[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77864-77868]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27547]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-6336-N-01]


Request for Information for HUD's Community Development Block 
Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) Rules, Waivers, and Alternative 
Requirements

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development, HUD.

ACTION: Request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 
seeks public input to strengthen and improve requirements for entities 
receiving and implementing Community Development Block Grant Disaster 
Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding. This Request for Information (RFI) is to 
solicit feedback to inform how the Department can modify, expand, 
streamline, or remove CDBG-DR rules and requirements with the goals of 
expediting long-term resilient recovery, reducing, or eliminating 
barriers for impacted beneficiaries, ensuring equitable community 
recovery, and simplifying compliance for CDBG-DR grantees within its 
statutory authority. Additionally, HUD seeks information and 
recommendations to reduce the administrative burden for those receiving 
and implementing CDBG-DR funding after a disaster to accelerate the 
availability of assistance to disaster survivors and affected 
communities.

DATES: Comments are requested on or before February 21, 2023. Late-
filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments responsive 
to this Request for Information (RFI). All submissions must refer to 
the docket number and title of the RFI. Comments may include written 
data, views, or arguments. Each individual or organization is 
encouraged to submit only one response and to limit its submission to 
10 pages in 12-point or larger font, with a page number provided on 
each page. Commenters are encouraged to identify the number of the 
specific question or questions to which they are responding. Responses 
should include the name of the person(s) or organization(s) filing the 
comment but should not include any personally identifiable information.
    There are two methods for submitting public comments.
    1. Electronic Submission of Comments. Interested persons may submit 
comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
https://www.regulations.gov.
    2. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by 
mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 10276, 
Washington, DC 20410-0500.
    HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit their feedback and 
recommendations electronically. Electronic submission of comments 
allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a response, 
ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make comments 
immediately available to the public. Comments submitted electronically 
through the https://www.regulations.gov website can be viewed by other 
commenters and interested members of the public. Commenters should 
follow the instructions provided on that site to submit comments 
electronically.

    Note:  To receive consideration as public comments, comments 
must be submitted through one of the two methods specified above. 
Again, all submissions must refer to the docket number and title of 
the notice.

    Public Inspection of Public Comments. All comments and 
communications properly submitted to HUD will be available for public 
inspection and copying between 8 a.m.

[[Page 77865]]

and 5 p.m. EST weekdays at the above address. Due to security measures 
at the HUD Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the 
public comments must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division 
at (202) 708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is 
prepared to receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of 
hearing, as well as individuals with speech or communication 
disabilities. To learn more about how to make an accessible telephone 
call, please visit: https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs. Copies of all comments submitted 
are available for inspection and downloading at https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessie Handforth Kome, Director, 
Office of Block Grant Assistance, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 7282, Washington, DC 20410-0500, 
telephone number (202) 708-3587. Facsimile inquiries may be sent to Ms. 
Kome at (202) 708-0033. (The telephone and fax numbers are not toll-
free numbers). HUD welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from 
individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well as individuals 
with speech or communication disabilities. To learn more about how to 
make an accessible telephone call, please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs. Email inquiries 
may be sent to [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Overview of CDBG-DR Funding

    Since 1993, Congress has periodically funded CDBG-DR grants through 
emergency supplemental appropriations acts. CDBG-DR funding is not 
authorized through standing statute, but instead was created through 
these emergency appropriations acts premised on the annual (non-
disaster) CDBG program. While the grants are largely subject to the 
statutes and regulations governing the non-disaster CDBG programs, each 
appropriations act that has made CDBG-DR funds available has provided 
the Department with the authority to waive those requirements and 
establish alternative requirements, except for requirements related to 
fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and the environment. 
This broad authority enables the Secretary to establish waivers and 
alternative requirements to support resilient recovery from individual 
disasters or a particular group of disasters.
    HUD is seeking to adopt a revised process for implementing future 
CDBG-DR grants to assist potential CDBG-DR grantees (i.e., states, 
local governments, and Indian tribes (as that term is defined in 
section 102(a)(17) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1974) (HCDA)), recipients, and the public in planning for the use of 
the funding. To achieve this goal, HUD intends to publish a 
comprehensive notice that would standardize the CDBG-DR allocation and 
implementing notice process and inform potential CDBG-DR grantees, 
recipients, and other stakeholders about each phase of the CDBG-DR 
grant process (i.e., a ``CDBG-DR Universal Notice''). The planned CDBG-
DR Universal Notice would address a number of aspects of the CDBG-DR 
funded disaster recovery and mitigation process including: 1) grantees' 
pre-award submissions; 2) steps and timelines; 3) action plan 
development, submittal, and implementation; and 4) applicable waivers 
and alternative requirements. The objective of the planned CDBG-DR 
Universal Notice would be to outline comprehensive and uniform 
requirements that will govern subsequent allocations of supplemental 
CDBG-DR funding to provide disaster recovery assistance in a more 
predictable, equitable, and timely way.
    When Congress enacts new supplemental appropriations of CDBG-DR 
funding, HUD will incorporate the applicable provisions of the CDBG-DR 
Universal Notice, to the extent the CDBG-DR Universal Notice is 
consistent with the appropriations act, in a separate published notice 
(the ``Allocation Announcement Notice''). Each Allocation Announcement 
Notice will announce the new CDBG-DR allocations and impose the 
applicable waivers and alternative requirements in the CDBG-DR 
Universal Notice for the subject CDBG-DR grants. Each Allocation 
Announcement Notice will also modify the CDBG-DR Universal Notice as 
necessary to comply with any new statutory requirements. For example, a 
Public Law may allow grantees receiving an award for a specific 
disaster year to access funding for program administrative costs prior 
to the Secretary's certification of financial controls and procurements 
processes, and adequate procedures for proper grant management. If a 
new provision like this is included in a CDBG-DR appropriations act 
that is different from prior appropriations acts, the requirements 
governing the provision would not be covered in a CDBG-DR Universal 
Notice and would need to be addressed in an Allocation Announcement 
Notice (amending the CDBG-DR Universal Notice, if necessary). The 
Department modeled this process in the Allocation Announcement Notices 
published on February 3, 2022 (87 FR 6364) and May 24, 2022 (87 FR 
31636) for grantees receiving funds for disasters occurring in 2020 and 
2021 and included a CDBG-DR Consolidated Notice as an appendix.

Objectives of a CDBG-DR Universal Notice

    The focus of CDBG-DR grant funds is to address long-term housing 
recovery and other needs including infrastructure, economic 
revitalization, and mitigation activities, particularly serving the 
most vulnerable communities. In its FY2023 budget proposal, the 
Administration has articulated principles for these grants, finding 
that CDBG-DR is uniquely positioned to advance equity and prioritize 
disadvantaged communities, turning disaster-impacted neighborhoods that 
have historically faced underinvestment into resilient, healthy, 
sustainable, thriving communities. CDBG-DR's role in long-term housing 
recovery prioritizes and integrates resilient investments that mitigate 
the effects of future natural disasters, which will significantly 
reduce future fiscal and social costs.
    Through a Universal Notice, HUD seeks to:
     Outline a uniform set of waivers and alternative 
requirements designed for future allocations of CDBG-DR funds, 
including all timelines, documentation, and other requirements for pre-
award grantee submissions;
     Encourage intentional and early coordination among 
potential CDBG-DR grantees, other agencies/departments at the state or 
local level, and other regional or local planning efforts to better 
align disaster recovery assistance with the goals of regional 
development plans, resilience plans, and state and local Hazard 
Mitigation Plans;
     Consistent with the principles of the Administration's 
Justice40 initiative, increase opportunities for planning to expand 
awareness of the availability of disaster recovery assistance and to 
advance equitable distribution of assistance, including community 
engagement efforts, and planning for targeted assistance to residents 
of disadvantaged communities (e.g., a Promise Zone, a Neighborhood 
Revitalization Strategy Area) that are underserved, members of 
protected classes under fair housing and civil

[[Page 77866]]

rights laws (i.e., race, color, national origin, religion, sex--which 
includes sexual orientation and gender identify--familial status, and 
disability), and other vulnerable populations who have been 
historically marginalized and can be adversely affected by disasters 
that often exacerbate existing inequities (e.g., racial and ethnic 
minorities, the elderly, persons experiencing homelessness, etc.); and
     Improve long-term community resilience by fully 
integrating resilience planning and hazard mitigation activities into 
disaster recovery to reduce the impacts of climate change and future 
disasters, encourage nature-based recovery efforts (focusing on 
healthier water and air, and effective debris and waste management), 
address environmental justice concerns associated with disaster 
recovery efforts, and address recovery needs for accessible, resilient, 
and affordable housing for low- and moderate-income persons.
     Assist in making measurable progress to reduce fiscal 
exposure to climate change and its effects for the Federal government, 
states, and local governments. This effort is consistent with the High-
Risk Report in 2019, in which the General Accountability Office (GAO) 
noted that ``numerous studies have concluded that climate change poses 
risks to many environmental and economic systems and creates a 
significant fiscal risk to the federal government.'' More broadly, the 
notice will be designed to support the policy of the Administration to 
combat the climate crisis by implementing a government-wide approach 
that: reduces climate pollution in every sector of the economy; 
increases resilience to the impacts of climate change; protects public 
health; conserves lands, waters, and biodiversity; delivers 
environmental justice; and spurs well-paying union jobs and economic 
growth, especially through innovation, commercialization, and 
deployment of clean energy technologies and infrastructure.

II. Purpose of This Request for Information

    The purpose of this RFI is to solicit feedback to inform how the 
Department can strengthen CDBG-DR requirements and to accelerate the 
availability of assistance to disaster survivors, consistent with the 
principles of the Administration as outlined in its FY2023 budget 
proposal in support of CDBG-DR authorization. HUD seeks information and 
recommendations to expedite long-term recovery, reduce or eliminate 
barriers, ensure equitable outcomes, and simplify compliance for CDBG-
DR grantees within its statutory authority.
    To expedite long-term recovery, Congress has historically 
authorized HUD to modify certain requirements by establishing waivers 
and alternative requirements, except for requirements related to fair 
housing, nondiscrimination, labor, and the environment. However, HUD 
may not waive or establish an alternative requirement on any provision 
established by an appropriations act. Therefore, HUD is most interested 
in proposed changes that are within its statutory authority provided by 
Public Law 117-43, the appropriations act that funded CDBG-DR 
assistance for 2020 and 2021 disasters. Comments that seek to identify 
statutory limitations that delay or hinder recovery are also welcome 
and HUD may submit these comments to Congress for consideration.
    HUD encourages participation from disaster survivors, Federal, 
state, local, and Tribal governments, nongovernmental organizations, 
the private sector including small businesses, and other stakeholders 
(e.g., emergency managers; renters; homeowners; multifamily-housing 
owners; public-housing agencies; academic researchers; urban planners; 
engineers; fair housing professionals; disaster recovery professionals; 
and organizations that advocate for affordable housing, members of 
protected classes, vulnerable populations, and underserved 
communities).

III. Specific Information Requested

    While HUD welcomes comments on all issues associated with 
streamlining and accelerating the implementation of CDBG-DR funds, HUD 
is particularly interested in receiving information, data, analyses, 
and recommendations on the topics outlined below, which focus on 
changes that are generally within HUD's statutory authority. The 
appropriations acts typically authorize the Secretary to waive or 
specify alternative requirements for any provision of any statute or 
regulation that the Secretary administers of CDBG-DR funds, except for 
requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor 
standards, and the environment. The list of questions below is a non-
exhaustive list and is intended to assist commenters in formulating 
their responses. This list is not intended to limit the issues or 
topics that commenters may address. HUD has organized this list into a 
series of questions to solicit targeted feedback regarding specific 
topics.
1. Reducing Administrative Burden and Accelerating Recovery.
    a. Are there CDBG-DR rules,\1\ waivers, or alternative requirements 
that are unnecessarily complicated? Please provide recommendations for 
how such rules and requirements should be revised.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ While CDBG-DR funds do not have disaster-specific 
regulations, in past Federal Register notices, HUD has imposed 
applicable State and Entitlement CDBG regulations at 24 CFR part 570 
on the use of CDBG-DR funds and issued any necessary waivers and 
alternative requirements of these regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b. Are there CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements 
that could be streamlined or removed to enable grantees to accelerate 
recovery? Please provide recommendations for alternative processes that 
would remove barriers, obstacles, and delays.
    c. Are there CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements 
that can be modified, expanded, or removed to reduce administrative 
burden for beneficiaries?
    d. Are there CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements 
that could be streamlined or removed to accelerate recovery for 
grantees receiving smaller awards, or grantees that are funding 
primarily small and rural communities? For example, in a Federal 
Register notice published on May 24, 2022, HUD identified any grant 
under $20,000,000 as a smaller grant award. Going forward, is 
$20,000,000 an appropriate threshold?
    e. Should there be a minimum allocation threshold for CDBG-DR grant 
awards? If so, what should the minimum allocation threshold be or be 
based on?
    f. Recent appropriations allow grantees to access funding for 
program administrative costs prior to the Secretary's certification of 
financial controls and procurement processes and adequate procedures 
for proper grant management. Grantees have used these administrative 
funds primarily for the development of the action plan (e.g., procuring 
contractors, increasing capacity, facilitating public participation, 
etc.). Aside from creating the action plan for program administrative 
costs, are there other approaches that HUD should consider to promote 
proactive coordination with other disaster response agencies before a 
CDBG-DR grant is executed?
    g. Are there any activities that are currently ineligible in CDBG 
and are either not funded by other disaster recovery agencies or not 
fully funded, but that are so critical to meeting recovery-related 
needs that it may be important to permit them through an

[[Page 77867]]

alternative requirement to advance a more resilient and equitable 
recovery?
    h. Are there CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements 
that should be revised to better align with federal disaster relief 
programs implemented by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 
the U.S. Small Business Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers, or other Federal agencies? Are there CDBG-DR rules, waivers, 
or alternative requirements that should be adopted by other Federal 
disaster recovery agencies?
    i. The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
Act (42 U.S.C. 5121-5207) (Stafford Act) and CDBG-DR appropriations 
acts require HUD and its grantees to coordinate with other Federal 
agencies that provide disaster assistance to prevent the duplication of 
benefits (DOB). How can HUD and other Federal agencies that provide 
disaster assistance make it easier to comply with DOB requirements?
    j. What data should grantees report to HUD to improve public 
transparency and to better allow evaluation of the use of CDBG-DR funds 
consistent with the principles of the Administration's Justice40 
initiative to increase federal support for disadvantaged communities 
(e.g., requiring grantees to report to HUD on the race and ethnicity of 
those who apply for assistance but are not ultimately served)? How 
might the administrative burden of reporting be reduced?
    k. What types of technical assistance should HUD offer grantees to 
support a timely, equitable, resilient, and successful recovery? Are 
there phases of CDBG-DR grants (e.g., initial administrative work, 
action plan development, program implementation, etc.) where providing 
more intensive technical assistance would be more effective? What types 
of technical assistance should States offer local government 
subrecipients to support a timely, equitable, resilient, and successful 
recovery?
    l. What types of technical assistance or other measures should HUD 
offer to better assist grantees in preventing and identifying potential 
contractor fraud and to strengthen the ability of grantees to assist 
beneficiaries when they are subject to contractor fraud?
    m. What mitigation techniques or requirements could HUD employ to 
enhance grantee capacity to comprehensively assess the likelihood of 
potential fraud risk and to otherwise detect and prevent fraud in 
grantee programs?
2. Establishing Priorities
    a. Should CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements be 
written to 1) encourage or require grantees to first address disaster 
recovery housing needs prior to other recovery needs (e.g., 
infrastructure), or 2) encourage or require grantees to invest in whole 
community recovery in proportion to its unmet recovery need (e.g., 
housing, infrastructure, economic revitalization, and mitigation)?
    b. If CDBG-DR should encourage grantees to invest in whole 
community recovery, what policy incentives would be most effective to 
encourage grantees to invest in whole community recovery in proportion 
to its unmet recovery need?
    c. What CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements, if 
any, should be modified or eliminated so that grantees are prioritizing 
assistance to low- and moderate-income persons and areas, vulnerable 
populations, and underserved communities?
    d. How can HUD assist grantees in using data-driven information to 
better align their proposed recovery programs and activities with unmet 
recovery needs? (HUD is also seeking public comment on how it defines 
and determines unmet recovery needs in a separate request for 
information. Please see the RFI requesting information on the CDBG-DR 
allocation formula published elsewhere in today's Federal Register.)
    e. How can CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements be 
modified or eliminated to encourage greater levels of investment in 
infrastructure projects that provide the greatest benefit to impacted 
low- and moderate-income areas?
    f. What CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements, if 
any, should be modified or eliminated so that grantees carry out 
activities to support economic revitalization for underserved and 
economically distressed communities?
    g. How can CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements be 
modified or eliminated to better address the unmet recovery and 
mitigation needs of affordable rental housing, public housing, and 
housing for vulnerable populations?
    h. How can CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements be 
modified or eliminated to allow grantees to leverage private capital 
(e.g., bridge loans) to start the long-term recovery process 
immediately after a disaster?
3. Understanding the Requirements for Most Impacted & Distressed (MID) 
Areas
    Currently, CDBG-DR appropriations acts require all funds to be used 
in a most impacted and distressed (MID) area resulting from a major 
disaster. Current rules attempt to balance requirements in the 
appropriations acts to make allocations to HUD-identified MID areas 
while also providing grantees with flexibility to capture additional 
areas that the grantee can determine is also a MID area, using data or 
information that is not available to HUD.
    a. What CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements, if 
any, should be modified or eliminated to clarify the differences 
between the HUD-identified MID area and the grantee-identified MID 
area?
    b. Are there specific parameters, data, or other criteria that 
should be established by HUD for a disaster-impacted community to 
qualify as a grantee-identified MID Area? Please provide 
recommendations for specific parameters, criteria, or limitations that 
should be established.
    c. Should HUD continue to allow for the use of CDBG-DR funds to 
benefit grantee-identified MID areas? How, if at all, should HUD adjust 
the requirements for the balance of assistance between HUD-identified 
and grantee-identified MID areas?
4. Developing the Action Plan
    a. What CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements 
relating to the action plan, if any, should be modified or eliminated 
to capture unmet disaster recovery needs or mitigation needs more 
accurately?
    b. HUD currently requires grantees to post an action plan for 30 
days to solicit public comment and to host at least one public 
hearing--is this enough time to solicit meaningful public feedback? 
Should HUD consider increasing this time or the number of public 
hearings required for initial action plans and/or for later, 
substantial amendments to the action plan to achieve meaningful 
community engagement?
    c. What enhancements should HUD consider to improve a grantee's 
experience with the HUD's Disaster Recovery Grant Reporting (DRGR) 
system and data reported by grantees, in particular the Public Action 
Plan module?
5. Advancing Equity
    a. What CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements, if 
any, should be modified or eliminated to ensure grantees equitably 
allocate resources

[[Page 77868]]

and adequately address disaster-related needs of the most impacted, 
vulnerable, and underserved communities?
    b. What CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements, if 
any, should be modified or eliminated to ensure that grantees advance 
equity in the timing of who is able to receive assistance and the 
amount of assistance available and received? For example, by 
prioritizing programs to assist homeowners over those that assist 
renters, a grantee may not have enough funding to meet the unmet needs 
of renters, including those less able to prepare for, respond to, and 
recover from the impacts of disasters.
    c. What CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements, if 
any, should be modified to further prevent an ``unjustified 
discriminatory effect'' (i.e., interests can be served by another 
practice with a less discriminatory effect) based on race or other 
protected class in the implementation of CDBG-DR funding to address 
disaster-related unmet needs (recognizing that HUD has no authority to 
waive or specify alternative requirements for statutes and regulations 
related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor, or the environment)?
    d. What barriers impede grantees' ability to allocate resources 
equitably? What barriers do protected class groups, vulnerable 
populations, and other underserved communities face in accessing, 
applying for, and receiving CDBG-DR assistance in a timely manner?
    e. What additional guidance, data, or support can HUD provide to 
help grantees comply with fair housing and civil rights requirements 
and allocate resources equitably across housing types?
    f. What challenges do grantees face in complying with their 
obligation to ensure meaningful access for individuals with limited 
English proficiency or effective communication for individuals with 
disabilities? What tools or resources could HUD provide to facilitate 
compliance with these obligations?
    g. Congress has recently identified Indian tribes as eligible CDBG-
DR grantees but there are currently no Indian tribes in HUD's CDBG-DR 
portfolio. Are there revisions to HUD's CDBG-DR policies that should be 
considered to capture tribal recovery needs more effectively? (Please 
also see the request for information from the public on the need for 
any revisions to HUD's allocation formula to better capture tribal 
recovery needs published elsewhere in today's Federal Register.)
    h. What barriers impede grantees' ability to design and utilize 
buyout programs, including incentives, to best serve protected class 
groups, vulnerable populations, and other underserved communities? What 
CDBG-DR rules and requirements, if any, should be modified or 
eliminated to ensure that grantees advance equity in their community-
driven relocation activities?
6. Incorporating Mitigation and Resilience Planning
    a. Are there CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements, 
and/or policies that prevent or limit grantees' focus on mitigating the 
impacts of climate change, particularly for those areas 
disproportionately impacted by climate change? If so, please describe.
    b. How can CDBG-DR's rules, waivers, or alternative requirements or 
policies be modified or eliminated to encourage grantees to use CDBG-DR 
funds to invest in activities that incorporate resilience and mitigate 
the impacts of climate change?
    c. What more can HUD do to encourage grantees to integrate long-
term disaster recovery and mitigation planning into other existing 
federal, state, and local planning requirements?
7. Replacing Disaster-damaged Housing Units, Minimizing Displacement, 
and Incentivizing Affordable Housing Development
    Should CDBG-DR notices continue to waive and provide alternative 
requirements for the one-for-one replacement housing requirements at 
section 104(d)(2)(A)(i) and (ii) and (d)(3) (42 U.S.C. 5304(d)(2)(A)(i) 
and (i) and (d)(3)) of the HCDA and 24 CFR 42.375 for disaster-damaged 
owner-occupied lower-income dwelling units that meet the grantee's 
definition of ``not suitable for rehabilitation?'' To expedite 
recovery, HUD waives this requirement for disaster-damaged owner-
occupied units that meet the grantee's definition for ``not suitable 
for rehabilitation.'' CDBG-DR grantees have the discretion to define 
``not suitable for rehabilitation,'' but must include their definition 
in their action plan for disaster recovery.
    a. How can CDBG-DR rules, waivers, or alternative requirements be 
modified or eliminated to ensure that grantees are mitigating natural 
hazard risks (e.g., sea level rise, high winds, storm surge, flooding, 
volcanic eruption, and wildfire risk), while also minimizing 
displacement of members of families, individuals, or entities such as 
businesses, farms, or nonprofit organizations from their homes and 
neighborhoods?
    b. What additional relocation, acquisition, and replacement housing 
waivers and alternative requirements should HUD consider that would 
assist and expedite community efforts to reduce future risk while 
minimizing displacement and ensuring fair treatment and protections to 
those whose property is acquired or who must move due to a CDBG-DR 
funded activity? For example, recent CDBG-DR notices waive (and provide 
alternative requirements to) several provisions of the Uniform 
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 
1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.) (URA), section 104(d) of the 
HCDA, and related CDBG programmatic requirements.
8. Modifying Green and Resilient Building Codes and Standards.
    a. Should the Department impose construction standards that require 
the use of CDBG-DR funds to adhere to current editions of the 
International Building Code (IBC), International Existing Building Code 
(IEBC), International Residential Code (IRC), International Wildland-
Urban Interface Code (IWUIC), International Plumbing Code (IPC), 
International Mechanical Code (IMC), International Fuel Gas Code 
(IFGC), International Fire Code (IFC), ICC 500-14, ICC/NSSA Standard on 
the Design and Construction of Storm Shelters, and ICC 600-14 Standard 
for Residential Construction in High-wind Regions?
    b. Should HUD better align its building code requirements for CDBG-
DR and CDBG-MIT with those required by FEMA or other Federal agencies? 
If so, how?

Marion M. McFadden,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development.
[FR Doc. 2022-27547 Filed 12-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P