Browse: Departments   Dates   Agencies  

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Veterans Affairs Department

CFR Citation: 49 CFR Part 24

Docket ID: [FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2003-14747]

RIN ID: RIN 2125-AE97

NOTICE: Part II

DOCUMENT ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), request for comments, and notice of public meetings.

SUBJECT CATEGORY: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally-Assisted Programs

DATES: The public meetings will be held on January 15, 2004, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., Washington, DC; January 22, 2004, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., Lakewood, CO; and January 28, 2004, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., Atlanta, GA.

Comments in response to this NPRM must be received on or before February 17, 2004.

DOCUMENT SUMMARY: The FHWA is proposing to amend several sections of the regulations that set forth governmentwide requirements for implementing the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act.) These proposed changes would clarify present requirements, meet modern needs and improve the service to individuals and businesses affected by Federal or federallyassisted projects while at the same time reducing the burdens of government regulations. The regulation has not been fully reviewed or updated since it was issued in 1989. The proposed amendments to the Uniform Act regulation would affect the land acquisition and displacement activities of 18 Federal Agencies including the new Department of Homeland Security. This document also provides notice of public meetings on the proposed changes to the regulation.

SUMMARY: Uniform relocation assistance and real property acquisition for Federal and federally-assisted programs [: For a document on this subject, see entry under Transportation Department in this issue]; Transportation Department,

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Electronic Access and Filing

You may submit or retrieve comments online through the Document Management System (DMS) at: http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. Acceptable formats include: MS Word (versions 95 to 97), MS Word for Mac (versions 6 to 8), Rich Text File (RTF), American Standard Code Information Interchange (ASCII)(TXT), Portable Document Format (PDF), and WordPerfect (versions 7 to 8.) The DMS is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. Electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines are available under the help section of the web site.

An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded by using a modem and suitable communications software from the Government Printing Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 5121661. Internet users may also reach the Federal Register's home page at: http://www.archives.gov and the Government Printing Office's database at:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Background

Reasons for This Proposal

Title 49 CFR part 24 has not been comprehensively revised or updated since its initial publication in 1989. We believe there is some confusion regarding a number of existing requirements. There could be improvement in achieving the goal of national program uniformity; and there are inadequacies in meeting contemporary needs. We also believe we could improve the service to individuals and businesses affected by Federal and federallyassisted projects while reducing administrative burdens.
History

Relevant Legislation

Title 49 CFR part 24 implements the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq., (``the Uniform Act'').

Current Regulations

As originally enacted, the Uniform Act authorized ``the head of each Federal Agency'' to establish regulations and procedures for implementing the Uniform Act. Inevitably, this led to significant differences in Agencies implementing regulations. In a March 8, 1978, Report to Congress (GAO Report No. GGD786, ``Changes Needed in the Relocation Act to Achieve More Uniform Treatment of Persons Displaced by Federal Programs, B148044 (1978)),'' \1\ the Comptroller General found that as a result of these differences the Federal government was not providing uniform treatment to people displaced from their homes and businesses by Federal or federallyassisted programs. Those differences among Federal implementing regulations also imposed significant administrative burdens on State and local governments. In 1981, for the Vice President's Presidential Task Force on Regulatory Relief, State and local governments identified the Uniform Act as a good candidate for State and local regulatory relief.
\1\ A copy of this report, Changes Needed in the Relocation Act to Achieve More Uniform Treatment of Persons Displaced by Federal Programs, is available in the docket.

Therefore, in May 1982, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) formed a Uniform Act Interagency Regulatory Review Working Group to develop uniform regulations to be implemented by each Agency covered by the Uniform Act. A Presidential Memorandum, dated February 27, 1985, was published in the Federal Register on March 5, 1985 (50
[[Page 70343]]
FR 8953), naming the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) as the Agency with lead responsibility for the Uniform Act. The Secretary of Transportation (hereafter Secretary) delegated this responsibility to the Federal Highway Administrator.

On March 5, 1985 (50 FR 8955), the USDOT published a model Uniform Act regulation, which, in accordance with the President's Memorandum of February 27, 1985, served as the basis for a proposed Uniform Act ``common rule'' to be issued by the 16 other affected Agencies. The proposed common rule was issued for comment by those 16 Agencies on May 28, 1985 (50 FR 21712.) After consideration of comments, on February 27, 1986, the common rule was adopted by each of the affected Federal Agencies and the former disparate relocation regulations of those Agencies were removed. This common rulemaking effort by the Federal Agencies that administered both direct Federal programs and projects, and federallyassisted programs and projects undertaken by State or local Agencies, achieved regulatory consistency among the separate Federal Agencies subject to the Uniform Act.

This common rulemaking effort presaged several of the statutory changes to the Uniform Act that were made by the Uniform Relocation Act Amendments of 1987 (Title IV, Pub. L. 10017, 101 Stat. 246) (``1987 Amendments''). In the administrative area, for example, to further ensure uniformity, the amendments specifically designated the USDOT as Lead Agency and required it, in coordination with other Federal Agencies, to issue a governmentwide rule, establish procedures and make interpretations to implement provisions of the Uniform Act. In the substantive area, the common rulemaking effort granted greater flexibility and discretion to State and local Agencies, a theme reiterated in the 1987 Amendments.

Implementation of the 1987 Amendments to the Uniform Act

On May 19, 1987 (52 FR 18768), the FHWA issued a notice proposing significant changes to the common rule as a result of the 1987 amendments to the Uniform Act. On December 1, 1987 (52 FR 45667), the FHWA issued a Notice of Regulatory Intent giving further notice of the specific regulatory actions that it and the other affected Federal Agencies would take to implement the 1987 Amendments.

On December 17, 1987 (52 FR 47994), the FHWA issued an interim final rule, as 49 CFR part 24, that revised the provisions of the common rule to include those provisions of the 1987 amendments to the Uniform Act (primarily increases in the dollar amounts of specific relocation assistance) that did not allow for administrative discretion or interpretation, and for which a period of public notices and comment would have been impractical. This interim final rule was promulgated in order to allow those Federal, State and local Agencies that were willing and able to provide the increased dollar amounts for specific relocation assistance, provided by the 1987 amendments, to do so expeditiously. On the same day at 52 FR 48015, 17 Federal Departments and Agencies that administer the Uniform Act published interim final rules rescinding the common rule from each of their regulations and adopting in its place a crossreference to the single interim final rule published by the FHWA as 49 CFR part 24. The effective date for these Agency rescissions and crossreferences varied. However, all such actions took effect on or before April 2, 1989, the date the 1987 Amendments became mandatory. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), was unable to join the other Federal Agencies in publishing an interim final rescission and cross referencing action on December 17, 1987, because of its need to first satisfy certain Congressional review obligations. HUD subsequently published such an interim rule on February 19, 1988 (53 FR 4964).

The FHWA issued an NPRM on July 21, 1988, at 53 FR 27598, proposing to fully implement the statutory amendments to the Uniform Act and to replace the interim final rule. On March 2, 1989 (54 FR 8928), the FHWA issued the final rule, which implemented all of the provisions of the 1987 Amendments to the Uniform Act, and replaced the interim final rule. This was the final step in the development of a single common rule for implementing the Uniform Act.

The Uniform Act and the common rule govern the relocation and land acquisition programs of all Federal departments and Agencies. Those departments and Agencies that, for convenience, provide a cross reference to this part, and the location of those crossreferences, are listed below:
Department of Agriculture

7 CFR Part 21
Department of Commerce

15 CFR Part 11
Department of Defense

32 CFR Part 259
Department of Education

34 CFR Part 15
Department of Energy

10 CFR Part 1039
Environmental Protection Agency

40 CFR Part 4
Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 25
General Services Administration

41 CFR Part 10551
Department of Health and Human Services

45 CFR Part 15
Department of Housing and Urban Development

24 CFR Part 42
Department of Justice

41 CFR Part 12818
Department of Labor

29 CFR Part 12
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

14 CFR Part 1208
Tennessee Valley Authority

18 CFR Part 1306
Veterans Administration

38 CFR Part 25

The United States Postal Service has indicated that it will comply voluntarily with the Uniform Act, although its current regulations (39 CFR part 777) differ slightly from these proposed regulations.

However, because the Uniform Act applies to all acquisitions of real property or displacements of persons resulting from Federal or federallyassisted programs or projects, the Act's application is not affected by the absence of a cross reference to 49 CFR part 24 in a department's or Agency's regulations. Further, Federal or federally assisted activities involving land acquisition or displacement, undertaken by a newly constituted Federal department or Agency, such as, for example, the new Department of Homeland Security, would be covered by the Act.

1993 Amendments to the Governmentwide Regulations

On January 28, 1992, the President issued a Memorandum for Certain Department and Agency Heads entitled ``Reducing the Burden of Government Regulation'' which called upon Departments and Agencies to review their existing regulations in order to determine whether changes should be made to promote economic growth, create jobs, or eliminate unnecessary costs or other burdens on the economy.

The FHWA, as a result of its review of the Uniform Act common rule, identified several amendments that it believed would enhance the relocation assistance provided to displaced businesses, thus increasing their chances of a successful relocation. Additionally, we identified changes that
[[Page 70344]]
would reduce the regulatory burden imposed on such businesses as well as on State and local governments implementing the regulation. Therefore, on July 27, 1992 (57 FR 33164), we issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposing these changes to the common rule and published the final rule on April 30, 1993 (58 FR 26072). 1999 Amendments to the Governmentwide Regulation

Pub. L. 105117, 111 Stat. 2384 (November 21, 1997) amended the Uniform Act to provide that an alien not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible to receive relocation payments or any other assistance provided under the Uniform Act, unless such ineligibility would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the alien's spouse, parent, or child, and such spouse, parent, or child is a citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence. As a result of these changes, the FHWA proposed to amend the common rule to reflect the prohibitions on payments to aliens not lawfully present in the United States. After publishing an NPRM on June 12, 1998 (63 FR 32175), the FHWA published a final rule implementing these changes on February 12, 1999 (64 FR 7127).

FHWA Actions To Update the Regulations

Following a series of requests from other Federal Agencies, States, and local public agencies, concerning the need for updating the Uniform Act and Title 49, CFR Part 24, the FHWA initiated a comprehensive review of 49 CFR part 24 by hosting an all Federal Agency briefing and listening session at the Uniform Act 30th Anniversary Symposium in Mesa, Arizona, in November of 2001. Seventyfive individuals representing 14 Federal Agencies, provided specific comments and suggestions. We compiled the comments and in March of 2002 we formed a Federal Interagency Task Force (Task Force) to review all comments received from both the private and public sectors and to begin developing proposed changes to the common rule. All 18 Federal Agencies whose programs are affected by the Uniform Act were asked to provide a representative to be a member of the Task Force. Next, the FHWA published a notice on May 14, 2002 (67 FR 34514), announcing 5 nationwide public listening sessions in June and July 2002 to gather broader input.

Following these sessions, the Task Force once again evaluated each comment. Based on the comments received, the FHWA determined there was a need to update the regulation. The Task Force then began to identify specific provisions of the regulation that should be updated. The Task Force drafted proposed regulatory language, and on November 7, 2002, the FHWA hosted an AllFederal Agencies' meeting to present and discuss the draft language to each of the Agencies affected by this rule. On December 5, 2002, each Agency was given the draft language and asked to provide its specific feedback to the FHWA. This feedback helped the FHWA formulate the proposed changes in this NPRM.

SectionbySection Discussion of Proposed Changes

Descriptions of the regulatory changes proposed in this part are set forth below. All members of the public who are affected by relocation or land acquisition activities undertaken or funded by Federal departments and Agencies are encouraged to comment on this NPRM. Comments from interested State and local governments are particularly requested. We have made several minor grammar changes such as adding or deleting commas and shortening sentences for clarity that will not change the meaning or intent. These minor changes are not addressed in the SectionbySection discussion.
Subpart AGeneral

Section 24.2 Definitions

We propose to add a subsection listing acronyms and to include a numbering system to better identify definitions. This would provide users a list of the most commonly used acronyms in the regulation. These acronyms have become commonplace in conversation and correspondence in the land acquisition and displacement activities of the 18 Federal Agencies. Also, currently, there are 35 complex and lengthy definitions listed in alphabetical order. Without a clear and simple way of referring to definition provisions it is difficult to communicate with affected parties, which complicates both effective Agency administration and public understanding of applicable provisions. Since this rule applies to the programs of approximately 18 Federal Agencies, it is important that they all write and talk with the same understanding. To include a numbering system for the definitions was one of the most requested proposals received during the comment period from both the private and public domain.

Section 24.2(a)(6)(ii) Comparable Replacement Dwelling

We propose to remove the phrase ``style of living'' from paragraph (2) of the definition of comparable replacement dwelling.

The phrase ``style of living'' has sometimes been misused and has proven to be confusing. Occasionally, it has been used out of context and interpreted to require identical unique features found in acquired dwellings such as, cherry cabinets, gold fixtures, and other specialized items to be in comparable replacement dwellings. In such cases, the standard for replacement housing has been raised to a level above ``comparable.'' This interpretation can make it nearly impossible to find appropriate replacement housing and could result in replacement housing payments greater than those intended by Congress. As noted in the conference report accompanying the 1987 amendments, ``The Conferees recognize that strict and absolute adherence to an exhaustive, detailed, featurebyfeature comparison can result in rigidities. These can constitute a substantial economic burden and can lead to excessive cost if the law requires, or is interpreted to require, the replacement dwelling to possess every feature of the acquired dwelling as an absolute minimum.'' H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 10027, at 247 (1987).

The Congress realized the difficulty in finding comparable replacement dwellings and intended there to be some flexibility in the definition. Removing the phrase ``style of living'' will not erode any protections provided to the displaced person. Other criteria under the definition of comparability would adequately cover the factors covered by ``style of living.''
Section 24.2(a)(6)(vii) Comparable Replacement DwellingCurrently Available

We propose to revise section 24.2(a)(6)(vii) by deleting the last sentence and moving it to a new section, 24.2(a)(6)(ix). This new section would also provide that, when a person that is displaced from government subsidized housing accepts an offer of government housing assistance at the replacement dwelling, any requirements of the government housing program relating to the number of rooms or living space of the replacement dwelling would apply.
Section 24.2(a)(6)(viii) Comparable Replacement DwellingWithin the Financial Means of the Displaced Person

We propose to consolidate the definition of comparable replacement [[Page 70345]]
dwelling into a single paragraph, proposed as Sec. 24.2(a)(6)(viii). This consolidation would define the purchase price or amount of rent that is considered to be within the displaced person's financial means for both a homeowner and a residential tenant. The consolidation would reduce verbiage, without any change in substance.

Section 24.2(a)(8)(ii) Decent, Safe, and Sanitary Dwelling

We propose to add a requirement to the decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling definition to reflect the protections provided by Public Law 102550, Residential LeadBased Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992. Lead based paint hazard levels established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in accordance with Public Law 102550 are intended to protect families and children under the age of six from ingesting paint dust or chips while occupying replacement housing. HUD's Lead Safe Housing Rule (24 CFR 35, subparts BR), which implements that law for federallyowned and assisted housing, provides the strategy for protecting occupants during temporary relocation. The replacement dwelling unit must not have deteriorated paint (or deteriorated lead based paint if paint testing is conducted) or dustlead hazards. A unit built on or after January 1, 1978 meets the requirement. The lead safety provision does not apply to displacement of persons who are either elderly or disabled (unless a child under 6 years will reside or be expected to reside in the unit), nor if the replacement dwelling unit is a zerobedroom dwelling. This proposed change would include this same standard in Sec. 24.2(a)(8)(ii).
Section 24.2(a)(8)(v) Decent, Safe, and Sanitary DwellingLocal Housing Codes

We propose to amend this definition to require the Agencies to follow the local housing code provision that addresses the maximum number of persons permitted to occupy a room used for sleeping purposes. In the absence of a local housing code requirement, the written policy of the Agency would govern. Additionally, Agencies must also follow any housing code provision which addresses the minimum amount of square feet for each person occupying a dwelling unit or portion thereof. This would make it easier to determine the number of bedrooms required for a replacement dwelling unit.

Similarly, we propose that the local housing code or, if no such code provision exists, the written policy of the Agency, would determine the minimum age of children of the opposite gender which must occupy separate rooms used for sleeping purposes. In the absence of a local housing code or a written policy by the Agency, the minimum standards established for a decent, safe and sanitary dwelling in Sec. 24.2(a)(8) are to be applied.

Section 24.2(a)(9)(ii)(D) Persons Not Displaced

We proposed to amend this section in appendix A to provide that temporary relocation assistance to a person required to move from their dwelling, business, farm, or nonprofit organization are limited to a one year period. Such persons remaining in a temporary location for a period exceeding one year must be offered all permanent relocation assistance.

Section 24.2(a)(11) Dwelling Site

We propose to add a definition of the term ``dwelling site.'' The dwelling site represents the area, and specifically the size of the land area, on which a dwelling is located. The ``dwelling site,'' as defined, is a typical lot for similar dwellings in the neighborhood where the dwelling to be acquired is located. This definition would help ensure more accurate computations of replacement housing payments when a dwelling is located on a larger than normal site or when mixed use or multifamily properties are involved, and reflects current practice.

Section 24.2(a)(12) Eviction for Cause

At the request of the HUD and with concurrence by the Task Force, we propose to simplify the eviction for cause provision in Sec. 24.206 by adding a definition of eviction for cause to Sec. 24.2(a)(12). The proposed definition includes some of the provisions that are currently included in Sec. 24.206. Eviction is a legal process, not an administrative procedure, and therefore, the proposed definition would retain the current link to applicable State and local law.

Section 24.2(a)(15) Household Income

At the request of Federal, State, and local public Agencies having the responsibility of administering the Uniform Act, we propose to add, for clarity, a new definition, ``household income.'' This definition would include examples of what does and does not constitute a person's gross monthly household income for purposes of establishing a base monthly income under proposed Sec. 24.402(b)(2)(ii).

Household income would generally include average monthly income from all sources, but would exclude income from dependent children 18 years old or younger and full time students, and various governmental assistance described in appendix A of this part, Sec. 24.2(a)(15). Section 24.2(a)(16) Initiation of Negotiations

We propose to add a sentence to the definition of ``initiation of negotiations'' to provide that, in the case of acquisitions of real property, described in the initiation of negotiations, for the purposes of Sec. 24.101(b)(1) through (5) (that must be based on an amicable agreement with the owner) establishing a qualified tenant's eligibility for relocation benefits, would occur when the Agency and the owner reach agreement to purchase the real property.

Section 24.2(a)(18) Mobile Home

We propose to add a definition for a mobile home to this section. The term includes both manufactured homes and recreational vehicles used as residences. We also propose to add further requirements that recreational vehicles must meet in order to be qualified for relocation assistance in appendix A. Appendix A would also explain the difference between manufactured homes and mobile homes recognized by HUD for that Agency's programs. For purposes of this regulation, however, we propose that both are to be considered as mobile homes. (Subpart F continues to include an explanation of the different methods of computing relocation assistance when a mobile home has been determined to be personal property, and when it is determined to be real property.)

Section 24.2(a)(24) Salvage Value

We propose to revise the definition of ``salvage value'' to clarify that the value of an item is to be based on the item being removed at the buyer's expense.

Section 24.2(a)(30) Unlawful Occupant

We propose to change the term ``unlawful occupancy'' to ``unlawful occupant'' so that the definition can be stated more clearly. We also propose to remove the word ``squatter'' from the definition. The word may be offensive and is not necessary to the definition. The wording changes proposed would simplify the definition without changing its meaning.

Section 24.2(a)(34) Waiver Valuation

We propose to use the term ``waiver valuation'' to identify the valuation
[[Page 70346]]
process and product when Sec. 24.102(c)(2) appraisal waiver provisions are implemented.

Section 24.9 Recordkeeping and Reports

In accordance with the Presidential Memorandum dated February 27, 1985, United States Department of Transportation is required to report annually to the President's Council on Management Improvement, a part of the Office of Management and Budget, on implementation of the Uniform Act. Under the current reporting requirement, the Lead Agency has received very little statistical information, and thus has little or no knowledge of the extent and impact of other Federal funding Agencies acquisition and displacement activities. Therefore, in Sec. 24.9(c), we propose to require Federal Agencies to submit an annual report summarizing of their real property acquisition and displacement activities to the Lead Agency. This proposed change would enable us to prepare and submit a more comprehensive and useful report, in addition to facilitating a more active monitoring role in our duty as Lead Agency.

We propose to redesign Appendix B to be less burdensome and to enable the information to be reported electronically. Appendix B is the statistical support form of which Agencies are required to submit reports of real property acquisition and displacement activities, if required by the Federal Agency funding the project. Additionally, we propose to remove the requirement that the Agency submit this report no more frequently than every three years, since this report is issued each year.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development and most other Federal funding Agencies support this proposed change.

Subpart BReal Property Acquisition

We propose to make a minor change by replacing the term ``fair market value'' with ``market value'' throughout the subpart to better reflect current appraisal terminology.

Section 24.101 Applicability of Acquisition Requirements

We propose to restructure Sec. 24.101(a) to clarify the application of the real property acquisition requirements set forth in this subpart, and to revise the exceptions to those requirements.

Currently, the two major exceptions to real property acquisition requirements in Subpart B are voluntary transactions and acquisitions in which the Agency does not have the power of eminent domain.

Based on the suggestion of Federal Agencies, we propose that these exceptions no longer apply to acquisitions by Federal Agencies. We are advised that some Federal Agencies use these types of transactions to a significant extent. To best ensure that the objectives of the Uniform Act are satisfied, we propose that Federal Agencies follow the valuation processes set forth in this subpart for all of their direct acquisitions. This proposal is also consistent with section 305(b)(2) (42 U.S.C. 4655(b)(2)) of the Uniform Act, which allows these exceptions for recipients of Federal financial assistance, but provides no such exceptions for Federal Agencies themselves. We propose to retain the exceptions for federallyassisted projects and programs.

Essential to the exceptions is the requirement that the owner must be informed that the property would not be acquired unless an amicable agreement can be reached. Currently, the regulation requires the Agency to inform the owner what it believes to be the fair market value of the property. We propose to require the Agency to inform the property owner in writing (1) that the property will not be acquired unless an amicable agreement can be reached, and (2) of the market value of his/ her property. This would more closely parallel the Uniform Act requirement that is applicable to covered transactions, and provide the property owner with documented assurance of the Agency's authority and intentions.

Some Agencies suggested that the requirement that the Agency inform the owner of what it believes to be market value in Sec. 24.101(a)(1) and (2) be revised to also include a requirement for a supporting appraisal. We have not proposed adding such a requirement. However, we propose adding language to Appendix A noting that, while the regulation does not require an appraisal in these cases, an Agency may still decide to use some form of an appraisal, and, in any event, an agency must have some reasonable basis for the valuation required by Sec. 24.101(a)(1) and (2).

To assist readers/users, we propose to add a cross reference to the location in the rule of relocation assistance provisions that are applicable to any tenants that must move as a result of these excepted acquisitions.

We propose to delete the introductory phrase in proposed Sec. 24.101(c), currently Sec. 24.101(b), to eliminate unnecessary verbiage.

Section 24.102 Basic Acquisition Policies

The Uniform Act provides that the requirement for an appraisal may be waived in cases involving the acquisition of property with a low market value. We propose to clarify Sec. 24.102(c)(2) by separating it into paragraphs (i) and (ii). Paragraph (i) would concern donations and is essentially unchanged. Paragraph (ii) would address low value properties and would specify that when such properties are to be acquired, and the appraisal waived, the Agency must prepare a ``waiver valuation,'' a term proposed to be defined in Sec. 24.2(a)(34). We propose to raise the appraisal waiver threshold in Sec. 24.102(c)(2) from $2,500 to $10,000. In addition, we propose to add a new provision that would allow the Federal funding Agency to raise the threshold up to a maximum of $25,000, provided that the Agency acquiring the real property offers the property owner the option of having an appraisal performed.

These proposed changes reflect the general increase in property values since the present threshold was established. Comments we have received and our experience to date, have shown no indication of administrative abuse or property owner objection. Broad Agency support indicates a higher threshold is justified.

Section 24.102(e) Summary Statement

We propose to revise the language in (3) to be clearer and more specific.

Section 24.102(i) Administrative Settlement

We propose to revise the language to require more specific information in the written justification (``state'' rather than ``indicate'') and delete specific suggestions (``appraisals, recent court awards, estimated trial costs, or valuation problems'') in favor of requesting ``what available information, including trial risks, supports the settlement.''

Section 24.102(n) Conflict of Interest

Language currently in Sec. 24.103(e) Criteria for appraisals, addresses conflicts of interest for appraisers and review appraisers. Proposed language would add all persons making waiver valuations under Sec. 24.102(c)(2) to this section. This proposed change would bring equal conflict of interest standards to all individuals valuing real property, whether their work be waiver valuations, appraisal, or appraisal review, and would clarify who is covered.

[[Page 70347]]

We also propose adding a new provision that any person functioning as a negotiator shall not supervise or formally evaluate either the appraiser, review appraiser or person making waiver valuations. This provision would enhance appraiser independence and further support the Uniform Act concept that the appraisal is part of the acquisition process that includes not only appraisal and appraisal review, but also the Agency responsibility and authority to establish an amount, based on an approved (reviewed) appraisal, believed to be just compensation, offer that amount to the property owner, and be prepared to consider updating the offer of just compensation (Sec. 24.102(g)) and administrative settlement (Sec. 24.102(i)), as appropriate. Recognizing that some Federal assistance recipients, particularly those with limited staff resources, may find this provision unworkable, we propose that, in such cases, the Federal funding agency may waive this provision. And, since the proposed provision would apply to more individuals than just the appraiser, we propose to relocate it to be under basic acquisition policies.

Section 24.103 Criteria for Appraisal

The revisions we propose to Sec. Sec. 24.103 and 24.104 are the first since the Appraisal Foundation published the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).\2\ Considerable confusion and misunderstanding as to the applicability of USPAP provisions to Uniform Act real property acquisitions have existed ever since USPAP was published. The Uniform Act and 49 CFR Part 24 set the requirements for appraisal and appraisal review in support of Federal and federally assisted acquisition of real property for government projects. \2\ Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Published by the Appraisal Foundation, a nonprofit educational organization. Copies may be ordered from the Foundation at the following URL: http://www.appraisalfoundation.org/html/USPAP2003/toc.htm .

Appraisers who are committed to adhere to USPAP by virtue of State appraisal licensing or certification should look to the provisions of USPAP, including the scope of work, the Jurisdictional Exception Rule and the Supplemental Standards provisions, and their State Appraisers' board for guidance on how they can remain in compliance with USPAP and perform appraisals for Agencies following Uniform Act and 49 CFR part 24 requirements.

Many of the proposed provisions of Sec. Sec. 24.103 and 24.104, are intended to assist the appraiser, the Agency and others in understanding the requirements of these subparts in light of USPAP.

We propose to change the terminology throughout this section from ``standards'' to ``requirements'' to avoid confusion with USPAP standards rules. We also propose to add the phrase ``Federal and federallyassisted program'' to more accurately identify the type of appraisal practices that are to be referenced, and to differentiate them from private sector, especially mortgage lending, appraisal practice.

Section 24.103(a) Appraisal Requirements

We propose to add a sentence indicating that these regulations set forth the requirements for real property acquisition appraisals for Federal and federallyassisted programs. This would make it clear that other performance standards, such as USPAP and those issued by professional appraisal societies, do not govern programs covered by the Uniform Act. We propose to reorder other sentences in the paragraph for greater clarity, and to add a requirement for a scope of work statement in each appraisal. In appendix A, we propose to add a discussion on preparing the scope of work. We also propose to insert the word ``simple'' to help identify and differentiate the ``minimum requirements'' appraisal. We propose to move the requirements now in Sec. 24.103(a)(1) to the scope of work, as discussed in appendix A, and renumber the remaining detailed appraisal requirements (1) through (5).

Section 24.103(a)(3)

To clarify the intent of this section, we propose to add language that describes the content of a detailed appraisal to conform with currently used terminology (sales comparison approach). We also propose to move the discussion of the Agency's authority to require only the market approach (sales comparison approach) to appendix A, where we propose it be included in the determination of the scope of work. Section 24.103(b)

We propose to delete the first phrase because it is redundant. Section 24.103(d)

We propose to specifically add ``review appraisers'' to clarify that they are included in this section that addresses appraiser qualifications. We also propose to add a discussion to appendix A to emphasize the need for appraisers and review appraisers to be qualified and competent, and that State licensing or certification can help provide an indication of an appraiser's abilities.

Section 24.104 Review of Appraisals

We propose to use consistent terminology to refer to the person performing appraisal reviews, i.e., review appraiser. We also propose to add language to clarify and specify the responsibilities, authorities and expectations associated with appraisal review. Section 24.104(a)

We propose to add language that would specifically state that the review appraiser's examination of the appraisal must include examination of the presentation and analysis of market information. While this may not be a change from what Agencies, as a matter of practice, now expect of review appraisers, we believe this proposed language would avoid misunderstanding and confusion. Also, we propose to state clearly that the review appraiser is to ensure that appraisal performance complies with appraisal requirements in Sec. 24.103 and other applicable requirements, and supports the appraiser's opinion of value. This would avoid any misunderstanding as to the criteria for the review. The level of analysis and reporting would depend on the complexity of the appraisal and appraisal review problems. We propose that the report identify the appraisal report(s) reviewed, document the findings and conclusions arrived at during the review of the appraisal(s), and identify each appraisal report as rejected, accepted (meets all requirements, but not selected as approved), or approved (as the basis for the establishment of the amount believed to be just compensation). Identification of each appraisal report is proposed as a method of avoiding confusion as to the status of each reviewed appraisal.

Section 24.104(b)

We propose to add language that would make it clear that the review appraiser may develop independent valuation information as part of the appraisal review process.

Section 24.104(c)

We propose to add language that would require the review appraiser to prepare a written report and specify what is to be in the report.

We also propose that the review appraiser prepare a signed certification, which would state the parameters of the review and the approved value and, if
[[Page 70348]]
appropriate, the amount believed to be just compensation to be offered the property owner.
Subpart CGeneral Relocation Requirements

Section 24.202 Applicability

We propose to add a sentence to Sec. 24.202 that adds a requirement that displaced persons be fully informed of their rights and benefits. It has come to our attention that displaced persons have been asked to waive their relocation rights and benefits without being informed of the extent of those benefits. This proposal would protect and strengthen the requirement that Agencies fully inform displaced persons of any rights and benefits they may be eligible for under this part.

This proposal is also integral to new proposed Sec. 24.207(f), Waiver of relocation benefits, which would prohibit Agencies from proposing or asking displaced persons to waive their relocation rights and benefits.

Section 24.203(d) Notice of Intent To Acquire

We propose to move the definition of ``notice of intent to acquire'' from Sec. 24.2 ``Definitions'' to Sec. 24.203, ``Relocation notices,'' with a minor revision. This proposed revision would be for continuity and clarity.
Section 24.205 Relocation Planning, Advisory Services and Coordination

In response to widespread concern about the inadequacy of Uniform Act relocation and reestablishment procedures and payments for displaced businesses, we sponsored the National Business Relocation Study \3\ (``the study''). The study, undertaken for FHWA by an independent consultant, investigated business relocation concerns and provided recommendations to develop solutions to these problems. \3\ The National Business Relocation Study (2002) is available for public inspection at the following URL: http//http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/realestate/nbrs2002.htm .

The study found that relocation assistance advisory services for businesses were generally considered fair to poor. Some of the findings specifically noted that relocation agents were not adequately trained or informed to address the complexities of complicated business relocations, and were unable to provide meaningful assistance in locating replacement properties.

The changes proposed in this section are based upon the findings and recommendations of the study and are meant to address the added burden of displacement on businesses, and provide additional assistance to increase businesses' viability after displacement.

Section 24.205(a) Relocation Planning

We propose to change Sec. 24.205(a) to provide additional items for Agencies to consider in planning for business relocations.

The Uniform Act and this section of the regulation require Agencies to plan federally funded programs and projects in such a manner that Agencies recognize the problems associated with displacement and develop solutions to minimize the adverse affects of displacement. An Agency must engage in such planning before proceeding with any action, which causes displacement and should scope the plan to the complexity and nature of the displacing action.

Currently, this section of the regulation provides examples of items to consider in relocation planning. The planning considerations currently include both residential and nonresidential items, but residential planning requirements are more comprehensive than the non residential planning ones. We recognize that the Uniform Act requires a more generous ``make whole'' approach for residential displacements. However, we also recognize that a significant number of displaced small businesses have not been able to successfully relocate. Therefore, we propose to require the Agency to engage in planning for the problems associated with nonresidential displacement.
Section 24.205(c)(2)(i)(A)(F) Relocation Assistance Advisory Services

We propose to change Sec. 24.205(c)(2)(i)(A) through (F) to include six specific items in personal interviews for business relocations. These six paragraphs are a result of our National Relocation Business Study and will assist in determining the future needs of displaced businesses.

During the five national listening sessions, the FHWA received many comments concerning the lack of guidance and direction on what information the Agency should obtain when making personal interviews with businesses. The FHWA also received testimony from States and Local Public Agencies of actual cases where good interviewing and early planning is credited with preventing business closures.

The Uniform Act and this section of the regulation requires Agencies to ensure that relocation assistance advisory services are made available to all persons displaced by the Agency. A critical element in any successful relocation, and also an advisory services requirement, is to determine the needs and preferences of displaced persons through a personal interview.

Currently, this section of the regulations provides no examples of items for Agencies to consider in personal interviews for either residential or nonresidential displacements. Generally, we believe Agencies do not need additional guidance in conducting personal interviews for residential displacements. However, we believe that specific guidance in conducting personal interviews for nonresidential displacements is necessary to help address the added burden of displacement on businesses and provide additional assistance to increase their viability after displacement. Therefore, we have proposed guidance in (c)(2)(i)(A) through (F) of this section to assist Agencies in conducting personal interviews. This proposed change is based upon the findings and recommendations of the National Business Relocation Study.
Section 24.205(c)(2)(ii)(C) Relocation Assistance Advisory Service

We propose to revise this section to permit any displacing agency that has a program objective of providing minority persons with an opportunity to relocate to areas outside of minority concentration to provide reasonable and justifiable increases in the replacement housing payment to facilitate such moves.

Section 24.205(c)(2)(ii)(D) Transportation

In order to make it clear that all displaced persons must be offered transportation to inspect replacement housing, we propose to eliminate the specific reference to the elderly and handicapped in the current regulation.

Section 24.206 Eviction for Cause

We propose to revise this section on eviction for cause by moving several of the current provisions to the new definition of eviction for cause in Sec. 24.2(a)(12).

Section 24.207(f) Waiver of Relocation Benefits

We propose to implement a new requirement for ``waiver of relocation benefits.'' This requirement would offer more protection to displaced persons. It would prohibit an Agency from proposing or requesting a displaced person to give up his/her rights or entitlements to relocation assistance.
[[Page 70349]]
We do not believe that an otherwise eligible person may relieve a governmental body of its statutory obligation to provide Uniform Act assistance by agreeing to waive such assistance. The primary purpose of the Uniform Act is to impose requirements upon Agencies that acquire property and displace persons for Federal or federallyfunded projects. The Uniform Act does not grant rights or benefits directly to individuals, rather it imposes duties and obligations upon Federal, State, and local governments.

A statement or agreement by a displaced person who does not wish to receive certain assistance does not free a government Agency from the obligations or requirements imposed by Federal law. In such a case where a displaced person indicates in writing he/she does not want assistance, the Federal or State Agencies must still fully inform the displaced person of all the assistance he/she is entitled to receive. Section 24.207(g) Entitlement to Payments

We propose to add new paragraph (g) to Sec. 24.207 to clarify that, since relocation payments are considered a form of compensation, they do not constitute Federal financialassistance, and accordingly, the expenditure of such relocation payments by a displaced person would not trigger further application of the Uniform Act or similarly applicable Federal requirements.
Section 24.208(f)(1) Aliens Not Lawfully Present in the United States

We propose that the references to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in Sec. 24.208(f)(1) be revised to reflect the fact that the INS has become part of the Department of Homeland Security, and renamed the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS).

Subpart DPayments for Moving and Related Expenses

We propose to substantially reorganize Subpart D. With few exceptions, the basic content would remain the same; however, based upon the comments from our 5 national public listening sessions and comments from other Agencies, this subpart needs to be reorganized for clarity and ease of use. Accordingly, we propose to realign the different moving costs allowance provisions.

We propose to divide Subpart D into six sections. We would transfer a number of criteria from Sec. 24.304, Reestablishment Expense, with its $10,000 limit, to Sec. 24.301, Payment for actual reasonable moving and related expenses, and Sec. 24.303, Payment for related non residential expenses, where there are no limits and the payment is determined by actual, reasonable and necessary criteria. This would offer greater flexibility in assisting small businesses, farms, and nonprofit organizations by removing several relocation costs from inclusion in the $10,000 statutory limit placed on reestablishment expenses. We propose to incorporate existing Sec. 24.303 into proposed Sec. 24.301 with specific criteria clearly spelled out for each type of move.

We propose several new paragraphs that would help clarify the different types of moving costs. In Sec. 24.303 we propose that payment would be provided for certain moving related costs that are not personal property but are essential to the continuance of operation of the business. We propose a new paragraph, Sec. 24.301(e), that would compensate displaced persons who are not forced to move from their residence or business but have personal property that must be moved from the acquired area.
Section 24.301(b)(3), 24.301(c)(iii) and 24.301(d)(2)(ii) Moving Cost Finding

We are proposing to add a provision allowing moving expenses to be determined by a qualified staff person for small uncomplicated personal property moves, commonly called a ``moving cost finding'' or ``a finding.'' The proposed moving cost finding is another option available to the displaced person and the Agency. This option cannot be forced on the displaced person. The proposed moving cost finding would recognize an additional method of moving personal property that is currently being used by many Agencies. The proposed moving cost finding gives the Agency a cost effective and expeditious way to pay for small uncomplicated moves of personal property that are located outside of the primary dwelling or business structure(s). This method would allow the Agency to use qualified staff personnel to estimate the cost of such smalluncomplicated personal property moves and offer the option to the displaced person as a means of a self move. The cost would be capped at $3,000 and not be binding on the displaced person. The displaced person may elect any of the other methods to move. This provides both the Agency and the displaced person a quick cost effective way of making a selfmove.

Section 24.301(e) Personal Property Only

We propose a new paragraph that would describe the relocation assistance available to a displaced person for moving personal property from the acquisition area, when the acquisition does not require the relocation of a dwelling (including a mobile home), business, farms or nonprofit organizations. Personal property only moves might include moving such things as farm equipment or livestock where the related buildings are not affected.
Section 24.301(g)(14)(i) Actual Direct Loss of Tangible Personal Property

The Uniform Act provides that a displaced business, farm or non profit organization is entitled to be compensated for the actual direct loss of tangible personal property. We propose to slightly change the direct loss of tangible personal property provision to eliminate much confusion over the term ``fair market value for continued use.'' Displacing Agencies are reluctant to discuss this benefit with displaced businesses because of the uncertainty over how to determine the payment.

Therefore, we propose to strike the phrase ``fair market value of the item for continued use at the displacement site'' and replace it with ``market value of the item, less the proceeds of the sale'' to clarify the basis for valuing such property. This is consistent with the intent of the Uniform Act, 42 U.S.C. 4622(a)(2).
Section 24.301(g)(14)(ii) Actual Direct Loss of Tangible Personal Property

We propose to add language to this section that would clarify what constitutes the estimated cost of moving when a business elects to discontinue the business or the business has a piece of equipment in storage or nonoperational at the acquired site. Confusion comes from whether or not such an estimate, used to compute the payment for actual direct loss of tangible personal property, should include disconnecting and reconnecting costs when the business elects to discontinue operation or elects not to move the equipment to the replacement location. The proposed language would clarify those cases in which reconnecting costs would or would not be included in calculating the estimated cost of moving such equipment. We believe this would be consistent with the intent of the Uniform Act, to provide moving benefits that are actual, reasonable and necessary.
[[Page 70350]]

Section 24.301(g)(17) Searching for a Replacement Location

We propose to move this paragraph from Sec. 24.303(a)(13) and increase ``searching expenses'' from $1,000 to $2,500. This amount has been set at $1,000 for 16 years. This proposed change is supported by the FHWA's National Business Relocation Study which recommended increasing the searching expenses. Searching expenses are intended to provide compensation for the actual time and effort to find a replacement site, which also should include reasonable costs to investigate the site. Such costs may include the cost of obtaining permits, attending zoning hearings or negotiating the purchase of a replacement site. We propose to provide additional insight and flexibility in appendix A on the application of searching expenses. Section 24.301(g)(18) Low Value/High Bulk

We propose to add a paragraph on low value/high bulk property. The current regulation does not address cases where items of personal property owned by a displaced business are more costly to move than they are worth. The proposed change would provide a procedure available when the personal property to be moved is of low value and high bulk and, in the judgment of the displacing Agency, the cost of moving the personal property is disproportionate to its value.
Section 24.301(h)(12) Ineligible Moving and Related Expenses.

For clarity and uniformity, we propose to add refundable security and utility deposits to the list of ineligible moving expenses, Sec. 24.301(h)(12). Since refundable deposits, by the name alone, indicates a return of the investment to the displaced person, we do not consider a refundable deposit a reimbursable expense under the Uniform Act. Section 24.301(i)(1) and (2) Notification and Inspection

We propose to reorganize and merge this section from four paragraphs into three paragraphs. We do not propose to change the wording. These proposed changes are for clarity and readability. The phrase ``The displaced person must'' is merged into the introductory paragraph to eliminate redundancy and provide clarity.
Section 24.302 Fixed Payment for Moving ExpensesResidential Moves

This section provides that displaced residential owners and tenants may receive a moving expense payment based on the Fixed Residential Moving Cost Schedule \4\ approved by the FHWA. Currently, this section provides that the Fixed Residential Moving Cost Schedule payment made to a person with minimal personal possessions in occupancy of a dormitory style room or whose residential move is performed by an Agency at no cost to the individual is limited to $50. This has been the limit since 1987. Since this payment is included in the fixed residential moving cost schedule that is updated periodically, we are proposing to remove the $50 dollar amount from Sec. 24.302, so that the amount and future increases to this payment would be established by the Fixed Residential Moving Cost Schedule. Therefore, each time the schedule is updated, this payment could be updated as well. Agencies must be sure they are using the most current edition of the Fixed Residential Moving Cost Schedule.
\4\ The Fixed Residential Moving Cost Schedule is available for public inspection at the following URL: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov//////realestate/fixsch96.htm .

Section 24.303 Related NonResidential Eligible Expenses

As a result of reorganizing Subpart D for convenience and clarity, the relocation of all items of personal property would be included in Sec. 24.301. We are proposing to add a new section, Sec. 24.303, that would provide reimbursement for several costs that are not considered to be personal property but are essential to the continuing operation of the business. These costs are additional expenses, other than for moving personal property, that are not covered by either Sec. 24.301 (personal property) or Sec. 24.304 (real property.) Reimbursement for these expenses would be allowed if they are determined by the Agency to be ``actual, reasonable and necessary.''
Subpart EReplacement Housing Payments

Section 24.401(e)(4) Incidental Expenses

We are proposing to add professional home inspection to the list of reimbursable incidental expenses. Professional home inspections including electrical systems, plumbing, and HVAC are commonplace and should be added to the list of reimbursable incidental expenses. Most agencies are currently allowing for this expense.
Section 24.401(f) Rental Assistance Payment for 180 Day Homeowner Occupant

We propose to add language that would allow a rental assistance payment for a 180day homeowner, who elects to rent, instead of purchase, a replacement dwelling, to exceed $5,250 if the difference in the estimated market rent of the acquired dwelling and the rent for a comparable replacement dwelling support a higher figure. However, the rental supplemental payment would not be allowed to exceed the amount the 180day owner would have received as a housing (purchase) supplemental payment under proposed Sec. 24.401(b). It was brought to our attention through the national listening sessions and through discussions with other Federal Agencies that this change would be fair and make the displaced person whole at no additional cost to the Agency.

An example of the proposed change would be where an elderly couple who own their home may want to rent rather than purchase another home. Under current procedure, the Agency would compute a replacement housing offer, which for this example is, say, $10,000. The Agency would then compute a rental assistance payment based on the difference in market rent and an available comparable dwelling, which for this example is $7,000. Currently, we would only pay the maximum amount of $5,250. The proposed change would allow the Agency to pay the $7,000 rent supplement or any rent supplement up to what they would have received as a 180day homeowner ($10,000 in this example) to purchase a replacement dwelling.

We feel this would be a fair and equitable approach, provided the rent supplement does not exceed the amount the 180day homeowner could receive if he or she elected to purchase a replacement dwelling, rather than to rent one.
Section 24.402(b)(2)(ii) Replacement Housing Payment for 90Day Occupant

We propose to slightly revise Sec. 24.402(b)(2)(ii) to reflect the statutory requirement that only a lowincome displaced person's income shall be taken into consideration when calculating rental assistance payments for a comparable replacement dwelling (42 U.S.C. 4624(a).)

Section 24.402(b)(2) currently uses 30 percent of a person's average monthly gross household income as the criteria for computing replacement housing payments for all eligible displaced tenants. This often results in large payments to existing tenants who are [[Page 70351]]
not low income and who elect to pay more than 30 percent of their monthly gross household income for rental housing. This proposed change would be more reflective of the intent of the Uniform Act in that it assures consideration of income for lowincome persons.

The proposal would rely on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Annual Survey of Income Limits.\5\ The proposed procedures in Sec. 24.402(b)(2)(ii) would continue to use the 30 percent of monthly gross household income, but only for displaced persons who qualify as low income. The base monthly rental would continue to be established solely on the criteria in Sec. 24.402(b)(2).
\5\ The Annual Survey of Income Limits can be found at the following URL: http://www.huduser.org/datasets/il.html. Section 24.402(c) Downpayment Assistance Payment

For uniformity, we propose to clarify that the replacement housing payment received under Sec. 24.402(b) may be used for a downpayment assistance payment. There is a disparity among Agencies as to the amount that can be used as the downpayment. Most State and Federal Agencies currently allow the full amount of the rent supplement to be applied to the downpayment. Some, on the other hand, follow the guidance in appendix A of this regulation which limits the amount of the downpayment to what would ordinarily be required to obtain conventional loan financing for a decent, safe and sanitary dwelling. No such limits are included in the Uniform Act.

Therefore, we propose to add language that would allow the displaced person to apply the full amount of the rent supplement to the downpayment on a decent, safe and sanitary dwelling. We also propose to slightly modify appendix A to conform to the proposed change. Section 24.403(a) Determining Cost of Comparable Replacement Dwelling

At the request of several Federal Agencies, we are proposing that Agencies pay, as a part of the reasonable cost of a comparable replacement dwelling, the increased real estate taxes, if any, for displaced 180day owner occupants displaced as a result of a Federal or federallyfunded project. This payment would be based on the difference between the monthly real estate tax on the acquired dwelling, and the monthly real estate tax on the replacement dwelling at the time of purchase but not to exceed the monthly real estate tax on a comparable replacement dwelling.

The benefit would be calculated over a 24month period. If the displaced person elects to purchase a replacement dwelling where the real estate tax at the time of purchase exceeds that of the comparable replacement dwelling, the increased tax payment, if any, would be limited to the increased monthly tax cost of the comparable replacement dwelling at the time of purchase for 24 months. Should the displaced person elect to purchase a replacement dwelling for less than the cost of a comparable replacement dwelling, the increased tax calculation would be based on the 24 month increase, if any, in the real estate tax of the acquired dwelling and that of the replacement dwelling at the time of purchase.

The rationale for this proposal is that increased real estate taxes represent a real part of the cost of a replacement dwelling and are often a financial burden, particularly for displaced persons with fixed incomes, such as social security. Other situations could arise where a displaced person that purchases a new home may lose his/her grand fathered real estate tax rate privileges and be subject to a higher real estate tax rate. The proposal would comport with the spirit and purpose of the Uniform Act, which is to treat displaced persons fairly by ensuring that they are able to relocate to a replacement dwelling that is comparable to the dwelling from which they were displaced. Section 24.403(a)(1) Adjustment of Comparables

We propose to remove the requirement that Agencies adjust the asking price of the comparable replacement dwelling in computing replacement housing payments. Currently, this section bases a displaced person's replacement housing payment on the adjusted difference between the asking price and the selling price of a comparable replacement dwelling as determined by an Agency survey of the area. This requirement, because it can provide a replacement housing payment that is different than the price of a comparable dwelling, is burdensome and forces the displaced person to become a negotiator. This imposes an unnecessary obligation on the displaced person for which he/she probably is not qualified. Removing this requirement also would relieve the Agency of the administrative burden of conducting a market survey to determine the adjusted sales value. The procedure for determining a comparable dwelling would not change, only the current requirement to adjust the price of the selected comparable dwelling would be eliminated. The replacement housing payment would be based on the list price of the comparable dwelling not the adjusted price. Additionally, the reference to the adjustment of c

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Ronald E. Fannin, Office of Real Estate Services, HEPR, (202) 3662042; Reginald K. Bessmer, Office of Real Estate Services, HEPR, (202) 3662037 or Reid Alsop, Office of the Chief Counsel, HCC30, (202) 3661371, Federal Highway Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.s.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.