Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13945

estimated that 1,500,000 cubic yards of

waste were disposed of at this-site.

In a letter dated July 22, 1988,

representatives of the landfill owner

stated that Dakhue Landfill, Inc. was

financially unable to undertake closure

and postclosure activities required at

the landfill. On October 11, 1988,

Dakhue Landfill, Inc. filed for Chapter

11 bankruptcy.

The Site was proposed for the NPL on

October 26, 1989 and finalized on

August 30, 1990 with a score of 42.

The U.S. EPA funded the MPCA to

conduct of Remedial Investigation (RI)

and Feasibility Study (FS) activities. RI

work involves determining the nature

and extent of contamination and FS

work involves developing and

evaluating remedial alternatives.

During the course of those activities,

U.S. EPA and MPCA decided to divide

the remedy for the Site into two units

or discrete actions, referred to as

‘‘operable units’’ (OUs). They are as

follows:

OU One: Source control of

contaminates from the landfill.

OU Two: Contaminated groundwater

migration management.

A focused FS was completed in

March, 1991 for the first OU and a

Record of Decision (ROD) was issued on

June 28, 1991 outlining work necessary

to address the source of the

contamination, the landfill itself.

An RI was completed for the second

OU in August, 1992 and a FS was

completed in December, 1992. A ROD

was issued on June 30, 1992 outlining

work necessary to address the migration

of contaminated groundwater.

The objective of the remedial action

initiated for the Dakhue Sanitary

Landfill was to meet the overall goal of

protecting human health and the

environment. This objective will be

achieved through the construction of the

landfill cover and maintaining a

groundwater monitoring system so that

the potential risks associated with the

Site are reduced. This will be

accomplished through reducing the

infiltration of water into the landfill

waste mass; reducing the build-up of

combustible gases; and reducing the

generation and discharge of landfill

leachate and continued monitoring of

the Site will ensure the future

effectiveness of the remedy.

On June 28, 1991, a Record of

Decision (ROD) which documented

remedial actions for OU one (source

control) was signed. The first operable

unit addresses the source of the

contamination by containing the wastes

and contaminated soil on-site. The

function of this operable unit is to

provide a final cover for the Dakhue

Sanitary Landfill which will prevent or

minimize groundwater contamination

and risks associated with the exposure

to the contaminated materials. The

major components of the selected

remedy for this operable unit include:

Capping with a final cover system

consisting of a gas control layer, a

barrier layer of low permeable material,

a drainage layer, topsoil cover and

vegetation.

The remedy for the second operable

unit includes the following components:

The institutional Controls contained in

Dakota County Ordinance No. 114 and

Minnesota Rules 4725.2000 and

4725.4300 which restrict well

development. A long-term groundwater

monitoring program to: (1) Ensure that

contaminated groundwater is not

migrating off-site (2) assess trends in

water quality in the Sand and Gravel

aquifer; (3) verify that the deep aquifer

is not affected; and (4) to provide

adequate protection to aquatic life in

Judicial Ditch No. 1 from adverse effects

resulting from possible discharge of

contaminated groundwater.

Construction of the landfill cover

provided for in OU one was completed

during the 1992 construction season.

Groundwater monitoring as provided in

OU two was initiated and several

rounds of sampling have been

completed to date.

EPA, with concurrence of the State of

Minnesota, has determined that all

appropriate Fund-financed responses

under CERCLA at the Dakhue Sanitary

Landfill Site have been completed, and

no further Superfund response is

appropriate in order to provide

protection of human health and the

environment. Therefore, U.S. EPA

proposes to delete this Site from the

NPL.

Dated: March 1, 1995.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region V.

[FR Doc. 95–6270 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Parts 61 and 206

RIN 3067–AC35

National Flood Insurance Program;

Group Flood Insurance Policy for

Individual and Family Grant Program

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would

establish a Group Flood Insurance

Policy (GFIP) and the criteria for its

implementation by the National Flood

Insurance Program (NFIP) when Federal

disaster assistance is provided under the

Individual and Family Grant Program

after the President makes a disaster

declaration.

EFFECTIVE DATE: We invite your

comments which will be accepted until

May 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Please send comments to

the Rules Docket Clerk, Office of the

General Counsel, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,

room 840, Washington, DC 20472,

(facsimile) (202) 646–4536.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles M. Plaxico, Jr., Federal

Emergency Management Agency,

Federal Insurance Administration, (202)

646–3422, (facsimile) (202) 646–3445; or

Laurence W. Zensinger in FEMA’s

Response and Recovery Directorate,

(202) 646–3642, (facsimile) (202) 646–

2730.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

411, Individual and Family Grant (IFG)

Programs the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C.

§ 5178) authorizes the President to make

grants to States for the purpose of

making grants to individuals or families

adversely affected by a major disaster.

This disaster assistance is provided to

eligible individuals or families who are

unable to meet disaster-related

necessary expenses or serious needs

through insurance or other means of

assistance. The maximum grant amount

provided under the State-administered

IFG program is $12,600 in Fiscal Year

1995, and is adjusted annually as the

Consumer Price Index for All Urban

Consumers changes.

In past presidentially declared major

disasters, IFG recipients were required

to purchase and maintain ‘‘adequate

flood insurance’’ if they had flood

damage and were in a special flood

hazard area of a community in which

the sale of flood insurance was available

under the NFIP. According to the

regulations published to carry out the

purposes of § 411(a), ‘‘adequate flood

insurance’’ is defined as a flood

insurance policy that provides coverage

at least for the grant award, for which

the maximum in Fiscal Year 1995 is

$12,600. A homeowner is able to apply

that amount to building or contents

damage, or to both kinds of damage,

whereas a renter can apply up to

$12,600 solely for damage to contents.

Our experience has shown that many

IFG recipients historically have not used

the part of the grant award that was

provided to them to purchase the

required flood insurance for that

intended purpose. These individuals
13946 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules

frequently have been unable to obtain

adequate assistance from other means

and have endured hardship as a result

of the disaster. Often they have such

low incomes that they cannot afford to

repay a loan, even if the interest rate is

as low as four percent and the

repayment schedule is spread over a

number of years. Therefore, FEMA

developed an NFIP Group Flood

Insurance Policy (GFIP) for IFG

homeowners or renters who experience

flood damage, in an effort to assist these

individuals to protect themselves from

future flood losses and to comply with

the purchase and maintenance

requirements of the IFG program. By

using the GFIP concept, FEMA can

achieve significant administrative

savings and can offer a premium rate for

the 3-year GFIP that is approximately

$50 more than the 1-year premium for

a conventional Standard Flood

Insurance Policy for a property with the

insurance-rating characteristics that

most of the properties that are

anticipated to be covered under the

GFIP have.

On September 23, 1994, while FEMA

was in the process of preparing

regulations to implement the GFIP, the

President signed Public Law 103–325,

the Riegle Community Development and

Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994.

Title V of Pub. L. 103–325 reformed

major portions of the National Flood

Insurance Act of 1968, and is cited as

the National Flood Insurance Reform

Act of 1994 (NFIRA). Section 582 of

Pub. L. 103–325 states:

‘‘No Federal disaster relief assistance

made available in a flood disaster area

may be used to make a payment * * *

to a person for repair, replacement, or

restoration for damage to any personal,

residential, or commercial property if

that person at any time has received

flood disaster assistance that was

conditional on the person first having

obtained flood insurance under

applicable Federal law and

subsequently having failed to obtain and

maintain flood insurance as required

under applicable Federal law on such

property.’’

We interpret this section as a

requirement in flood disasters for each

grantee who receives Federal disaster

assistance for flood damage to property

located in a special flood hazard area

and who is required to purchase flood

insurance (or had insurance purchased

for them) to maintain at least a

minimum amount of flood insurance on

the property forever, or until they move

to another address. If flood insurance is

not maintained, then no Stafford Act

assistance may be provided for IFG

under sec. 411(a) for real or personal

property in any subsequent flood

disasters. This maintenance provision

also applies to individuals who bought,

or otherwise had transferred to them,

any real estate for which the flood

insurance maintenance requirement was

previously levied.

To enable States to provide affordable

policies to IFG recipients, FEMA

proposes to limit IFG assistance to

individuals and families with $200 or

more of real or personal property

damage or loss. Assisting individuals

with damage of less than $200 is not

cost-effective.

For individuals who qualify for IFG

assistance, FEMA proposes that a fixed

premium amount, initially in the

amount of $200, will be added to the

IFG awards (subject to the current grant

maximum) to cover the cost of the

grantee’s flood insurance coverage for

the first 3 years. If the grantee has

disaster needs that meet or exceed the

maximum grant amount, this fixed

premium amount shall be withheld

from the grant and provided to the NFIP

to pay the premium, thus ensuring the

grantee is provided with a policy. The

policy coverage will be equivalent to the

maximum IFG grant amount each fiscal

year. This amount is $12,600 in Fiscal

Year 1995 as mentioned earlier.

The State IFG program staff would

provide the NFIP with records of the

individuals to be insured. The records,

which the State would provide NFIP on

a weekly basis, would be accompanied

by payments to cover the premium

amounts for each grantee/policyholder

for the 3-year policy term. The NFIP

would then issue a Certificate of Flood

Insurance to each insured. During the 3-

year term of the coverage, the amount(s)

of coverage listed in the Certificate of

Flood Insurance would be adjusted

annually on October 1 to reflect changes

in the Consumer Price Index for All

Urban Consumers.

Approximately 60 days before the end

of the 3-year term of the GFIP, the NFIP

would notify the IFG grantee/policyholder of the procedures to follow for

applying for a new flood insurance

policy and of the amount of coverage

that the IFG grantee/policyholder must

obtain in order to comply with the flood

insurance maintenance requirements

established under the NFIRA. For

purposes of complying with the

maintenance requirement, a ‘‘minimal

amount of flood insurance’’ means an

amount equal to the IFG program’s

maximum grant amount in effect at the

time the new policy is obtained.

Further, at the time of each subsequent

renewal, the notification concerning the

amount of coverage that must be

maintained would be revised to reflect

the IFG program’s maximum grant

amount then in effect.

NFIP’s Standard Flood Insurance

Policy (which would be made available

to grantees upon request) specifies a

number of restrictions and limitations.

While most exclusions pertain only to

certain items in the building, some of

the exclusions mean that there is no

coverage at all for the building or the

contents in the building. The coverage

exclusions would be specified in the

Addendum that would accompany the

Certificate of Flood Insurance, which

the NFIP would send to each IFG

grantee/policyholder. If a Certificate of

Flood Insurance is issued for a grantee

whose property is ineligible for GFIP

coverage, the NFIP, upon discovery of

such ineligibility, would notify the

grantee that the Certificate is rescinded

and then refund the full premium costs

to the President’s Fund. The State’s 25%

share would then be forwarded to the

State. The State would then return the

$200 only to those grantees who

received maximum grant awards and

had their premium costs deducted from

those awards.

NFIRA requires a 30-day waiting

period, with two specific exceptions,

before flood insurance coverage

becomes effective under the Standard

Flood Insurance Policy. Neither

exception applies to the GFIP.

Therefore, to comply with the NFIRA,

GFIP coverage would become effective

on the 30th day following the date that

the records and premium payment are

received by the NFIP from the State.

National Environmental Policy Act

This rule is categorically excluded

from the requirements of 44 CFR Part

10, Environmental Consideration. No

environmental impact assessment has

been prepared.

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory

Planning and Review

This proposed rule is not a significant

regulatory action within the meaning of

§ 2(f) of E.O. 12866 of September 30,

1993, 58 FR 51735, but attempts to

adhere to the regulatory principles set

forth in E.O. 12866. The rule has not

been reviewed by the Office of

Management and Budget under E.O.

12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

FEMA requests that commenters

address their concerns about any

additional paperwork or recordkeeping

reporting burden this proposed rule may

place upon them. Comments on

paperwork or recordkeeping issues

including burden estimates (i.e., the

time it would take a State to research
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