Third Allocation, Waivers, and Alternative Requirements for Grantees Receiving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Disaster Recovery Funds in Response to Hurricane Sandy, 62182-62194 [2014-24662]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 200 (Thursday, October 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62182-62194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24662]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5696-N-11]


Third Allocation, Waivers, and Alternative Requirements for 
Grantees Receiving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Disaster 
Recovery Funds in Response to Hurricane Sandy

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice advises the public of a third allocation of 
Community Development Block Grant disaster recovery (CDBG-DR) funds 
appropriated by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 (Pub. L. 
113-2) for the purpose of assisting recovery in the most impacted and 
distressed

[[Page 62183]]

areas identified in major disaster declarations due to Hurricane Sandy 
and other eligible events in calendar years 2011, 2012 and 2013. This 
allocation provides $2,504,017,000 to assist Hurricane Sandy recovery. 
Included in this allocation is $930,000,000 to implement projects from 
the HUD-sponsored Rebuild by Design competition, described in Federal 
Register Notices 78 FR 45551 (July 29, 2013), and 78 FR 52560 (August 
23, 2013). The first and second allocations for recovery from Hurricane 
Sandy totaling $10,509,000,000 were published, together with program 
requirements, at 78 FR 14329 (March 5, 2013) and 78 FR 69104 (November 
18, 2013). Additional notices at 78 FR 23578, 78 FR 46999, 79 FR 17173, 
and 79 FR 40133 have provided clarifying guidance, additional waivers, 
and alternative requirements. This third allocation brings total 
funding to recover from the impacts of Hurricane Sandy and other 
eligible events in the Sandy-affected region to $13,013,017,000. The 
Notice also establishes requirements governing the use of these funds.

DATES: Effective Date: October 21, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stan Gimont, Director, Office of Block 
Grant Assistance, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th 
Street SW., Room 7286, Washington, DC 20410, telephone number 202-708-
3587. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number 
via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339. Facsimile 
inquiries may be sent to Mr. Gimont at 202-401-2044. (Except for the 
``800'' number, these telephone numbers are not toll-free.) Email 
inquiries may be sent to disaster_recovery@hud.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Allocation and Related Information
II. Use of Funds
III. Timely Expenditure
IV. Grant Amendment Process
V. Authority to Grant Waivers
VI. Rebuild by Design Allocations, Purpose, and Requirements
VII. Applicable Rules, Statutes, Waivers, and Alternative 
Requirements
VIII. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
IX. Finding of No Significant Impact
Appendix A: Allocation Methodology

I. Allocation and Related Information

    The Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 (Pub. L. 113-2, 
approved January 29, 2013) (Appropriations Act) made available $16 
billion in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for necessary 
expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, restoration of 
infrastructure and housing, and economic revitalization in the most 
impacted and distressed areas resulting from a major disaster declared 
pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) (Stafford Act), due to 
Hurricane Sandy and other eligible events in calendar years 2011, 2012, 
and 2013. The law provides that funds shall be awarded directly to a 
State or unit of general local government (hereafter local government) 
at the discretion of the Secretary. Unless noted otherwise, the term 
``grantee'' refers to any jurisdiction receiving a direct award from 
HUD under this Notice.
    On March 1, 2013, the President issued a sequestration order 
pursuant to section 251A of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act, as amended (2 U.S.C. 901a), and reduced funding for CDBG-
DR grants under the Appropriations Act to $15.18 billion. Through a 
Federal Register Notice published March 5, 2013, the Department 
allocated $5.4 billion for the areas most impacted by Hurricane Sandy 
(78 FR 14329). On November 18, 2013, HUD allocated an additional $5.1 
billion to further assist in recovery from Hurricane Sandy (78 FR 
69104). Other Notices have also allocated funds from the Appropriations 
Act for other major disasters occurring in 2011, 2012 and 2013.
    To comply with statutory direction that funds be used for disaster-
related expenses in the most impacted and distressed areas, HUD makes 
allocations based on the best available data that cover all the 
eligible affected areas. The initial allocation to Hurricane Sandy 
grantees was based on unmet housing and economic revitalization needs, 
while the second allocation also included data on unmet infrastructure 
restoration needs. This Notice provides the following Round 3 awards 
totaling $1.574 billion to address unmet recovery needs (See Appendix A 
for allocation methodology) and allocates $930 million toward proposals 
developed through the Rebuild by Design competition. The awards for all 
grantees are as follows:

                                                          Table 1--Hurricane Sandy Allocations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                       Total funding To
                       Grantee                         First allocation    Second allocation   Third allocation    Rebuild by design         date
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connecticut.........................................         $71,820,000         $66,000,000         $11,459,000         $10,000,000        $159,279,000
New Jersey..........................................       1,829,520,000       1,463,000,000         501,909,000         380,000,000       4,174,429,000
New York............................................       1,713,960,000       2,097,000,000         420,922,000         185,000,000       4,416,882,000
New York City.......................................       1,772,820,000       1,447,000,000         639,056,000         355,000,000       4,213,876,000
Rhode Island........................................           3,240,000          16,000,000             671,000                 N/A          19,911,000
Maryland............................................           8,640,000          20,000,000                 N/A                 N/A          28,640,000
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...........................................       5,400,000,000       5,109,000,000       1,574,017,000         930,000,000      13,013,017,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New York City must expend all funds within New York City. State 
grantees may expend funds in any county that received a Presidential 
disaster declaration in 2011, 2012, or 2013 subject to the limitations 
described in Table 2.
    Table 2 identifies a minimum percentage of the third allocation, 
inclusive of the Rebuild by Design allocation that must be spent in the 
HUD-identified Hurricane Sandy Most Impacted and Distressed counties. 
All selected RBD proposals are located in counties previously 
identified by the Department as the most impacted and distressed 
pursuant to the Federal Register Notice published on March 5, 2013 (78 
FR 14329). The opportunity for certain grantees to expend 20 percent of 
their allocations outside the most impacted and distressed counties 
identified by HUD enables those grantees to respond to highly localized 
distress identified via their own data for most impacted and distressed 
areas.

[[Page 62184]]



                Table 2--Most Impacted and Distressed Counties Within Which Funds may be Expended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Minimum
                                     Counties from the following                                percentage that
                                       major declared disasters      Hurricane Sandy Most      must be expended
              Grantee                  are eligible for CDBG-DR    Impacted and  Distressed   in Hurricane Sandy
                                       funds (FEMA declaration             counties              most impacted
                                               number)                                          and distressed
                                                                                                   counties
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York City......................  All Counties...............  All Counties..............                 100
New York...........................  1957, 1993, 4020, 4031,      Nassau, Rockland, Suffolk,                  80
                                      4085, 4111, 4129.            Westchester, and all
                                                                   Counties in New York City
                                                                   (Bronx, Kings, New York,
                                                                   Queens, Richmond).
New Jersey.........................  1954, 4021, 4033, 4039,      Atlantic, Bergen, Cape                      80
                                      4048, 4070, 4086.            May, Essex, Hudson,
                                                                   Middlesex, Monmouth,
                                                                   Ocean, Union.
Connecticut........................  1958, 4023, 4046, 4087,      Fairfield, New Haven......                  80
                                      4106.
Rhode Island.......................  4027, 4089, 4107...........  Washington................                  80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This Notice builds upon the requirements of the Federal Register 
Notices published by the Department on March 5, 2013 (78 FR 14329), 
April 19, 2013 (78 FR 23578), August 2, 2013 (78 FR 46999), November 
18, 2013 (78 FR 69104), March 27, 2014 (79 FR 17173), and July 11, 2014 
(79 FR 40133) referred to collectively in this Notice as the ``Prior 
Notices.'' The Prior Notices are available at:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-03-05/pdf/2013-05170.pdf
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-04-19/pdf/2013-09228.pdf
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-08-02/pdf/2013-18643.pdf
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-11-18/pdf/2013-27506.pdf
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-03-27/pdf/2014-06850.pdf
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-07-11/pdf/2014-16316.pdf

    Executive Order 13632, published at 77 FR 74341, established the 
Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force, to ensure government- and 
region-wide coordination to help communities as they are making 
decisions about long-term rebuilding and to develop a comprehensive 
rebuilding strategy. Section 5(b) of Executive Order 13632 requires 
that HUD, ``as appropriate and to the extent permitted by law, align 
[the Department's] relevant programs and authorities'' with the 
Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Strategy (the Rebuilding Strategy). 
Accordingly, this Notice is informed by both the Rebuilding Strategy 
released by the Task Force on August 19, 2013 and Rebuild by Design 
(RBD), an initiative of the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force and 
HUD and part of the Rebuilding Strategy's recommendation to promote 
resilience rebuilding through innovation. RBD addresses structural and 
environmental vulnerabilities that Hurricane Sandy exposed in 
communities throughout the region and developed fundable solutions to 
better protect residents from future disasters. The Rebuilding Strategy 
and information about RBD can be found, respectively, at:

https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=HSRebuildingStrategy.pdf
https://www.rebuildbydesign.org

II. Use of Funds

    The Appropriations Act requires funds to be used only for specific 
disaster recovery related purposes. Consistent with the Rebuilding 
Strategy, it is essential to build communities back stronger and more 
resilient. This allocation provides additional funds to Sandy-impacted 
grantees to support investments in resilient recovery.
    The Appropriations Act requires that prior to the obligation of 
CDBG-DR funds, a grantee must submit a plan detailing the proposed use 
of funds, including criteria for eligibility and how the use of these 
funds will address disaster relief, long-term recovery, restoration of 
infrastructure and housing, and economic revitalization in the most 
impacted and distressed areas. In an Action Plan for Disaster Recovery 
(Action Plan), grantees must describe uses and activities that: (1) Are 
authorized under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act 
of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) (HCD Act) or allowed by a waiver or 
alternative requirement published in this Notice and the Prior Notices; 
and (2) respond to a disaster-related impact. HUD has previously 
approved an Action Plan for each grantee receiving an allocation of 
funds in this Notice. Grantees are now directed to submit substantial 
Action Plan Amendments in order to access funds provided in this 
Notice. RBD and formula allocations may be included together or in 
separate Action Plan Amendments. For more information on requirements 
for substantial Action Plan Amendments, please see Sections IV and VI 
of this Notice.
    As provided by the HCD Act, funds may be used as a matching 
requirement, share, or contribution for any other federal program when 
used to carry out an eligible CDBG-DR activity. However, pursuant to 
the requirements of the Appropriations Act, CDBG-DR funds may not be 
used for expenses reimbursable by, or for which funds are made 
available by, FEMA or the United States Army Corps of Engineers 
(USACE).
    The Notice published November 18, 2013 (78 FR 69104) imposes 
additional requirements on certain grantees. The grantees must update 
the needs assessment component of their Action Plan amendments to 
reflect current unmet needs, as applicable. The State of New York must 
either: (1) Ensure that a portion of its allocation is used to address 
resiliency and local cost share requirements for damage to both the 
Metropolitan Transportation Authority infrastructure in New York City 
and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey; or (2) demonstrate 
that such resiliency needs and local cost share has otherwise been met. 
The State of New Jersey must undertake one of these same actions with 
regard to the Port Authority. In order to demonstrate that resiliency 
and local cost share requirements have otherwise been met, the 
substantial Action Plan Amendments submitted by State of New York and 
the State of New Jersey must include evidence of consultation with the 
Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Port Authority of New 
York and New Jersey, as applicable. New York City must ensure that a 
portion of its allocation is used to address the recovery and 
resilience needs of the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA), or 
demonstrate that such resiliency needs have otherwise been met.

[[Page 62185]]

III. Timely Expenditure of Funds

    To ensure the timely expenditure of funds the Appropriations Act 
requires that funds be expended within two years of the date HUD 
obligates funds to a grantee. Funds are obligated to a grantee upon 
HUD's signing of a grantee's CDBG-DR grant agreement. In its Action 
Plan, a grantee must demonstrate how funds will be fully expended 
within two years of obligation and HUD must obligate all funds not 
later than September 30, 2017. For any funds that the grantee believes 
will not be expended by the deadline and that it desires to retain, the 
grantee must submit a letter to HUD not less than 30 days in advance of 
the deadline justifying why it is necessary to extend the deadline for 
a specific portion of funds. The letter must detail the compelling 
legal, policy, or operational challenges necessitating any such waiver, 
and must also identify the date by when the specified portion of funds 
will be expended. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
provided HUD with authority to act on grantee waiver requests but 
grantees are cautioned that such waivers may not be approved. If 
granted, waivers will be published in the Federal Register. Funds 
remaining in the grantee's line of credit at the time of its 
expenditure deadlines will be recaptured by HUD.

IV. Grant Amendment Process

    To access funds allocated by this Notice grantees must submit a 
substantial Action Plan Amendment to their approved Action Plan. 
Submission to and review by HUD must follow the process outlined below. 
HUD approves the Amendment according to criteria identified in the 
Prior Notices and this Notice.
     Before submitting a substantial Action Plan Amendment, a 
grantee must consult with affected citizens, stakeholders, local 
governments and public housing authorities to determine updates to its 
needs assessment, and as necessary, update its comprehensive risk 
analysis;
     Grantee amends its citizen participation plan to reflect 
the requirements of this Notice, as described in Section VII.3;
     Grantee publishes the proposed substantial amendment to 
its previously approved Action Plan for Disaster Recovery on the 
grantee's official Web site for no less than 30 calendar days and holds 
at least one public hearing to solicit public comment;
     Grantee responds to public comment and submits its 
substantial Action Plan Amendment to HUD (with any additional 
certifications required by this Notice) no later than 120 days after 
the effective date of this Notice;
     HUD reviews the substantial Action Plan Amendment within 
60 days from date of receipt and approves the Amendment according to 
criteria identified in the Prior Notices and this Notice;
     HUD sends an Action Plan Amendment approval letter. The 
Secretary may disapprove of the Action Plan Amendment if it is 
determined that it does not meet the requirements of this Notice or 
relevant prior Notices. If the substantial Amendment is not approved, a 
letter will be sent identifying its deficiencies; the grantee must then 
re-submit the Amendment within 45 days of the notification letter;
     Grantee ensures that the HUD-approved substantial Action 
Plan Amendment (and updated Action Plan) is posted on its official Web 
site;
     HUD sends an amended unsigned grant agreement with revised 
grant conditions to the grantee; and the grantee signs and returns the 
amended grant agreement;
     HUD signs the grant agreement amendment and revises the 
grantee's line of credit amount (this triggers the two year expenditure 
deadline for any funds obligated by this amended grant agreement) and 
provides a copy of the executed grant agreement to the grantee;
     If it has not already done so, grantee enters the 
activities from its published Action Plan Amendment into the Disaster 
Recovery Grant Reporting (DRGR) system and submits it to HUD within the 
system;
     The grantee may draw down funds from the line of credit 
after the Responsible Entity completes applicable environmental 
review(s) pursuant to 24 CFR part 58 (or paragraph A.20 under Section 
VI of the March 5, 2013 Notice) and, as applicable, receives from HUD 
or the state an approved Request for Release of Funds and 
certification;
     Grantee amends its published Action Plan to include its 
projection of expenditures and outcomes within 90 days of the Action 
Plan Amendment approval as provided for in paragraph VII.2.f of this 
Notice; and
     Grantee updates its full consolidated plan to reflect 
disaster-related needs no later than its Fiscal Year 2015 consolidated 
plan update if it has not already completed the update.

V. Authority To Grant Waivers

    The Appropriations Act authorizes the Secretary to waive, or 
specify alternative requirements for, any provision of any statute or 
regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with HUD's 
obligation or use by the recipient of these funds (except for 
requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor 
standards, and the environment). Waivers and alternative requirements 
are based upon a determination by the Secretary that good cause exists 
and that the waiver or alternative requirement is not inconsistent with 
the overall purposes of title I of the HCD Act. Regulatory waiver 
authority is also provided by 24 CFR 5.110, 91.600, and 570.5.

VI. Rebuild by Design Allocations, Purpose, and Requirements

    Rebuild by Design (RBD) was a planning and design competition to 
increase resilience in the Sandy-affected region as part of recovery 
from the storm. The Department conducted the competition under the 
authority of Sec.  105 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 
2010 (15 U.S.C. 3719). Administered in partnership with philanthropic, 
academic, and nonprofit organizations, HUD solicited the best talents 
and ideas from around the world to seek innovative solutions for how 
communities rebuild and adapt in response to the damage from a disaster 
and future risks presented by natural hazards and climate change. More 
regarding the history of the competition can be found in the Federal 
Register at 78 FR 45551, published July 29, 2013, and 78 FR 52560, 
published August 23, 2013.
    The competition resulted in the selection of ten interdisciplinary 
design teams as finalists to participate in an in-depth process. 
Ultimately, six proposals were announced as winning proposals in June 
2014, representing an award of distinction for the respective design 
teams.

1. Rebuild by Design Allocations

    Under this Notice, the Department is providing $930 million in 
funds for use toward the implementation of proposals developed through 
the RBD competition. Unless otherwise provided for in the Prior Notices 
or in this Notice, the allocated RBD funds are subject to all 
applicable CDBG requirements. For example, RBD expenditures must be 
included in each grantee's overall benefit requirement. The specified 
uses and additional requirements on these allocations are outlined 
later in this Notice. Grantees are prohibited from spending the funds 
provided by this allocation for RBD on non-RBD purposes, including 
other disaster recovery activities.
    Allocations for RBD are identified in Table 3 below by proposal:

[[Page 62186]]



                               Table 3--Rebuild by Design Allocations by Proposal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   RBD CDBG-DR
               Grantee                          Proposal                     Location              Allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State of New Jersey.................  New Meadowlands............  Meadowlands................      $150,000,000
State of New Jersey.................  Resist, Delay, Store,        Weehawken/Hoboken/Jersey          230,000,000
                                       Discharge.                   City.
State of New York...................  Living with the Bay........  Nassau County..............       125,000,000
State of New York...................  Living Breakwaters.........  Staten Island..............        60,000,000
New York City.......................  The Big U..................  Manhattan/Lower East Side..       335,000,000
New York City.......................  Hunts Point Lifelines......  South Bronx/Hunts Point....        20,000,000
State of Connecticut................  Resilient Bridgeport.......  Bridgeport.................        10,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the RBD competition process, each design team worked 
closely with each respective grantee to ensure that design solutions 
within the proposals were consistent with the grantee's recovery goals 
and priorities.

2. Purpose of RBD Allocations and Required Actions

    Each selected proposal from the RBD competition is comprised of 
multiple phases, which collectively represent a larger master plan. For 
each selection, the multiple phases collectively are referred to in 
this Notice as the selected RBD proposal. For purposes of the RBD-
related sections of this Notice, HUD is referring to the first phase, 
portion of a phase, or pilot project of each selected proposal as an 
``RBD Project.'' Each of these RBD Projects can be implemented to 
provide independent, meaningful risk reduction and assist in recovery. 
Successful implementation of RBD Projects will require collaboration 
within and among various levels of government (including, but not 
limited to, the environmental review and permitting process). In 
addition, implementation of RBD Projects may require engagement with 
private-sector, nonprofit, and philanthropic entities as part of an 
overall financing strategy.
    At a minimum, grantees must use the specific allocation for each 
selected RBD proposal to undertake the following actions:

    a. Implement each RBD Project identified in Section VI.3 
consistent with the proposal selected through the RBD competition 
process, to the greatest extent practicable and appropriate, 
considering the technical, fiscal, environmental, legal, and other 
constraints or opportunities that may be encountered. CDBG-DR funds 
must be used to implement the RBD Project, including research, 
study, analysis, planning, citizen participation, design, and 
engineering activities or other activities (i.e., pre-development 
activities) that are necessary and reasonable to achieve RBD Project 
implementation as well as site work and RBD Project construction 
(i.e. development activities). The Department recognizes that the 
amount of CDBG-DR allocated to each proposal may not be sufficient 
to fully build-out the RBD Project. Accordingly, grantees must 
describe the major or primary RBD Project elements that they will 
develop further for implementation according to the total amount of 
funding (HUD and non-HUD funds) that can be reasonably anticipated 
as part of the RBD Action Plan Amendment process described in 
Section VI.4. In order to meet the requirements of this Notice, the 
RBD Project, when completed, must achieve independent utility.
    b. Undertake planning activities necessary at the RBD Project- 
and selected RBD proposal-level. Planning at the RBD Project level 
is necessary for the continued design and ultimate construction of 
the RBD Project activities. Planning at the selected RBD proposal 
level is necessary to ensure that the completed RBD Project will 
have appropriate continuity and connection to implementation of 
subsequent phases of the selected RBD proposal or other resilience 
plans and strategies. Selected RBD proposal-level planning must 
include development of an implementation strategy, including 
identification of potential funding sources and financing 
mechanisms, to continue the subsequent phase or phases of the 
selected RBD proposal. RBD Project-level planning should examine 
potential displacement of residents, businesses, and other entities 
due to potentially increasing costs of rent and property ownership 
in the years following the completion of the RBD Project (e.g., 
gentrification). Consideration should also be given to actions for 
mitigating the impacts of such displacement.
    c. Develop an implementation case study and lessons learned 
document, recording the implementation process for each RBD Project, 
to be submitted to HUD prior to grant close-out. The Department 
anticipates that new and creative coordination structures, 
partnerships, and decision-making processes may be developed during 
the implementation process and will use these case studies and 
lessons learned documents to inform future recovery efforts. 
Grantees must develop this document using a scope and methodology 
acceptable to the Department. HUD will work with grantees to develop 
an acceptable format for this document.

    The Department also encourages grantees to secure additional 
funding to implement other phases or portions of the selected RBD 
proposals and to consider increasing the scale, effectiveness, impact, 
or scope of the RBD Projects identified in this Notice. If the 
allocated RBD funding permits a grantee to implement additional phases 
or portions of the selected RBD proposal beyond the RBD Project 
identified in the grantee's approved Action Plan Amendment, the grantee 
must, again, seek HUD approval through the substantial RBD Action Plan 
Amendment Process described in Section VI.4 below.

3. RBD Project Descriptions

    Descriptions of the RBD Projects to be funded with these 
allocations can be found on the RBD Web site (www.rebuildbydesign.org) 
according to the names below:
a. State of New Jersey: Meadowlands
    CDBG-DR funds are provided to assist in the implementation of the 
first phase (``Pilot 1'') of the proposal titled ``New Meadowlands.'' 
Pilot 1 includes Little Ferry, Moonachie, Carlstadt, Teterboro, and a 
portion of South Hackensack.
b. State of New Jersey: Weehawken/Hoboken/Jersey City
    CDBG-DR funds are provided to assist in the implementation of the 
first phase (``Phase 1'') of the proposal titled ``Resist, Delay, 
Store, Discharge.''
c. State of New York: Nassau County
    CDBG-DR funds are provided to assist in the implementation of the 
first phase (``Slow Streams'') of the proposal titled ``Living with the 
Bay.'' Slow Streams runs along the Mill River and through Rockville 
Centre.
d. State of New York: Staten Island
    CDBG-DR funds are provided to assist in the implementation of the 
first phase (``Tottenville Pilot'') of the proposal titled ``Living 
Breakwaters.'' Tottenville Pilot is located along the South Shore.
e. New York City: Manhattan/Lower East Side
    CDBG-DR funds are provided to assist in the implementation of the 
first phase (``Compartment 1: East River Park'') of the proposal titled 
``BIG U.''

[[Page 62187]]

f. New York City: South Bronx/Hunts Point
    CDBG-DR funds are provided to assist in implementation of the 
proposal titled ``Hunts Point Lifelines.'' The amount of CDBG-DR funds 
allocated pursuant to this Notice is not sufficient to fully fund the 
first phase of the proposal. Therefore, funding is to be used for 
continued study, analysis, planning, and community engagement as well 
as for design, engineering, and construction of a pilot project, as yet 
undefined. For purposes of this allocation, this pilot project will be 
considered the RBD Project for this selected RBD proposal. In order to 
allow the time necessary for engagement of community stakeholders 
regarding selection of a pilot project, the pilot project does not need 
to be identified in the initial Action Plan Amendment submitted in 
response to this Notice; however the grantee must describe the planning 
activity and certify that it will complete the pilot project in its 
initial Action Plan Amendment. Once the pilot project is identified by 
the City, the City must then submit a substantial Action Plan Amendment 
that incorporates the pilot project in order for project-related funds 
to be obligated.
g. State of Connecticut: Bridgeport
    CDBG-DR funds are provided to assist in implementation of the 
finalist proposal titled ``Resilient Bridgeport.'' Although the 
proposal for Bridgeport was not selected as a winning proposal, funds 
are being allocated to reduce flood risk for the most vulnerable public 
housing stock in the city and to leverage significant match funding 
from the State of Connecticut and other local funds. The Department 
recognizes that additional planning is required to re-assess and re-
scope one or more elements of the proposal to identify a pilot project 
that can be implemented and that the forthcoming project may require 
greater deviation from the proposal as submitted relative to that of 
winning proposals. Funding allocated pursuant to this Notice is to be 
used for continued study, analysis, planning, and community engagement 
as well as for design, engineering, and construction of a pilot 
project, as yet undefined. For purposes of this allocation, this pilot 
project will be considered the RBD Project for this selected proposal. 
At a minimum, the pilot project must reduce flood risk to public 
housing in the City's South End/Black Rock Harbor area. In order to 
allow the time necessary for engagement of community stakeholders 
regarding selection of a pilot project, the pilot project does not need 
to be identified in the initial Action Plan Amendment submitted in 
response to this Notice; however, the grantee must describe the 
planning activity and certify that it will complete the pilot project 
in its initial Action Plan Amendment. Once the pilot project is 
identified, the State of Connecticut must then submit a substantial 
Action Plan Amendment that incorporates the pilot project in order for 
project-related funds to be obligated.

4. RBD Action Plan Amendment Process

    The RBD Action Plan Amendment process, as described below, is 
designed to ensure that as specific plans for the RBD Project are 
developed, the RBD Project remains consistent with the selected RBD 
proposal and the RBD Project approved by HUD as an eligible CDBG 
activity as described in Section VII.4.c of this Notice. Before a 
grantee can access its RBD Allocation to carry out the RBD Project 
described in Section VI.2. of this Notice (or other phases of the 
selected RBD Proposal as permitted by this Notice), the grantee must 
complete the Grant Amendment process described in Section IV of this 
Notice as well as the RBD Amendment process described here:
    a. Following announcement of RBD allocations on May 30, 2014, 
grantee proceeds with additional planning, outreach, design, 
engineering, and other pre-development activities necessary to develop 
the RBD Project to the level of detail necessary for purposes of 
environmental review, permitting, and construction. Grantees are 
strongly encouraged to integrate project planning with the 
environmental review process.
    b. Grantees may charge to the grant the costs of CDBG eligible, RBD 
Project planning and pre-development activities incurred on or after 
May 30, 2014, by temporarily reprograming previously awarded CDBG-DR 
funds already identified for planning away from such planning 
activities for purposes of funding RBD Project planning and pre-
development activities under the alternative requirements described in 
Section VII.4.a. and b. of this Notice.
    c. No later than 120 days after the effective date of this Notice, 
grantee must submit its initial RBD Action Plan Amendment. The required 
elements of this Amendment are further described in Section VI.6.a.
    d. HUD approves the initial RBD Action Plan Amendment. Following 
HUD approval, grantee identifies the amount it wishes to obligate in 
consideration of the expenditure timeframes identified in Section III 
of this Notice and engages residents and community stakeholders in 
fully developing the RBD Project. Grantee also begins to take actions 
necessary for the environmental review process.
    e. For RBD Projects not requiring an Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) pursuant to the requirements of 24 CFR part 58: Grantee submits a 
subsequent substantial Action Plan Amendment to reflect the final RBD 
Project, as described in Section VI.6.b. This Amendment must include a 
detailed description of the final RBD Project as permitted and approved 
from the environmental review process. This Amendment may be submitted 
prior to or concurrent with grantee's submission of its Request for 
Release of Funds and Certifications (RROF). Following approval of the 
Action Plan Amendment and RROF, funds from the grantee's line of credit 
will be made available for construction (proceed to Section VI.4.g).
    f. For RBD Projects requiring an EIS:
    i. Following completion of the Draft EIS, grantee submits a 
subsequent substantial Action Plan Amendment to reflect the final RBD 
Project, as described in Section VI.6.b. This Amendment must identify 
the RBD Project scope and design as it exists at that point. Grantees 
are not prohibited from proceeding with the EIS process. HUD approval 
of this Action Plan Amendment is contingent upon whether the RBD 
Project is as consistent with the conceptual proposal as practicable 
and appropriate. HUD will provide clarifying guidance as to the content 
and format of materials that will help ensure timely approval of the 
Action Plan Amendment under the criteria for approval of Action Plan 
Amendments containing RBD Projects described in this Notice. If the 
Action Plan is not approved, RBD Project-related costs will not be 
eligible following the date of disapproval until the RBD Project is 
brought back into alignment with the RBD Project as proposed in the 
previously approved Action Plan.
    ii. Grantee successfully stewards the RBD Project through the 
environmental review process pursuant to 24 CFR part 58 and any 
permitting processes required to implement the RBD Project.
    iii. HUD anticipates that the final EIS or other project plan 
development may result in material changes to the project after grantee 
submits the subsequent substantial Action Plan Amendment described in 
Section VI.4.f.i. If no material changes have occurred since the 
previous RBD Project design and scope approved by HUD in the grantee's 
Action Plan Amendment, no additional amendment is necessary. If the RBD 
Project has undergone a material change, then the grantee must submit a

[[Page 62188]]

substantial Action Plan Amendment in order to describe the final RBD 
Project as permitted and approved from the environmental review 
process. A grantee may submit its RROF concurrent with this Action Plan 
Amendment, if applicable, and its Record of Decision for the project. 
Following approval of the Action Plan Amendment, if applicable, and 
RROF, funds from the grantee's line of credit will be made available 
for construction.
    g. Grantee begins drawing funds for construction. HUD staff will 
continue to routinely monitor each grantee for continued consistency of 
RBD Projects with its approved Action Plan.

5. RBD Environmental Review Requirements

    Grantees will conduct environmental reviews pursuant to 24 CFR part 
58 and are strongly encouraged to integrate RBD Project planning with 
the environmental review process to the fullest extent possible by, for 
instance, aligning scoping and public comment periods required as part 
of environmental reviews with those required for RBD Action Plan 
Amendments. It is expected that grantees will undertake action that 
contributes to the environmental review process as soon as RBD Project 
planning commences. To expedite environmental review and permitting and 
to ensure that the most complex projects are delivered as efficiently 
as possible, grantees shall submit all RBD Projects to the Sandy 
Regional Team for Federal Review and Permitting as provided for in 
Section VII.1 of the Notice published on November 18, 2013 (78 FR 
69104). Grantees must group together and evaluate as a single project 
all individual activities which are related either on a geographical or 
functional basis, or are logical parts of a composite of contemplated 
actions. Furthermore, grantees must analyze the reasonably foreseeable 
direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the RBD Project. See 40 CFR 
1508.7 and 1508.8. If the RBD Project is anticipated to require an EIS, 
grantees are encouraged to undertake the scoping process as early as 
possible consistent with 24 CFR part 58 and 40 CFR parts 1500-1508.

6. RBD Action Plan Requirements

a. Initial Action Plan Amendment for Proposed RBD Project
    Grantees in receipt of an RBD allocation must submit an initial 
substantial Action Plan Amendment that includes the following elements:
(i) RBD Project Description
    A general description of the proposed RBD Project to be designed 
and implemented (e.g., through narrative, maps, and conceptual project 
renderings). This description must also identify the CDBG national 
objective(s) that will be met by the funded RBD Project. The grantee 
must describe the use of all funds dedicated for planning, pre-
development, and project construction costs and must breakout estimated 
amounts for such costs. The description must demonstrate the RBD 
Project's feasibility and effectiveness in providing protection against 
current and future threats and hazards, including future risks 
associated with climate change. Additionally, the grantee must include 
in its description any applicable infrastructure requirements of the 
November 18, 2013 Notice as described in Section VI.7.a of this Notice.
(ii) Implementation Partnership for RBD Project
    A description of the implementation partnership responsible for RBD 
Project completion. The description must identify the grantee agency 
responsible for managing the implementation of the RBD Project. The 
Action Plan Amendment must demonstrate that the implementing agency has 
the capacity to successfully implement the RBD Project in a timely, 
cost-effective, and compliant manner. If adequate capacity does not 
currently exist, the grantee must identify how it will provide this 
capacity. Adequate demonstration of capacity is typically reflected by, 
but is not limited to: Staffing levels; management structure; 
operational authority; experience; established controls, policies, and 
procedures; and history or ability to work collaboratively with other 
city, county, state, and federal agencies as required.
    The description of the implementation partnership must identify the 
entities that will comprise the partnership as well as the nature and 
role of each entity of the partnership (e.g., type of agreement, 
responsibilities, authorities, etc.). The description should include 
identification of any agreements that have been executed or that will 
need to be signed (such as contracts, subrecipient agreements, 
memoranda of understanding, etc.) for the partnership to effectively 
function and meet the requirements in this Notice. State grantees must 
include a description of the roles and responsibilities of the 
incorporated municipalities in which the projects are located.
(iii) Citizen Participation Plan for RBD Project
    A description of the citizen participation plan specifically 
related to the prospective planning and implementation of RBD Projects. 
The competition process through which the proposals were developed 
involved transparent and inclusive community outreach and public 
participation surrounding each proposal. Grantees must demonstrate to 
the satisfaction of the Department that they will continue to similarly 
engage community stakeholders through the planning, design, and 
development process related to each RBD Project and selected RBD 
proposal in their Action Plan. HUD encourages grantees to align citizen 
participation plan requirements with environmental review public 
participation processes to the fullest extent possible to gain 
efficiencies. For example, if the project requires an EIS, then the 
required public comment period following the publication of a Draft EIS 
should run, to the fullest extent possible, concurrently with the 
comment period for the substantial Action Plan Amendment. Grantees must 
take steps to ensure that vulnerable and underserved populations, 
including racial and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and 
persons with limited English proficiency, are involved in the planning 
and decision-making processes throughout the RBD Project.
(iv) RBD Project Timeline
    A description of the general timeline for RBD Project development 
until completion. Grantees should identify the general timeframe for 
activities such as additional study/research, planning, design/
engineering, environmental review and permitting, site development, and 
construction. The timeline must be revised to reflect more accurate 
expectations once the final RBD Project design is approved by HUD. The 
timeline should reflect a critical path approach to RBD Project 
completion that illustrates the milestones to the completion of the RBD 
Project and estimates the resources required for accomplishment of each 
milestone.
(v) Identification of Leveraged or Reasonably Anticipated Funds for RBD 
Project
    A description of funds that are anticipated to be generated or 
secured in leveraging the CDBG-DR allocation for RBD Project completion 
as well as any additional CDBG-DR funds the grantee anticipates 
dedicating to the RBD

[[Page 62189]]

Project beyond the funds allocated to the RBD Project in this Notice. 
Accordingly, the description must identify any potential gap or 
shortfall in RBD Project funding (relative to what is being proposed) 
and identify the strategy(ies) that will be pursued to secure such 
funds. While RBD Projects must be implemented as consistent with the 
winning proposals as practicable and appropriate, it is understood that 
modifications may be necessary in response to the amount of funding 
ultimately secured.
b. Subsequent Action Plan Amendment to Reflect Final RBD Project
    As described under Section VI.4.e. and f. of this Notice, the 
Department is requiring grantees to submit an Action Plan Amendment as 
a condition for the release of funds for RBD Project-related 
construction activities. HUD will provide clarifying guidance as to the 
format of materials for approval of Action Plan Amendments containing 
the final RBD Project descriptions described in this Notice. Grantees 
are advised that the Amendment submission must detail a final RBD 
Project that comports with the selected RBD proposal to the greatest 
extent practicable and appropriate and must update the required RBD 
Action Plan Amendment elements described in Section VI.6.a.
    Submissions will need to include an examination of the RBD Project 
through a Benefit-Cost Analysis, using methodologies and approaches 
acceptable to HUD. In its submission, the grantee must demonstrate the 
degree to which the project reduces flood risk and the respective 
geography that it will benefit. In its submission, the grantee must 
also certify to adequately fund the long-term operation and maintenance 
of the RBD Project from reasonably anticipated revenue, recognizing 
that operation and maintenance costs must be provided from sources 
other than CDBG and CDBG-DR funds. Approval of the Action Plan 
Amendment is contingent upon this certification.
    Grantees are also responsible for demonstrating that the RBD 
Project is feasible, including having an appropriate design that will 
result in the benefits proposed. In order to demonstrate that the 
engineering design for the RBD Project is feasible, a registered 
Professional Engineer (or other design professional) must certify that 
the design meets the appropriate code, or industry design and 
construction standards. HUD, when approving the RBD Action Plan 
Amendment, may impose special conditions on the grants to address high 
risk factors that HUD identifies in its review.
    HUD expects the grantee or a subrecipient, contractor, or 
subgrantee to take responsibility for operating and maintaining any 
levee, floodwall, or other flood control structure or system funded 
under the RBD allocation. Grantees must identify the entity(ies) that 
will own, operate, and maintain any levee or levee/breakwater system. 
Any levee or levee/breakwater system funded under the RBD allocation 
must be technically sound. The grantee must certify in its Action Plan 
Amendment that it, or the local authority assuming ownership of a 
levee, will take action to ensure the levee is certified and meets FEMA 
standards at 44 CFR 65.10 and is subsequently accredited by FEMA, which 
allows for floodmaps to be re-drawn accordingly.

7. Applicability of Prior Notice Requirements to RBD Projects

a. Infrastructure requirements of Prior Notices
    As a result of the RBD competition process, RBD Projects are 
considered as having met:
    (i) The definition of infrastructure projects and related 
infrastructure projects under Section VI.b.1 of the November 18, 2013 
Notice;
    (ii) The requirement for impact and unmet needs assessments and the 
comprehensive risk analysis under Section VI.c and VI.d of the November 
18, 2013 Notice;
    (iii) The process required for the selection and design of green 
infrastructure projects or activities under Section VI.f of the 
November 18, 2013 Notice; and
    (iv) The additional requirements for major infrastructure projects 
(``Covered Projects'') under Section VI.g of the November 18, 2013, 
Notice. However, the Initial RBD Action Plan Amendment as described in 
Section VI.6.a of this Notice must still include a description of how 
the grantee plans to monitor and evaluate the efficacy and 
sustainability of RBD Projects, and meet the resilience performance 
standards requirement as outlined at Section VI.2.e of the November 18, 
2013 Notice. Each RBD Project has been introduced to the Sandy Regional 
Infrastructure Resilience Coordination (SRIRC) Group. Grantees are 
expected to continue to work in consultation with SRIRC as this state 
and federal interagency group can help facilitate coordination of 
project scopes to best align and integrate with other recovery projects 
in the area. In addition, funded RBD Projects will be submitted to the 
Sandy Regional Team for Federal Review and Permitting for enhanced 
coordination that can expedite the implementation process, as provided 
for in Section VII.1 of the Notice published on November 18, 2013 (78 
FR 69104).
b. Eligible Activity
    Under the waiver and alternative requirements imposed by this 
Notice, RBD Projects are CDBG-eligible activities subject to a 
determination by the Department that the RBD Project remains as 
consistent with the selected RBD proposal as practicable and 
appropriate, and meets all other requirements in this Notice.
    HUD has previously provided for the eligibility of large complex 
projects that are composed of multiple activities that, in and of 
themselves, would be eligible and contribute to long-term recovery. The 
Department has determined that the projects resulting from the RBD 
process are a critical component of the region's long-term recovery and 
resilience to future weather events. To accomplish the initiative's 
stated intention, each grantee will fund additional strategic planning 
and public outreach followed by an RBD Project that successfully 
implements an initial phase of the design. At HUD's request, grantees 
have agreed that the RBD Projects will be implemented and contribute to 
their respective disaster recovery process. At this stage of 
development, it may be difficult for grantees to categorize RBD 
Projects into discrete categories of CDBG eligibility. HUD has 
determined that the activities that comprise the RBD Project, including 
the implementation case study and lessons learned document, are 
necessarily eligible CDBG activities under this Notice. Therefore, to 
streamline implementation of RBD Projects, HUD is providing an 
alternative requirement, as described in Section VII.4.c of this 
Notice, to create an eligible activity referred to as `Rebuild by 
Design,' to include all pre-development and construction activities 
carried out in accordance with identified RBD Projects referenced in 
this Notice. As a criterion for approval of an Action Plan Amendment 
containing an RBD Project, HUD must determine that the description of 
the RBD Project, as included in a grantee Action Plan, is consistent 
with the eligible activity described in this Notice. Grantees must 
consider any portion of their RBD allocations expended on planning and 
general administrative costs as planning and general administrative 
expenditures for purposes of calculating compliance with the 20 percent 
cap on planning and general administration costs and 5

[[Page 62190]]

percent cap on general administration costs of their total CDBG-DR 
grant (i.e., the sum total of all CDBG-DR funds received under the 
Appropriations Act) as outlined in the March 5, 2013 Notice.
c. National Objective Classification
    In the initial RBD Action Plan Amendment submitted in response to 
this Notice, as described in Section VI.6.a of this Notice, grantees 
must identify the CDBG national objective(s) associated with each RBD 
Project. Each RBD Project must meet the national objective requirements 
applicable to other CDBG-DR activities. Grantees may attribute a single 
national objective that covers the complete RBD Project activity; 
however grantees may also choose to categorize the project into 
multiple activities in order to distinguish and classify expenditures 
as benefiting low- and moderate-income populations, as a means of 
meeting the overall benefit requirement. Grantees must establish 
appropriate methods by which an RBD Project may be attributable to 
multiple national objectives through consultation with the Department. 
In addition, through the research and analysis conducted as part of the 
competition, RBD Projects have demonstrated an acceptable connection to 
recovery from the direct and indirect impacts of Hurricane Sandy.
d. Procurement of Consultants Supporting Project Design
    Grantees should ensure that individuals with a strong working 
knowledge of both the RBD Project to be implemented and the overall 
proposal are among the consultants hired to advance the project. Given 
the unique knowledge and understanding that each RBD design team 
possesses regarding their respective proposal, grantees should consider 
how it may procure design team members noncompetitively. The RBD design 
teams and their members represent a collection of some of the best 
planning, design, and engineering talent in the world as they were 
selected by the President's Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force out 
of a universe of 148 teams from more than 15 different countries. The 
teams also bring interdisciplinary expertise such as economists, 
sociologists, hydrologists, and climate scientists.
    If a grantee has adopted or is required to use 24 CFR part 85, the 
grantee is reminded of the provisions of 24 CFR 85.36, which set forth 
the conditions under which a grantee may engage in a non-competitive, 
single source procurement (Sec.  85.36(d)(4)). Grantees operating under 
part 85 are granted the authorization referenced under Sec.  85.36 
(d)(4)(i)(C) only regarding procurement of the design teams (or members 
of the design teams) that participated in the development of selected 
RBD proposals through the HUD-sponsored RBD competition. The grantee 
will be responsible for ensuring compliance with requirements that all 
costs be necessary and reasonable. (In many cases, this will entail the 
grantee undertaking a cost analysis prior to hiring consultants.) 
Grantees that have not adopted part 85 should review state or local 
requirements associated with single source procurement to ensure 
continued consistency with Sec.  85.36 and are advised to follow all 
applicable procurement requirements as well as those identified by HUD 
regulations and Notices.

VII. Applicable Rules, Statutes, Waivers, and Alternative Requirements

    This section of the Notice describes requirements imposed by the 
Appropriations Act, as well as applicable waivers and alternative 
requirements. For each waiver and alternative requirement described in 
this Notice, the Secretary has determined that good cause exists and 
the action is not inconsistent with the overall purpose of the HCD Act. 
The following requirements apply only to the CDBG-DR funds appropriated 
in the Appropriations Act.
    Grantees may request additional waivers and alternative 
requirements to address specific needs related to their recovery 
activities. Except where noted, waivers and alternative requirements 
described below apply to all grantees under this Notice. Under the 
requirements of the Appropriations Act, waivers are effective five days 
after publication in the Federal Register.

1. Incorporation of General Requirements, Waivers, Alternative 
Requirements, and Statutory Requirements Previously Described

    Grantees are advised that general requirements, waivers and 
alternative requirements provided for and subsequently clarified or 
modified in the Prior Notices, apply to all funds under this Notice, 
except as modified herein. These waivers and alternative requirements 
provide additional flexibility in program design and implementation to 
support resilient recovery following Hurricane Sandy, while also 
ensuring that statutory requirements unique to the Appropriations Act 
are met. Waivers or alternative requirements previously issued pursuant 
to specific grantee requests remain in effect under their terms.

2. Action Plan for Disaster Recovery Waiver and Alternative 
Requirements

    a. Infrastructure Programs and Projects. The infrastructure 
requirements described in in Section VI.2 of the Notice published on 
November 18, 2013 (78 FR 69106) apply to infrastructure programs and 
projects funded through the allocation provided by this Notice except 
as otherwise noted for RBD Projects in Section VI of this Notice. In 
evaluating infrastructure programs and projects included in a 
substantial Action Plan Amendment submitted in response to this Notice, 
HUD will assess the adequacy of a grantee's response to each of the 
elements outlined in Section VI.2 of the November 18, 2013 Notice or as 
qualified in this Notice regarding RBD Projects as a basis for the 
approval of the amendment. However, grantees need not resubmit 
responses to elements approved by HUD unless warranted by changing 
conditions or if project-specific analysis is required.
    b. Identification/Description of Covered Projects. For any Covered 
Project held to the requirements of the Notice published on November 
18, 2013, Section VI.2.g.1 of that Notice (``Action Plan for Disaster 
Recovery waiver and alternative requirement--Infrastructure Programs 
and Projects, Additional Requirements for Major Infrastructure 
Projects, Identification/Description''), as amended by the March 27, 
2014 Notice, is modified to require: A description of the Covered 
Project, including: total project cost estimate (illustrating both the 
CDBG-DR award as well as other federal resources for the project, such 
as funding provided by the Department of Transportation or FEMA), CDBG 
eligibility (i.e., a citation to the HCD Act, applicable Federal 
Register notice, or a CDBG regulation), how it will meet a national 
objective, and the project's connection to Hurricane Sandy or other 
disasters cited in this Notice. The Department recognizes that grantees 
often finance large scale infrastructure projects by leveraging several 
sources of funds that may shift over time. Therefore, the Department 
may elect to approve projects based on estimates of total project cost 
and of other funding sources as well as the CDBG-DR contribution 
amount. Grantees are expected to provide the best estimates available 
and the expected timeline for determining the exact costs. Grantees 
must submit an Action Plan Amendment to reflect any material 
adjustments to the cost estimate. As

[[Page 62191]]

described in Section VII.3 of this Notice, where an adjustment of the 
CDBG-DR contribution to a Covered Project triggers the substantial 
amendment criteria described in the March 5, 2013 Notice (78 FR 14329) 
at Section VI.A.3.a., grantees must submit a Substantial Action Plan 
Amendment subject to the requirements of the Notice, which requires no 
less than 7 calendar days to solicit public comment. The Covered 
Project itself is subject to the 30-day comment period and public 
hearing required by the November 18, 2013 Notice. However, HUD will 
consider resubmissions of Covered Projects submitted to HUD prior to 
the effective date of this Notice and revised in accordance with these 
amended requirements, subject to all non-substantial Action Plan 
Amendment requirements.
    c. Certification of proficient controls, processes and procedures. 
The Appropriations Act requires the Secretary to certify, in advance of 
signing a grant agreement, that the grantee has in place proficient 
financial controls and procurement processes and has established 
adequate procedures to prevent any duplication of benefits as defined 
by Section 312 of the Stafford Act, ensure timely expenditure of funds, 
maintain comprehensive Web sites regarding all disaster recovery 
activities assisted with these funds, detect and prevent waste, fraud, 
and abuse of funds. Grantees submitted documentation for the 
Secretary's certification pursuant to paragraph VI.E.42.q of the March 
5, 2013 Notice and updated them in accordance with 78 FR 691014 
(November 18, 2013). In any Action Plan Amendment submitted after the 
effective date of this Notice, grantees are required to identify any 
material changes in its processes or procedures that could potentially 
impact the Secretary's or the grantee's prior certification. Grantees 
are advised that HUD may revisit any prior certification based on a 
review of an Action Plan Amendment submitted for this allocation of 
funds, as well as monitoring reports, audits by HUD's Office of the 
Inspector General, citizen complaints or other sources of information. 
As a result of HUD's review, the grantee may be required to submit 
additional documentation or take appropriate actions to sustain the 
certification.
    d. Amending the Action Plan. Except as otherwise provided for in 
this Notice, Section VI.A.1.k at 78 FR 14337 of the March 5, 2013 
Notice is amended, as necessary, to require each grantee to submit a 
substantial Action Plan Amendment to HUD within 120 days of the 
effective date of this Notice. All Action Plan Amendments submitted 
after the effective date of this Notice must be prepared in accordance 
with the Prior Notices, as modified by this Notice. In addition, they 
must budget all, or a portion, of the funds allocated under this 
Notice. Grantees are reminded that an Action Plan may be amended one or 
more times until it describes uses for 100 percent of the grantee's 
CDBG-DR award. The last date that grantees may submit an Action Plan 
Amendment is June 1, 2017 given that HUD must obligate all CDBG-DR 
funds not later than September 30, 2017. The requirement to expend 
funds within two years of the date of obligation will be enforced 
relative to the activities funded under each obligation, as applicable.
    e. HUD Review/Approval. Consistent with the requirements of section 
105(c) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, HUD 
will reject or approve each grantee's substantial Action Plan Amendment 
within 60 days from the date of receipt. This timeframe allows HUD's 
federal partners to view the Amendment and provide feedback. The 
Secretary may disapprove an Amendment if it is determined that it does 
not meet the requirements of the Prior Notices, as amended by this 
Notice.
    f. Projection of expenditures and outcomes. Section VI.A.1.l. at 78 
FR 14337 of the March 5, 2013 Notice is amended, as necessary, to 
require each grantee to amend its Action Plan to update its projection 
of expenditures and outcomes within 90 days of its Action Plan 
Amendment approval. The projections must be based on each quarter's 
expected performance--beginning the quarter funds are available to the 
grantee and continuing each quarter until all funds are expended. 
Projections should include the entire amount allocated by this Notice. 
Amending the Action Plan to accommodate these changes is not considered 
a substantial amendment. Guidance on preparing the projections is 
available on HUD's Web site at: https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/communitydevelopment/programs/drsi/afwa.

3. Citizen Participation Waiver and Alternative Requirement

    78 FR 69104 (November 18, 2013) modified paragraph 3 at 78 FR 14338 
of the March 5, 2013 Notice to require grantees to publish substantial 
Action Plan Amendments for comment for 30 days prior to submission to 
HUD. Covered Projects are subject to the 30-day comment period and 
public hearing required by the November 18, 2013 Notice. However, as 
described in paragraph VII.2.b. of this Notice, this paragraph modifies 
paragraph 4 at 78 FR 69109 of the November 18, 2013 Notice by imposing 
a 7-day public comment period only when a grantee proposes adjustments 
of CDBG-DR contributions to a Covered Project that would trigger a 
substantial amendment by exceeding the $1 million threshold. Action 
Plan amendments must include full project descriptions for Covered 
Projects. Grantees are reminded of both the citizen participation 
requirements of that Notice and that HUD will monitor grantee 
compliance with those requirements and the alternative requirements of 
this Notice. Grantees are strongly encouraged to align citizen 
participation plan requirements with environmental review public 
participation processes to the fullest extent possible to gain 
efficiencies. Grantees are encouraged to conduct outreach to community 
groups, including those that serve minority populations, persons with 
limited English proficiency, and persons with disabilities, to 
encourage public attendance at the hearings and the submission of 
written comments concerning the Action Plan Amendment.
    The grantee must continue to make the Action Plan, any amendments, 
and all performance reports available to the public on its Web site and 
on request. The grantee must also make these documents available in a 
form accessible to persons with disabilities and persons of limited 
English proficiency, in accordance with the requirements of the March 
5, 2013 Notice. Grantees are also encouraged to conduct outreach to 
local nonprofit and civic organizations to disseminate draft 
substantial Action Plan Amendments for public comment. Until the grant 
is closed the grantee must provide citizens, affected local 
governments, and other interested parties with reasonable and timely 
access to information and records relating to the Action Plan and to 
the grantee's use of grant funds. This objective should be achieved 
through effective use of the grantee's comprehensive Web site mandated 
by the Appropriations Act.

4. Waivers and Alternative Requirements for Rebuild by Design 
Allocations

    a. Interim funding for RBD planning and RBD Project-related pre-
development costs. Without providing a waiver and alternative 
requirement, HUD would be required to make the RBD eligible activity 
determination

[[Page 62192]]

described in Section VI.7.b prior to a grantee's use of funds made 
available by the RBD Allocation for RBD Project pre-development costs. 
However, this eligibility determination will not be made until the 
grantee has completed the RBD Action Plan Amendment Process as 
described in Section VI.4. To ensure timely progress and prevent gaps 
in continuity regarding design development and community engagement for 
implementation of RBD Projects, HUD is providing this waiver and 
alternative requirement to permit grantees to temporarily reprogram 
CDBG-DR funds previously identified for planning in an Action Plan 
governing earlier CDBG-DR allocations under the Appropriations Act. 
This alternative requirement will allow grantees to move funds 
temporarily from planning activities for purposes of funding RBD 
Project planning and pre-development costs. In order to undertake this 
action, grantees must submit a non-substantial Action Plan Amendment to 
identify any amounts reprogrammed, with the exception of general 
planning activities that are eligible under 24 CFR 570.205 (including 
planning activities under 570.205 undertaken by states pursuant to the 
waiver for planning-only activities in the March 5, 2013 Notice), which 
would not require an amendment. Under the terms of this alternative 
requirement, when funds become available under the grantee's line of 
credit for the RBD Project, the grantee must set aside funds from the 
RBD allocation in the amount reprogrammed for the RBD Project under 
this alternative requirement for the original planning purpose for 
which these funds were designated. Use of existing CDBG-DR funding for 
RBD Project planning and pre-development activities is allowed for such 
expenditures incurred following the announcement of RBD allocations by 
the Secretary on May 30, 2014.
    b. Citizen participation waiver and alternative requirement--
Interim funding for RBD Project planning and pre-development costs. 
Modifications to a grantee's Action Plan to reflect the temporary 
reprogramming of funds for RBD Project planning and pre-development 
costs, as outlined in subparagraph a above, are not subject to the 
substantial amendment criteria described in the March 5, 2013 Notice 
(78 FR 14329); however, these modifications are subject to all non-
substantial Action Plan Amendment requirements.
    c. Rebuild by Design as an eligible CDBG activity. As described in 
Section VI.7.b of this Notice, the Department is waiving 42 U.S.C. 
5305(a) only to the extent necessary to create a new eligible activity, 
the `Rebuild by Design' eligible activity, that includes:
     RBD Pre-development and Construction Costs: This waiver 
and alternative requirement permits grantees receiving an RBD 
allocation to designate all necessary pre-development and construction 
costs carried out in accordance with the selected RBD proposal 
described in a HUD-approved Action Plan as an eligible activity; and
     RBD Implementation case study and lessons learned 
document: This waiver and alternative requirement allows grantees to 
classify costs expended on the preparation of the case study and 
lessons learned document required in Section VI of this Notice as 
eligible CDBG activity costs (not planning costs) of the `Rebuild by 
Design' eligible activity.

5. Reimbursement of Disaster Recovery Expenses

    In addition to pre-award requirements described in the March 5, 
2013 Notice, grantees are subject to HUD's guidance issued July 30, 
2013--``Guidance for Charging Pre-Award Costs of Homeowners, 
Businesses, and Other Qualifying Entities to CDBG Disaster Recovery 
Grants'' (CPD Notice 2013-05), as may be amended. The CPD Notice is 
available on the CPD Disaster Recovery Web site at: https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=cdbg_preaward_notice.pdf.

6. Duplication of Benefits

    Grantees are reminded that the March 5, 2013 Notice, at 78 FR 
14344, imposes a requirement that grantees, in administering grant 
funds, adhere to the guidance in the Federal Register Notice published 
November 16, 2011 (76 FR 71060), ``Guidance on Duplication of Benefit 
Requirements and Provision of CDBG-DR Assistance''. This requirement 
continues to apply to funds made available under this Notice. The 
Duplication of Benefits Notice is available on the CPD Disaster 
Recovery Web site at: https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/programoffices/administration/hudclips/notices/cpd

7. Eligibility of Needs Assessment and Comprehensive Risk Analysis 
Costs

    Grantees may use CDBG-DR funds to update their impact and unmet 
needs assessments as well as their comprehensive risk analyses for 
infrastructure projects as required by November 18, 2013 Notice, 
consistent with the overall 20 percent limitation on the use of funds 
for planning, management, and administrative costs.

VIII. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for the disaster 
recovery grants under this Notice is as follows: 14.269.

IX. Finding of No Significant Impact

    A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the 
environment has been made in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR 
part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). The FONSI is 
available for public inspection between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays in 
the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of 
Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, 
Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD 
Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the docket file 
must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-3055 
(this is not a toll-free number). Hearing or speech-impaired 
individuals may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free 
Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

    Dated: October 9, 2014.
Clifford Taffet,
General Deputy Assistant Secretary.

Appendix A--Allocation Methodology

May 2014 CDBG-DR Allocation Methodology

    This allocation is calculated based on relative share of needs 
HUD has estimated are required to rebuild to a higher standard 
consistent with CDBG program requirements and the goals set forth in 
the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Strategy. HUD's analysis shows that 
when calculating both unmet repair costs and resiliency needs, there 
is adequate funding allocated to address the critical housing and 
small business repair needs of each grantee, but grantees will 
continue to need to make careful choices about prioritizing the 
limited resources for those most impacted and distressed, most 
particularly in consideration of infrastructure and non-critical 
resiliency investments. In addition to ensuring adequate amounts of 
funds have been allocated for addressing critical housing and 
business needs, HUD has allocated funds estimated to support 
development of at least one phase of Sandy Rebuild by Design (RBD) 
award winning projects and one final project. This allocation 
methodology applies only to the formula allocation and not to the 
RBD allocation.
    HUD calculates the cost to rebuild the most impacted and 
distressed homes, businesses, and infrastructure back to pre-
disaster conditions. From this base calculation, HUD calculates both 
the amount not covered by insurance and other federal sources to 
rebuild back to pre-disaster conditions as

[[Page 62193]]

well as a ``resiliency'' amount which is calculated at 30 percent of 
the total basic cost to rebuild back the most distressed homes, 
businesses, and infrastructure to pre-disaster conditions. The 
estimated cost to repair unmet needs are combined with the 
resiliency needs to calculate the total severe unmet needs estimated 
to achieve long-term recovery. This calculation of housing, 
business, and infrastructure needs is used to determine the relative 
share of funding for this Sandy state allocation versus other 
eligible disasters of 2011, 2012, and 2013. Consistent with HUD's 
intent to prioritize critical housing and business needs with this 
final allocation, the formula sub-allocation among Sandy states is 
made proportional to the calculated severe unmet needs for estimated 
remaining housing and business needs (excluding infrastructure).

Statutory Language for the Allocation

    Public Law 113-2 (January 29, 2013) provides the following 
language on how the Secretary shall allocate the funds: ``For an 
additional amount for ``Community Development Fund'', 
$16,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017, for 
necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, 
restoration of infrastructure and housing, and economic 
revitalization in the most impacted and distressed areas resulting 
from a major disaster declared pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et 
seq.) due to Hurricane Sandy and other eligible events in calendar 
years 2011, 2012, and 2013, for activities authorized under title I 
of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 
et seq.): Provided, That funds shall be awarded directly to the 
State or unit of general local government as a grantee at the 
discretion of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development: 
Provided further, That the Secretary shall allocate to grantees not 
less than 33 percent of the funds provided under this heading within 
60 days after the enactment of this division based on the best 
available data:''

Available Data

    The ``best available'' data HUD staff have identified as being 
available to calculate unmet needs at this time for all disasters in 
2011, 2012, and 2013 meeting HUD's Most Impacted and Distressed 
threshold comes from the following data sources:
     FEMA Individual Assistance program data on housing unit 
damage;
     SBA for management of its disaster assistance loan 
program for housing repair and replacement;
     SBA for management of its disaster assistance loan 
program for business real estate repair and replacement as well as 
content loss; and
     FEMA Public Assistance, Department of Transportation 
Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration, 
Corps of Engineers, and US Department of Agriculture Emergency 
Watershed Restoration data on infrastructure
    These funds are only allocated toward disasters in 2011, 2012, 
and 2013 determined by HUD to be most impacted and distressed 
disasters.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For Hurricane Sandy, a most impacted disaster is any state 
that received a FEMA Individual Assistance declaration. For other 
disasters a Most Impacted disaster is a disaster where the severe 
housing and business unmet needs (excluding resiliency) exceed $25 
million from counties with greater than $10 million in unmet housing 
and business severe needs (excluding resiliency and area 
construction cost adjustment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calculating Unmet Housing Needs

    The core data on housing damage for both the unmet housing needs 
calculation and the concentrated damage are based on home inspection 
data for FEMA's Individual Assistance program (extracted January 
2014). For unmet housing needs, the FEMA data are supplemented by 
Small Business Administration data from its Disaster Loan Program 
(extracted January 2014). HUD calculates ``unmet housing needs'' as 
the number of housing units with unmet needs times the estimated 
cost to repair those units less repair funds already provided by 
FEMA, where:
     Each of the FEMA inspected owner units are categorized 
by HUD into one of five categories:
    [cir] Minor-Low: Less than $3,000 of FEMA inspected real 
property damage.
    [cir] Minor-High: $3,000 to $7,999 of FEMA inspected real 
property damage.
    [cir] Major-Low: $8,000 to $14,999 of FEMA inspected real 
property damage (if basement flooding only, damage categorization is 
capped at major-low).
    [cir] Major-High: $15,000 to $28,800 of FEMA inspected real 
property damage and/or 4 to 6 feet of flooding on the first floor.
    [cir] Severe: Greater than $28,800 of FEMA inspected real 
property damage or determined destroyed and/or 6 or more feet of 
flooding on the first floor.
    To meet the statutory requirement of ``most impacted and 
distressed'' in this legislative language, homes are determined to 
have a high level of damage if they have damage of ``major-low'' or 
higher. That is, they have a real property FEMA inspected damage of 
$8,000 or flooding over 4 foot. Furthermore, a homeowner is 
determined to have unmet needs if they have received a FEMA grant to 
make home repairs. For homeowners with a FEMA grant and insurance 
for the covered event, HUD assumes that the unmet need ``gap'' is 20 
percent of the difference between total damage and the FEMA grant.
     FEMA does not inspect rental units for real property 
damage so personal property damage is used as a proxy for unit 
damage. Each of the FEMA inspected renter units are categorized by 
HUD into one of five categories:
    [cir] Minor-Low: Less than $1,000 of FEMA inspected personal 
property damage.
    [cir] Minor-High: $1,000 to $1,999 of FEMA inspected personal 
property damage.
    [cir] Major-Low: $2,000 to $3,499 of FEMA inspected personal 
property damage (if basement flooding only, damage categorization is 
capped at major-low).
    [cir] Major-High: $3,500 to $7,499 of FEMA inspected personal 
property damage or 4 to 6 feet of flooding on the first floor.
    [cir] Severe: Greater than $7,500 of FEMA inspected personal 
property damage or determined destroyed and/or 6 or more feet of 
flooding on the first floor.
    For rental properties, to meet the statutory requirement of 
``most impacted and distressed'' in this legislative language, homes 
are determined to have a high level of damage if they have damage of 
``major-low'' or higher. That is, they have a FEMA personal property 
damage assessment of $2,000 or greater or flooding over 4 feet. 
Furthermore, landlords are presumed to have adequate insurance 
coverage unless the unit is occupied by a renter with income of 
$30,000 or less. Units are occupied by a tenant with income less 
than $30,000 are used to calculate likely unmet needs for affordable 
rental housing. For those units occupied by tenants with incomes 
under $30,000, HUD estimates unmet needs as 75 percent of the 
estimated repair cost.
     The median cost to fully repair a home for a specific 
disaster to code within each of the damage categories noted above is 
calculated using the average real property damage repair costs 
determined by the Small Business Administration for its disaster 
loan program for the subset of homes inspected by both SBA and FEMA. 
Because SBA is inspecting for full repair costs, it is presumed to 
reflect the full cost to repair the home, which is generally more 
than the FEMA estimates on the cost to make the home habitable. If 
fewer than 100 SBA inspections are made for homes within a FEMA 
damage category, the estimated damage amount in the category for 
that disaster has a cap applied at the 75th percentile of all 
damaged units for that category for all disasters and has a floor 
applied at the 25th percentile.

Calculating Unmet Infrastructure Needs

     To proxy unmet infrastructure needs, HUD uses data from 
FEMA's Public Assistance program on the state match requirement 
(extracted January 2014). This allocation uses only a subset of the 
Public Assistance damage estimates reflecting the categories of 
activities most likely to require CDBG funding above the Public 
Assistance and state match requirement. Those activities are 
categories: C-Roads and Bridges; D-Water Control Facilities; E-
Public Buildings; F-Public Utilities; and G-Recreational-Other. 
Categories A (Debris Removal) and B (Protective Measures) are 
largely expended immediately after a disaster and reflect interim 
recovery measures rather than the long-term recovery measures for 
which CDBG funds are generally used. Because Public Assistance 
damage estimates are available only statewide (and not county), CDBG 
funding allocated by the estimate of unmet infrastructure needs are 
sub-allocated to New York City from the New York State total based 
on the distribution of initial project-level estimates obtained from 
FEMA (69 percent New York City, 31 percent New York state). Note, 
that due to most states' large private electric utilities being 
ineligible for FEMA Public Assistance, HUD does not include the 
estimated repair costs for the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) in 
New York.

[[Page 62194]]

     For the third round of CDBG-DR funding for Sandy 
recovery, HUD includes four additional sources of information:
    1. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Infrastructure Resilience 
Coordination (extracted June 2013). Many USACE Sandy projects 
require very high local cost shares. However, Federal requirements 
only allow grantees to no more than $250,000 of CDBG-DR funding 
towards local match requirements for these projects. As such, this 
calculation only includes $250,000 per USACE project where local 
match is higher than that amount.
    2. DOT, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Sandy Recovery 
Grants--Emergency Relief (ER) (extracted June 2013). We include an 
estimate of the local cost share from this program. To calculate 
this estimate, we only include 20% of non-quick release Sandy ER 
project estimates as of July 2013.
    3. DOT, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Emergency 
Relief (ER) (extracted June 2013). We include the 10% local cost 
share for these transit projects. Note, since much of the New York 
City transit damage is owned by a state organization, the 
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York State receives the 
vast majority of need from this grant. Also note that the State of 
New Jersey receives 66% of the local match requirement from the Port 
Authority's match requirement; New York State receives 34% of the 
Authority's match requirement.
    4. USDA Emergency Watershed Repair Program (extracted May 2014). 
For most impacted disasters in 2011, 2012, and 2013 that have not 
received supplemental funding to address watershed repairs, HUD 
includes the estimated unmet repair costs calculated by USDA in the 
unmet repair needs calculation.

Calculating Economic Revitalization (Small Business) Needs

     Based on SBA disaster loans to businesses (extracted 
January 2014), HUD used the sum of real property and real content 
loss of small businesses not receiving an SBA disaster loan. This is 
adjusted upward by the proportion of applications that were received 
for a disaster that content and real property loss were not 
calculated because the applicant had inadequate credit or income. 
For example, if a state had 160 applications for assistance, 150 had 
calculated needs and 10 were denied in the pre-processing stage for 
not enough income or poor credit, the estimated unmet need 
calculation would be increased as (1 + 10/160) * calculated unmet 
real content loss.
     Because applications denied for poor credit or income 
are the most likely measure of needs requiring the type of 
assistance available with CDBG-DR funds, the calculated unmet 
business needs for each state are adjusted upwards by the proportion 
of total applications that were denied at the pre-process stage 
because of poor credit or inability to show repayment ability. 
Similar to housing, estimated damage is used to determine what unmet 
needs will be counted as severe unmet needs. Only properties with 
total real estate and content loss in excess of $30,000 are 
considered severe damage for purposes of identifying the most 
impacted and distressed areas.

[cir] Category 1: real estate + content loss = below $12,000
[cir] Category 2: real estate + content loss = $12,000 to $30,000
[cir] Category 3: real estate + content loss = $30,000 to $65,000
[cir] Category 4: real estate + content loss = $65,000 to $150,000
[cir] Category 5: real estate + content loss = above $150,000

    To obtain unmet business needs, the amount for approved SBA 
loans is subtracted out of the total estimated damage.

Resiliency Needs

    CDBG Disaster Recovery Funds are often used to not only support 
rebuilding to pre-storm conditions, but also to build back much 
stronger. For the disasters covered by this Notice, HUD has required 
that grantees use their funds in a way that results in rebuilding 
back stronger so that future disasters do less damage and recovery 
can happen faster. To calculate these resiliency costs, HUD 
multiplied it estimates of total repair costs for seriously damaged 
homes, small businesses, and infrastructure by 30 percent. Total 
repair costs are the repair costs including costs covered by 
insurance, SBA, FEMA, and other federal agencies. The resiliency 
estimate at 30 percent of damage is intended to reflect some of the 
unmet needs associated with building to higher standards such as 
elevating homes, voluntary buyouts, hardening, and other costs in 
excess of normal repair costs. Note that because FEMA Public 
Assistance does not include the estimated cost to repair Public 
Housing that is covered by private insurance, HUD adds to its 
resiliency calculation 30 percent times the insurance payment for 
Public Housing repairs.

Housing and Small Business Construction Cost Adjustment

    Prior to making this final allocation, HUD staff carefully 
reviewed the housing programs being operated by New York City and 
New Jersey. Out of this analysis came the observation that higher 
construction costs in New York and New Jersey were not being 
adequately accounted for in HUD's base formula for determining 
relative share of funding among the 2011, 2012, and 2013 disasters. 
As a result, for this allocation, HUD has increased its estimate of 
severe unmet housing and business repair and resiliency needs to 
account for these higher construction costs. To do this, HUD used 
the same Marshall & Swift regional cost adjustment multipliers used 
for HUD's annual calculation of Total Development Costs developed 
for HUD's public housing repair programs. The specific construction 
cost multiplier used for adjusting the above calculations of unmet 
housing and business needs for each grantee was as follows:

Connecticut: 1.19
Maryland: 1.00
New York State: 1.44
New York City: 1.45
New Jersey: 1.34
Rhode Island: 1.00

[FR Doc. 2014-24662 Filed 10-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P