Displacement Plan for CDBG and HOME

Home

Federal Register / Vol. 54. No. 40 / Thursday. March 2. 1989 / Rules and Regulations 24.103(a) when the property value exceeds $2.500. Reply: That is not the intent of these sections. Under the appraisal waiver provisions of 1 24.102(c)(2), the utility company has the option of not making en appraisal if the value is estimated to be less than $2,500, and the valuation problem is simple and straight -forward. See the preamble discussion of that section for further information. Under the appraisal standards in 1 24.103(a). the utility company essentially determines its own appraisal documentation standards and polides. particularly with respect to acquisitions which do not require a detailed appraisal. The intent of this provision is to match the extent of the analysis and documentation to the complexity of the appraisal problem. In difficult. complex valuation situations, 124.103(1) requires preparation of a "detailed" appraisal. and specifies the minimum content of such appraisals. The minimum content specifications apply only to detailed appraisal reports. Several commenters missed this point Finally, there is no necessary connection between the $2,500 appraisal waiver ceiling. and the need to prepare a detailed appraisal report. The decision on when to secure a detailed appraisal lies primarily with the utility company. based on its assessment of the situation. 5. The regulation appears to require that we contract for the services of independent appraisers, even though we have well qualified appraisers on our staff. Reply: This 4m incorrect. The use of staff or outside personnel for appraisal work is entirely at the discretion of the utility company. The only policy which addresses this Issue is 1 24.103(d), which essentially states the appraiser must be qualified to perform the work. 8. The regulation appears to require that we give the owner s copy of the appraisal. which will hinder negotiations. Reply: The regulation does not require that the owner be given a copy of the appraisal. In some cases this Is a matter of State law, but In the typical situation it Is a negotiation policy decision at the discretion of the Agency. In 124.102(e), the owner is required to be given a written offer and summary statement which. in very brief terms, amounts to a description of what the offer la for. A utility company may wish to contact the State highway agency and obtain a copy of its summary statement form or format for use aa a guide. 7. These regulations are not sites.. ft use m inhalation es. many alternative locations available, and one of the owners will usually be happy to sell a satisfactory site. Reply: It was this kind of situation FHWA contemplated when it developed the valuntary transaction policy and criteria found at 124.i01(e)(1). If an acquisition meets the criteria, Subpart B requirements do not apply. 8. Section 24.102(}) regarding a deposit with the court is in conflict with our State law on various pointe. State law specifies a different place for the deposit. and is likewise specific on haw the amount of the deposit is to be determined. Reply: The provision comes from section 301.(4) of the Uniform Act. and. as noted above, is applicable to the greatest extent practicable under State law on federally assisted projects. If State law prescribes a different process there is no conflict because State eminent domain law prevails. See also 124.4(a) regarding assurances. 9. just compensation in our State is based on the before end after rule, rather than the take plus damage rule. if we were to appraise damages separately, u seems to be necessary under 124.103(aXS), the appraisal would not be admissable in court. Reply: The language in section 301(31 of the Uniform Act recognizes the differences from State law an what constitutes fust compensation. It was not FHWA intent to force a different appraisal process. This oversight has been corrected by the addition of "where appropriate" to 124.103(a)(5). 10. The requirement for a review appraisal in 124.104 should be deleted except for high value situations. Reply: FHWA has not adopted this recommendation because of the importance we place on the appraisal review function. The comment indicates there may be a misunderstanding. Section 24.104 does not require an appraisal by a reviewer (although the reviewer may choose to do so because of an inadequate appraisal report). Rather, this section is intended to require a review of the appraisal or appraisals on a property. The review is an essential part of the process of establishing the amount of the offer of just tion to be made to the owner.: simplistic terms, the reviewer checks for errors of fact. consistency of value from property to property. and general adequacy of the appraisal as a basis for the offer of just compensation. Where there is only one appraisal. the reviewer is that critical second party involved in lbsof ratting he amount of We o�The association with 124.4(c) eiganlingprevention of 8919 fraud waste. and mismanagement fie readily apparent. The reader la directed to the discussion under ( 24.104 in Appendix A for further information. As stated there. in low value, uncomplicated situation's a signature may suffice as the reviewer's statement The foregoing discussion of issues raised in the comments is intended to assist utility companies and others in the implementation of these regulations and to describe how the impact of these regulations on cooperatives will be limited. However. it is possible that there may be other questions that have not been answered. We encourage any further comments relating to the impact of this regulation on rural electric cooperatives. Any further comments on this subject will be considered and. if warranted the regulation will be upended and/or the discussion in the preamble will be supplemented. Most. if not all. Federal financial assistance for utility companies comes through the REA of the USDA. FHWA intends to work closely with Departmental officials in effecting smooth implementation. Section 24.102 Basic Acquisition Policies Section 24102(cX2). This section addresses waiver of appraisals. One comment said agencies should have the latitude to decide not to obtain an appraisal where property maybe donated without first obtalntng a release from the owner. The Agency has that discretion for the under 52,500 value category. A prior release is not necessary. However, the FHWA does not agree with extending that same policy to all donation situations. An owner may want an appraisal and an offer before making a decision to donate, and itis only fair to make the owner aware of this option. On the matter of establishing the dollar threshold at 52,500. four stated it was too high, seven said it was too low, and ten stated 52,500 was acceptable. FHWA has decided to retain the proposed threshold. A commenter raised the question of a review where no appraisal has been made. Other comments questioned how an Agency is going to know if an acquisition is worth less than 52.500 in the absence of an appraisal. Section 24.102f c)(2) contemplates that an informed judgment will be made by a qualified person. While iprudence suggests the-valuet is not a s�batian be in writing, andbelstained .,ys• rr.•�