![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Prohibition on Use of Community Development Block Grant Assistance for Job-Pirating Activities
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: May 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 100)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 30025-30027]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24my06-15]
[[Page 30026]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 570
[Docket No. FR-4556-F-03]
RIN 2506-AC04
Prohibition on Use of Community Development Block Grant
Assistance for Job-Pirating Activities
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and
Development, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 23, 2005, HUD published an interim rule
implementing certain statutory changes by revising HUD's regulations
for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Specifically,
the interim rule prohibited state and local governments from using CDBG
funds for ``job-pirating'' activities that are likely to result in
significant job loss. The rule also applied to section 108 loan
guarantees and the use of Brownfields Economic Development Initiative
and Economic Development Initiative funds with section 108 loan
guarantees and CDBG funding. This final rule follows publication of the
December 23, 2005, interim rule, and makes no changes at this final
rule stage.
DATES: Effective Date: June 23, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Kennedy, Office of Block Grant
Assistance, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh
Street, SW., Room 7286, Washington, DC 20410-7000, telephone (202) 708-
3587 (this is not a toll-free number).
In addition, program participants may contact their respective
program offices by calling the applicable telephone number listed below
(these telephone numbers are not toll-free).
For State CDBG, HUD-administered Small Cities, and Insular
recipients: Michael Sowell, Community Planning and Development
Specialist, State and Small Cities Division, (202) 708-1322.
For Entitlement Communities: Stan Gimont, Director, Entitlement
Communities Division, (202) 708-1577.
For Section 108 program participants: Paul Webster, Director,
Financial Management Division, (202) 708-1871.
For Economic Development Initiative (EDI) and Brownfields Economic
Development Initiative (BEDI) program participants: William Seedyke, EDI
and BEDI Program Coordinator, Grants Management Division, (202) 708-3484.
Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may access any of the
telephone numbers listed in this section by calling the Federal
Information Relay Service toll-free at (800) 877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42
U.S.C. 5301-5320) (1974 HCD Act) establishes the statutory framework
for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. HUD's
regulations implementing the CDBG program are located at 24 CFR part
570 (entitled ``Community Development Block Grants''). As used in this
final rule, the term ``CDBG funding'' or reference to CDBG programs
means, in addition to the Entitlement and State CDBG programs, those
programs covered by the part 570 regulations (e.g., section 108 loan
guarantees, the Economic Development Initiative, the Brownfields
Economic Development Initiative, HUD-administered Small Cities, and the
Insular CDBG program). This final rule does not apply to the Indian
CDBG program.
Section 105 of the 1974 HCD Act (42 U.S.C. 5305) was amended by
section 588 of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998
(QHWRA) (Title V of the Fiscal Year 1999 HUD Appropriations Act, Pub.
L. 105-276, approved October 21, 1998). Specifically, section 105 was
amended to add a subsection (h) entitled ``Prohibition on Use of
Assistance for Employment Relocation Activities.'' This subsection
prohibits the use of CDBG funds to facilitate the relocation of for-
profit businesses from one labor market area to another if the
relocation is likely to result in a significant job loss.
Subsection 105(h) provides as follows:
(h) Prohibition on Use of Assistance for Employment Relocation
Activities.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no amount
from a grant under section 106 made in fiscal year 1999 or any
succeeding fiscal year may be used to assist directly in the
relocation of any industrial or commercial plant, facility, or
operation, from [one]
area to another area, if the relocation is
likely to result in a significant loss of employment in the labor
market area from which the relocation occurs.
On October 24, 2000 (65 FR 63756), HUD published a proposed rule to
implement section 588 of QHWRA. The October 24, 2000, proposed rule
proposed to prohibit state and local governments from using CDBG funds
for job-pirating activities. Job pirating was defined as the act of one
community luring a business, and the jobs that would accompany it, from
another community that could have significant impact on the economic
viability of the latter community. HUD received 32 public comments on
the proposed rule.
On December 23, 2005 (70 FR 76362), HUD published an interim rule
that took into consideration the public comments received on the
proposed rule. In response to those public comments, the interim rule
made several changes to the proposed rule, including (1) the ``de
minimis'' job loss definition; (2) the state designation of applicable
Labor Market Area (LMA); (3) the time limits on anti-piracy
requirements; (4) the streamlining of reporting requirements; and (5)
the definition of ``directly assist.'' In addition, the interim rule
also provided the public with an additional opportunity to comment on
the regulatory job-pirating provisions in general and on changes made
to the rule based on the earlier comments.
II. This Final Rule
This final rule follows publication of the December 23, 2005,
interim rule, and takes into consideration public comments received on
the interim rule. HUD received one comment on the interim rule. After
careful consideration of the public comment, HUD has decided to adopt
the December 23, 2005, interim rule as final without change.
The public comment period for this interim rule closed on February
23, 2006. As noted, HUD received one public comment from a community
development commission. The commenter wrote that the interim rule
limits the ability of public entities and discourages private
businesses from fostering development through public/private
partnerships. Additionally, the commenter wrote that the definition of
Local Market Area (LMA) is not the most logical tool to use in
evaluating market area job loss, as LMAs can be various sizes and the
definition may not accurately account for a variety of market factors
and commuting patterns. Also, the commenter wrote that HUD should
explicitly exclude national and large retail operations from the rule's
provisions. The commenter stated that the nature of such retail
operations are driven by consumer patterns not likely associated with
market forces beyond the immediate proximity of the retail outlets. The
commenter also stated that job relocation is likely to be statistically
insignificant because the personnel for such operations are usually
hired from the area in which the outlet is located.
After careful consideration of the public comment, HUD has chosen
not to make any changes to the rule. HUD does not agree that the
interim rule, if implemented, would impede the public
[[Page 30027]]
and private sectors from partnering with each other. The rule's
principal function is to prohibit CDBG funds from directly assisting a
business in a relocation of its operations. CDBG funds may be used for
many other public-private partnership scenarios. Furthermore, HUD does
not agree that LMAs are not adequate tools to use in evaluating job
loss. As noted in the interim rule's preamble, LMAs include
Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and Metropolitan Divisions, which
both take into consideration commuting patterns. Lastly, HUD does not
agree that large, national retail operations should be excluded from
the rule. HUD already considered the impact that this rule would have
on these operations, and, as noted in the interim rule's preamble, HUD
made necessary adjustments to the interim rule. For example, the
commenter suggests that recordkeeping requirements would be onerous for
large retail operations. However, HUD considered this point and has
already streamlined the reporting requirements to only require a
certification submission.
III. Findings and Certifications
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements contained in this final
rule are currently approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under section 3504(h) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44
U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned OMB control number 2506-0077 for the
CDBG Entitlement program, and 2506-0085 for the State CDBG program. An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless the collection displays
a currently valid control number.
Environmental Impact
A Finding of No Significant Impact with respect to the environment
was made at the proposed rule stage and is applicable to this final
rule 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). The Finding of No Significant Impact is
available for public inspection between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
weekdays in the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW.,
Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking
requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
There are no anticompetitive discriminatory aspects of the rule with
regard to small entities and there are not any unusual procedures that
would need to be complied with by small entities. Additionally, HUD
received no comments on its December 23, 2005, interim rule on whether
uniform application of requirements on entities of differing sizes
often place a disproportionate burden on small businesses. Therefore,
the undersigned certifies that this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (entitled ``Federalism'') prohibits an agency
from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule
either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state and local
governments and is not required by statute, or the rule preempts state
law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements
of section 6 of the Order. This final rule does not have federalism
implications and would not impose substantial direct compliance costs
on state and local governments nor preempt state law within the meaning
of the Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for federal agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and
tribal governments and the private sector. This final rule does not
impose any federal mandates on any state, local, or tribal governments
or the private sector within the meaning of the UMRA.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) program numbers
for the programs covered by this final rule are as follows:
--Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants--14.218;
--Community Development Block Grants/State's program--14.228;
--Community Development Block Grants/Small Cities program--14.219;
--Community Development Block Grants/Brownfields Economic Development
Initiative--14.246;
--Community Development Block Grants/Section 108 Loan Guarantees--
14.248; and
--Community Development Block Grants/Special Purpose Grants/Insular
Areas--14.225.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 570
Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Community
development block grants, Grant programs--education, Grant programs--
housing and community development, Guam, Indians, Loan programs--
housing and community development, Low and moderate income housing,
Northern Mariana Islands, Pacific Islands Trust Territory, Puerto Rico,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Student aid, Virgin Islands.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, the interim rule
for part 570 of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations, adding
Sec. 570.210 and Sec. 570.482, and amending Sec. 570.200 and Sec.
570.506, is promulgated as final, without change.
Dated: May 16, 2006.
Pamela H. Patenaude,
Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development.
[FR Doc. 06-4796 Filed 5-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P