket 96–2, FCC 97–347

(released October 15, 1997), 62 FR

55525 (October 27, 1997). This rule,

which deals with Quiet Zones and

Arecibo Coordination Zone was

published with a clerical error.

Need for Correction

As published, this final rule contains

an error that may be misleading and is

in need of clarification.

Correction of Publications

Accordingly, the publication on

October 27, 1997, of final rules in ET

Docket No. 96–2, which was the subject

of FR Doc. 97–28296, is corrected as

follows:

§ 101.123 [Corrected]

On page 55536, in the third column,

within the regulatory instruction for

§ 101.123, paragraph (d) is correctly

designated as paragraph 101.123(e).

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–29661 Filed 11–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

48 CFR Parts 1515 and 1552

[FRL–5919–4]

Acquisition Regulation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document revises the

EPA Acquisition Regulation (EPAAR)

on calculation of profit or fee. Two

unrelated administrative corrections are

also being made.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Acquisition

Management (3802R), 401 M Street

S.W., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Larry Wyborski, Telephone: (202) 564–

4369.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Information

The proposed rule was published in

the Federal Register (62 FR 27712–

27715) on May 21, 1997, providing for

a 60-day comment period.

Interested parties were afforded the

opportunity to participate in the making

of this rule. The following is a summary

of each comment and the Agency

disposition of those comments.

1. Comment: EPA should make it

clear that Subpart 1515.970–2(b)(iv)

cannot be interpreted to allow only one

profit or fee determination for both the

general contractor and subcontractor

levels of an acquisition.

Response: Privity of contract is an

established principle in Government

contracting. The Government’s contract

is with the prime (general) contractor.

Duties such as direction and payment of

the subcontractors are solely the

responsibility of the prime contractor.

Therefore, profit or fee determinations

are solely based on the prime

contractor’s effort.

2. Comment: We are concerned about

the soundness of ‘‘structured approach’’

policy. We believe the structured

approach prevents the Government from

receiving best value by adding

unnecessary expense to the negotiation

process. Further, the structure approach

distorts market value in competitive

procurements by substituting private

industry competitive determinations of

cost and profit with Government

notions of what the market ‘‘should be.’’

Response: As stated in EPAAR

1515.902(a)(3), the structured approach

is a basis for negotiations, not a final

determination. Also, EPAAR 1515.903 is

being added by this rule to allow

exemption of cost realism evaluations

from required use of a structured

approach. Cost realism is a factor in best

value procurements. Furthermore,

EPAAR 1515.902(b) specifies numerous

other types of contracts and

circumstances where methods other

than the structured approach set forth in

EPAAR 1515.970 may be used. For

instance, the structured approach is not

required for construction contracts

(EPAAR 1515.902(b)(vi)).

3. Comment: We are concerned that

Subpart 1515.970–2(b)(2)(iii)(C) of the

proposed rule could be misinterpreted

by contracting officers. Each

construction acquisition, regardless of

the contract type or contractor

experience, is a unique project which

can have significant distinguishing

characteristics. Profit or fee weighted

guidelines should therefore be

considered anew for each acquisition.

Response: We agree that the cited

provision may be subject to

misinterpretation. It is also unnecessary,

since it is not a mandatory requirement

and the contracting officer has a certain

amount of flexibility in making

weighted guideline determinations. The

provision at 1515.970–2(b)(2)(iii)(C) will

be deleted.

4. Comment: EPA should emphasize

to contracting officers that weighted

guidelines are prenegotiation

benchmarks, not unchangeable

standards.

Response: See EPAAR 1515.902(a)(3)

and the Agency policy at EPAAR

1515.970–1. Both citations provide for a

structured approach as a basis for

negotiations, rather than as a final

determination.

5. Comment: EPA should review and

update its statement in EPAAR

1515.970–2(a)(3), relating to facilities

capital cost of money.

Response: Based on a review of

approaches taken by other Agencies on

this matter, EPA will reassess EPAAR

1515.970–2, for possible revision in a

future action.

II. Executive Order 12866

This is not a significant regulatory

action under Executive Order 12866;

therefore, no review is required at the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs within OMB.