Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13947

and compile the information and send

premium payments to the NFIP) may be

addressed to the points of contact

identified in the ‘‘For Further

Information Contact’’ section of this

proposed rule, and to Donald Arbuckle,

Office of Management and Budget,

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, 3255 New Executive Office

Building, Washington, DC 20503.

Executive Order 12612, Federalism

This rule involves no policies that

have federalism implications under E.O.

12612, Federalism, dated October 26,

1987.

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform

This rule meets the applicable

standards of § 2(b)(2) of E.O. 12778.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Parts 61 and

206

Flood insurance; Disaster assistance.

Accordingly, 44 CFR Parts 61 and 206

are proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 61—INSURANCE COVERAGE

AND RATES

1. The authority citation for Part 61

continues to read as follows:

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

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR

41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O.

12127 of Mar. 31, 1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,

1979 Comp., p. 376.

2. Section 61.17 is added to read as

follows:

§ 61.17 Group Flood Insurance Policy

(a) A Group Flood Insurance Policy

(GFIP) is a policy covering all

individuals named by a State as

recipients under § 411 of the Stafford

Act (42 U.S.C. 5178) of an Individual

and Family Grant program award for

flood damage as a result of a

Presidential disaster declaration. The

premium for the GFIP, initially, is a flat

fee of $200 per policyholder. The

amount of coverage would be equivalent

to the maximum grant amount

established under § 411. Coverage under

the GFIP would become effective on the

30th day following the date the NFIP

receives the records and premium

payments from the State.

(b) The GFIP is the Standard Flood

Insurance Policy Dwelling Form (a copy

of which is included in Appendix A(1)

of this part), except that:

(1) The GFIP provides coverage for

losses caused by land subsidence, sewer

backup, or seepage of water without

regard to the requirement in paragraph

B.3. of Article 3 that the structure be

insured to 80 percent of its replacement

cost or the maximum amount of

insurance available under the National

Flood Insurance Program.

(2) Article 7—Deductibles does not

apply to the GFIP. The deductible is

$200 (applicable separately to any

building loss and any contents loss) for

insured flood damage losses sustained

by the insured property in the course of

any subsequent flooding event during

the policy term. No deductible shall

apply to Article 3 B.3.

(3) Article 9 E., Cancellation of Policy

By You, does not apply to the GFIP.

(4) Article 9 G., Policy Renewal, does

not apply to the GFIP.

PART 206—FEDERAL DISASTER

ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTERS

DECLARED ON OR AFTER

NOVEMBER 23, 1988

3. The authority citation for Part 206

is amended to read as follows:

Authority: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster

Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42

U.S.C. 5121 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.;

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR

41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O.

12127 of Mar. 31, 1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,

1979 Comp., p. 376.

Subpart E—Individual and Family

Grant Programs

4. Section 206.131(d)(1)(iii)(C)(2) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 206.131 Individual and Family Grant

Programs.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(1) * * *

(iii) * * *

(C) * * *

(2) The National Flood Insurance

Program (NFIP) regulations, at 44 CFR

61.17, establish the Group Flood

Insurance Policy (GFIP), which is a

policy that covers eligible individuals

named by a State as recipients under

section 411 of the Stafford Act of an IFG

program award for flood damage as a

result of a Presidential disaster

declaration.

(i) IFG assistance will be provided to

individuals or families with residential

or personal property damage or losses of

$200 or more. Individuals with damage

of $199 or less will not be eligible for

IFG assistance.

(ii) The premium for the GFIP is a

necessary expense within the meaning

of this section. The State shall withhold

this portion of the IFG award and

provide it to the NFIP on behalf of

individuals and families who are

eligible for coverage. The coverage shall

be equivalent to the maximum grant

amount established under § 411(f) of the

Stafford Act.

(iii) The State IFG program staff

would provide the NFIP with records of

individuals who received an IFG award

and are, therefore, to be insured.

Grantees would not be covered if they

are determined to be ineligible for

coverage based on a number of

exclusions established by the NFIP.

Records of IFG grantees to be insured

shall be accompanied by payments to

cover the premium amounts for each

grantee for the 3-year policy term. The

NFIP will then issue a Certificate of

Flood Insurance to each grantee.

(iv) Once the grantee/policyholder

receives the Certificate of Flood

Insurance, the grantee should review the

list of the types of buildings that are

ineligible for coverage. If the damaged

building and its contents are ineligible,

the grantee must notify the NFIP in

writing. The NFIP will then reimburse

the State IFG program for the premium,

so the IFG program can issue a check for

the premium amount to the grantee

when a premium amount was withheld

from a maximum grant award. (If the

grantee wishes to refer to or review a

Standard Flood Insurance Policy, it will

be made available by the NFIP upon

request.)

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance’’; No. 83.516,

‘‘Disaster Assistance’’).

Dated: February 24, 1995.

Elaine A. McReynolds,

Administrator, Federal Insurance

Administration.

Richard W. Krimm,

Associate Director, Response and Recovery.

[FR Doc. 95–6361 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–02–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 94–84, RM–8478]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Driscoll,

Gregory and Robstown, Texas

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on the deletion of vacant

Channel 283A at Gregory, Texas. The

deletion of Channel 283A at Gregory is

necessary in order to accommodate the

proposed substitution of Channel 283C3

for Channel 286A at Robstown, Texas,

the reallotment of Channel 283C3 from

Robstown to Driscoll, Texas, and the

modification of Station KMIQ(FM)’s
13948 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules

1The Board has also investigated some public

aircraft accidents under memoranda of

understanding with various Federal agencies and

State and local governments.

license to specify Driscoll as Station

KMIQ(FM)’s community of license. See

59 FR 38950, August 1, 1994.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before May 1, 1995, and reply comments

on or before May 16, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

In addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, or its counsel or consultant,

as follows: Lee J. Peltzman, Esq., Shainis

& Peltzman, Suite 200, 2000 L Street,

Washington, D.C. 20036 (Counsel for

petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Further

Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM

Docket No. 94–84, adopted March 1,

1995, and released March 10, 1995. The

full text of this Commission decision is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC’s Reference Center (Room 239),

1919 M Street, NW, Washington, D.C.

The complete text of this decision may

also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor, ITS, Inc.,

(202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street, NW,

Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–6339 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION

SAFETY BOARD

49 CFR Parts 800, 830, and 831

Reporting of Public Aircraft Accidents

AGENCY: National Transportation Safety

Board.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule and

request for comments.

SUMMARY: The NTSB is proposing

various revisions to its rules to

implement P.L. No. 103–411, which

expands the scope of its jurisdiction to

include investigations of certain public

aircraft accidents.

DATES: Comments are invited by April

14, 1995.

ADDRESSES: An original and 2 copies of

any comments must be submitted to:

Office of General Counsel, National

Transportation Safety Board, 490

L’Enfant Plaza East, SW., Washington,

DC 20594, Attention: Public Aircraft

Rules.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane

F. Mackall, (202) 382–6540.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

October 25, 1994, President Clinton

signed H.R. 2440, the Independent

Safety Board Act Amendments of 1994.

Codified as Public Law No. 103–411

(the Act), it is effective on April 23,

1995, and directly affects aircraft

operated by and for Federal, State and

local governments. The core of the

legislation is amendments to the Federal

Aviation Act of 1958 to expand the

Federal Aviation Administration’s

(FAA) safety regulation to previously

exempt ‘‘public’’ aircraft, and the FAA

is in the process of developing

implementing rules and guidance. The

Act, however, also changed the

jurisdiction of the National

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB or

Safety Board).

Presently, jurisdiction of the Safety

Board to investigate aircraft accidents

depends on whether the aircraft

involved are ‘‘civil’’ or ‘‘public.’’ An

aircraft is either one or the other. These

two terms are defined in the Federal

Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, 49

U.S.C. 40102(a) (17) and (37). Until

now, the Safety Board’s statutory

investigation authority extended only to

civil aircraft, although accidents and

incidents involving certain public

aircraft are required to be reported to the

NTSB within 10 days. See 49 CFR

830.20.1

Section 3(c) of the Act expands the

Safety Board’s statutory role in

investigating aircraft accidents to

include all ‘‘public’’ aircraft other than

those operated by the Armed Forces or

by a United States intelligence agency.

Thus, with these two exceptions,

aircraft operated by Federal, State and

local governments will, as of April 23,

1995, be subject to Board jurisdiction for

the purposes of accident investigation in

the U.S., in addition to any reporting

requirements. We propose in this

proceeding to make changes to our

regulations, as necessary to reflect the

Act.

The key question the Safety Board

must answer is: when does an accident

‘‘involve’’ an aircraft ‘‘operated by’’ the

Armed Forces or ‘‘intelligence agencies’’

so as to qualify for the exception to our

public aircraft jurisdiction? As to what

organizations would be included in the

term ‘‘Armed Forces,’’ we consider the

National Guard, and the Coast Guard,

for example, to be within the definition,

and propose to continue that practice.

We construe the term ‘‘intelligence

agency’’ strictly, and propose only to

apply it to those Federal agencies that

are so named or categorized (for

example, in their enabling statutes).

In defining the term ‘‘operated by,’’

there is no issue of interpretation when

the military is flying military-owned

aircraft (assuming only one aircraft is

involved in any accident/incident).

Such an accident would be outside our

jurisdiction. But, if the aircraft is not

actually owned and operated by the

military, we have in the past used a

‘‘single-flight’’ test for Federal use of

otherwise private aircraft to determine

whether the aircraft is civil or public

and, thus, determine our jurisdiction.

That is, if the Navy contracted for a

civilian aircraft to transport troops,

during the aircraft’s use for that purpose

it might have been deemed a public

aircraft and outside our mandatory

jurisdiction—even though by interagency agreement we might have

investigated an accident. After April 23,

this matter is to be analyzed differently.

Irrespective of the aircraft status as civil

or public, we propose to interpret the

statute as requiring that any such

accident will be investigated by NTSB

unless the aircraft was actually operated

by Armed Forces personnel.

The new definition of public aircraft

is complex, and has generated

considerable discussion and

interpretation concerning the scope and

application of the civil/public aircraft

division for the purposes of FAA safety

regulation. The distinction between

civil and public aircraft (as opposed to

the distinction between military and