1981, and authority to continue existing coverage is extended to September 30, 1984. In addition, the requirement under prior law for submission to the Congress of the plan for liquidation and termination of both programs "on September 30, 1981, or as soon thereafter as possible" is modified so as to require submission of the plan on September 30, 1981, without qualification.

FLOOD INSURANCE EXTENSIONS

Authority to enter into new contracts for flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance program is extended for one year, through September 30, 1981. Authority to provide subsidized flood insurance under the so-called "emergency program" in communities which have adopted minimum flood plain management measures and for which the necessary actuarial rates and flood hazard elevation studies have not yet been accomplished, also is extended for 1 year, through September 30, 1981.

FLOOD INSURANCE STUDIES

The appropriation of not to exceed $74 million is authorized for fiscal year 1980 for flood insurance studies under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968.

TRANSFER OF FEDERAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATOR

The Urban Property Protection and Reinsurance Act of 1968 (title XI of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968) had established in the Department of Housing and Urban Development the position of Federal Insurance Administrator. The new law transfers this position to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The new law also modifies title V of the United States Code so that the position of Federal Insurance Administrator, in the Department of Housing and Urban Development, at level IV of the Executive Schedule, is transferred to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE

The managers on the part of the House and the Senate at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 3875) to amend and extend certain federal laws relating to housing, community and neighborhood development and preservation, and related programs, and for other purposes, submit the following joint statement to the House and the Senate in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the managers and recommended in the accompanying conference report:

The Senate amendment to the text of the bill struck out all of the House bill after the enacting clause and inserted a substitute text. The House recedes from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate with an amendment which is a substitute for the House bill and the Senate amendment. The differences between the House bill, and the Senate amendment, and the substitute agreed to in conference are noted below, except for clerical corrections, conforming changes made necessary by agreements reached by the conferees, and minor drafting and clarifying changes.

Authorization

TITLE I-COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

SECTION 312 REHABILITATION LOANS

The House bill contained a provision authorizing for appropriation for section 312 rehabilitation loans an amount not to exceed $150 million for fiscal year 1980. The Senate amendment contained a provision authorizing for appropriation an amount not to exceed $130 million for Fiscal Year 1980. The conference report contains the Senate provision amended to authorize for appropriation an amount not to exceed $140 million for Fiscal Year 1980.

Limitation on multi-family loans

The House bill contained a provision, not in the Senate amendment, limiting the amount that the Secretary may utilize after October 1, 1979, for rehabilitation loans for multi-family properties to $50 million. The conference report contains a provision limiting the amount that may be utilized for multi-family rehabilitation loans after October 1, 1979, to $75 million.

COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AUTHORIZATION

The House bill contained a provision authorizing for appropriation for comprehensive planning grants an amount not to exceed $45 million for Fiscal Year 1980. The Senate amendment contained a provision authorizing for appropriation an amount not to exceed $50 million. The conference report contains the Senate provision.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AMENDMENTS

CDBG metropolitan balances

The House bill contained a provision not contained in the Senate amendment increasing the CDBG setaside of funds for nonentitlement metropolitan communities from $250 million to $290 million in Fiscal 1980. The conference report contains the House provision reduced to $275 million.

This figure was adopted as a result of new information provided by HUD that such a level would keep the total funding for nonentitlement metropolitan communities at the level existing in Fiscal 1979. The conferees also direct the Secretary to utilize $10 million of the Secretary's discretionary fund under section 107 to offset the effects of the increase in the metropolitan balances setaside by transferring the $10 million into the basic grant portion of the program. It is not the intent of the conferees to designate which of the HUD budgeted eligible categories, under section 107, should be reduced to make up the $10 million.

Eligibility

The Senate amendment contained a provision which would have made local governments which are part of, but are not located entirely within the boundaries of an urban county, eligible for grants out of the CDBG metropolitan balances, on the condition that (1) the funds will be used in that part of the unit of local government for which the grant was made, and (2) the funds received by the urban county will not be used in that part of the unit of local government which is not located within the boundaries of the urban county.

The House bill did not contain a similar provision. The conference report includes the Senate provision amended to provide that in computing the amount of assistance with respect to any urban county, a unit of local government not entirely located within the urban county may be included, except if the unit of local government is included as part of any other unit of local government for the purpose of computing such assistance. Furthermore, any amount received by the urban county may be used in the area not located entirely within the urban county's boundaries.

Definition of unit of general local government

The House bill contained a provision not in the Senate amendment. redefining the term "unit of general local government" to also include the Northern Mariana Islands as eligible CDBG recipients. The conference report contains this provision.

Delegation of the environmental review authority

The House bill contained a provision that was not contained in the Senate amendment clarifying the authority of the Secretary to delegate to local governments his responsibility over the conduct of environmental reviews. The conference report contains the House. provision.

The conferees are aware that there has been some confusion over whether the Secretary has the authority to delegate such authority with regard to Acts other than the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Specifically, the conferees wish to make clear that delegations can also be made with regard to the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966, Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Flood Disaster Protection Act and Clean Air Act, as well as other Acts which further the purposes of the NEPA.

In clarifying the delegation of environmental review authority under the CDBG program, the conferees have been made aware that discussions are presently underway within the Administration regarding the procedural treatment of environmental matters in the UDAG program. The conferees expect HUD to assist in resolving outstanding issues regarding conformance of the UDAG program with the purposes and requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and other provisions of law which further the purposes of such Act. The conferees expect that the appropriate committees of Congress will be consulted on these discussions in advance of the reauthorizations of these programs during 1980.

URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANTS

Pockets of poverty A

Eligibility. The House bill contained a provision not contained in the Senate amendment which provided that a city or urban county may be considered severely distressed, and therefore, eligible for assistance under the UDAG program, if it contains one or more areas, as defined in the House provision, which have the levels of physical and economic distress set forth in the minimum standards. The conference report does not contain the House provision.

Direct benefit.-The House bill also contained a provision not in the Senate amendment which required that assistance received under the pockets of poverty be utilized for the direct benefit of the area or areas that have qualified for such assistance. The conference report does not contain this provision.

Comparable services.-The House bill, but not the Senate amendment, required the Secretary, before providing such assistance, to determine that the recipient will provide comparable services to the distressed areas commensurate with those provided to other parts of the cities. The conference report does not contain this provision.

Limitations and effective dates.-The House bill further provided! that the Secretary make up to 20 percent of the funds authorized for the UDAG program available for grants to cities eligible unde pockets of poverty; furthermore, that the provisions of pocket. of poverty assistance would become effective October 1, 1979. The coni... ence report does not contain these provisions.

Pockets of poverty B

Authority. The House bill contained a provision not incia the Senate amendment limiting assistance provided on the severely distressed areas to grants made under the pocket o provision. The conference report does not contain the House Eligible areas.-The House bill provided that grani section may be made only if determined by the Secretar, will only be utilized in an area (1) for a metropolita: county, that consists of one or more contiguous census san population of at least 10,000 persons or 10 percent o which ever is less; for a nonmetropolitan city, that more contiguous census tracts having a populatie.. €

57-343 0 - 80 - 6

persons or 10 percent of the population, whichever is greater, (2) in which at least 70 percent of the residents have incomes below 80 percent of the city or county's median income, and (3) in which at least 30 percent of the residents have incomes below the national poverty level. The Senate amendment contained a similar provision, except that (1) rather than defining a qualified area in terms of contiguous census tracts, any defined geographic vicinity could qualify if it meets the other eligibility requirements, and (2) rather than income requirements, the vicinity must meet minimum standards for determining distress to be established by the Secretary, which standards shall be based on such factors as percentage of poverty, condition of housing, and levels of unemployment within the area.

The conference report contains the House provision, with the amendment that specifies (1) that for cities with a population of 50,000 or greater or an urban county, qualified areas may be composed of one or more contiguous census tracts, enumeration districts or block groups as defined by the Bureau of Census which have at least a population of 10,000 persons or 10 percent of the population of the city or or urban county, whichever is less, and (2) that in the case of a city with a population of less than 50,000, that consists of one or more continguous census tracts, enumeration districts or block groups as defined by the Bureau of Census which have a population of at least 2,500 persons or 10 percent of the city's population, whichever is greater. The House provision was further amended to provide that the Secretary may waive the requirement that the grant only be utilized in connection with a project located in a qualified area where the Secretary determines (1) that there is no suitable site for the project within such area, (2) the project will be located directly adjacent to such area, and (3) the project will substantially contribute to the physical and economic development of such area.

The conferees wish to make clear that the Department should accept for purposes of determining the eligibility of an individual area data supplied by the locality and verified by the Bureau of the Census as to its accuracy, as well as information available from special census surveys and the 1970 census.

In addition, the conferees believe that in all but very rare instances, the project should be located within the area to be assisted. The UDAG program is intended not only to provide employment but to also provide the physical and economic stimulus to encourage further development in the area. Clearly this aim is best achieved when the project. is located directly in the area. The conferees believe, however, that there are limited circumstances in which a project could be funded if it were outside the area. Admittedly the conditions placed on the exception are strict. There must be no other suitable site in the area and the site chosen must be directly adjacent to the area. The project would also have to be shown to substantially contribute to the physical and economical development of the area even though it is located outside the area. These conditions are intended to assure that the assisted area receive the maximum possible benefit from the UDAG project. The conferees are also concerned that even though the project may be within the pocket it may not serve the development needs of the pocket. This could be the case where the pocket includes a portion of the central business district or an industrial park which have little rela