63540 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9918– 

37–Region 8] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Partial 

Deletion of the California Gulch 

Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 8 announces the 

deletion of the Operable Unit 4 (OU4), 

Upper California Gulch; Operable Unit 

5 (OU5), ASARCO Smelters/Slag/Mill 

Sites; and Operable Unit 7 (OU7), 

Apache Tailing Impoundment, of the 

California Gulch Superfund Site (Site) 

located in Lake County, Colorado, from 

the National Priorities List (NPL). The 

NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This partial 

deletion pertains to the Operable Unit 4, 

Upper California Gulch (media of 

concern—waste rock and fluvial tailing 

piles); Operable Unit 5, ASARCO 

Smelters/Slag/Mill Sites (media of 

concern—slag and soil); and Operable 

Unit 7, Apache Tailing Impoundment 

(media of concern—tailing and soil), of 

the California Gulch Superfund Site 

(Site). Operable Unit 2, Malta Gulch; 

Operable Unit 8, Lower California 

Gulch; Operable Unit 9, Residential 

Populated Areas; and Operable Unit 10, 

Oregon Gulch were partially deleted by 

previous rules. Operable Unit 1, the Yak 

Tunnel/Water Treatment Plant; 

Operable Unit 3, the Denver & Rio 

Grande Western Railroad Company Slag 

Piles/Railroad Easement/Railroad Yard; 

Operable Unit 6, Starr Ditch/Penrose 

Dump/Stray Horse Gulch/Evans Gulch; 

Operable Unit 11, the Arkansas River 

Floodplain; and Operable Unit 12 

(OU12), Site-wide Water Quality will 

remain on the NPL and is/are not being 

considered for deletion as part of this 

action. The EPA and the State of 

Colorado, through the Colorado 

Department of Public Health and the 

Environment, have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, the 

deletion of these parcels does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

DATES: This action is effective October 

24, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–HQ–SFUND– 

1983–0002. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the http://

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 

Business Information or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy: 

Æ By calling EPA Region 8 at (303) 

312–7279 and leaving a message, or 

Æ At the Lake County Public Library, 

1115 Harrison Avenue, Leadville, CO 

80461, (719) 486–0569, Monday and 

Wednesday from 10:00 a.m.–8:00 p.m., 

Tuesday and Thursday from 10:00 a.m.– 

5:00 p.m., and Friday and Saturday 1:00 

p.m.–5:00 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Linda Kiefer, Remedial Project Manager, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 8, Mail Code 8EPR–SR, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202– 

1129, (303) 312–6689, email: 

kiefer.linda@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

portion of the site to be deleted from the 

NPL is: Operable Unit 4, Upper 

California Gulch; Operable Unit 5, 

ASARCO Smelters/Slag/Mill Sites; and 

Operable Unit 7, Apache Tailing 

Impoundment, of the California Gulch 

Superfund Site (Site) in Lake County, 

Colorado. A Notice of Intent for Partial 

Deletion for this Site was published in 

the Federal Register (79 FR 47043) on 

August 12, 2014. 

The closing date for comments on the 

Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion was 

September 11, 2014. Two public 

comments were received. One comment 

supported the partial deletion. The 

other comment requested that the OU4, 

OU5 and OU7 not be partially deleted 

due to concerns over water quality. In 

response, water quality has greatly 

improved since the NPL listing in 1983. 

The Upper Arkansas was recently 

designated a Colorado Parks and 

Wildlife Gold Medal Fishing area. The 

media covered in OU4, OU5 and OU7 

are wastes from mining, milling and 

smelting activities. The general remedial 

action objectives of OU4, OU5, and OU7 

were to contain and control sources of 

contamination. Surface water and 

ground water quality were not 

specifically addressed in the remedies 

for these operable units. Site-wide water 

quality is specifically addressed in 

OU12, which is an active operable unit. 

Under OU12, response action can be 

conducted anywhere on the Site if 

needed to address releases that impact 

or may impact water quality goals in the 

Arkansas River. In OU4, OU5 and OU7, 

all responses actions have been 

completed and institutional controls are 

in place. A responsiveness summary 

was prepared and placed in both the 

docket, EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002, 

on www.regulations.gov, and in the 

local repository listed above. 

EPA maintains the NPL as the list of 

sites that appear to present a significant 

risk to public health, welfare, or the 

environment. Deletion of a site from the 

NPL does not preclude further remedial 

action. Whenever there is a significant 

release from a site deleted from the NPL, 

the deleted site may be restored to the 

NPL without application of the hazard 

ranking system. Deletion of portions of 

a site from the NPL does not affect 

responsible party liability, in the 

unlikely event that future conditions 

warrant further actions. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 

9601–9657; E.O. 13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR 

2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 

3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O.12580, 52 FR 

2923, 3 CFR 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Dated: October 9, 2014. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2014–25286 Filed 10–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY 

MANAGEMENT AGENCY 

44 CFR Parts 204 and 206 

[Docket ID FEMA–2013–0004] 

RIN 1660–AA78 

Disaster Assistance; Fire Management 

Assistance Grant (FMAG) Program— 

Deadline Extensions and 

Administrative Correction 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63541 

1 Disaster Relief Act of 1974, Public Law 93–288, 

section 417, 88 Stat. 158 (1974), redesignated as 

section 420 by the Stafford Act, Public Law 100– 

707, section 106(j), 102 Stat. 4705 (1988); codified 

as amended at 42 U.S.C. 5187. 

2 Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, Public Law 

106–390, section 303, 42 U.S.C. 5121, added ‘‘local 

government’’ to section 420 of the Stafford Act. 

3A major disaster under the Stafford Act is any 

natural catastrophe or, regardless of cause, any fire, 

flood, or explosion 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 

States, local governments, and disaster relief 

organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, 

hardship, or suffering caused thereby. 

4Pursuant to FEMA regulations at 44 CFR 204.22, 

only the Governor of a State or the Governor’s 

Authorized Representative can request an FMAG 

declaration. 

5The grantee is usually a State; however, an 

Indian Tribal government may also be the grantee, 

in which case it takes on the same responsibilities 

as the State. See 44 CFR 204.3. 

6The incident period is the time interval during 

which the declared fire occurs. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the authority of 

Section 420 of the Robert T. Stafford 

Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act, as amended, the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) provides grants for the 

mitigation, management, and control of 

any fire or fire complex on public or 

private forest land or grassland that 

threatens such destruction as would 

constitute a major disaster. This rule 

finalizes, without change, a proposed 

rule to revise the Fire Management 

Assistance Grant (FMAG) program 

regulations to lengthen the potential 

extension for the grantee’s submission 

of its grant application to FEMA from 

up to 3 months to up to 6 months. This 

rule also finalizes, without change, the 

proposed regulation to lengthen the 

potential extension for a subgrantee to 

submit a project worksheet from up to 

3 months to up to 6 months. The rule 

finalizes additional minor 

administrative changes to the rule. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

24, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William Roche, Director, Public 

Assistance Division, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 

Washington DC, 20472–3100, (phone) 

202–212–2340, or (email) 

William.Roche@dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Fire Management Assistance 

Grant (FMAG) Program is authorized by 

section 420 of the Robert T. Stafford 

Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act 1 (Stafford Act). Section 

420 authorizes the President to provide 

assistance, including grants, equipment, 

supplies, and personnel to any State or 

local government 2 or Indian Tribal 

government for the mitigation, 

management, and control of any fire on 

public or private forest land or grassland 

that threatens such destruction as would 

constitute a major disaster.3

In order to receive funding for an 

FMAG, only a State 4 may submit a 

request for an FMAG declaration and 

the request must be submitted to the 

Regional Administrator (RA) while the 

fire is burning uncontrolled. See 44 CFR 

204.22. If FEMA approves the request 

and issues the declaration, the grantee 5

may begin preparing a grant application 

package for submission to the FEMA 

RA. State agencies, Tribal governments, 

and local governments interested in 

applying for FMAG subgrants must 

submit a Request for Fire Management 

Assistance Subgrant to the grantee. See 

44 CFR 204.41(a). Once FEMA 

determines that the subgrantee meets 

the eligibility criteria, FEMA Regional 

staff begins to work with the grantee and 

local staff to prepare project worksheets. 

See 44 CFR 204.52(b). The project 

worksheet identifies actual costs 

incurred by the subgrantee or grantee as 

a result of firefighting activities, and is 

the mechanism by which FEMA 

reimburses eligible costs. 

Under the FMAG program, certain 

administrative costs are reimbursable. 

Grantees and subgrantees may claim 

direct costs (i.e., those costs directly 

attributable to a particular project) 

associated with requesting, obtaining, 

and administering a grant for a declared 

fire, including regular and overtime pay 

and travel expenses for permanent, 

reassigned, temporary, and contract 

employees who assist in administering 

the fire management assistance grant. 

Other direct administrative costs 

incurred by the grantee or subgrantee, 

such as equipment and supply 

purchases, may be eligible, but must be 

reviewed by the grantee and FEMA RA. 

Indirect costs incurred by the grantee 

during the administration of a grant are 

allowed in accordance with the 

provisions of 44 CFR part 13 and OMB 

Circular A–87; subgrantees may not 

claim indirect administrative costs. 

Because FEMA will not approve 

project worksheets under $1000, 

administrative costs reported on project 

worksheets must total $1,000 or more to 

be eligible for Public Assistance 

reimbursement. See 44 CFR 

204.52(c)(5). 

Subgrantees must submit all of their 

project worksheets to the grantee for 

review. The grantee determines the 

deadline for subgrantees to submit 

completed project worksheets, but the 

deadline must be no later than 6 months 

from the close of the incident period.6

At the request of the grantee, the FEMA 

RA may grant an extension of up to 3 

months for the submission of the project 

worksheet. The grantee must include a 

justification in its request for an 

extension. See 44 CFR 204.52(c). 

The grantee submits the subgrantee 

project worksheets to the FEMA RA as 

part of its grant application. See 44 CFR 

204.51(b)(4) and 204.52(c). The grantee 

should submit its grant application 

within 9 months of the FMAG 

declaration. See 44 CFR 204.51(a)(2). 

Upon receipt of a written request from 

the grantee, the Regional Administrator 

may grant an extension for up to 3 

months. The grantee’s request must 

include a justification for the extension. 

See 44 CFR 204.51(a). 

II. The Proposed Rule 

On March 7, 2013, FEMA published 

a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (78 FR 

14740), which proposed to lengthen the 

potential extension for the grantee’s 

submission of its grant application to 

FEMA from up to 3 months to up to 6 

months of the declaration. The proposed 

rule also proposed to lengthen the 

potential extension for a subgrantee to 

submit a project worksheet from up to 

3 months to up to 6 months. These 

proposed deadline extensions provide 

increased flexibility to applicants who 

may benefit from additional time to 

prepare the documentation necessary to 

support a grant application and may 

reduce or eliminate financial losses due 

to delayed invoices by third parties that 

exceed the maximum 3-month deadline 

extension. In addition, FEMA proposed 

to exempt project worksheets claiming 

only administrative costs from the 

$1,000 minimum. This would allow 

entities with only a small amount of 

administrative costs to be reimbursed 

for those costs. 

FEMA also proposed to make 

additional minor administrative changes 

to its FMAG regulations to reflect 

current statutory and regulatory 

requirements and clarify grant 

application procedures. These 

administrative changes included: 

a. Changing the regulatory text to clarify 

the current regulatory language that suggests 

that FMAG grants are approved before local 

governments submit their project worksheets. 

Local governments submit their project 

worksheets to the State and the State submits 

all the project worksheets to FEMA as part 

of the grant application package. See 44 CFR 

204.51 and 205.52. 

b. Changing the regulatory text from stating 

that grantees ‘‘should’’ submit their grant 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
63542 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

7Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013, 

Public Law 113–2, section 103, 42 U.S.C. 5123, 

states that any reference in this Act to ‘State and 

local,’ ‘State or local,’ ‘State, and local,’ ‘State, or 

local,’ or ‘State, local’ (including plurals) with 

respect to governments or officials is deemed to 

refer also to Indian tribal governments and officials, 

as appropriate. 

application within 9 months of the fire 

incident to stating they ‘‘must’’ submit the 

grant application within 9 months of the fire 

incident. See 44 CFR 204.51(a)(2). FEMA 

proposed this change because the deadline 

has never been optional. 

c. Adding to the regulatory text to state 

explicitly that the request for extensions and 

justifications for project worksheets must be 

in writing. This is a non-substantive change 

that mirrors the requirement in 44 CFR 

204.51 that the grantee must provide 

justifications in writing for its request for a 

time extension to submit grant applications. 

Further, the current regulations already 

require subgrantees to request an extension 

and provide a justification in its request for 

an extension but FEMA did not state that the 

request be in writing when it promulgated 

the current regulations. See 44 CFR 

204.52(c)(3). 

d. Clarifying that project worksheets will 

not be accepted after the regulatory deadline, 

or after the extension if the grantee or 

subgrantee asked for an extension 

e. Clarifying that FMAG administrative 

costs are not part of management costs. See 

44 CFR 204.63. FEMA reimburses FMAG 

direct and indirect administrative costs in 

accordance with 44 CFR part 13 rather than 

44 CFR part 207 which addresses 

management costs. 

f. Removing references to OMB forms, the 

definition of ‘‘we, our, us’’ and making 

format changes 

g. Removing the word ‘‘including,’’ this 

was a typographical error, from the list of 

reimbursable equipment costs. 

h. Removing Part 206, subpart L, Fire 

Suppression Assistance, because the FMAG 

program replaced the Fire Suppression 

Assistance Program. 

FEMA proposed these administrative 

changes and changes in nomenclature to 

clarify its FMAG regulations. 

III. Discussion of Public Comments 

FEMA received six comments on the 

proposed rule; five were favorable and 

one was unrelated to the proposed rule. 

A. General 

The comments were generally 

supportive of the proposed rule, finding 

the proposed changes were ‘‘timely’’ 

and ‘‘welcome,’’ and that the addition of 

3 months to the extension process and 

the elimination of the $1,000 minimum 

for administrative costs were both good 

improvements. 

1. FEMA’s Dissemination of Information 

One commenter requested that FEMA 

review its method of disseminating 

information to the public. This 

commenter stated that there was very 

little knowledge of FEMA’s proposed 

revisions among State forestry agencies 

throughout the United States. 

FEMA takes note of this comment and 

will include Other Federal Agencies 

(OFA) in future communications. In 

addition, FEMA will query OFAs 

involved with the program to determine 

the best ways to notify State forestry 

agencies of FMAG activities and 

communications. FEMA has also 

ensured a robust external affairs roll out 

to notify stakeholders prior to 

publication of the final rule. 

In another comment, the commenter 

stated that the cost thresholds for the 

FMAG program are rarely updated in an 

efficient manner and are difficult to 

locate, which leads to additional work 

in submitting a request for assistance for 

potential applicants. FEMA notes that 

the individual and cumulative cost 

thresholds are adjusted for inflation 

annually in January using the Consumer 

Price Index for All Urban Consumers 

published by the United States 

Department of Labor. FEMA sends the 

individual and cumulative cost 

thresholds via electronic 

communication to every FMAG program 

contact in the FEMA regions, usually at 

the end of January or beginning of 

February, for wider dissemination to its 

stakeholders. In addition, FEMA has 

updated its Web site to make this 

information more available and 

accessible. A link to the FMAG cost 

thresholds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 can 

be found on the FEMA Web site at: 

http://www.fema.gov/policies-andpublications. 

2. Request To Modify Forms and 

Required Data 

One commenter suggested that FEMA 

consider modifying its data 

requirements and forms associated with 

submitting a request for an FMAG 

declaration. The commenter stated that 

request for an FMAG declaration is 

currently structured to accommodate a 

western fire where the impact is 

concentrated over a large single 

geographic area, rather than in the 

context of multiple fires in multiple 

regions of a State and varied impacts 

and environments. 

FEMA’s forms, and the associated 

data necessary to complete FEMA’s 

forms, address one fire. FEMA 

acknowledges that gathering the 

necessary data to support a FMAG 

request for multiple fires within the 

regulatory timeframe can be a challenge. 

FEMA will look into this further, and if 

it decides to pursue the issue, will do 

so in a separate mechanism. FMAG 

declarations operate on a 24-hour realtime basis and are frequently conducted 

over the telephone with written followup. The Governor of a State or the 

Governor’s Authorized Representative 

submits a request for a fire management 

assistance declaration to the FEMA RA 

while the fire is burning uncontrolled 

and threatening such destruction as 

would constitute a major disaster. See 

44 CFR 204.22. The RA gathers the 

State’s information, and calls upon a 

Principal Advisor for a technical 

assessment of the fire. See 44 CFR 

204.23. Using all available data and 

information, the RA develops a Regional 

summary and recommendation, and 

makes a decision to approve or deny the 

declaration request. See 44 CFR 204.24. 

The request is approved or denied based 

on the conditions that existed at the 

time of the request and whether the fire 

or fire complex threatens such 

destruction as would constitute a major 

disaster. See 44 CFR 204.21 and 44 CFR 

204.24. 

3. Definition of ‘‘Fire Complex’’ 

Another comment suggested that 

FEMA revise the FMAG fire complex 

definition to accommodate a variety of 

organizational frameworks that fulfill 

the objective of effectively managing 

fire(s). FEMA understands the position 

that multiple smaller fires may pose the 

same or equivalent threat of a major 

disaster that a single large fire presents. 

The FMAG Program currently provides 

assistance for a single large fire or a fire 

complex that is managed by a single 

incident commander. The scenario of 

multiple smaller fires in a wide 

geographic area being regionally 

managed has not been brought forward 

to FEMA’s knowledge. FEMA uses four 

criteria to evaluate the threat posed by 

a fire or fire complex. These criteria 

include: (1) Threat to lives and 

improved property, including threats to 

critical facilities/infrastructure, and 

critical watershed areas; (2) availability 

of State and local 7 firefighting 

resources; (3) high fire danger 

conditions, as indicated by nationally 

accepted indices such as the National 

Fire Danger Ratings System; and (4) 

potential major economic impact. See 

44 CFR 204.21. This recommendation is 

outside the scope of this rulemaking, 

but FEMA will take it under 

consideration in any future revisions to 

the FMAG program. 

One commenter requested that the 

FMAG process provide better allowance 

for the use of a ‘‘fire complex’’ structure 

of management in which multiple fires 

on a local level are managed collectively 

by a central incident management 

organization based out of a regionally 

located office. Again, this comment is 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63543 

outside the scope of this rulemaking, 

but FEMA will take the comment under 

consideration to determine if the current 

definition of a fire complex is 

appropriate. 

4. Better Recognition of State Forest Fire 

Suppression 

One comment suggested that the 

FMAG Program better recognize the 

organization structure of State forestry 

fire suppression throughout the eastern 

United States. FEMA understands that 

fire suppression organizational 

structures in the eastern part of the 

country vary from other organizational 

structures in mountainous areas in 

much of the western United States and 

vary from fire suppression structures 

needed in the large grassland areas in 

the Midwest. Based on FEMA data, 

FEMA believes the FMAG Program, in 

its current form, adequately recognizes 

and is responsive to all fire suppression 

organization structures. From 2006 to 

2013, there were over 500 FMAG 

declared fires in the United States. In 

that same period of time there were 9 

major disaster declarations for wild land 

fires. Since FMAGs are limited to those 

fires that threaten a major disaster, this 

data shows that the FMAG Program is 

successful how it is currently structured 

and administered. Unless presented 

with additional information, we do not 

anticipate modifying the existing 

program structure. 

B. Deadline Extensions 

In the proposed rule, FEMA proposed 

to revise 44 CFR 204.52(c)(3) to allow 

the FEMA RA to grant up to a 6-month 

extension for a subgrantee to submit the 

project worksheet. The current 

regulations allow for a maximum 3- 

month extension. In addition, FEMA 

proposed to lengthen the 3-month 

deadline extension for the grantee’s 

submission of its grant application to 

FEMA in 44 CFR 204.51(a)(2) to a 

maximum 6-month extension. 

1. General Support 

Commenters supported this change, 

citing various reasons. One commenter 

supported the change because of limited 

staffing in States that experience the 

majority of fires, and the additional time 

would allow the reporting of all costs, 

especially after large, lengthy or 

multiple fires. Another commenter 

noted that the additional 3-month 

extensions for grantees and subgrantees 

were especially needed during a 

‘‘significant’’ fire season. Another 

commenter noted that the change would 

ease the burden on local governments to 

submit all the necessary information on 

time to maintain eligibility for FMAG 

funds. 

2. Consistency of FMAG and Public 

Assistance 

One commenter stated that while the 

extended time period was positive, the 

general framework of the FMAG and 

Public Assistance programs should be 

consistent and cost effective. While 

outside the scope of this rulemaking, 

FEMA notes that it does agree with this 

comment and when possible the FMAG 

program and other Public Assistance 

programs are aligned and use the same 

or similar policies. For example, the 

purchase of supplies and equipment 

that are necessary to respond to the 

declared fire may be an eligible FMAG 

cost. The grantee or subgrantee, 

however, may be required to 

compensate FEMA for the fair market 

value of the equipment and supplies 

when the items are no longer needed for 

fire suppression activities. This is 

consistent with Public Assistance 

eligibility criteria found in FEMA Policy 

No. 9525.12, Disposition of Equipment, 

Supplies and Salvaged Materials, which 

provides guidance at http://

www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/

pa/9525_12.pdf. However, due to the 

different nature of wildfires from other 

disasters, the FMAG program has its 

own regulations. See 44 CFR Part 204. 

There are different time requirements as 

specified in those regulations. 

3. Common Practice 

One commenter stated that the 

proposed time extensions have already 

been a common FEMA practice. FEMA 

notes that this rulemaking codifies 

current practice, which FEMA has been 

implementing since 2002. FEMA’s goal 

for these changes is to create a 

regulatory mechanism for granting 

extensions and avoid the need to 

routinely grant extensions beyond the 

regulatory limit, which is a significant 

administrative burden not only to the 

applicant but to FEMA and the State or 

Indian Tribal government. By extending 

the deadlines, the regulations better 

reflect reality and the actual time 

needed to submit an FMAG application 

or project worksheet. 

4. Additional Time Extensions 

One commenter suggested that FEMA 

incorporate a provision to allow the 

FEMA RA to grant additional time 

extensions if necessary as a result of 

delayed third party billings from 

Federal agencies. Another commenter 

raised the concern that even with the 

proposed changes many local 

governments will need additional 

extensions to take into account delays 

experienced by local jurisdictions in 

obtaining cost/invoices for air assets 

provided to the local jurisdiction to the 

incident under contract with Federal 

agencies. FEMA understands that 

delayed third party billings are an issue 

with some grants, especially with OFA. 

The United States Forest Service has 

recently implemented a software 

upgrade program (Financial 

Management Modernization Initiative) 

that is intended to expedite billings. 

FEMA expects this to eliminate delayed 

billings so this should not be an issue 

once fully implemented. In addition, 

when FEMA drafted its proposed 

rulemaking, FEMA looked into this 

option as an alternative to the proposed 

changes. However, to ensure consistent 

time extension determinations, FEMA 

set a time frame for the extensions. 

C. Elimination of the $1,000 Project 

Worksheet Minimum for Administrative 

Costs 

FEMA currently does not allow 

reimbursement for a project worksheet 

that totals less than $1,000. In the 

proposed rule, FEMA proposed to revise 

44 CFR 204.52(c)(5) to indicate that the 

$1,000 project worksheet minimum 

does not apply to project worksheets 

that are limited to allowable 

administrative costs as defined in 44 

CFR 204.63. This is a substantive 

change, and ensures that grantees and 

subgrantees are reimbursed for all 

eligible administrative expenses. 

Three commenters supported this 

proposed change. One commenter stated 

that due to current rule limitations and 

without this revision, many small 

entities are unable to recover these 

costs. This revision would allow small 

entities to be reimbursed for their 

administrative efforts regardless of the 

amount. Another commenter 

acknowledged that this proposed 

change would allow for full 

reimbursement of all eligible 

administrative costs. Finally, a 

commenter welcomed this change for 

FMAG as many of the smaller 

jurisdictions have not been able to 

obtain reimbursement for their direct 

administrative costs since the costs tend 

to fall well below $1,000. 

IV. Regulatory Analysis 

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) and Executive 

Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review) 

Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 

direct agencies to assess the costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
63544 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, of 

reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, 

and of promoting flexibility. This rule 

has not been designated a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action,’’ under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 

the Office of Management and Budget 

has not reviewed this rule. 

Summary 

This rule does not impose mandatory 

costs on grantees and subgrantees. This 

rule does provide the RA with increased 

flexibility to assist grantees and 

subgrantees who submit FMAG 

applications and whose circumstances 

warrant an extension. In addition, the 

exemption from the $1,000 project 

worksheet minimum will allow grantees 

and subgrantees not previously 

reimbursed for eligible program 

administrative expenses to receive 

additional compensation from FEMA 

and the Disaster Relief Fund. FEMA 

estimates this exemption will transfer 

between $10,000 and $50,000 in 

administrative costs over the next 10 

years (undiscounted) from grantees and 

subgrantees to FEMA. 

Total Costs and Benefits of This Rule 

There are no direct monetary costs 

associated with the increased extensions 

identified in the rule. The cost of 

existing requirements (i.e., grant 

application submission) has the 

potential to be shifted, but not changed, 

by this rule. However, an extension may 

indirectly impact a grantee’s or 

subgrantee’s cash flow. For instance, if 

funds needed to reimburse fire 

suppression services (per a mutual aid 

fiscal agreement) are delayed due to an 

extension, then a grantee will have to 

use alternative means to avoid a 

budgetary shortfall. Regardless, it is the 

grantee’s choice whether or not to apply 

for an extension and the grantee will 

need to consider if it is more beneficial 

to expend extra efforts to submit its 

FMAG application without an extension 

or to find alternative means to cover any 

associated shortfalls. Based on previous 

FMAG application submittals, FEMA 

expects approximately twenty 6-month 

grantee extensions to be granted over 

the next 10 years. As is current practice 

(44 CFR 204.52(c)(3)), subgrantee 

extensions are at the request of the 

grantee. Our estimate of grantee 

extensions includes any subgrantee 

extension requests that may be included 

as part of the grantee’s request. A 

grantee request may cover multiple 

subgrantee extensions. 

The exemption from the $1,000 

project worksheet minimum for those 

project worksheets submitted only to 

claim administrative costs will transfer 

eligible administrative costs from 

grantees and subgrantees to FEMA and 

the Disaster Relief Fund. This will allow 

grantees and subgrantees not previously 

reimbursed for eligible program 

administrative expenses to receive 

compensation. FEMA subject matter 

experts from FEMA’s Recovery 

Directorate estimate an average of one to 

five such project worksheets will be 

submitted each year. FEMA assumes for 

this analysis that the cost of such project 

worksheets will be $1,000. The resulting 

total additional transfer to grantees and 

subgrantees, over 10 years, ranges 

between $10,000 and $50,000 

(undiscounted). 

Benefits of the rule include increased 

flexibility to grantees and subgrantees 

for submitting their respective 

applications. A longer application 

period may also allow applicants to use 

lengthier but more cost efficient grant 

application preparation methods. The 

rule will also more accurately reflect the 

operational and administrative demands 

of the FMAG grant process. In addition, 

the rule’s nonsubstantive modifications 

will improve regulatory clarity. 

Retrospective Review 

To facilitate the periodic review of 

existing regulations, Executive Order 

13563 requires agencies to consider how 

best to promote retrospective analysis of 

rules that may be outmoded, ineffective, 

insufficient, or excessively burdensome, 

and to modify, streamline, expand, or 

repeal them in accordance with what 

has been learned. The Executive Order 

requires agencies to issue a retrospective 

review plan, consistent with law and 

the agency’s resources and regulatory 

priorities, under which the agency will 

periodically review its existing 

significant regulations to determine 

whether any such regulations should be 

modified, streamlined, expanded, or 

repealed so as to make the agency’s 

regulatory program more effective or 

less burdensome in achieving the 

regulatory objectives. Review of FEMA’s 

existing FMAG regulations revealed that 

they could be modified to provide for 

greater flexibility for FEMA to account 

for extenuating circumstances that may 

delay applications. Therefore, FEMA is 

increasing available extension times by 

3 months for both grantee and 

subgrantee FMAG submissions. In 

addition, FEMA has decided to expand 

coverage of administrative costs by 

exempting the $1,000 project worksheet 

minimum for those project worksheets 

submitted only to claim eligible 

program administrative costs. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended by 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. 

L. 104–121), requires Federal agencies 

to consider the potential impact of 

regulations on small businesses, small 

governmental jurisdictions, and small 

organizations during the development of 

their rules. As this rule imposes no 

direct monetary cost, FEMA certifies 

that this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. FEMA notes 

that public comment on the proposed 

rule suggested this rule could especially 

benefit small entities. Commenters 

stated that small entities and smaller 

jurisdictions would now be able to 

recover full reimbursement for all 

eligible administrative costs as their 

direct administrative costs tended to fall 

below the previous $1,000 threshold. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

As required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public 

Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), as 

amended, an agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless the collection of information 

displays a valid OMB control number. 

This rule contains collections of 

information that are subject to review by 

OMB under the PRA. The information 

collections included in this rule are 

approved by OMB under control 

numbers 1660–0058, Fire Management 

Assistance Grant Program, which 

expires on October 31, 2014, and 1660– 

0025, FEMA Emergency Preparedness 

and Response Directorate Grants 

Administration Forms, which expires 

on September 30, 2017. There is no new 

information collections included in this 

rule. 

D. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism, 

64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999), sets forth 

principles and criteria that agencies 

must adhere to in formulating and 

implementing policies that have 

federalism implications, that is, 

regulations that have substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. Federal 

agencies must closely examine the 

statutory authority supporting any 

action that would limit the 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63545 

policymaking discretion of the States, 

and to the extent practicable, must 

consult with State and local officials 

before implementing any such action. 

This rule involves no policies that have 

federalism implications under Executive 

Order 13132. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995, Public Law 104–4, 109 Stat. 48 

(Mar. 22, 1995) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), 

requires Federal agencies to assess the 

effects of their discretionary regulatory 

actions that may result in the 

expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal 

government, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted 

for inflation) or more in any one year. 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 

however, does not apply to regulations 

that provide for emergency assistance or 

relief at the request of any State, local, 

or Tribal government or any official of 

a State, local, or Tribal government (2 

U.S.C. 1503). FMAGs are provided upon 

the request of the State. In addition, 

FEMA has determined that this rule will 

not result in the expenditure by State, 

local, and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, nor by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more in any one year as 

a result of a Federal mandate, and it will 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions are 

deemed necessary under the provisions 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 

F. Executive Order 12898, 

Environmental Justice 

Under Executive Order 12898, Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994), as amended by 

Executive Order 12948, 60 FR 6381 

(Feb. 1, 1995), FEMA incorporates 

environmental justice into its policies 

and programs. The Executive Order 

requires each Federal agency to conduct 

its programs, policies, and activities that 

substantially affect human health or the 

environment, in a manner that ensures 

that those programs, policies, and 

activities do not have the effect of 

excluding persons from participation in 

our programs, denying persons the 

benefits of our programs, or subjecting 

persons to discrimination because of 

their race, color, or national origin. 

No action that FEMA can anticipate 

under this rule will have a 

disproportionately high or adverse 

human health and environmental effect 

on any segment of the population. 

Accordingly, the requirements of 

Executive Order 12898 do not apply to 

this rule. 

H. Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform 

FEMA has reviewed this rule under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). This 

rule meets applicable standards to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

I. Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 

2000), applies to agency regulations that 

have Tribal implications, that is, 

regulations that have substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. Under 

this Executive Order, to the extent 

practicable and permitted by law, no 

agency shall promulgate any regulation 

that has Tribal implications, that 

imposes substantial direct compliance 

costs on Indian Tribal governments, and 

that is not required by statute, unless 

funds necessary to pay the direct costs 

incurred by the Indian Tribal 

government or the Tribe in complying 

with the regulation are provided by the 

Federal Government, or the agency 

consults with Tribal officials. FEMA has 

determined that this rule does not have 

Tribal implications and does not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Indian Tribal governments. The FMAG 

program is a voluntary grant program in 

which Indian Tribes may participate as 

grantees or subgrantees; the program 

provides monetary assistance to Indian 

Tribes, and does not affect the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. 

J. National Environmental Policy Act 

FEMA did not prepare an 

environmental assessment as defined by 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969, Public Law 91–190, 83 Stat. 852 

(Jan. 1, 1970)(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as 

amended, because a categorical 

exclusion applies to this rulemaking 

action. This rule deals with the FMAG 

program, which is categorically 

excluded from the preparation of an 

environmental impact statement under 

44 CFR 10.8(d)(2)(xix)(N). Further, no 

extraordinary circumstances exist 

requiring the need to develop an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement. See 44 

CFR 10.8(d)(3). 

L. Congressional Review of Agency 

Rulemaking. 

FEMA has sent this final rule to the 

Congress and to the Government 

Accountability Office under the 

Congressional Review of Agency 

Rulemaking Act, (‘‘Congressional 

Review Act’’), Public Law 104–121, 110 

Stat. 873 (Mar. 29, 1996) (5 U.S.C. 804). 

This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ within 

the meaning of the Congressional 

Review Act. 

List of Subjects 

44 CFR Part 204 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Fire prevention, Grant 

programs, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

44 CFR Part 206 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Coastal zone, Community 

facilities, Disaster assistance, Fire 

prevention, Grant programs-housing and 

community development, Housing, 

Insurance, Intergovernmental relations, 

Loan programs-housing and community 

development, Natural resources, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency amends 44 CFR 

parts 204 and 206 as follows: 

PART 204—FIRE MANAGEMENT 

ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM 

■ 1. Revise the authority citation for part 

204 to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5121 through 5207; 

6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Department of Homeland 

Security Delegation 9001.1. 

§ 204.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. Remove the words ‘‘We (FEMA)’’ 

and add, in their place, the word 

‘‘FEMA’’. 

■ 3. In § 204.3— 

■ a. In the definition of ‘‘Applicant’’, 

remove the word ‘‘us’’ and add, in its 

place, the word ‘‘FEMA’’; 

■ b. In the definition of ‘‘Hazard 

mitigation plan’’, remove the words 

‘‘We address’’, and add, in their place, 

the words ‘‘FEMA addresses’’; 

■ c. In the definition of ‘‘Performance 

period’’, remove ‘‘(Standard Form 424)’’ 

and ‘‘in block 13’’; 

■ d. In the definition of ‘‘Project 

worksheet’’, remove the words ‘‘FEMA 

Form 90–91, which identifies’’, and add, 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
63546 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

in their place, the words ‘‘The form 

which identifies’’; 

■ e. Remove the definitions of ‘‘FEMA 

Form 90–91’’, ‘‘Request for Federal 

Assistance’’, ‘‘Standard Form (SF) 424’’, 

and ‘‘We, our, us’’; and 

■ f. Add a definition of ‘‘Application for 

Federal Assistance’’ in alphabetical 

order to read as follows: 

§ 204.3 Definitions used throughout this 

part. 

* * * * * 

Application for Federal Assistance. 

The form the State submits to apply for 

a grant under a fire management 

assistance declaration. 

* * * * * 

§ 204.21 [Amended] 

■ 4. In § 204.21— 

■ a. In paragraphs (a) and (b) 

introductory text, remove the word 

‘‘We’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘FEMA’’; and 

■ b. In paragraph (a), after the word 

‘‘complex’’, add the words ‘‘on public or 

private forest land or grassland’’. 

§ 204.22 [Amended] 

■ 5. In § 204.22, remove the word ‘‘we’’ 

and add, in its place, the word ‘‘FEMA’’; 

and remove ‘‘(FEMA Form 90–58)’’. 

§ 204.25 [Amended] 

■ 6. In § 204.25(b), remove the word 

‘‘we’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘FEMA’’. 

§ 204.42 [Amended] 

■ 7. In § 204.42— 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(1), after the word 

‘‘safety’’, remove the comma and add, in 

its place, a period, and remove 

‘‘including:’’; 

■ b. In paragraphs (b)(5) and (f), remove 

the word ‘‘We’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘FEMA’’; and 

■ c. In paragraph (b)(5), remove the 

words ‘‘we determine’’ and add, in their 

place, the words ‘‘FEMA determines’’. 

§ 204.51 [Amended] 

■ 8. In § 204.51— 

■ a. In paragraph (a), remove the space 

after the word ‘‘Administrator’’; and 

remove the phrase ‘‘SF 424 (Request for 

Federal Assistance) and FEMA Form 

20–16a (Summary of Assurances—Nonconstruction Programs)’’ and add, in its 

place, the phrase ‘‘Application for 

Federal Assistance and Summary of 

Assurances—Non-construction 

Programs’’; 

■ b. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the 

word ‘‘should’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘must’’; and remove the number 

‘‘3’’ and add, in its place, the number 

‘‘6’’; 

■ c. In paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(5), 

remove the word ‘‘We’’ and add, in its 

place, the word ‘‘FEMA’’; 

■ d. In paragraphs (b)(1) and (d), remove 

the word ‘‘we’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘FEMA’’; 

■ e. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the 

word ‘‘determine’’, and add, in its place, 

the word ‘‘determines’’, and 

■ f. In paragraph (d), after the words 

‘‘Regional Administrator’’, remove the 

space wherever they appear; and 

remove the word ‘‘approve’’, and add, in 

its place, the word ‘‘approves’’. 

■ 9. In § 204.52— 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(1), remove ‘‘(FEMA 

Form 90–91)’’; 

■ b. In paragraph (c)(1), remove the 

words ‘‘amendments to’’ and add, in 

their place, the words ‘‘part of’’; and 

■ c. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (c)(3), 

(4), and (5) to read as follows: 

§ 204.52 Application and approval 

procedures for a subgrant under a fire 

management assistance grant. 

(a) Request for Fire Management 

Assistance. (1) State, local, and tribal 

governments interested in applying for 

fire management assistance subgrants 

must submit a Request for Fire 

Management Assistance subgrant to the 

Grantee in accordance with State 

procedures and within timelines set by 

the Grantee, but no longer than 30 days 

after the close of the incident period. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) At the request of the Grantee, the 

Regional Administrator may extend the 

time limitations in this section for up to 

6 months when the Grantee justifies and 

makes a request in writing. 

(4) Project Worksheets will not be 

accepted after the deadline in paragraph 

(c)(2) of this section has expired, or, if 

applicable, after an extension specified 

by the Regional Administrator in 

paragraph (c)(3) of this section has 

expired. 

(5) $1,000 Project Worksheet 

minimum. When the costs reported are 

less than $1,000, that work is not 

eligible and FEMA will not approve that 

Project Worksheet. This minimum 

threshold does not apply to Project 

Worksheets submitted for the direct and 

indirect costs of administration of a fire 

grant, as defined in § 204.63. 

§ 204.53 [Amended] 

■ 10. In § 204.53(a), remove the word 

‘‘us’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘FEMA’’. 

§ 204.54 [Amended] 

■ 11. In § 204.54— 

■ a. In the introductory paragraph, 

remove the words ‘‘we make’’ and add, 

in their place, the words ‘‘FEMA 

makes’’; and 

■ b. In paragraph (a), after the words 

‘‘Regional Administrator’’, remove the 

space wherever it appears. 

§ 204.62 [Amended] 

■ 12. In § 204.62— 

■ a. In paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d), 

remove the word ‘‘We’’ wherever it 

appears and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘FEMA’’; 

■ b. In paragraph (a), remove the word 

‘‘provide’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘provides’’; 

■ c. In paragraph (c), remove the word 

‘‘consider’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘considers’’; 

■ d. In paragraph (d), remove the word 

‘‘incur’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘incurs’’; 

■ e. In paragraphs (c) and (d), remove 

the word ‘‘we’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘FEMA’’; and 

■ f. In paragraphs (a), (b), and (d), 

remove the word ‘‘us’’ wherever it 

appears and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘FEMA’’. 

■ 13. In § 204.63— 

■ a. In paragraphs (a) and (b), remove 

the word ‘‘We’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘FEMA’’; 

■ b. Add a new paragraph (c) to read as 

follows: 

§ 204.63 Allowable costs. 

* * * * * 

(c) Management costs as defined in 44 

CFR part 207 do not apply to this 

section. 

§ 204.64 [Amended] 

■ 14. In § 204.64(a), remove ‘‘(FEMA 

Form 20–10)’’. 

PART 206—FEDERAL DISASTER 

ASSISTANCE 

■ 15. The authority citation for part 206 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster 

Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 

U.S.C. 5121 through 5207; Homeland 

Security Act of 2002, 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

9001.1; sec. 1105, Pub. L. 113–2, 127 Stat. 43 

(42 U.S.C. 5189a note). 

Subpart L—[Removed and Reserved] 

■ 16. Remove and reserve subpart L, 

consisting of §§ 206.390 through 

206.399. 

Dated: October 9, 2014. 

W. Craig Fugate, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24802 Filed 10–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–23–P 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES