The local mitigation plan is the
representation of the jurisdiction’s
commitment to reduce risks from
natural hazards, serving as a guide for
decision makers as they commit
resources to reducing the effects of
natural hazards. Local plans will also
serve as the basis for the State to
provide technical assistance and to
prioritize project funding.
(a) Plan requirement. (1) For disasters
declared after November 1, 2003, a local
government must have a mitigation plan
approved pursuant to this section in
order to receive HMGP project grants.
Until November 1, 2003, local
mitigation plans may be developed
concurrent with the implementation of
the project grant.
(2) Regional Directors may grant an
exception to the plan requirement in
extraordinary circumstances, such as in
a small and impoverished community,
when justification is provided. In these
cases, a plan will be completed within
12 months of the award of the project
grant. If a plan is not provided within
this timeframe, the project grant will be
terminated, and any costs incurred after
notice of grant’s termination will not be
reimbursed by FEMA.
(3) Multi-jurisdictional plans (e.g.
watershed plans) may be accepted, as
appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction
has participated in the process and has
officially adopted the plan. State-wide
plans will not be accepted as multijurisdictional plans. (b) Planning process. An open public
involvement process is essential to the
development of an effective plan. In
order to develop a more comprehensive
approach to reducing the effects of
natural disasters, the planning process
shall include:
(1) An opportunity for the public to
comment on the plan during the
drafting stage and prior to plan
approval;
(2) An opportunity for neighboring
communities, local and regional
agencies involved in hazard mitigation
activities, and agencies that have the
authority to regulate development, as
well as businesses, academia and other
private and non-profit interests to be
involved in the planning process; and
(3) Review and incorporation, if
appropriate, of existing plans, studies,
reports, and technical information.
(c) Plan content. The plan shall
include the following:
(1) Documentation of the planning
process used to develop the plan,
including how it was prepared, who
was involved in the process, and how
the public was involved.
(2) A risk assessment that provides
the factual basis for activities proposed
in the strategy to reduce losses from
identified hazards. Local risk
assessments must provide sufficient
information to enable the jurisdiction to
identify and prioritize appropriate
mitigation actions to reduce losses from
identified hazards. The risk assessment
shall include:
(i) A description of the type, location,
and extent of all natural hazards that
can affect the jurisdiction. The plan
shall include information on previous
occurrences of hazard events and on the
probability of future hazard events.
(ii) A description of the jurisdiction’s
vulnerability to the hazards described in
paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This
description shall include an overall
summary of each hazard and its impact
on the community. The plan should
describe vulnerability in terms of:
(A) The types and numbers of existing
and future buildings, infrastructure, and
critical facilities located in the
identified hazard areas;
(B) An estimate of the potential dollar
losses to vulnerable structures identified
in paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section
and a description of the methodology
used to prepare the estimate;
(C) Providing a general description of
land uses and development trends
within the community so that mitigation
options can be considered in future land
use decisions.
(iii) For multi-jurisdictional plans, the
risk assessment section must assess each
jurisdiction’s risks where they vary from
the risks facing the entire planning area.
(3) A mitigation strategy that provides
the jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing
the potential losses identified in the risk
assessment, based on existing
authorities, policies, programs and
resources, and its ability to expand on
and improve these existing tools. This
section shall include:
(i) A description of mitigation goals to
reduce or avoid long-term
vulnerabilities to the identified hazards.
(ii) A section that identifies and
analyzes a comprehensive range of
specific mitigation actions and projects
being considered to reduce the effects of
each hazard, with particular emphasis
on new and existing buildings and
infrastructure.
(iii) An action plan describing how
the actions identified in paragraph
(c)(2)(ii) of this section will be
prioritized, implemented, and
administered by the local jurisdiction.
Prioritization shall include a special
emphasis on the extent to which
benefits are maximized according to a
cost benefit review of the proposed
projects and their associated costs.
(iv) For multi-jurisdictional plans,
there must be identifiable action items
specific to the jurisdiction requesting
FEMA approval or credit of the plan.
(4) A plan maintenance process that
includes:
(i) A section describing the method
and schedule of monitoring, evaluating,
and updating the mitigation plan within
a five-year cycle.
(ii) A process by which local
governments incorporate the
requirements of the mitigation plan into
other planning mechanisms such as
comprehensive or capital improvement
plans, when appropriate.
(iii) Discussion on how the
community will continue public
participation in the plan maintenance
process.
(5) Documentation that the plan has
been formally adopted by the governing
body of the jurisdiction requesting
approval of the plan (e.g., City Council,
County Commissioner, Tribal Council).
For multi-jurisdictional plans, each
jurisdiction requesting approval of the
plan must document that it has been
formally adopted.
VerDate 11<MAY>2000 10:58 Feb 25, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26FER2.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 26FER2 DRAFT
8852 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations (d) Plan review. (1) Plans must be
submitted to the State Hazard Mitigation
Officer for initial review and
coordination. The State will then send
the plan to the appropriate FEMA
Regional Office for formal review and
approval.
(2) The Regional review will be
completed within 45 days after receipt
from the State, whenever possible.
(3) Plans must be reviewed, revised if
appropriate, and resubmitted for
approval within five years in order to
continue to be eligible for HMGP project
grant funding.
(4) Managing States that have been
approved under the criteria established
by FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c)
will be delegated approval authority for
local mitigation plans, and the review
will be based on the criteria in this part.
Managing States will review the plans
within 45 days of receipt of the plans,
whenever possible, and provide a copy
of the approved plans to the Regional
Office.
PART 206—FEDERAL DISASTER
ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTERS
DECLARED ON OR AFTER
NOVEMBER 23, 1988
2. The authority citation for part 206
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42
U.S.C. 5121–5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3
of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.,
p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979
Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3
CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54
FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214.
2a. Revise Part 206, Subpart M to read
as follows:
Subpart M—Minimum Standards
Sec.
206.400 General.
206.401 Local standards.
206.402 Compliance.
§ 206.400 General.
(a) As a condition of the receipt of any
disaster assistance under the Stafford
Act, the applicant shall carry out any
repair or construction to be financed
with the disaster assistance in
accordance with applicable standards of
safety, decency, and sanitation and in
conformity with applicable codes,
specifications and standards.
(b) Applicable codes, specifications,
and standards shall include any disaster
resistant building code that meets the
minimum requirements of the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as well
as being substantially equivalent to the
recommended provisions of the
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction
Program (NEHRP). In addition, the
applicant shall comply with any
requirements necessary in regards to
Executive Order 11988, Floodplain
Management, Executive Order 12699,
Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally
Assisted or Regulated New Building
Construction, and any other applicable
Executive orders.
(c) In situations where there are no
locally applicable standards of safety,
decency and sanitation, or where there
are no applicable local codes,
specifications and standards governing
repair or construction activities, or
where the Regional Director determines
that otherwise applicable codes,
specifications, and standards are
inadequate, then the Regional Director
may, after consultation with appropriate
State and local officials, require the use
of nationally applicable codes,
specifications, and standards, as well as
safe land use and construction practices
in the course of repair or construction
activities.
(d) The mitigation planning process
that is mandated by section 322 of the
Stafford Act and 44 CFR part 201 can
assist State and local governments in
determining where codes,
specifications, and standards are
inadequate, and may need to be
upgraded.
§ 206.401 Local standards.
The cost of repairing or constructing
a facility in conformity with minimum
codes, specifications and standards may
be eligible for reimbursement under
section 406 of the Stafford Act, as long
as such codes, specifications and
standards meet the criteria that are
listed at 44 CFR 206.226(b).
§ 206.402 Compliance.
A recipient of disaster assistance
under the Stafford Act must document
for the Regional Director its compliance
with this subpart following the
completion of any repair or construction
activities.
Subpart N—Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program
3. Revise § 206.431 to read as follows:
§ 206.431 Definitions.
Activity means any mitigation
measure, project, or action proposed to
reduce risk of future damage, hardship,
loss or suffering from disasters.
Applicant means a State agency, local
government, Indian tribal government,
or eligible private nonprofit
organization, submitting an application
to the grantee for assistance under the
HMGP.
Enhanced State Mitigation Plan is the
hazard mitigation plan approved under
44 CFR part 201 as a condition of
receiving increased funding under the
HMGP.
Grant application means the request
to FEMA for HMGP funding, as outlined
in § 206.436, by a State or tribal
government that will act as grantee.
Grant award means total of Federal
and non-Federal contributions to
complete the approved scope of work.
Grantee means the government to
which a grant is awarded and which is
accountable for the use of the funds
provided. The grantee is the entire legal
entity even if only a particular
component of the entity is designated in
the grant award document. Generally,
the State is the grantee. However, an
Indian tribal government may choose to
be a grantee, or it may act as a
subgrantee under the State. An Indian
tribal government acting as a grantee
will assume the responsibilities of a
‘‘state’’, under this subpart, for the
purposes of administering the grant.
Indian tribal government means any
Federally recognized governing body of
an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band,
nation, pueblo, village, or community
that the Secretary of Interior
acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe
under the Federally Recognized Tribe
List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. This
does not include Alaska Native
corporations, the ownership of which is
vested in private individuals.
Local Mitigation Plan is the hazard
mitigation plan required of a local or
Indian tribal government acting as a
subgrantee as a condition of receiving a
project subgrant under the HMGP as
outlined in 44 CFR 201.6.
Standard State Mitigation Plan is the
hazard mitigation plan approved under
44 CFR part 201, as a condition of
receiving Stafford Act assistance as
outlined in § 201.4.
State Administrative Plan for the
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program means
the plan developed by the State to
describe the procedures for
administration of the HMGP.
Subgrant means an award of financial
assistance under a grant by a grantee to
an eligible subgrantee.
Subgrant application means the
request to the grantee for HMGP funding
by the eligible subgrantee, as outlined in
§ 206.436.
Subgrantee means the government or
other legal entity to which a subgrant is
awarded and which is accountable to
the grantee for the use of the funds
provided. Subgrantees can be a State
agency, local government, private nonprofit organizations, or Indian tribal government as outlined in § 206.433.
VerDate 11<MAY>2000 17:00 Feb 25, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26FER2.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 26FER2 DRAFT
Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 8853 Indian tribal governments acting as a
subgrantee are accountable to the State
grantee.
4. Revise § 206.432(b) to read as
follows:
§ 206.432 Federal grant assistance.
* * * * *
(b) Amounts of assistance. The total of
Federal assistance under this subpart
shall not exceed either 15 or 20 percent
of the total estimated Federal assistance
(excluding administrative costs)
provided for a major disaster under 42
U.S.C. 5170b, 5172, 5173, 5174, 5177,
5178, 5183, and 5201 as follows:
(1) Fifteen (15) percent. Effective
November 1, 2003, a State with an
approved Standard State Mitigation
Plan, which meets the requirements
outlined in 44 CFR 201.4, shall be
eligible for assistance under the HMGP
not to exceed 15 percent of the total
estimated Federal assistance described
in this paragraph. Until that date,
existing, approved State Mitigation
Plans will be accepted.
(2) Twenty (20) percent. A State with
an approved Enhanced State Mitigation
Plan, in effect prior to the disaster
declaration, which meets the
requirements outlined in 44 CFR 201.5
shall be eligible for assistance under the
HMGP not to exceed 20 percent of the
total estimated Federal assistance
described in this paragraph.
(3) The estimates of Federal assistance
under this paragraph (b) shall be based
on the Regional Director’s estimate of all
eligible costs, actual grants, and
appropriate mission assignments.
* * * * *
5. Section 206.434 is amended by
redesignating paragraphs (b) through (g)
as paragraphs (c) through (h),
respectively; adding a new paragraph
(b); revising redesignated paragraphs (c)
introductory text and (c)(1); and revising
redesignated paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
§ 206.434 Eligibility.
* * * * *
(b) Plan requirement. (1) For all
disasters declared on or after November
1, 2003, local and tribal government
applicants for subgrants, must have an
approved local mitigation plan in
accordance with 44 CFR 201.6 prior to
receipt of HMGP subgrant funding.
Until November 1, 2003, local
mitigation plans may be developed
concurrent with the implementation of
subgrants.
(2) Regional Directors may grant an
exception to this requirement in
extraordinary circumstances, such as in
a small and impoverished community
when justification is provided. In these
cases, a plan will be completed within
12 months of the award of the project
grant. If a plan is not provided within
this timeframe, the project grant will be
terminated, and any costs incurred after
notice of grant’s termination will not be
reimbursed by FEMA.
(c) Minimum project criteria. To be
eligible for the Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program, a project must:
(1) Be in conformance with the State
Mitigation Plan and Local Mitigation
Plan approved under 44 CFR part 201;
* * * * *
(d) Eligible activities. (1) Planning. Up
to 7% of the State’s HMGP grant may be
used to develop State, tribal and/or local
mitigation plans to meet the planning
criteria outlined in 44 CFR part 201.
(2) Types of projects. Projects may be
of any nature that will result in
protection to public or private property.
Eligible projects include, but are not
limited to:
(i) Structural hazard control or
protection projects;
(ii) Construction activities that will
result in protection from hazards;
(iii) Retrofitting of facilities;
(iv) Property acquisition or relocation,
as defined in paragraph (e) of this
section;
(v) Development of State or local
mitigation standards;
(vi) Development of comprehensive
mitigation programs with
implementation as an essential
component;
(vii) Development or improvement of
warning systems.
* * * * *
6. Revise § 206.435(a) to read as
follows:
§ 206.435 Project identificaiton and
selection criteria.
(a) Identification. It is the State’s
responsibility to identify and select
eligible hazard mitigation projects. All
funded projects must be consistent with
the State Mitigation Plan. Hazard
Mitigation projects shall be identified
and prioritized through the State, Indian
tribal, and local planning process.
* * * * *
7. Revise § 206.436 to read as follows:
§ 206.436 Application procedures.
(a) General. This section describes the
procedures to be used by the grantee in
submitting an application for HMGP
funding. Under the HMGP, the State or
Indian tribal government is the grantee
and is responsible for processing
subgrants to applicants in accordance
with 44 CFR part 13 and this part 206.
Subgrantees are accountable to the
grantee.
(b) Governor’s Authorized
Representative. The Governor’s
Authorized Representative serves as the
grant administrator for all funds
provided under the Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program. The Governor’s
Authorized Representative’s
responsibilities as they pertain to
procedures outlined in this section
include providing technical advice and
assistance to eligible subgrantees, and
ensuring that all potential applicants are
aware of assistance available and
submission of those documents
necessary for grant award.
(c) Hazard mitigation application.
Upon identification of mitigation
measures, the State (Governor’s
Authorized Representative) will submit
its Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
application to the FEMA Regional
Director. The application will identify
one or more mitigation measures for
which funding is requested. The
application must include a Standard
Form (SF) 424, Application for Federal
Assistance, SF 424D, Assurances for
Construction Programs, if appropriate,
and an narrative statement. The
narrative statement will contain any
pertinent project management
information not included in the State’s
administrative plan for Hazard
Mitigation. The narrative statement will
also serve to identify the specific
mitigation measures for which funding
is requested. Information required for
each mitigation measure shall include
the following:
(1) Name of the subgrantee, if any;
(2) State or local contact for the
measure;
(3) Location of the project;
(4) Description of the measure;
(5) Cost estimate for the measure;
(6) Analysis of the measure’s costeffectiveness and substantial risk reduction, consistent with § 206.434(c);
(7) Work schedule;
(8) Justification for selection;
(9) Alternatives considered;
(10) Environmental information
consistent with 44 CFR part 9,
Floodplain Management and Protection
of Wetlands, and 44 CFR part 10,
Environmental Considerations.
(d) Application submission time limit.
The State’s application may be amended
as the State identifies and selects local
project applications to be funded. The
State must submit all local HMGP
applications and funding requests for
the purpose of identifying new projects
to the Regional Director within 12
months of the date of disaster
declaration.
(e) Extensions. The State may request
the Regional Director to extend the
application time limit by 30 to 90 day
VerDate 11<MAY>2000 17:00 Feb 25, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26FER2.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 26FER2 DRAFT
8854 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations increments, not to exceed a total of 180
days. The grantee must include a
justification in its request.
(f) FEMA approval. The application
and supplement(s) will be submitted to
the FEMA Regional Director for
approval. FEMA has final approval
authority for funding of all projects.
(g) Indian tribal grantees. Indian tribal
governments may submit a SF 424
directly to the Regional Director.
Subpart H—Public Assistance
Eligibility
* * * * *
8. Revise § 206.220 to read as follows:
§ 206.220 General.
This subpart provides policies and
procedures for determinations of
eligibility of applicants for public
assistance, eligibility of work, and
eligibility of costs for assistance under
sections 402, 403, 406, 407, 418, 419,
421(d), 502, and 503 of the Stafford Act.
Assistance under this subpart must also
conform to requirements of 44 CFR part
201, Mitigation Planning, and 44 CFR
part 206, subparts G—Public Assistance
Project Administration, I—Public
Assistance Insurance Requirements, J—
Coastal Barrier Resources Act, and M—
Minimum Standards. Regulations under
44 CFR part 9—Floodplain Management
and 44 CFR part 10—Environmental
Considerations, also apply to this
assistance.
9. Section 206.226 is amended by
redesignating paragraphs
(b) through (j) as paragraphs (c)
through (k), respectively; adding a new
paragraph (b); and revising redesignated
paragraph (g)(5) to read as follows:
§ 206.226 Restoration of damaged
facilities.
* * * * *
(b) Mitigation planning. In order to
receive assistance under this section, as
of November 1, 2003, the State must
have in place a FEMA approved State
Mitigation Plan in accordance with 44
CFR part 201.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(5) If relocation of a facility is not
feasible or cost effective, the Regional
Director shall disapprove Federal
funding for the original location when
he/she determines in accordance with
44 CFR parts 9, 10, 201, or subpart M
of this part 206, that restoration in the
original location is not allowed. In such
cases, an alternative project may be
applied for.
* * * * *
Dated: February 19, 2002.
Michael D. Brown,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 02–4321 Filed 2–25–02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718–05–P
VerDate 11<MAY>2000 10:58 Feb 25, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26FER2.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 26FER2 DRAFT
Hazard
Mitigation Assistance
Unified Guidance
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, and Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
July 12, 2013
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Department of Homeland Security
500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20472
DRAFT
Titles of Opportunities:
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program
Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)
Funding Opportunity Numbers:
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) numbers for the three Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) programs are:
97.039 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
97.047 Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program
97.029 Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)
Federal Agency Name:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Announcement Type:
Initial
DRAFT
CONTENTS
Part I. Funding Opportunity Description................................................................................... 1
A. Authorization and Appropriation........................................................................................ 2
B. Additional Program Information......................................................................................... 3
B.1 Programmatic Changes ..............................................................................................4
Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements .............................................. 9
A. Mitigation Planning .......................................................................................................... 11
B. Technical Feasibility and Effectiveness ............................................................................ 11
C. Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands ....................................................... 11
D. Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Review and Compliance.................. 12
E. Cost-effectiveness............................................................................................................. 12
F. Cost Review...................................................................................................................... 12
G. Project Development ......................................................................................................... 14
H. Advance Assistance .......................................................................................................... 14
I. Strategic Funds Management............................................................................................ 14
J. Project Monitoring............................................................................................................ 15
K. Closeout ............................................................................................................................ 15
Part III. Award Information...................................................................................................... 16
Part IV. Eligibility Information................................................................................................. 17
A. Eligible Applicants............................................................................................................ 17
A.1 Eligible Subapplicants..............................................................................................17
B. Cost Sharing...................................................................................................................... 18
B.1 Federal Funds Allowed to Be Used as Non-Federal Cost Share..............................20
B.2 Increased Cost of Compliance as Non-Federal Cost Share ......................................20
C. Restrictions ....................................................................................................................... 20
C.1 Non-Discrimination Compliance .............................................................................20
C.2 Conflict of Interest ...................................................................................................21
C.3 Duplication of Programs ..........................................................................................21
C.4 Duplication of Benefits ............................................................................................21
D. General Program Requirements ........................................................................................ 22
D.1 Eligible Activities.....................................................................................................22
D.1.1 Mitigation Projects ...................................................................................... 23
D.1.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning ........................................................................ 27
D.1.3 Management Costs ...................................................................................... 29
i
DRAFT
D.2 Ineligible Activities ..................................................................................................30
D.3 Cost-effectiveness ....................................................................................................31
D.4 Feasibility and Effectiveness....................................................................................32
D.5 Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirement .......................................................................32
D.5.1 Indian Tribal Government Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirement ............... 34
D.5.2 Conformance with Hazard Mitigation Plans............................................... 34
D.6 Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Requirement ............................34
D.6.1 Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands ................................. 35
D.7 National Flood Insurance Program Eligibility Requirements ..................................35
D.7.1 Special Flood Hazard Area Requirements .................................................. 36
D.8 Statutory, Regulatory, and Other Requirements ......................................................36
Part V. Application and Submission Information ................................................................... 38
A. Address to Request Application Package ......................................................................... 38
B. Content and Form of Application ..................................................................................... 38
C. Submission Dates and Times............................................................................................ 39
D. Intergovernmental Review ................................................................................................ 39
E. Funding Restrictions ......................................................................................................... 39
E.1 HMGP Funding Restrictions....................................................................................39
E.2 PDM Program Funding Restrictions ........................................................................40
E.3 FMA Funding Restrictions.......................................................................................40
E.4 Management Costs Funding Restrictions .................................................................40
F. Other Submission Requirements ....................................................................................... 41
F.1 Application Consideration under Multiple HMA Programs ....................................41
F.2 Pre-Award Costs ......................................................................................................41
G. Applicant Guidance .......................................................................................................... 41
G.1 General Applicant Guidance ....................................................................................41
G.2 Minimum Eligibility and Completeness Criteria .....................................................42
H. Scope of Work .................................................................................................................. 43
H.1 Project Scope of Work .............................................................................................43
H.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning Scope of Work ............................................................44
H.3 Management Costs Scope of Work ..........................................................................46
H.4 Schedule ...................................................................................................................46
H.5 Cost Estimate ............................................................................................................46
H.5.1 Project Cost Estimate .................................................................................. 47
H.5.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning Cost Estimate ................................................. 47
H.5.3 Management Cost Estimate ......................................................................... 48
I. Cost-effectiveness............................................................................................................. 48
ii
DRAFT
I.1 Substantial Damage Waiver .....................................................................................48
I.2 Aggregation..............................................................................................................49
I.3 5 Percent Initiative ...................................................................................................49
I.4 Pre-calculated Benefits (Safe rooms) .......................................................................49
I.5 Greatest Savings to the Fund ....................................................................................49
I.6 Environmental Benefits ............................................................................................49
I.7 Benefit-Cost Analysis Resources .............................................................................50
J. Feasibility and Effectiveness Documentation................................................................... 50
K. Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Documentation ................................ 51
Part VI. Application Review Information ................................................................................ 54
A. Review Criteria ................................................................................................................. 54
A.1 Application Review..................................................................................................54
A.2 Cost-effectiveness Review .......................................................................................54
A.3 Feasibility and Effectiveness Review ......................................................................54
A.4 Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Review ....................................55
A.5 HMA Efficiencies ....................................................................................................55
A.5.1 Safe Room Projects ..................................................................................... 55
A.5.2 Wind Retrofit Projects ................................................................................. 56
A.5.3 Certain Flood Mitigation Projects ............................................................... 56
B. Review and Selection Process .......................................................................................... 56
B.1 Technical Review.....................................................................................................56
B.2 Requests for Information ..........................................................................................56
B.2.1 Request for Information Timelines ............................................................. 57
B.3 Selection ...................................................................................................................59
B.4 Notification...............................................................................................................59
B.5 Reconsideration Process...........................................................................................59
B.5.1 Consideration of Additional Information .................................................... 60
Part VII. Award Administration Information ......................................................................... 61
A. Notice of Award................................................................................................................ 61
B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements ........................................................... 61
B.1 Cost-Share Documentation ......................................................................................61
B.2 Scope of Work Changes...........................................................................................62
B.3 Budget Changes........................................................................................................62
B.3.1 Non-construction Projects ........................................................................... 62
B.3.2 Construction Projects .................................................................................. 62
B.3.3 Cost Overruns and Underruns ..................................................................... 62
iii
DRAFT
B.4 Program Period of Performance...............................................................................63
B.4.1 Extensions ................................................................................................... 63
B.5 Requests for Advances and Reimbursements ..........................................................63
B.5.1 Strategic Funds Management ...................................................................... 64
B.6 Program Income .......................................................................................................64
B.7 Federal Income Tax on Mitigation Project Funds....................................................64
B.8 Noncompliance .........................................................................................................65
C. Reporting Requirements ................................................................................................... 65
C.1 Federal Financial Reports .........................................................................................65
C.2 Performance Reports ................................................................................................66
C.3 Final Reports ............................................................................................................67
D. Closeout ............................................................................................................................ 67
D.1 Subgrant Closeout ....................................................................................................67
D.2 Grant Closeout..........................................................................................................68
D.2.1 Update of Repetitive Loss Database ........................................................... 69
Part VIII. FEMA Contacts......................................................................................................... 71
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance.................................................................................... 72
A. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program .................................................................................... 72
A.1 Grantee Request for HMGP Funds ..........................................................................72
A.2 State Administrative Plan .........................................................................................72
A.2.1 Designation of Grantee and SHMO ............................................................ 73
A.2.2 Staffing Requirements and the Mitigation Team ........................................ 73
A.2.3 Procedures to Guide Implementation Activities ......................................... 74
A.2.4 Sliding Scale................................................................................................ 74
A.2.5 Management Costs ...................................................................................... 75
A.2.6 Submission and Approval Deadlines .......................................................... 75
A.3 HMGP Funding ........................................................................................................75
A.4 HMGP Management Costs .......................................................................................76
A.5 Eligible Subapplicants..............................................................................................77
A.6 Submission of HMGP Subapplications ....................................................................78
A.7 Grant Cost-share Requirements ...............................................................................78
A.8 Post-Disaster Code Enforcement Projects ................................................................79
A.9 Advance Assistance..................................................................................................80
A.10 Phased Projects.........................................................................................................82
A.10.1 Pre-Screening Process ................................................................................. 83
A.10.2 Phase I Conditional Approval ..................................................................... 83
iv
DRAFT
A.10.3 Phase II Approval-Construction Process..................................................... 84
A.11 The 5 Percent Initiative ............................................................................................84
A.11.1 Availability of Additional Funds for Tornado Mitigation........................... 85
A.12 Appeal Process .........................................................................................................85
B. Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program ...................................................................................... 87
B.1 Allocation .................................................................................................................87
B.2 Small Impoverished Communities ...........................................................................87
B.3 Information Dissemination .......................................................................................87
B.4 Applicant Ranking of Subapplications .....................................................................88
B.5 Selection ...................................................................................................................88
C. Flood Mitigation Assistance Program .............................................................................. 89
C.1 Eligible Properties ....................................................................................................89
C.2 Repetitive Loss Strategy ...........................................................................................89
C.3 Cost Sharing .............................................................................................................90
C.4 Applicant Ranking of Subapplications .....................................................................90
C.5 Selection ...................................................................................................................90
Part X. Appendices ..................................................................................................................... 92
A. Acronyms .......................................................................................................................... 92
B. Glossary ............................................................................................................................ 95
C. Additional Resources ...................................................................................................... 103
D. Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance ......................................... 107
E. Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Project Subapplications ................ 117
F. Safe Room Application Using Pre-Calculated Benefits ................................................. 120
G. Generator FAQ................................................................................................................ 125
H. Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Planning Subapplications ............. 133
I. EHP Checklist................................................................................................................. 135
J. 8-Step Decision Making Process for Floodplain Management Considerations ............. 137
K. Section 106 Process under the National Historic Preservation Act ................................ 138
L. Application for Advance Assistance............................................................................... 140
v
DRAFT
List of Figures
Figure 1: Overall Project Lifecycle ..................................................................................................9
Figure 2: General Steps in Project Scoping Process ......................................................................10
Figure 3: Frontloading EHP Considerations and the NEPA Process ............................................13
Figure 4: RFI Flowchart.................................................................................................................58
List of Tables
Table 1: Eligible Subapplicants .....................................................................................................18
Table 2: Cost-Share Requirements ................................................................................................19
Table 3: Eligible Activities by Program ........................................................................................23
Table 4: Green Open Space and Riparian Benefits .......................................................................50
Table 5: RFI Timelines ..................................................................................................................57
Table 6: FEMA Regions ................................................................................................................71
vi
DRAFT
PART I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
DESCRIPTION
Part I of the Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Unified Guidance introduces the three HMA programs and outlines the organization of the document.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) HMA programs present a critical opportunity to reduce the risk to individuals and property from natural hazards while simultaneously reducing reliance on Federal disaster funds.
On March 30, 2011, the President signed Presidential Policy Directive 8: National Preparedness (PPD-8), and the National Mitigation Framework was finalized in May 2013. The National Mitigation Framework comprises seven core capabilities, including Threats and Hazard Identification, Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment, Planning, Community Resilience, Public Information and Warning, Long-term Vulnerability Reduction, and Operational Coordination. HMA programs provide funding for eligible activities that are consistent with the National Mitigation Framework’s Long-term Vulnerability Reduction capability. HMA programs reduce community vulnerability to disasters and their effects, promote individual and community safety and resilience, and promote community vitality after an incident.
Furthermore, HMA programs reduce response and recovery resource requirements in the wake of a disaster or incident, which results in a safer community that is less reliant on external financial assistance.
Hazard mitigation is any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards and their effects. This definition distinguishes actions that have a long-term impact from those that are more closely associated with immediate preparedness, response, and recovery activities. Hazard mitigation is the only phase of emergency management specifically dedicated to breaking the cycle of damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. Accordingly, States, Territories, Indian Tribal governments, and communities are encouraged to take advantage of funding that HMA programs provide in both the pre- and post-disaster timelines.
Together, these programs provide significant opportunities to reduce or eliminate potential losses to State, Indian Tribal government, and local assets through hazard mitigation planning and project grant funding. Each HMA program was authorized by separate legislative action, and as such, each program differs slightly in scope and intent.
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) provides funds to States, Territories, Indian Tribal governments, local governments, and eligible private non-profits (PNPs) following a Presidential major disaster declaration. The Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) programs provide funds annually to States, Territories, Indian Tribal governments, and local governments. Although the statutory origins of the programs Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 1
DRAFT
differ, both share the common goal of reducing the risk of loss of life and property due to natural hazards.
This guidance applies to HMGP funds available for disasters declared on or after the date of publication. The guidance in this document is subject to change based on new laws or regulations enacted after publication. This guidance is applicable to the PDM and FMA programs; the application cycles are announced via http://www.grants.gov/. For additional information, please contact FEMA.
State, Territory, or Indian Tribal governments are eligible Applicants for HMA programs. The Applicant is responsible for soliciting subapplications from eligible subapplicants, assisting in the preparation of them, and submitting eligible, complete applications to FEMA in priority order. HMA grant funds are awarded to Applicants. When funding is awarded, the Applicant then becomes the “Grantee” and is accountable for the use of the funds, responsible for administering the grant, and responsible for complying with program requirements and other applicable Federal, State, Territorial, and Indian Tribal laws and regulations. As the Grantee, the Applicant is also responsible for financial management of the program and overseeing all approved projects. In general, the “subapplicant” is a State-level agency, Indian Tribal government, local government, or other eligible entity that submits a subapplication for FEMA assistance to the Applicant. If HMA funding is awarded, the subapplicant becomes the “subgrantee” and is responsible for managing the subgrant and complying with program requirements and other applicable Federal, State, Territorial, Indian Tribal, and local laws and regulations. An Indian Tribal government may participate as either the Applicant/Grantee or the subapplicant/subgrantee (see Part IV, A). For HMGP, “subapplicant” has the same meaning given to the term “Applicant” in the HMGP regulations at Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 206.431.
A. Authorization and Appropriation
HMGP is authorized by Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended (the Stafford Act), Title 42, U.S. Code (U.S.C.) 5170c. The key purpose of HMGP is to ensure that the opportunity to take critical mitigation measures to reduce the risk of loss of life and property from future disasters is not lost during the reconstruction process following a disaster. HMGP is available, when authorized under a Presidential major disaster declaration, in the areas of the State requested by the Governor. Indian Tribal governments may also submit a request for a major disaster declaration within their impacted area. The amount of HMGP funding available to the Applicant is based upon the estimated total of Federal assistance, subject to the sliding scale formula outlined in 44 CFR Section 206.432(b) that FEMA provides for disaster recovery under the Presidential major disaster declaration. The formula provides for up to 15 percent of the first $2 billion of estimated aggregate amounts of disaster assistance, up to 10 percent for amounts between $2 billion and $10 billion, and up to
7.5 percent for amounts between $10 billion and $35.333 billion. For States with enhanced Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 2
DRAFT
plans, the eligible assistance is up to 20 percent for estimated aggregate amounts of disaster assistance not to exceed $35.333 billion.
The PDM Program is authorized by Section 203 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5133. The PDM Program is designed to assist States, Territories, Indian Tribal governments, and local communities to implement a sustained pre-disaster natural hazard mitigation program to reduce overall risk to the population and structures from future hazard events, while also reducing reliance on Federal funding in future disasters.
The FMA program is authorized by Section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended (NFIA), 42 U.S.C. 4104c, with the goal of reducing or eliminating claims under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
The National Flood Insurance Fund (NFIF) provides the funding for the FMA program. The PDM and FMA programs are subject to the availability of appropriation funding, as well as any program-specific directive or restriction made with respect to such funds.
More information about each program can be found on the FEMA HMA Web site at https://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance.
B. Additional Program Information
This guidance consolidates the common requirements for all HMA programs and explains the unique elements of the programs in individual sections. Additionally, it provides information for Federal, State, Indian Tribal, and local officials on how to apply for HMA funding for a proposed mitigation activity.
The organization of this HMA Unified Guidance provides clarity and ease of use by presenting information common to all programs in general order of the grant life cycle. As a result, closely related topics may be presented in different sections of the guidance. This guidance is organized in the following manner:
Part I, Funding Opportunity Description, introduces the HMA programs; Part II, Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements, provides general information to facilitate project scoping and the overall decision-making process; Part III, Award Information, provides information about available funding and application deadlines;
Part IV, Eligibility Information, provides information about eligible Applicants and subapplicants, cost-sharing requirements, and other program requirements; Part V, Application and Submission Information, provides information regarding application development including funding restrictions; Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 3
DRAFT
Part VI, Application Review Information, summarizes the FEMA review and selection process;
Part VII, Award Administration Information, highlights grants management requirements from the time an award is made through closeout;
Part VIII, FEMA Contacts, provides Regional and State contact information; Part IX, Additional Program Guidance, provides information that is unique to each program; and
Part X, Appendices, includes acronyms, a glossary, additional resources, and referenced regulations and statutes.
Additional guidance for particular activity types is provided as an Addendum to this guidance. This additional guidance provides information specific to property acquisition and structure demolition or relocation, wildfire mitigation, safe room construction, mitigation reconstruction, and structure elevation projects.
B.1 Programmatic Changes
Although many of the specific requirements of each program remain the same, significant revisions to programmatic requirements included in this HMA Unified Guidance are:
Per the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 (SRIA), Indian Tribal governments can submit a request for a major disaster declaration within their impacted areas; A new Part II has been created to outline the importance of “frontloading” HMA program requirements in the project scoping and development process; The Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 eliminated the Repetitive Flood Claims and Severe Repetitive Loss programs and made the following significant changes to the FMA program:
The definitions of repetitive loss and severe repetitive loss properties have been modified (Part IX, C.1);
There is no longer a State cap of $10 million or a community cap of $3.3 million for any 5-year period;
There is no longer a limit on in-kind contributions for the non-Federal cost share (previously limited to one-half of the non-Federal share); Mitigation reconstruction is an eligible activity;
Cost-share requirements have changed to allow more Federal funds for properties with repetitive flood claims and severe repetitive loss properties (Part IV, B); Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 4
DRAFT
The development or update of mitigation plans shall not exceed $50,000 Federal share to any Applicant or $25,000 Federal share to any subapplicant (Part V, E.3); and There is no longer a restriction that a planning grant can only be awarded not more than once every 5 years to a State or community.
For Duplication of Benefits (DOB), HMA does not require that property owners seek assistance from other sources (with the exception of insurance); However, other assistance anticipated or received must be reported (Part IV, C.4). A Privacy Act notice is required to be provided to homeowners participating in mitigation projects;
For HMGP, the purchase and installation of stand-alone generators are eligible under regular HMGP funding if they protect a critical facility and meet all other program eligibility criteria (Part IV, D.1.1);
For HMGP and the PDM Program, generators and/or related equipment purchases (e.g., generator hook-ups) that are not stand-alone are considered eligible when the generator and related equipment directly relates to the hazard being mitigated and is part of a more comprehensive project (Part IV, D.1.1);
For non-structural retrofits, the elevation of utilities is an eligible activity (Part IV, D.1.1); FEMA Policy 104-008-01, “Hazard Mitigation Assistance for Wind Retrofit Projects for Existing Residential Buildings” dated November 16, 2012, has been incorporated (Part IV, D.1.1). With the release of this HMA Unified Guidance, the policy has been superseded; A mitigation planning subgrant award can result in a mitigation plan adopted by the jurisdiction(s) and approved by FEMA or it can also include planning-related activities as outlined in 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206 (Part IV, D.1.2);
FEMA Mitigation Planning Memorandum (MT-PL) #2 “Guidance For FEMA Regional Directors Regarding “Extraordinary Circumstances” under which an HMGP Project Grant may be awarded to Local Jurisdictions without an Approved Local Mitigation Plan” dated October 28, 2005, has been incorporated. With the release of this HMA Unified Guidance, the memo has been superseded;
For PDM and FMA project subgrants, the Region may apply extraordinary circumstances, when justification is provided, with concurrence received from FEMA Headquarters (Risk Reduction and Risk Analysis Divisions) prior to granting an exception (Part IV, D.5); For the PDM Program, the Federal share to update a hazard mitigation plan has been reduced to $300,000 (Part V, E.2);
Applications must contain minimal information in order for FEMA to be able to make a general eligibility determination (Part V, G.2);
Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 5
DRAFT
Applications or subapplications submitted to FEMA that do not contain the minimal eligibility criteria are subject to immediate denial (Part V, G.2); ♦ Greatest Savings to the Fund (GSTF) extends to properties under HMA (Part V, I); An expedited cost-effectiveness methodology (substantial damage waiver) is available for property acquisition projects when certain conditions are met under all HMA programs; this was previously limited to HMGP (Part V, I);
FEMA Policy 108-024-01, “Consideration of Environmental Benefits in the Evaluation of Acquisition Projects under the Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Programs” dated June 18, 2013, has been incorporated (Part V, I). With the release of this HMA Unified Guidance, this policy has been incorporated;
Green open space and riparian area benefits can now be included in the project benefit cost ratio (BCR) once the project BCR reaches 0.75 or greater. The inclusion of environmental benefits in the project BCR is limited to acquisition-related activities; FEMA recommends several HMA efficiencies to facilitate FEMA review and approval (Part VI, A.5);
FEMA provides timelines for Applicants to comply with requests for information (RFI) (Part VI, B.2.1);
FEMA clarifies the consideration of additional information in support of a subapplication (Part VI, B.5);
FEMA clarifies that requests for Scope of Work Changes must address the need for the change through a revised scope, schedule, and budget (Part VII, B.2); FEMA clarifies when prior FEMA approval is needed for a budget change (Part VII, B.3); With the publication of this HMA Unified Guidance, the Period of Performance (POP) for the programs begins with the opening of the application period and ends no later than 36 months from the close of the application period. All requests to extend the grant POP beyond 12 months from the original grant POP termination date must be approved by FEMA Headquarters (Part VII, B.4);
FEMA may elect to provide funding for certain projects in incremental amounts (Strategic Funds Management [SFM]) (Part VII, B.5.1);
The Grantee must notify FEMA of each property for which settlement was completed in that quarter (Part VII, C.2);
The HMGP final lock-in will be established 12 months after date of declaration. The final lock-in amount may be greater than or less than the previous calculations. Because the lock-in estimate is subject to change, FEMA will not obligate more than 75 percent of any estimate prior to the calculation of the final lock-in without concurrence of the Regional Administrator or Federal Coordinating Officer with Disaster Recovery Manager Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 6
DRAFT
Authority and the Office of Chief Financial Officer (Part IX, A.3); With the release of this guidance, Section 1104 of the SRIA is incorporated as Advance Assistance in (Part IX, A.9);
Advance Assistance can be used to accelerate the implementation of the HMGP.
Applicants may use Advance Assistance to develop mitigation strategies and obtain data to prioritize, select, and develop complete HMGP applications in a timely manner (Part IX, A.9);
For acquisition projects, clarifications were made regarding the purchase of vacant land, land already owned by an eligible entity, and outstanding tax liens (Addendum, Part A); FEMA will make a determination on the open space compatibility of access to a subsurface resource (e.g., mineral rights) on a case-by-case basis (Addendum, Part A); Acquisitions in Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS) units and Other Protected Areas (OPAs) are eligible under all HMA programs if the projects are otherwise eligible under the requirements in the 44 CFR and this guidance (Addendum, Part A); FEMA clarifies that the relevant event may vary under the HMA programs; however, premarket value or current market value can be used at the Applicant’s discretion for all HMA programs (Addendum, Part A);
In accordance with Section 203(a)(1) of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, the replacement housing allowance for homeowners may increase from $22,500 to $31,000 on October 1, 2014 (Addendum, Part A); With the release of this HMA Unified Guidance, certified clean is defined as a letter from the appropriate local, State, Indian Tribal, or Federal entity determining that no further remedial action is required to protect human health or the environment (Addendum, Part A);
FEMA Policy MRR-2-08-1, “Wildfire Mitigation Policy for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program,” dated September 8, 2008, has been incorporated. With the release of this HMA Unified Guidance, this policy has now been superseded (Addendum, Part B);
FEMA urges communities to implement wildfire projects using the materials and technologies that are in accordance with the International Code Council, FEMA, U.S. Fire Administration, and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Firewise recommendations, whenever applicable (Addendum, Part B); For wildfire projects, the application will include a narrative statement acknowledging the information required in the final operations and maintenance plan. The final operations and maintenance plans must be submitted to FEMA prior to project closeout (Addendum, Part B);
Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 7
DRAFT
FEMA Interim Policy MRR-2-09-1, “Hazard Mitigation Assistance for Safe Rooms,” dated April 30, 2009, and FEMA Memorandum, subject “Waiver of Two Provisions of Mitigation Interim Policy MRR-2-09-1, “Hazard Mitigation Assistance for Safe Rooms,” dated February 07, 2012, have been incorporated. With the release of this HMA Unified Guidance both policies are now superseded (Addendum, Part C); For safe room projects, costs associated with the acquisition of land for a community safe room are eligible costs (Addendum, Part C);
For safe room projects, FEMA will review final operations and maintenance plans during project closeout (Addendum, Part C); and
For safe room projects, costs associated with fire suppression sprinklers and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems are an eligible cost (Addendum, Part C).
Part I. Funding Opportunity Description 8
DRAFT
PART II. FRONTLOADING HMA PROGRAM
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
Part II provides general information on the importance of “frontloading” HMA Program eligibility requirements in the project scoping and the overall decision-making process. Project scoping and project development are two of the earliest steps in the overall project lifecycle (see Figure 1) and can have a significant impact on the course an application or subapplication takes through the HMA grant process.
Project scoping (as shown in Figure 2) is the process by which subapplicants develop effective mitigation alternatives based on a defined set of requirements that meet the stated purpose and need of the proposed project. Applicants are encouraged to include representatives of the whole community in planning and scoping the project to gain broad community participation and support.
The scoping process includes the identification and evaluation of technical feasibility, cost review, cost-effectiveness, and environmental and cultural resource considerations. Based on potential impacts to environmental and cultural resources, there may be a legal requirement to alter the project. The process results in the development of a preferred project alternative that is then documented through the preparation of the application or subapplication. Applicants and subapplicants should consider the whole range of program requirements at the beginning stages of project development. The incorporation of these considerations into the scoping process can increase the efficiency of program review and ensure that all HMA program requirements are addressed.
Figure 1: Overall Project Lifecycle
Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements 9 DRAFT
Figure 2: General Steps in Project Scoping Process
Addressing the following HMA program requirements at the earliest stage possible in the decision-making process is important because it can lead to enhanced project scoping as well as development and prevent delays later:
Mitigation Planning;
Technical Feasibility and Effectiveness;
Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands;
Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Review and Compliance; Cost-Effectiveness; and
Cost Review.
Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements 10 DRAFT
“Frontloading” of these requirements at the earliest point in the decision-making process increases the efficacy of the overall HMA Program. It also reduces the need for RFIs, which may result in quicker selections of projects for further review or approval. Additionally, early consideration of Advance Assistance, SFM, project monitoring, and project closeout in the decision-making process can facilitate the scoping and development of viable projects.
A. Mitigation Planning
Reviewing and incorporating information from the State, Indian Tribal, or local mitigation plan can help an Applicant or subapplicant facilitate the development of mitigation project alternatives. Linking the existing mitigation plan to project scoping can support the Applicant and the subapplicant in selecting the most appropriate mitigation activity that best addresses the identified hazard(s) while taking into account community priorities. In particular, the mitigation strategy section of the plan identifies a range of specific mitigation activities that can reduce vulnerability and includes information on the process that was used to identify, prioritize, and implement the range of mitigation actions considered. Another resource that may be useful in developing mitigation alternatives is the “Mitigation Ideas” guide available from the FEMA Library (see http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6938). It is important to reference the mitigation plan as potential project alternatives may have been considered during the planning process. If these alternatives were not considered during the mitigation planning process, please include this information in the next mitigation plan update. For more information on hazard mitigation planning, see Part IV, D.1.2 (eligible activities), Part V, H.2 (scope of work), Part V, H.5.2 (cost estimate), or Part X, C (additional resources).
B. Technical Feasibility and Effectiveness
Mitigation projects submitted for the HMA grants must be both feasible and effective at mitigating the risks of the hazard for which the project was designed. The feasibility of the project is demonstrated through conformance with accepted engineering practices, established codes, standards, modeling techniques, or best practices. Effective mitigation measures funded under HMA should provide a long-term or permanent solution. Consideration of technical feasibility and effectiveness during the project scoping process facilitates project development.
For more information on technical feasibility and effectiveness, see Part VI, A.3 (application review criteria), Part IV, D.4 (eligibility program requirements), or Part V, J (documentation).
C. Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands
HMA programs and grants must conform to 44 CFR Part 9, which incorporates the requirements of Executive Order (EO) 11988 (Floodplain Management) and EO 11990 (Protection of Wetlands). All proposed actions should be reviewed to determine if they are in the floodplain or a wetland. Any actions located in the 100-year floodplain (500-year for critical actions), or adversely increasing the base flood or adversely affecting a wetland, trigger the requirement to Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements 11 DRAFT
complete the 8-step decision-making process outlined in 44 CFR Section 9.6, see Part X, Appendix J. As part of that process, FEMA must consider alternative locations to determine whether the floodplain or wetland is the only practicable location for that action. If the floodplain or wetland is the only practicable location, FEMA must avoid or must minimize adverse impacts to the floodplain or wetland. For more information on floodplain management and the protection of wetlands, see Part IV, D.6.1 (general program requirements) and Part X, Appendix J (8-Step Decision Making Process for Floodplain Management Considerations).
D. Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Review and Compliance
HMA programs and grants must comply with all environmental and historic preservation (EHP) laws and with 44 CFR Part 10, which may include identifying alternate locations and, as necessary, modifying the project. See the EHP Checklist in Part X, Appendix I. Completion of this list is not a substitute for environmental compliance. The front-loading of EHP into the decision-making process allows for development of mitigation measures that reduce or eliminate the proposed project’s impact to the human environment; see Figure 3 for an overview of frontloading the EHP and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Moreover, compliance with all environmental laws and regulations is a condition of the grant. Two key considerations are whether the proposed project is located in an area that has endangered or threatened species or critical habitat and whether the proposed project might impact historic or cultural resources. If the project could result in adverse impacts to those resources, it might be necessary to change the scope of the project to avoid those impacts or incorporate mitigation measures to minimize the impacts to those resources. To determine whether any EHP issues may be associated with the proposed project, Applicants should review FEMA’s HMA EHP Resources At-a-Glance Guide, located at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6976. For more information on EHP, see Part IV, D.6 (general program requirements), Part V, K (documentation), and Part VI, A.4 (application review).
E. Cost-effectiveness
Mitigation activities are required by statute and regulation to be cost-effective or be in the interest of the NFIF. Consideration of the cost-effectiveness requirement at the earliest possible stage of the decision-making process can facilitate project scoping and improve project design.
For more information on cost-effectiveness, see Part IV, D.3 (general program requirements) and Part V, I (documentation).
F. Cost Review
All costs included in the subapplication should be reviewed to ensure that they are necessary, reasonable, and allocable consistent with the provisions of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87 and 2 CFR Part 225, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements 12 DRAFT
Figure 3: Frontloading EHP Considerations and the NEPA Process Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements 13 DRAFT
Governments. Conducting this cost review at the earliest possible stage allows for improved project scoping and facilitates project development, which facilitates FEMA project review.
G. Project Development
Project scoping is not a separate, stand-alone process from project development. It can be considered the initial stage of project development, during which the details of mitigation activities are evaluated and developed. State, Local, and Indian Tribal governments that actively participate in and document their project scoping process put themselves in a greater position for success during project development. The information gathered in the scoping process serves as the basis for the development of a more detailed and robust technical design, cost, and environmental compliance components of the mitigation activity.
During the project development process, the subapplicant may encounter project considerations such as technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and EHP that necessitate the refinement or adjustment of the mitigation activity. When these situations are encountered, the reason for the refinement or re-scoping should be fully documented and included with the subapplication.
H. Advance Assistance
Section 1104 of the SRIA authorizes the use of
Advance Assistance to accelerate the implementation
of the HMGP. Applicants may use Advance
Assistance to develop mitigation strategies and obtain
data to prioritize, select, and develop complete
HMGP applications in a timely manner. Using
Advance Assistance can help Applicants develop
eligible and complete applications that include a
feasible project budget and an appropriate project
milestone. See Part IX, A.9 for additional
information on Advance Assistance.
ADVANCE ASSISTANCE
Advance Assistance can be used to
develop mitigation strategies and
obtain data to prioritize, select, and
develop complete HMGP applications.
Consideration of Advance Assistance
early in the decision-making process
can help facilitate the development of
a viable project, as well as project
administration.
I. Strategic Funds Management
FEMA has implemented SFM. SFM, or
incremental funding, is the concept of fiscal
program management designed to provide funds
as they are needed to implement approved HMGP
activities. Through SFM, Applicant recovery and
preparedness, communication and partnership,
and the overall fiscal accuracy are expected to be improved. Considering SFM early in the decision-making process can help facilitate the development of a feasible project budget and
STRATEGIC FUNDS MANAGEMENT
SFM is a fiscal management approach
designed to provide funds to the Grantee as
needed to implement approved HMGP
activities.
Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements 14 DRAFT
appropriate project milestones. At the beginning of an SFM project, FEMA and the State will work together to develop a work schedule.
See Part VII, B.5.1 for additional information on SFM.
J. Project Monitoring
After a grant or subgrant is awarded, the Grantee and subgrantee are required to monitor and evaluate the progress of the mitigation activity in accordance with the:
Approved original scope of work (SOW) and budget;
Administrative requirements of 44 CFR Part 13; and
Any applicable State requirements.
Sound project monitoring improves the efficiency of the project implementation process and the obligation of funds process. The satisfactory use of quarterly reporting facilitates project management and allows the Grantee, subgrantee, and FEMA to monitor obligations and any unliquidated funds. For additional information on project monitoring (reporting requirements) see Part VII, C.
K. Closeout
Upon project completion, the Grantee and subgrantee are required to closeout the subgrant or grant in accordance 44 CFR Section 13.50 (Closeout). The project file should document that the:
Approved SOW was fully implemented;
All obligated funds were liquidated and in a manner consistent with the approved SOW; All environmental compliance measures or mitigations were implemented; The project was implemented in a manner consistent with the grant or subgrant agreement; Grantees submitted the required quarterly financial and performance reports; and The grant and subgrant were closed out in accordance with the provisions outlined in Part VII, C and D (subgrant and grant closeout).
For more information on closeout, see Part VII, D.
Part II. Frontloading HMA Program Eligibility Requirements 15 DRAFT
PART III. AWARD INFORMATION
Funding under HMA programs is subject to the availability of appropriations (as well as any directive or restriction made with respect to such funds in the law) and, for HMGP, to the amount of FEMA disaster recovery assistance under the Presidential major disaster declaration.
For additional information about available funding for HMGP, see Part IX, A.3; for the PDM Program, see Part IX, B.1; and for FMA, see Part IX, C.
Part III. Award Information 16
DRAFT
PART IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Part IV identifies common eligibility requirements for all HMA programs, such as eligible Applicants and subapplicants, cost-sharing requirements, restrictions on the use of HMA funds, activities that are eligible for HMA funding, and other program requirements. Additional program-specific requirements are found in Part IX of this guidance. Additional project-specific requirements can be found in the Addendum to this guidance. To be eligible for funding, Applicants and subapplicants must apply for funds as described in this guidance.
A. Eligible Applicants
Entities eligible to apply for HMA grants include the emergency management agency or a similar office of the 50 States (e.g., the office that has primary emergency management or floodplain management responsibility), the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Indian Tribal governments. Each State, Territory, Commonwealth, or Indian Tribal government shall designate one agency to serve as the Applicant for each HMA program. For the definition of the term Indian Tribal government refer to 44 CFR Section 206.431.
An Indian Tribal government may have the option to apply for HMA grants through the State as a subapplicant or directly to FEMA as an Applicant. The option for an Indian Tribal government to apply directly to FEMA reflects FEMA recognition that Indian Tribal governments are sovereign nations and share a government-to-government relationship with the United States.
This choice is independent of a designation under other FEMA grants and programs, but is not available on a project-by-project basis within a single grant program. If an Indian Tribal government chooses to apply directly to FEMA and is awarded the grant, it bears the full responsibility of a Grantee for the purposes of administering the grant. For plan requirements relevant to the options to apply as a subapplicant or an Applicant, see Part IV, D.5.1.
A.1 Eligible Subapplicants
All interested subapplicants must apply to the Applicant. Table 1 identifies, in general, eligible subapplicants. For specific details regarding eligible subapplicants, refer to 44 CFR Section 206.434(a) for HMGP and 44 CFR Section 79.6(a) for FMA. For HMGP and the PDM Program, see 44 CFR Section 206.2(a)(16) for a definition of local governments.
Individuals and businesses are not eligible to apply for HMA funds; however, an eligible Applicant or subapplicant may apply for funding on behalf of individuals and businesses. For additional information about the eligibility of PNPs for HMGP, see Part IX, A.5.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 17
DRAFT
Table 1: Eligible Subapplicants
Entity HMGP PDM FMA
State agencies √ √ √
Indian Tribal governments √ √ √
Local governments/communities √ √ √
Private non-profit organizations (PNPs) √
B. Cost Sharing
Under the HMA programs, the total cost to implement approved mitigation activities is generally funded by a combination of Federal and non-Federal sources. Both the Federal and the nonFederal cost shares must be for eligible costs used in direct support of the approved activities under this guidance and the grant award. Contributions of cash, third-party in-kind services, materials, or any combination thereof, may be accepted as part of the non-Federal cost share.
FEMA administers cost-sharing requirements consistent with 44 CFR Section 13.24 and 2 CFR Section 215.23. To meet cost-sharing requirements, the non-Federal contributions must be reasonable, allowable, allocable, and necessary under the grant program and must comply with all Federal requirements and regulations.
In general, HMA funds may be used to pay up to 75 percent of the eligible activity costs. The remaining 25 percent of eligible activity costs are derived from non-Federal sources. Exceptions to the 75 percent Federal and 25 percent non-Federal share (see Table 2) are as follows:
PDM Program – Small impoverished communities may be eligible for up to a 90 percent Federal cost share. For information about small impoverished communities, see Part IX, B.2.
FMA
FEMA may contribute up to 100 percent Federal cost share for severe repetitive loss properties or the expected savings to the NFIF for acquisition or relocation activities (the GSTF value for property acquisition may be offered to the property owner if the project is not cost-effective using pre-event or current market value); FEMA may contribute up to 90 percent Federal cost share for repetitive loss properties; and
FEMA may contribute up to 75 percent Federal cost share for NFIP-insured properties. Insular areas, including American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands – FEMA automatically waives the non-Federal cost share when the non-Federal cost share for the entire grant is under $200,000, not an individual subgrant. If the non-Federal cost share for the entire grant is $200,000 or Part IV. Eligibility Information 18
DRAFT
greater, FEMA may waive all or part of the cost share, such a waiver is usually consistent with that provided for Public Assistance under the disaster declaration. If FEMA does not waive the cost share, the insular area must pay the entire cost-share amount, not only the amount over $200,000.
Cost-share requirements also extend to management costs with the following exceptions:
For HMGP, available HMGP management costs are calculated as a percentage of the Federal funds provided. There is no additional cost-share requirement for management costs.
Under the PDM Program, only Indian Tribal Grantees meeting the definition of a small impoverished community are eligible for a non-Federal cost share of 10 percent for management costs.
See Part IX, A.7 for further information about HMGP cost-share requirements and Part V, E.4 for further information on funding restrictions for management costs.
HMA Federal funds, or funds used to meet HMA cost-share requirements, may not be used as a cost share for other Federal funds, for lobbying, or intervention in Federal regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings.
Table 2: Cost-Share Requirements
Programs Mitigation Activity
(Percent of Federal / NonFederal Share)
Grantee
Management Costs
(Percent of Federal / NonFederal Share)
Subgrantee
Management Costs
(Percent of Federal / NonFederal Share)
HMGP 75/25 100/0 –/–(1)
PDM 75/25 75/25 75/25
PDM – subgrantee is small
impoverished community
90/10 75/25 90/10
PDM – Tribal Grantee is
small impoverished
community
90/10 90/10 90/10
FMA – insured properties
and planning grants
75/25 75/25 75/25
FMA – repetitive loss
property(2)
90/10 90/10 90/10
FMA – severe repetitive loss
property(2)
100/0 100/0 100/0
(1) Subapplicants should consult their State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) for the amount or percentage of HMGP subgrantee management cost funding their State has determined to be passed through to subgrantees. (2) To be eligible for an increased Federal cost share a FEMA-approved State or Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan that addresses repetitive loss properties must be in effect at the time of grant award, and the property that is being submitted for consideration must be a repetitive loss property.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 19
DRAFT
B.1 Federal Funds Allowed to Be Used as Non-Federal Cost Share
In general, the non-Federal cost-share requirement may not be met with funds from other Federal agencies; however, authorizing statutes explicitly allow some Federal funds to be used as a cost share for other Federal grants. Federal funds that are used to meet a non-Federal cost-share requirement must meet the purpose and eligibility requirements of both the Federal source program and the HMA grant program.
B.2 Increased Cost of Compliance as Non-Federal Cost Share The NFIP Increased Cost of Compliance (ICC) claim payment from a flood event may be used to contribute to the non-Federal cost-share requirements so long as the claim is made within the timelines allowed by the NFIP. ICC payments can only be used for costs that are eligible for ICC benefits; for example, ICC cannot pay for property acquisition, but can pay for structure demolition or relocation. In addition, Federal funds cannot be provided where ICC funds are available; if the ICC payment exceeds the required non-Federal share, the Federal funding award will be reduced to the difference between the cost of the activity and the ICC payment.
If an ICC payment is being used as a subapplicant’s non-Federal cost share, the NFIP policyholder must assign the claim to the subapplicant. However, only that part of the ICC benefit that pertains to the property can be assigned to the subapplicant. The NFIP policyholder can only assign the ICC benefit to the subapplicant; in no case can the policyholder assign the ICC benefit to another individual. Steps for the assignment of ICC coverage are available at http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program/steps-assignment-coverage-d-increasedcost-compliance-coverage.
C. Restrictions
C.1 Non-Discrimination Compliance
In accordance with Section 308 of the Stafford Act and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, all HMA programs are administered in an equitable and impartial manner, without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, nationality, sex, age, disability, English proficiency, or economic status. In addition, Federal assistance distributed by State and local governments is to be implemented in compliance with all applicable laws.
Applicants and subapplicants must ensure that no discrimination is practiced. Applicants and subapplicants must consider fairness, equity, and equal access when prioritizing and selecting project subapplications to submit with their grant application. Subapplicants also must ensure fairness and equal access to property owners and individuals that benefit from mitigation activities.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 20
DRAFT
C.2 Conflict of Interest
Applicants and subapplicants must avoid conflicts of interest. Subapplicants must comply with the procurement guidelines at 44 CFR Section 13.36, which require subapplicants to avoid situations in which local officials with oversight authority might benefit financially from the grant disbursement. Applicants must comply with guidelines for awarding and administering subgrants as stated in 44 CFR Section 13.37.
C.3 Duplication of Programs
FEMA will not provide assistance for activities for which it determines the primary or more specific authority lies with another Federal agency or program. Other programs and authorities should be examined before applying for HMA funding. HMA funds are not intended to be used as a substitute for other available program authorities. Available program authorities include other FEMA programs (e.g., Individual Assistance and Public Assistance) and programs under other Federal agencies, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service. FEMA may disallow or recoup amounts that duplicate other authorities.
For additional information about Duplication of Programs for wildfire mitigation projects, see Addendum, Part B.2.
C.4 Duplication of Benefits
HMA funds cannot duplicate funds received by
or available to Applicants or subapplicants from
other sources for the same purpose. Examples of
other sources include insurance claims, other
assistance programs (including previous project
or planning grants and subgrants from HMA
programs), legal awards, or other benefits
associated with properties or damage that are
subject of litigation.
Because the availability of other sources of
mitigation grant or loan assistance is subject to
available information and the means of each
DUPLICATION OF BENEFITS
DOB is used to describe assistance that is
from more than one source and that is used
for the same purpose or activity. The
purpose may apply to the entire project or
only part of it.
DOB may apply when assistance for the
same purpose:
Has been received
Will be received
Is reasonably available from another
source, such as insurance or legal
settlements due to the property owners
individual Applicant, HMA does not require that property owners seek assistance from other sources (with the exception of insurance). However, it is the responsibility of the property owner to report other benefits received, any applications for other assistance, the availability of insurance proceeds, or the potential for other compensation, such as from pending legal claims for damages, relating to the property.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 21
DRAFT
Where the property owner has an insurance policy covering any loss to the property that relates to the proposed HMA project, the means are available for receiving compensation for a loss or, in the case of ICC, assistance toward a mitigation project. FEMA will generally require that the property owner file a claim prior to the receipt of HMA funds.
Information regarding other assistance received by properties in HMA projects may be shared under 5 U.S.C. 552a (b) of the Privacy Act of 1974. Uses may include sharing with custodians of property records, such as other Federal or other governmental agencies, insurance companies, or any public or private entity, for the purposes of ensuring that the property has not received money that is duplicative of any possible HMA grants received. When obtaining information from property owners about other sources of assistance, a Privacy Act statement must be distributed to each owner. For more information about the process of verifying potential duplication, access the HMA Tool for Identifying Duplication of Benefits at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6815 and for a copy of the Privacy Act statement (see Appendix F of that document).
For additional information on DOB for property acquisition and structure demolition or relocation projects, see Addendum Part A.11.4.
D. General Program Requirements
D.1 Eligible Activities
To be eligible, activities must meet all requirements referenced in this guidance. Eligible activities for HMA fall into the following categories:
Mitigation projects (all HMA programs);
Hazard mitigation planning (all HMA programs); and
Management costs (all HMA programs).
Table 3 summarizes eligible activities that may be funded by the HMA programs. Detailed descriptions of these activities follow the table in Part IV, D.1.1, D.1.2, and D.1.3.
The following activities are not eligible as stand-alone activities but are eligible when included as a functional component of eligible mitigation activities:
For the PDM Program, generators and/or related equipment purchases (e.g., generator hook-ups),when the generator directly relates to the hazards being mitigated and is part of a larger project;
Real property or easements purchases required for the completion of an eligible mitigation project; and
Studies that are integral to the development and implementation of mitigation project, including hydrologic and hydraulic, engineering, or drainage studies.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 22
DRAFT
Table 3: Eligible Activities by Program
Eligible Activities HMGP PDM FMA
1. Mitigation Projects √ √ √
Property Acquisition and Structure Demolition √ √ √
Property Acquisition and Structure Relocation √ √ √
Structure Elevation √ √ √
Mitigation Reconstruction √
Dry Floodproofing of Historic Residential Structures √ √ √ Dry Floodproofing of Non-residential Structures √ √ √
Minor Localized Flood Reduction Projects √ √ √
Structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings √ √
Non-structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings and Facilities √ √ √ Safe Room Construction √ √
Wind Retrofit for One- and Two-Family Residences √ √
Infrastructure Retrofit √ √ √
Soil Stabilization √ √ √
Wildfire Mitigation √ √
Post-Disaster Code Enforcement √
Generators √ √
5 Percent Initiative Projects √
Advance Assistance √
2. Hazard Mitigation Planning √ √ √
3. Management Costs √ √ √
Additional information regarding eligible projects for HMGP is included in Part IX, A.8 and A.9; and for FMA, see Part IX, C.1.
Costs for eligible activities must be reasonable, allowable, allocable, and necessary as required by 2 CFR Part 225, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments, 44 CFR Section 13.22, applicable program regulations, and this guidance.
D.1.1 Mitigation Projects
This section briefly describes the mitigation projects eligible under one or more of the three HMA programs. Table 3 summarizes the eligibility of the following project types for each program:
Property Acquisition and Structure Demolition – The voluntary acquisition of an existing at-risk structure and, typically, the underlying land, and conversion of the land to Part IV. Eligibility Information 23
DRAFT
open space through the demolition of the structure. The property must be deed-restricted in perpetuity to open space uses to restore and/or conserve the natural floodplain functions. For property acquisition and structure demolition projects, see Addendum, Part A.
Property Acquisition and Structure Relocation – The voluntary physical relocation of an existing structure to an area outside of a hazard-prone area, such as the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) or a regulatory erosion zone and, typically, the acquisition of the underlying land. Relocation must conform to all applicable State and local regulations.
The property must be deed-restricted in perpetuity to open space uses to restore and/or conserve the natural floodplain functions. For property acquisition and structure relocation projects, see Addendum, Part A.
Structure Elevation – Physically raising and/or retrofitting an existing structure to the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) or higher if required by FEMA or local ordinance. Elevation may be achieved through a variety of methods, including elevating on continuous foundation walls; elevating on open foundations, such as piles, piers, posts, or columns; and elevating on fill. Foundations must be designed to properly address all loads and be appropriately connected to the floor structure above, and utilities must be properly elevated as well. FEMA encourages Applicants and subapplicants to design all structure elevation projects in accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI) 24-05, Flood Resistant Design and Construction. For additional information about structure elevation projects, see Addendum, Part E. Mitigation Reconstruction – The construction of an improved, elevated building on the same site where an existing building and/or foundation has been partially or completely demolished or destroyed. Mitigation reconstruction is only permitted for structures outside of the regulatory floodway or coastal high hazard area (Zone V) as identified by the existing best available flood hazard data. Activities that result in the construction of new living space at or above the BFE will only be considered when consistent with the mitigation reconstruction requirements.
Dry Floodproofing – Techniques applied to keep structures dry by sealing the structure to keep floodwaters out. For all dry floodproofing activities, FEMA encourages Applicants and subapplicants to design all dry floodproofing projects in accordance with ASCE/SEI 24-05.
Dry Floodproofing of Historic Residential Structures is permissible only when other techniques that would mitigate to the BFE would cause the structure to lose its status as a Historic Structure, as defined in 44 CFR Section 59.1. Dry Floodproofing of Non-residential Structures must be performed in accordance with NFIP Technical Bulletin (TB) 3-93, Non-Residential Floodproofing— Part IV. Eligibility Information 24
DRAFT
Requirements and Certification, and the requirements pertaining to dry floodproofing of non-residential structures found in 44 CFR Sections 60.3(b)(5) and (c)(4). Generators – Generators are emergency
equipment that provide a secondary
source of power. Generators and related
equipment (e.g., hook-ups) are eligible
provided that they are cost-effective,
contribute to a long-term solution to the
problem they are intended to address, and
meet other program eligibility criteria.
PDM Program: Generators and/or
related equipment purchases (e.g.,
generator hook-ups) are eligible when
the generator directly relates to the
hazards being mitigated and is part of
a larger project.
HMGP: A permanently installed
generator that is a stand-alone project
GENERATORS
Stand-alone generators and related
equipment (e.g., generator hook-ups) are
eligible under the 5 Percent Initiative.
Stand-alone generators (including related
equipment) are eligible for regular HMGP
funding if the generator protects a critical
facility and meets all other program
eligibility criteria.
Generators (including related equipment)
that constitute a functional portion of an
otherwise eligible mitigation measure are
eligible for HMGP and PDM Program
funding.
Portable generators are eligible for HMGP
regular funding and the 5 Percent Initiative
if they meet all HMGP requirements as
described in 44 CFR Section 206.434.
can be considered under regular HMGP funding if the generator protects a critical facility. Critical facilities may include police and fire stations, hospitals, and water and sewer treatment facilities. A generator that is a component of a larger project (e.g., elevation of a lift station) can also be funded under regular HMGP funding and the use of aggregation is permitted. Portable generators are eligible provided that they meet all HMGP requirements as described in 44 CFR Section 206.434. Stand-alone generator projects that cannot be determined cost-effective via standard HMA benefitcost methodology may be eligible under the 5 Percent Initiative. See Part IX, A.10 for additional information about the 5 Percent Initiative.
For additional information on generators please see the Frequently Asked Questions for Generators in Part X, Appendix G.
HMA funds are not available as a substitute for emergency, temporary, or partial solutions under the Stafford Act Section 403, Essential Assistance (42 U.S.C. 5170b) and/or the Stafford Act, Title VI Emergency Preparedness (42 U.S.C. 5195). Minor Localized Flood Reduction Projects – Projects to lessen the frequency or severity of flooding and decrease predicted flood damages, such as the installation or modification of culverts, and stormwater management activities, such as creating retention and detention basins. These projects must not duplicate the flood prevention activities of other Federal agencies and may not constitute a section of a larger flood control system.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 25
DRAFT
Under the FMA program, minor localized flood reduction projects should benefit NFIP-insured properties. Projects will be prioritized based on the number of NFIP insured properties included in the project. Projects that do not include NFIP-insured properties will not be considered for funding. Documentation must be provided in the subapplication to verify the NFIP insurance requirement, which includes flood insurance policy and property locator numbers as appropriate. Structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings – Modifications to the structural elements of a building to reduce or eliminate the risk of future damage and to protect inhabitants.
The structural elements of a building that are essential to protect to prevent damage include foundations, load-bearing walls, beams, columns, building envelope, structural floors and roofs, and the connections between these elements. Non-structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings and Facilities – Modifications to the non-structural elements of a building or facility to reduce or eliminate the risk of future damage and to protect inhabitants. Non-structural retrofits may include bracing of building contents to prevent earthquake damage or the elevation of utilities. Safe Room Construction – Safe room construction projects are designed to provide immediate life-safety protection for people in public and private structures from tornado and severe wind events, including hurricanes. For HMA, the term “safe room” only applies to extreme wind (combined tornado and hurricane) residential, non-residential, and community safe rooms; tornado community safe rooms; and hurricane community safe rooms. This type of project includes retrofits of existing facilities or new safe room construction projects, and applies to both single and dual-use facilities. For additional information, see Addendum, Part C.
Wind retrofit projects – Wind retrofit projects of one and two-family residential buildings must be designed in conformance with the design criteria found in the Wind Retrofit Guide for Residential Buildings (FEMA P-804) published December 2010. This document is available in the FEMA Library at
http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4569.
Infrastructure Retrofit – Measures to reduce risk to existing utility systems, roads, and bridges.
Soil Stabilization – Projects to reduce risk to structures or infrastructure from erosion and landslides, including installing geotextiles, stabilizing sod, installing vegetative buffer strips, preserving mature vegetation, decreasing slope angles, and stabilizing with rip rap and other means of slope anchoring. These projects must not duplicate the activities of other Federal agencies.
Wildfire Mitigation – Projects to mitigate at-risk structures and associated loss of life from the threat of future wildfire through:
Part IV. Eligibility Information 26
DRAFT
Defensible Space for Wildfire – Projects creating perimeters around homes, structures, and critical facilities through the removal or reduction of flammable vegetation. For additional information, see Addendum, Part B.3.1. Application of Ignition-resistant Construction – Projects that apply ignitionresistant techniques and/or non-combustible materials on new and existing homes, structures, and critical facilities. For additional information, see Addendum, Part B.3.2.
Hazardous Fuels Reduction – Projects that remove vegetative fuels proximate to atrisk structures that, if ignited, pose significant threat to human life and property, especially critical facilities. For additional information, see Addendum, Part B.3.3. Post-Disaster Code Enforcement – Projects designed to support the post-disaster rebuilding effort by ensuring that sufficient expertise is on hand to ensure appropriate codes and standards, including NFIP local ordinance requirements, are used and enforced.
For additional information, see Part IX, A.8.
Advance Assistance – Section 1104 of the SRIA authorizes the use of Advance Assistance to accelerate the implementation of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).
Applicants may use Advance Assistance to develop mitigation strategies and obtain data to prioritize, select and develop complete HMGP applications in a timely manner. See Part IX, A.9 for additional information on Advance Assistance. 5 Percent Initiative Projects – These projects, which are only available pursuant to an HMGP disaster, provide an opportunity to fund mitigation actions that are consistent with the goals and objectives of the State or Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) and local mitigation plans and meet all HMGP program requirements, but for which it may be difficult to conduct a standard Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) to prove cost-effectiveness.
For additional information, see Part IX, A.10.
D.1.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning
Mitigation plans are the foundation for effective hazard mitigation. A mitigation plan is a demonstration of the commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards and serves as a strategic guide for decision-makers as they commit resources.
The mitigation planning process includes hazard
identification and risk assessment leading to the
development of a comprehensive mitigation strategy
for reducing risks to life and property. The mitigation strategy section of the plan identifies a range of
MITIGATION PLANNINGRELATED ACTIVITIES
Planning activities can include assessing
risk and updating the mitigation strategy to
reflect current disaster recovery goals.
specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce risks to new and existing buildings and infrastructure. This section includes an action plan describing how identified mitigation activities will be prioritized, implemented, and administered.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 27
DRAFT
Planning activities funded under HMA are designed to develop State, Indian Tribal, and local mitigation plans that meet the planning requirements outlined in 44 CFR Part 201. A mitigation planning subgrant award must result in a mitigation plan adopted by the jurisdiction(s) and approved by FEMA or it must result in a planning related activity approved by FEMA (e.g., incorporating new data into the Risk Assessment, or updating the Mitigation Strategy to reflect current disaster recovery goals) consistent with the requirements in 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206.
For FMA, funds shall only be used to support the flood hazard portion of State, Indian Tribal, or local mitigation plans to meet the criteria specified in 44 CFR Part 201. Funds are only available to support these activities in communities participating in the NFIP.
For links to mitigation planning and risk assessment resources, see Part X, C.2.
D.1.2.1 Eligible Hazard Mitigation Planning-Related Activities Eligible activities include but are not limited to:
Update or enhance sections of the current FEMA-approved mitigation plan, such as:
Risk and vulnerability assessment based on new information, including supporting studies, such as economic analyses;
Mitigation strategy, specifically strengthening the linkage to mitigation action implementation, with emphasis on available HMA project grant funding; or Incorporate climate adaptation, green building, or smart growth principles into the risk assessment and/or mitigation strategy.
Integrate information from mitigation plans, specifically risk assessment or mitigation strategies, with other planning efforts, such as:
Disaster recovery strategy (pre- or post), preparedness, or response plans; Comprehensive (e.g., land use, master) plans;
Capital improvement or economic development plans;
Resource management / conservation plans (i.e., storm water, open space); or Other long-term community planning initiatives (i.e., transportation or housing). Building capability through delivery of technical assistance and training. Evaluation of adoption and/or implementation of ordinances that reduce risk and/or increase resilience.
D.1.2.2 Ineligible Hazard Mitigation Planning-Related Activities The following is a list of activities considered ineligible as “stand alone” planning-related activities:
Part IV. Eligibility Information 28
DRAFT
Hazard identification or mapping and related equipment for the implementation of mitigation activities (eligible under 5 Percent Initiative); Geographic Information System (GIS) software, hardware, and data acquisition whose primary aim is mitigation (eligible under 5 Percent Initiative); Public awareness or education campaigns about mitigation (eligible under 5 Percent Initiative);
Project scoping or development (also referred to as “project planning”), such as BCA, engineering feasibility studies, application development, construction design, or EHP data collection; and
Activities not resulting in a clearly defined product or product(s).
D.1.3 Management Costs
Management costs are any indirect costs and administrative expenses that are reasonably incurred by a Grantee or subgrantee in administering a grant or subgrant award.
Eligible Applicant or subapplicant management cost activities may include:
Solicitation, review, and processing of subapplications and subgrant awards; Subapplication development and technical assistance to subapplicants regarding feasibility and effectiveness, BCA, and EHP documentation;
Geocoding mitigation projects identified for further review by FEMA; Delivery of technical assistance (e.g., plan reviews, planning workshops, training) to support the implementation of mitigation activities;
Managing grants (e.g., quarterly reporting, closeout); Technical monitoring (e.g., site visits, technical meetings); Purchase of equipment, per diem and travel expenses, and professional development that is directly related to the implementation of HMA programs; and Staff salary costs directly related to performing the activities listed above.
Management costs are only awarded in conjunction with project or planning grants and subgrants. For more information regarding management costs for HMGP, see Part IX, A.4. For the PDM Program and FMA, FEMA may provide up to 25 percent of the Applicant’s anticipated management costs, upon the award and final approval of the first subgrant. The remaining management costs will be obligated as additional subgrants are awarded.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 29
DRAFT
D.2 Ineligible Activities
The following list provides examples of activities that are not eligible for HMA funding:
Projects that do not reduce the risk to people, structures, or infrastructure; Projects that are dependent on a contingent action in order to be effective and/or feasible (i.e., not a stand-alone mitigation project that solves a problem independently or constitutes a functional portion of a solution);
Projects with the sole purpose of open space acquisition of unimproved land; Projects for which actual physical work such as groundbreaking, demolition, or construction of a raised foundation has occurred prior to award or final approval. Projects for which demolition and debris removal related to structures proposed for acquisition or mitigation reconstruction has already occurred may be eligible when such activities were initiated or completed under the FEMA Public Assistance program to alleviate a health or safety hazard as a result of a disaster;
Projects that involve land that is contaminated with hazardous waste; Projects for preparedness activities or temporary measures (e.g., sandbags, bladders, geotubes);
Projects that create revolving loan funds;
Activities required as a result of negligence or intentional actions, or those intended to remedy a code violation, or the reimbursement of legal obligations such as those imposed by a legal settlement, court order, or State law;
FEMA may, at its discretion, choose not to fund projects subject to ongoing litigation if such litigation may affect eligibility of the project or may substantially delay implementation of the project;
All projects located in a CBRS Unit or in OPAs, other than property acquisition and structure demolition or relocation projects for open space under HMA. For details on property acquisition and structure demolition or relocation projects for open space within a CBRS Unit or OPAs see Addendum, Part A.2;
Activities on Federal lands or associated with facilities owned by another Federal entity; Major flood control projects related to the construction, demolition, or repair of dams, dikes, levees, floodwalls, seawalls, groins, jetties, breakwaters, and erosion projects related to beach nourishment or re-nourishment;
Projects for hazardous fuels reduction in excess of 2 miles from structures; Projects that address unmet needs from a disaster that are not related to mitigation; Part IV. Eligibility Information 30
DRAFT
Retrofitting facilities primarily used for religious purposes, such as places of worship (or other projects that solely benefit religious organizations). However, a place of worship may be included in a property acquisition and structure demolition or relocation project provided that the project benefits the entire community, such as when the whole neighborhood or community is being removed from the hazard area; Activities that only address manmade hazards;
Projects that address, without an increase in the level of protection, operation, deferred or future maintenance, repairs, or replacement of existing structures, facilities, or infrastructure (e.g., dredging, debris removal, replacement of obsolete utility systems, bridges, and facility repair/rehabilitation);
Projects for the purpose of:
Landscaping for ornamentation (e.g., trees, shrubs);
Site remediation of hazardous materials (with the exception eligible activities, such as the abatement of asbestos and/or lead-based paint and the removal of household hazardous wastes to an approved landfill);
Water quality infrastructure;
Projects that primarily address ecological or agricultural issues; Forest management;
Prescribed burning or clear-cutting;
Creation and maintenance of fire breaks, access roads, or staging areas; Irrigation systems;
Studies not directly related to the design and implementation of a proposed mitigation project; and
Preparedness measures and response equipment (e.g., response training, electronic evacuation road signs, interoperable communications equipment).
All projects must also comply with any additional project-specific guidance provided in the Addendum.
D.3 Cost-effectiveness
Mitigation program authorizing statutes (Flood Mitigation Assistance at 42 U.S.C. 4104c, PreDisaster Hazard Mitigation at 42 U.S.C. 5133, and Hazard Mitigation at 42 U.S.C. 5170c) require that FEMA provide funding for mitigation measures that are cost-effective or are in the interest of the NFIF. FEMA has specified minimum project criteria via regulation (44 CFR Part 79 and 44 CFR Section 206.434), including that Applicants must demonstrate mitigation projects are cost-effective. The determination of cost-effectiveness is performed in a variety of ways. It Part IV. Eligibility Information 31
DRAFT
is typically demonstrated by the calculation of a BCR, dividing total annualized project benefits by total annualized project cost. Projects where benefits exceed costs are generally considered cost-effective (see Part V, I and Part VI, A.2 for additional information).
D.4 Feasibility and Effectiveness
Mitigation projects funded by HMA must be both feasible and effective at mitigating the risks of the hazard(s) for which the project was designed. A project’s feasibility is demonstrated through conformance with accepted engineering practices, established codes, standards, modeling techniques, or best practices. Effective mitigation measures funded under HMA provide a longterm or permanent solution to a risk from a natural hazard.
For additional information about the feasibility and effectiveness requirement for mitigation reconstruction projects, see the Addendum, Part D.3; for additional feasibility and effectiveness resources, see Part X, C.5.
D.5 Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirement
In accordance with 44 CFR Part 201, all
Applicants for the PDM Program and FMA
must have a FEMA-approved State or Tribal
(Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan by the
application deadline and at the time of
obligation of the grant funds. The only
exception is for a subapplication for a State or
Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced)
Mitigation Plan. In addition, all subapplicants
for the PDM Program and FMA mitigation
projects must have a FEMA-approved local or
Indian Tribal mitigation plan by the application
deadline and at the time of obligation of grant
funds. There is no local or Indian Tribal
EXTRAORDINARY
CIRCUMSTANCES EXCEPTION
For HMGP project subgrants, the Regional
Administrator may grant an exception to a
local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan
requirement in extraordinary circumstances
when justification is provided.
For the PDM Program and FMA project
subgrants, the Region may apply
extraordinary circumstances when
justification is provided and with concurrence
from FEMA Headquarters (Risk Reduction
and Risk Analysis Divisions) before granting
an exception.
mitigation plan requirement for any HMA
program for a planning subgrant.
Applicants for HMGP funding must have a FEMA-approved State or Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan at the time of the disaster declaration and at the time HMGP funding is obligated to the Grantee to receive an HMGP award. For HMGP project subgrants, the Regional Administrator may grant an exception to the local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan requirement in extraordinary circumstances, when justification is provided. If this exception is granted, a local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan must be approved by FEMA within 12 months of the award of the project subgrant to that community.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 32
DRAFT
For PDM and FMA project subgrants, the Region may apply extraordinary circumstances when justification is provided and with concurrence from FEMA Headquarters (Risk Reduction and Risk Analysis Divisions) prior to granting an exception. If this exception is granted, a local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan must be approved by FEMA within 12 months of the award of the project subgrant to that community.
For HMGP, the PDM Program, and FMA, extraordinary circumstances exist when a determination is made by the Applicant and FEMA that the proposed project is consistent with the priorities and strategies identified in the State or Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan and that the jurisdiction meets at least one of the criteria below. If the jurisdiction does not meet at least one of the following criteria, the Region must coordinate with FEMA Headquarters (Risk Reduction and Risk Analysis Divisions) for HMGP and coordinate and seek concurrence prior to granting an exception for the PDM Program and FMA:
The jurisdiction meets the small impoverished community criteria (see Part IX, B.2); The jurisdiction has been determined to have had insufficient capacity due to lack of available funding, staffing, or other necessary expertise to satisfy the mitigation planning requirement prior to the current disaster or application deadline; The jurisdiction has been determined to have been at low risk from hazards due to low frequency of occurrence or minimal damages from previous occurrences due to sparse development;
The jurisdiction experienced significant disruption from a declared disaster or another event that impacts its ability to complete the mitigation planning process prior to award or final approval of a project grant; and
The jurisdiction does not have a mitigation plan for reasons beyond the control of the State, Indian Tribal or local community, such as Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) restrictions that delay FEMA from awarding project grants prior to the expiration of the local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan.
For HMGP, the PDM Program, and FMA, the Applicant must provide written justification that identifies the specific criteria from above or circumstance, explain why there is no longer an impediment to satisfying the mitigation planning requirement, and identify the specific actions or circumstances that eliminated the deficiency.
In determining whether to grant the exception, FEMA takes into consideration factors including whether an Applicant has prioritized its authorized HMA project assistance for use in those communities with an approved local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan, whether there are additional project funds available for award to a jurisdiction that does not have an approved local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan, and whether an Applicant has placed higher priority for grant funding on communities with higher risks. In all cases, a local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan must be completed and approved by FEMA within 12 months of the award. If a local or Indian Part IV. Eligibility Information 33
DRAFT
Tribal mitigation plan is not approved by FEMA within this timeline, the project subgrant will be terminated and any costs incurred after the notice of the subgrant’s termination will not be reimbursed by FEMA.
When an HMGP project subgrant is awarded under extraordinary circumstances, the Grantee shall acknowledge in writing to the Regional Administrator that a plan will be completed within 12 months of the award of the project grant. The Grantee must provide a work plan for completing the local or tribal mitigation plan, including milestones and a timetable, to ensure that the jurisdiction will complete the plan in the required time. This requirement shall be incorporated into the grant award (both the planning and project subgrant agreements, if a planning subgrant is also awarded).
D.5.1 Indian Tribal Government Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirement Indian Tribal governments with an approved Indian Tribal mitigation plan in accordance with 44 CFR Section 201.7 may apply for assistance from FEMA as a Grantee. In addition, if an Indian Tribal government with an approved Indian Tribal mitigation plan in accordance with 44 CFR Section 201.7 coordinates the review of their Indian Tribal mitigation plan with the State or another Indian Tribal government, it has the option to apply as a subapplicant through that State or Indian Tribal government, except as prohibited by State law.
D.5.2 Conformance with Hazard Mitigation Plans
Projects submitted for consideration for HMA funding must be consistent with the goals and objectives identified in the current, FEMA-approved State or Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan and local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan for the jurisdiction in which the activity is located.
D.6 Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation
Requirement
HMA programs, and grants awarded pursuant to these programs, must conform to 44 CFR Parts 9 and 10, and with all applicable EHP laws, implementing regulations, and EOs, such as the NEPA, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), EO 11988 (Floodplain Management), EO 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), and EO 12898 (Environmental Justice). EHP requirements ensure appropriate consideration of reasonable alternatives, taking the project’s impacts to the human environment into account in the decisionmaking process. The project, when completed, must comply with all applicable environmental laws and regulations as a condition of grant eligibility.
FEMA reviews the completeness of the responses to the questions in the EHP review section of the project subapplication and supporting documentation. For HMA project subapplications that do not include the required information for each property identified in the subapplication, there Part IV. Eligibility Information 34
DRAFT
may be a delay in identifying outstanding EHP compliance measures. Lack of the required information by the application deadline may prohibit FEMA from awarding a grant or subgrant.
FEMA has developed guidance to assist in completing the EHP information section of a project subapplication, including an eLearning Tool, online training, and information about historic preservation. For links to these EHP resources, see Part X, C.5.
D.6.1 Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands
As noted in Part IV D.6, all activities funded by HMA programs must conform to 44 CFR Part 9.
Activities involving development will only be eligible for a grant if the Applicant demonstrates that there is no practicable alternative to such development in accordance with 44 CFR Section
9.9. In addition, HMGP funds cannot be used to fund new construction or Substantial Improvement in a floodway or new construction in a coastal high hazard zone. However, the costs to elevate or floodproof a damaged structure or facility are not included in determining whether the Substantial Improvement threshold is triggered.
For additional information see 44 CFR Section 9.11(d).
D.7 National Flood Insurance Program Eligibility Requirements HMA eligibility is related to the NFIP as follows:
Subapplicant eligibility: All subapplicants for FMA must currently be participating in the NFIP, and not withdrawn or suspended, to be eligible to apply for grant funds. Certain non-participating political subdivisions (i.e., regional flood control districts or county governments) may apply and act as subgrantees on behalf of the NFIP-participating community in areas where the political subdivision provides zoning and building code enforcement or planning and community development professional services for that community;
Project eligibility: HMGP and PDM mitigation project subapplications for projects sited within an SFHA are eligible only if the jurisdiction in which the project is located is participating in the NFIP. There is no NFIP participation requirement for HMGP and PDM project subapplications for projects located outside of the SFHA; Hazard mitigation planning eligibility: There are no NFIP participation requirements for HMGP and PDM hazard mitigation planning subapplications; and Property eligibility: Properties included in a project subapplication for FMA funding must be NFIP insured at the time of the application submittal. Flood insurance must be maintained for the life of the structure.
Part IV. Eligibility Information 35
DRAFT
D.7.1 Special Flood Hazard Area Requirements
For structures that remain in the SFHA after the implementation of the mitigation project, flood insurance must be maintained for the life of the structure to an amount at least equal to the project cost or to the maximum limit of coverage made available with respect to the particular property, whichever is less. The maximum limit of coverage made available is defined as the replacement cost value of the structure up to $250,000 for residential and $500,000 for nonresidential. Insurance coverage on the property must be maintained during the life of the property regardless of transfer of ownership of such property.
The subgrantee (or property owner) must legally record, with the county or appropriate jurisdiction’s land records, a notice that includes the name of the current property owner (including book/page reference to record of current title, if readily available), a legal description of the property, and the following notice of flood insurance requirements:
This property has received Federal hazard mitigation assistance. Federal law requires that flood insurance coverage on this property must be maintained during the life of the property regardless of transfer of ownership of such property.
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5154a, failure to maintain flood insurance on this property may prohibit the owner from receiving Federal disaster assistance with respect to this property in the event of a flood disaster. The Property Owner is also required to maintain this property in accordance with the floodplain management criteria of 44 CFR Part 60.3 and City/County Ordinance.
Applicants/subapplicants receiving assistance for projects sited in an SFHA must ensure that these requirements are met by requesting that the participating property owner(s) sign an Acknowledgement of Conditions for Mitigation of Property in an SFHA with FEMA Grant Funds form and providing the form to FEMA prior to award or final approval. This form is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3592, or from the appropriate FEMA Regional Office (for Regional Office information, see Part VIII). Properties that do not meet these requirements will not be eligible to receive assistance under the HMA programs.
If an approved HMA project affects the accuracy of the applicable Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), the subgrantee is responsible for ensuring that appropriate map amendments or revisions are made. Costs associated with map amendments may be identified in the cost estimate section of a subgrant application.
D.8 Statutory, Regulatory, and Other Requirements
Mitigation activities must adhere to all relevant statutes, regulations, and requirements, including:
Sections 203 (PDM Program) and 404 (HMGP) of the Stafford Act; Part IV. Eligibility Information 36
DRAFT
Section 1366 (FMA) of the NFIA;
Section 322 of the Stafford Act (Mitigation Planning); Section 324 of the Stafford Act (Management Costs);
NHPA;
NEPA;
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970; Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands (44 CFR Part 9); Environmental Considerations (44 CFR Part 10, NEPA, and ESA); Coastal Barriers Resources Act (CBRA; 44 CFR Part 206, Subpart J); Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to States and Local Governments (44 CFR Part 13);
Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Non-Profit Organizations (2 CFR Part 215); Floodplain Management (44 CFR Part 60);
Flood Mitigation Grants (44 CFR Part 79);
Property Acquisition and Relocation for Open Space (44 CFR Part 80); Hazard Mitigation Planning (44 CFR Part 201);
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (44 CFR Part 206, Subpart N); Management Costs (44 CFR Part 207);
Cost Principles for Educational Institutions (2 CFR Part 220, OMB Circular A-21); Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments (2 CFR Part 225, OMB Circular A-87); Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations (2 CFR Part 230, OMB Circular A-122);
OMB Circular A-94, Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs;
OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations;
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Subpart 31.2, Contracts with Commercial Organizations; and
Other applicable Federal, State, Indian Tribal, and local laws, implementing regulations, and EOs (e.g., EO 11988, EO 11990).
Part IV. Eligibility Information 37
DRAFT
PART V. APPLICATION AND
SUBMISSION INFORMATION
Part V provides guidance on developing HMA applications or subapplications, and on related funding restrictions.
A. Address to Request Application Package
Applications for HMGP are processed through the National Emergency Management Information System (NEMIS). Applicants may use the Application Development Module of NEMIS to create project applications and submit them to the appropriate FEMA Region in digital format for the relevant disaster. For NEMIS Helpdesk resources, see Part X C.6.
Applications for the PDM Program and FMA are processed through the eGrants system. The eGrants system encompasses the entire grant application process and provides the means to electronically create, review, and submit a grant application to FEMA via the Internet.
Applicants and subapplicants can access eGrants at https://portal.fema.gov/famsVuWeb/home.
The FEMA Technical Service desk phone number is 1 (877) 611-4700. For additional eGrants resources, see Part X C.6.
For more information about using NEMIS or eGrants, contact the appropriate FEMA Regional Office (see Part VIII).
B. Content and Form of Application
For HMGP, subapplication packages are available from eligible Applicants following Presidential major disaster declarations. The Applicant selects and prioritizes subapplications and submits them to FEMA. Applicants must submit an SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance, before HMGP funding can be obligated. The Applicant submits the subapplications both in digital format via NEMIS and in hard copy format.
Applications and subapplications for the PDM Program and FMA are submitted via the eGrants system. If a subapplicant does not use the eGrants system, the Applicant must enter the paper subapplication(s) into the eGrants system on the subapplicant’s behalf. Blank applications that conform to the eGrants format are available for printing from the eGrants system and the FEMA Web site. Supporting documentation that cannot be electronically attached to the eGrants application (e.g., engineering drawings, photographs, and maps) must be submitted to the appropriate FEMA Regional Office. The entire application, including all paper documentation, must be received by the appropriate FEMA Regional Office no later than the application deadline.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 38
DRAFT
C. Submission Dates and Times
HMGP submittal deadlines for applications are established based on the disaster declaration date. For submission of an application for HMGP, see Part IX, A.1 and A.6.
Completed applications for the PDM Program and FMA must be submitted to FEMA through eGrants. Application submission due dates and times are posted to the HMA Web site at https://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance. Subapplicants should consult the official designated point of contact (POC) for their Applicant for more information regarding the application process. For more information on FEMA and Applicant contacts, see Part VIII. For additional information on HMA application cycles either contact FEMA or go to http://www.grants.gov/.
D. Intergovernmental Review
It may be necessary to allow sufficient time for an intergovernmental review of an application as established by EOs 12372 and 12416 (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs). If an Applicant has chosen not to participate in the intergovernmental review process, the application may be sent directly to FEMA. Guidance on the intergovernmental review process, including the names and addresses of the single POCs as listed by OMB, is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_spoc.
E. Funding Restrictions
HMA programs allow the funding of eligible costs for mitigation activities as outlined in Part IV, D.1. Subapplications that propose a Federal expenditure in excess of the Federal funding limit will not be considered for an award. For each program, additional funding restrictions apply as described below.
E.1 HMGP Funding Restrictions
Up to 7 percent of the Grantee’s HMGP ceiling may be used for mitigation planning activities in compliance with 44 CFR Section 201.3(c)(4). Up to 5 percent of the Grantee’s HMGP ceiling may be used for mitigation measures that are difficult to evaluate against traditional program cost-effectiveness criteria (i.e., the 5 Percent Initiative).
For Presidential major disaster declarations for tornadoes and high winds, an additional 5 percent of the Grantee’s HMGP ceiling may be used to fund hazard mitigation measures (e.g., warning systems) to address the unique hazards posed by tornadoes.
For more information on the 5 Percent Initiative and the additional 5 percent for tornadoes, see Part IX, A.10.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 39
DRAFT
E.2 PDM Program Funding Restrictions
Up to $800,000 Federal share may be
requested in a subapplication for a planning
grant to develop a new hazard mitigation
plan.
Up to $300,000 Federal share may be
requested in a subapplication for a planning
grant to update a hazard mitigation plan.
MAXIMUM AMOUNTS OF
MITIGATION PLANNING GRANTS
Under the PDM Program, the maximum
mitigation planning grant is $800,000 for a
new plan and $300,000 for an update.
Under FMA, the maximum individual
planning grant is $50,000 for any Applicant
and $25,000 for any subapplicant.
Up to $3 million Federal share may be requested in a subapplication to implement a mitigation project.
The cumulative Federal award for subapplications awarded during a single application cycle to any one Applicant shall not exceed 15 percent of the total appropriated PDM Program funds for that application cycle.
E.3 FMA Funding Restrictions
Individual planning grants using FMA funds shall not exceed $50,000 to any Applicant or $25,000 to any subapplicant. FMA funds can only be used for the flood hazard component of a hazard mitigation plan that meets the planning criteria outlined in 44 CFR Part 201.
E.4 Management Costs Funding Restrictions
For all HMA programs, indirect costs may be included as a part of the management cost estimate shown in the application or subapplication.
For HMGP only: The Grantee may request a flat percentage rate (4.89 percent) of the projected eligible program costs for management costs. The Grantee is responsible for determining the amount, if any, of funds that will be passed through to the subgrantee(s) for their management costs. For further information on HMGP management costs, see Part IX, A.2.5 and A.4.
Applicants for the PDM Program and FMA may apply for a maximum of 10 percent of the total funds requested in their grant application budget (Federal and non-Federal shares) for management costs to support the project and planning subapplications included as part of their grant application. Applicants requesting Applicant management costs must submit a separate Management Costs subapplication in eGrants. This subapplication must be included in the overall grant application or the request will not be considered. Applicants who are not awarded grants funds for project or planning activities will not receive reimbursement for the corresponding costs incurred in developing and submitting applications.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 40
DRAFT
Subapplicants for the PDM Program and FMA may apply for a maximum of 5 percent of the total funds requested in a subapplication for management costs. Subapplicants requesting management costs must include them in the project or planning subapplication for consideration as separate activities in the Mitigation Activity section of eGrants. Subapplicants who are not awarded subgrants for project or planning activities will not receive reimbursement for the corresponding costs incurred in developing and submitting subapplications.
F. Other Submission Requirements
F.1 Application Consideration under Multiple HMA Programs FEMA will only consider applications and subapplications submitted to a specific HMA program. If an applicant would like to have a subapplication considered under multiple HMA programs, the applicant must submit that subapplication to each HMA program separately.
F.2 Pre-Award Costs
Costs incurred after the HMA application period has opened, but prior to the date of the grant award or final approval, are identified as pre-award costs. For HMGP, the opening of the application period is the date when HMGP is authorized, which is generally the date of declaration. The opening of the application period for the PDM Program and FMA is established annually by FEMA.
Pre-award costs directly related to developing the application or subapplication may be funded through HMA as funds are available. Such costs may have been incurred, for example, to develop a BCA, to gather EHP data, for preparing design specifications, or for workshops or meetings related to development and submission of HMA applications and subapplications.
Costs associated with implementation of the activity but incurred prior to grant award or final approval are not eligible (projects initiated or completed prior to grant award or full approval of the project are not eligible). To be eligible for HMA funding, pre-award costs must be identified as separate line items in the cost estimate of the subapplication. Applicants and subapplicants may identify such pre-award costs as their non-Federal cost share. Applicants and subapplicants who are not awarded grants or subgrants will not receive reimbursement for the corresponding pre-award costs.
G. Applicant Guidance
G.1 General Applicant Guidance
FEMA will not direct the Applicant on how to submit its applications. The Applicant may submit a single application representing all subapplications or they may submit multiple applications. When submitting multiple subapplications, they should be ranked in priority order.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 41
DRAFT
Before forwarding subapplications to FEMA, Applicants also should review subapplications to document that:
The subapplicant has documented its capacity to manage the subgrant funds; The subapplicant has documented its capacity to complete the mitigation activity in the time specified;
Non-Federal cost-share funds are or will be available for the project; The maintenance requirements have been sufficiently identified, and the subapplicant or another authorized entity has accepted the maintenance responsibility; The underlying cost-effectiveness data are accurate and complete; and All program- and project-specific requirements have been met and are documented as appropriate.
If the subapplication is considered to be deficient, the Applicant may revise or augment the subapplication in consultation with the subapplicant. Applicants must certify that they have evaluated the activities included in each subapplication and that activities will be implemented in accordance with 44 CFR Part 13 and other applicable program or activity type requirements.
G.2 Minimum Eligibility and Completeness Criteria
FEMA will no longer accept incomplete and
placeholder project applications. Incomplete
applications or subapplications delay project
approval because they do not contain sufficient
information for FEMA to make program eligibility
determinations. Applications and subapplications
submitted to FEMA must meet the minimal
eligibility and completeness criteria as there is no
method to determine eligibility without these data.
These minimal eligibility criteria are required for all
MINIMUM ELIGIBILITY AND
COMPLETENESS REQUIREMENTS
Applications and subapplications submitted
to FEMA must meet the minimal eligibility
and completeness criteria, as there is no
method to determine eligibility without
these data. For a detailed Eligibility and
Completeness checklist please see Part X,
Appendix E for projects and Part X,
Appendix H for plans.
submittals including over-submittals and placeholder applications. Additional information may be requested during FEMA review. The following list is not all inclusive. For a more detailed checklist please see Part X, Appendix E for projects and Part X, Appendix H for plans.
Unless otherwise noted, the following criteria apply to plans, management costs, and project subapplications and applications:
Eligible Applicant;
Meets all plan requirements per 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206; Provides a detailed SOW as described in Part V, H;
Part V. Application and Submission Information 42
DRAFT
Provides a work schedule of 3 years or less;
If project is suitable for phased or incremental funding, the schedule reflects activities and timelines for each funding increment (projects);
Budget/Match Source;
A detailed cost estimate/budget is provided that supports the SOW;
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility (projects);
Project includes a FEMA-approved BCA or FEMA-approved alternate costeffectiveness documentation (see Part V, I for additional information); The proposed activity is feasible and effective as demonstrated through conformance with accepted engineering practices, established codes, standards, modeling techniques, or best practices (see Part V, J for additional information); EHP;
Project includes information and documentation to demonstrate conformance with all applicable laws and regulations (e.g., NEPA and State Historic Preservation Act); Project demonstrates that it minimizes harm to the environment and is the best alternative from a range of options considered (see Part V, K for additional information); and
Assurances.
H. Scope of Work
The SOW identifies the eligible mitigation activity, as described in Part IV, D.1; describes what will be accomplished; and explains how the mitigation activity will be implemented. The mitigation activity must be described in sufficient detail to verify the cost estimate. All activities for which funding is requested must be identified in the SOW prior to the close of the application period.
H.1 Project Scope of Work
The project subapplication SOW provides detailed information about the project, as well as applicable references and supporting documentation. The SOW includes:
Purpose of the project – The intended outcome or objectives of the project; Clear, concise description of the proposed project – Proposed conceptual design, means of implementation of the project, and responsible party for implementation; Identification of properties to be mitigated – All properties to be mitigated must be identified, including additional, alternate properties that may be substituted should one or Part V. Application and Submission Information 43
DRAFT
more of the other properties be withdrawn for eligibility or other reasons. In order for alternate properties to be properly considered in the event of a substitution, the same level of information for the alternate properties is required as is provided for the proposed properties;
Outcomes – Proposed project accomplishments, problem(s) that the project will solve, parties that will directly or indirectly benefit from the project, and ways that the risks of damage or harm will be reduced;
Special project components – New technologies that will be used during project implementation and how they are expected to provide the necessary results, and necessary laboratory tests or field-testing;
Other projects – Other projects that are currently being implemented or expected to be implemented that will affect the proposed project;
Extraordinary Circumstances – If this exception is used, a plan must be completed within 12 months of the award of the project grant, per Part IV, D.5 (Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirement); and
Latitude/Longitude and site photographs – Subapplicants must identify the proposed project location on a map and provide the latitude/longitude and any relevant photographs including, but not limited to sides of the building, foundation, roof, both sides of the culvert, and the surrounding project area.
The required documentation depends upon the nature of the proposed project and may include:
proposed schematics, drawings or sketches, photographs, maps, sections of hazard maps, a Flood Insurance Study, or a FIRM. Whenever possible, data used to document existing conditions must be obtained from recognized sources, such as Federal agencies, State agencies, and academic organizations. The references and/or supporting documentation from qualified and credible sources such as Professional Engineers or local government records should be included when using locally developed data. Deviations from standard procedures, methods, techniques, technical provisions of the applicable codes, or best practices must be thoroughly explained and documented. Subapplicants must identify the proposed project location on a map and provide any relevant photographs including, but not limited to, sides of the building, foundation, and roof (as appropriate).
H.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning Scope of Work
The hazard mitigation planning subapplication SOW must describe the development of a hazard mitigation plan or planning-related activity that is consistent with the requirements identified in 44 CFR Part 201.
For a hazard mitigation plan, the SOW must:
Describe the proposed planning activity, including whether it will:
Part V. Application and Submission Information 44
DRAFT
Result in a new or updated hazard mitigation plan that complies with the requirements identified in 44 CFR Part 201; or
Enhance an existing mitigation plan through a planning related activity that is consistent with 44 CFR Part 201.
Identify the jurisdiction(s) or tribe(s) that will participate in developing the plan or the planning-related activity and describe the jurisdictions; Provide a statement on how the overall planning effort will be coordinated; Describe the process for plan development or the planning-related activity, clearly demonstrating what applicable regulatory requirements will be met. Document in detail the activities the jurisdiction(s) will complete to develop the plan or the planning related activity, including public involvement, identification of hazards, development of a comprehensive risk/vulnerability assessment, identification of mitigation goals and strategies, and plan implementation, and describe how these activities relate to the cost estimate; and
For new or updated hazard mitigation plans, describe the plan adoption process for the jurisdiction(s) or tribe(s) to ensure sufficient time to complete the plan, as well as time for State and FEMA review and, if necessary, time to complete any required revisions and to formally adopt the plan.
Additionally, for an update to a hazard mitigation plan, the SOW must include the reasons for the update and describe the process for plan update, clearly demonstrating that applicable regulatory requirements will be met. Also, provide a statement on how the overall planning effort will be coordinated.
If available, the subapplication also should include a copy of the plan review document (i.e., review tool or crosswalk) from the FEMA approval of the previous plan.
For planning related activities, the SOW should describe the:
Final product(s);
Process and level of effort to develop the final product(s), including key milestones (such as meetings; data research, collection, and analysis; drafts; and outreach); and Process to incorporate the product(s) or results into the update of the next mitigation plan.
Applicants/subapplicants are advised to make use of already developed materials and to seek available resources when developing a new mitigation plan or updating a mitigation plan. For links to mitigation planning and risk assessment resources, see Part X, C.2.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 45
DRAFT
H.3 Management Costs Scope of Work
For the Applicant management cost subapplication, the SOW must describe the activities and specific tasks related to developing subapplications, and implementing as well as closing subgrants. The SOW should state whether the work will be conducted by the Applicant’s staff or by contractor staff.
H.4 Schedule
Subapplications should include a work schedule for all project tasks identified in the SOW, such as data collection, site survey, permitting and inspections, site preparation, and construction. The schedule should identify timelines for accomplishing significant milestones, including anticipated quarterly usage of Federal funds. Proposed schedules for individual subapplications should not exceed 36 months (see Part VII, B.4).
For planning subapplications, the work schedule must allow sufficient time for State and FEMA reviews; preparation of required revisions, if needed; formal adoption by the jurisdiction(s); and FEMA approval.
H.5 Cost Estimate
The cost estimate describes all of the subapplicant’s
anticipated costs associated with the SOW for the proposed mitigation activity. Cost estimates must include detailed estimates of various cost item categories, such as labor, materials, equipment, and subcontractor costs. No lumpsum estimates will be accepted. The cost estimate must identify the cost categories and value for which anticipated
COST ESTIMATES
FEMA will accept cost estimates
used to support budgets and BCAs
if the Applicant or subapplicant
certifies that the estimates are
based on nationally published or
local cost-estimating guides.
cash and third-party in-kind contributions will be used to meet the non-Federal cost share.
FEMA will accept cost estimates that the Applicant or subapplicant certifies were established using nationally published or local cost estimating guides to support the budget and BCA. The Applicant or subapplicant must include appropriate documentation in the application or subapplication that demonstrates a national published standard or local cost estimating guide was used. If a cost estimate is based on a contractor's bid or historic costs from another activity, detailed documentation must be provided. The applicant must document actual costs for eligible activities at closeout. Separate cost line items in a subapplication are required to ensure that cost thresholds are not exceeded. As applicable, the following line items must be listed separately in the budget:
Pre-award costs;
Subapplicant management costs for the PDM Program and FMA, and HMGP if the Grantee has agreed to pass through funds to the subgrantee; and Part V. Application and Submission Information 46
DRAFT
Information dissemination costs (for the PDM Program).
Additionally, the cost estimate should indicate items for which the cost may change, such as a price quoted by a contractor that is only valid for 1 year. Neither contingency nor escalation costs are permitted as individual line items in the cost estimate.
H.5.1 Project Cost Estimate
In addition to the items described in Part V, H.5, the project cost estimate must include a lineitem breakdown of all anticipated costs including, as applicable:
Costs for anticipated environmental resource impact treatment or historic property treatment measures;
Costs for engineering designs/specifications, including hydrologic and hydraulic studies/analyses required as an integral part of designing the project; Construction/demolition/relocation costs, such as survey, permitting, site preparation, and material/debris disposal costs; and
All other costs required to implement the mitigation project, including any applicable project-type specific costs identified in the Addendum of this guidance.
For additional information about cost estimates for property acquisition and structure demolition or relocation projects, see Addendum, Parts A.5 and A.6; for wildfire mitigation projects, see Addendum, Part B.3; for safe room construction projects, see Addendum, Part C.3.4; for mitigation reconstruction see projects Addendum, Parts D.2 and D.5; and for structure elevation projects, see Addendum, Part E.3.
H.5.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning Cost Estimate
In addition to the items described in Part V, H.5, the hazard mitigation planning cost estimate must include a line-item breakdown of costs associated with all elements described in the SOW, such as:
Meetings and public outreach, including the costs associated with what is necessary and reasonable;
Data research and collection, including eligible mapping activities or risk assessment; Plan drafting, review, and final production;
Information dissemination activities, including printing and advertising; and Professional development training, tuition, and travel for the purpose of carrying out the planning SOW.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 47
DRAFT
H.5.3 Management Cost Estimate
Applicants and subapplicants requesting management costs should provide supporting documentation and include these costs as separate line items in the cost estimate portion of the application or subapplication.
A narrative must accompany a request for management costs. The narrative should describe the activities, personnel requirements, and other costs for which the Grantee and/or subgrantee will use management cost funding. It should provide information on how the funds will be expended and monitored and show that sufficient funds will be available for closeout.
For more information on HMGP management costs, see Part IX, A.4.
I. Cost-effectiveness
FEMA will only consider applications that use a FEMA-approved methodology to demonstrate cost-effectiveness. This is typically demonstrated by the calculation of a BCR. Projects for which benefits exceed costs are generally considered cost-effective. Benefits may include avoided damages, loss of function, and displacement.
FEMA provides BCA software that allows Applicants to calculate a project BCR. Written materials and training are also available. The FEMA BCA software utilizes the OMB Circular A-94, Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs. FEMA requires using approved BCA software (version 4.5.5 or greater) to help ensure that calculations are consistent with OMB Circular A-94. The current software is available at the FEMA Regional Office or from the BCA Technical Assistance Helpline.
If FEMA standard values are used, then no additional documentation is required. If non-standard values are used, then documentation is required. Documentation must be accurate and sufficiently detailed for the analysis to be validated. FEMA recommends that supporting documentation be obtained from credible sources, such as a Flood Insurance Study.
Data associated with the various methodologies for analyzing cost-effectiveness are available from the appropriate FEMA Regional Office (see Part VIII) or the BCA Technical Assistance Helpline.
I.1 Substantial Damage Waiver
An expedited cost-effectiveness methodology is
available for property acquisition projects when
certain conditions are met. Structures that are
declared Substantially Damaged as a result of
flooding and located in a riverine SFHA on a
SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE
WAIVER EXTENDED
TO ALL HMA PROGRAMS
An expedited cost-effectiveness analysis
methodology is available for property
acquisition projects when certain conditions
are met.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 48
DRAFT
preliminary or effective FIRM are considered cost-effective for acquisition projects. If this methodology is used, the project application should include a certification that the structures meet these conditions.
I.2 Aggregation
An evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of a project
should include all activities included within the
SOW. This may include activities in multiple
jurisdictions. It may also include combining
benefits from multiple activities and multiple
hazards, such as wind and flood, if it is a part of the same project.
AGGREGATION
It is appropriate to aggregate benefits from
multiple activities and multiple jurisdictions if
part of the same project.
I.3 5 Percent Initiative
For 5 Percent Initiative subapplications for HMGP funding, a narrative description of the project’s cost-effectiveness must be provided. For more information on the 5 Percent Initiative, see Part IX, A.10.
I.4 Pre-calculated Benefits (Safe rooms)
For Safe Room Construction projects, an expedited cost-effectiveness methodology is available that identifies the benefits associated with certain types of safe rooms (see Appendix F). If this methodology is used, the submitted project application should include a copy of the data relevant to the project location.
I.5 Greatest Savings to the Fund
FEMA also allows for the use of the GSTF data and
methodology to demonstrate cost-effectiveness for
properties included in mitigation projects under
HMA. Subapplicants are not required to use this
methodology when submitting projects for funding
and may utilize the current applicable BCA version
GREATEST SAVINGS
TO THE FUND METHODOLOGY
GSTF can be used to demonstrate costeffectiveness of a project under all HMA programs.
(4.5.5 or greater) methodology.
I.6 Environmental Benefits
FEMA has identified and quantified environmental
benefits for mitigation activities. Incorporating
environmental benefits into the overall quantification
of benefits for acquisition-related activities supports
INCLUSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS INTO THE BCA TOOLKIT
Green open space and riparian benefits
have been identified and quantified for
acquisition projects. The BCR for an
acquisition project must be 0.75 before the
environmental benefit can be incorporated.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 49
DRAFT
FIMA’s mission of risk reduction, environmental compliance, and preservation of the natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain.
Specifically, FEMA developed economic values for green open space and riparian areas. FEMA will be incorporating the environmental benefits for green open space and riparian areas into the BCA toolkit for acquisition projects.
The economic value for green open space is $7,853 per acre per year. For riparian areas, the economic value is $37,493 per acre per year. When incorporating these values into FEMA’s BCA, the yearly benefits accrue over the 100-year project useful life and are discounted at 7 percent per year to meet OMB requirements. Table 4 provides the green open space and riparian benefits per acre per year and per square foot.
Table 4: Green Open Space and Riparian Benefits
Land Use Total Estimated Benefits
(per acre per year)
Total Estimated Benefits(1)
(per square foot)
Green Open Space $7,853 $2.57
Riparian $37,493 $12.29
(1) Projected for 100 years with 7 percent discount rate For an acquisition project, the BCR for a project must be 0.75 before incorporating the environmental benefit. This ensures projects funded by HMA are primarily associated with risk reduction activities. Once a project’s BCR reaches 0.75, the appropriate environmental benefit can be included for the individual properties.
I.7 Benefit-Cost Analysis Resources
Other methods to demonstrate cost-effectiveness may be used when they address a noncorrectable flaw in the FEMA-approved methodologies or propose a new approach that is unavailable using current tools. New methodologies may be used only if FEMA approves the methodology before application submission. For more information on resources, see Part X, C.3.
BCA Helpline
Telephone: (855) 540-6744
Email: [email protected]
BCA Policies, Overview, and Software
http://www.fema.gov/benefit-cost-analysis
J. Feasibility and Effectiveness Documentation
FEMA will use the information provided in the subapplication, including the SOW, the cost estimate, and supporting documentation to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of the Part V. Application and Submission Information 50
DRAFT
proposed mitigation activity. FEMA accepts the engineering design for a project if a registered Professional Engineer (or other design professional) certifies that the design meets the appropriate code or industry design and construction standards. FEMA will accept the certified engineering design in lieu of a comprehensive technical feasibility review. If accepted codes/standards are used, no additional documentation is required. See Part X, Appendix D (Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance) for examples of codes and standards used for various projects types.
If an alternative design is proposed the application/subapplication should contain:
Applicable building code/edition or engineering standard used; Level of protection provided by the proposed project and description of how the proposed activity will mitigate future losses;
For the retrofit of existing buildings or infrastructure protection projects, an assessment of the vulnerabilities of the existing building;
Any remaining risk to the structure after project implementation; and Proposed schematic drawings or designs (as applicable).
Project subapplications that do not include appropriate documentation to support the determination of feasibility and effectiveness may be removed from consideration. Upon request, FEMA will provide technical assistance regarding engineering documentation.
For structure elevation and dry floodproofing activities, a statement certifying that the project will be designed in conformance with ASCE/SEI 24-05 will assist in satisfying the feasibility and effectiveness requirement.
K. Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation
Documentation
The Applicant and subapplicant should ensure that the project SOW takes into account all potential EHP compliance issues. When completing the subapplication, the Applicant/subapplicant must answer a series of EHP review questions and provide information about potential impacts on environmental resources and cultural resources (if applicable) in the project area. For additional information, see Part X, Appendix I (EHP Checklist) and Part X, Appendix J (8-Step Decision Making Process for Floodplain Considerations), and Part X, Appendix K (Section 106 Process under the National Historic Preservation Act).
If potential impacts are identified through the responses to these EHP review questions, the Applicant/subapplicant must provide additional information, (as applicable), such as:
The property address, original date of construction, and two color photographs for any buildings, structures, objects, or manmade sites/landscapes features that are 50 years or Part V. Application and Submission Information 51
DRAFT
more in age. At least one of the two photographs provided of a building should be the front or primary façade showing the elevation;
Any identified federally listed threatened or endangered species and/or designated critical habitat in the project area;
Vegetation, including amount (area), type, and extent to be removed or affected; Identification of all surface waters in the project area regardless of drainage area, size, or perceived hazard level. Information about surface waters should include dimensions, proximity of the project activity to the water, and the expected and possible impacts of the project upon surface waters, if any; and
A description of any adverse effects on low income or minority populations in the project area.
Applicants seeking to determine whether there are any EHP issues associated with the proposed project should consult the HMA EHP Resources At-a-Glance Guide, located at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6976 and the HMA EHP at a Glance at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=5904. This Guide also provides key contacts, Web sites, and search engines to assist in early identification of EHP issues and to facilitate coordination with the appropriate State and Federal agencies.
If EHP issues are identified, the Applicant/subapplicant should initiate coordination with the relevant State and Federal agencies as early in the project planning stages as possible to address any potential EHP compliance issues associated with proposed projects. This coordination does not substitute, and shall not be interpreted to mean, that formal consultation has occurred between FEMA and the applicable resource agency.
Additional EHP compliance review activities may be necessary to facilitate project approval, such as environmental impact statements, environmental assessments, Phase I environmental site assessments, biological assessments, archeological or standing structures surveys and documentation, wetlands delineations, and air quality conformity analysis or determinations.
If FEMA or the Applicant/subapplicant identifies any potential impacts through the EHP review process described above, the following requirements must be completed before a grant award may be made:
Evaluate any potential effects to environmental and historic resources and provide the required information and documentation to identify the impact on these resources; Complete an evaluation of alternatives to the proposed action that will avoid or minimize these impacts, including consideration of the environmental impact of taking no action; Complete any required consultation and/or coordination with the appropriate parties (e.g., the State Historic Preservation Officer, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Part V. Application and Submission Information 52
DRAFT
Marine Fisheries Service) to evaluate potential effects of the proposed project and to identify any measures necessary to avoid or minimize these effects; Demonstrate that the project will comply with all environmental laws and regulations; and Make certain that the costs of any measures to treat adverse effects are realistically reflected in the project budget estimate.
Applicants/Grantees may incur costs for significant EHP compliance review activities and/or EHP mitigation measures. FEMA will consider the following factors to determine whether to reimburse costs:
Nature of the analysis or study required (e.g., environmental impact statement); Costs of EHP activities compared to project costs;
Complexity of the proposed project; and
Nature and extent of potential adverse impacts to environmental and/or historic resources.
Applicants should consider potential EHP costs during application development and submission and should seek to avoid activities that may negatively impact EHP resources.
FEMA may remove projects from consideration for full approval and/or funding when EHP compliance review activities are not progressing and the Applicant/Grantee has not dedicated resources and/or provided required documentation in a timely manner.
For additional information on required EHP documentation, see Part X, C.5.
Part V. Application and Submission Information 53
DRAFT
PART VI. APPLICATION
REVIEW INFORMATION
Part VI provides information about the review process so that Applicants and subapplicants can prepare applications that meet FEMA review criteria. During an application review, FEMA may request additional information or documentation from Applicants.
A. Review Criteria
While review processes vary somewhat among HMA programs, FEMA reviews all applications for:
Application eligibility;
Cost-effectiveness;
Feasibility and effectiveness; and
EHP compliance.
A.1 Application Review
FEMA will review all applications and subapplications for eligibility and completeness.
Applications and subapplications that do not satisfy the eligibility and completeness requirements will not be funded. The eligibility and completeness requirements are outlined in Parts IV and V.
A.2 Cost-effectiveness Review
FEMA will review the documentation provided in support of the subapplication costeffectiveness to validate the accuracy and credibility of data and ensure the appropriate use of the cost-effectiveness methodologies. Only subapplications meeting HMA cost-effectiveness requirements will be considered eligible.
A.3 Feasibility and Effectiveness Review
FEMA will use the information provided in the subapplication, including the SOW and project cost estimate sections, as well as any supporting documentation to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of the mitigation activity.
For project subapplications, FEMA will consider the following criteria in reviewing feasibility and effectiveness:
Conformance to accepted engineering practices, established codes, standards, modeling techniques, or best practices, as well as work schedule; Part VI. Application Review Information 54
DRAFT
Effectiveness in mitigating the risks of the hazard(s); and Reasonableness of the cost estimate.
A.4 Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Review Applicants and subapplicants are required to provide information to support the FEMA EHP compliance review. FEMA, in consultation with appropriate Federal and State resource agencies, will use the information provided in the application/subapplication, including the SOW, project cost estimate, as well as any supporting documentation, to ensure compliance with EHP requirements.
As part of the EHP review process, FEMA will assess compliance with applicable requirements including NEPA, NHPA, ESA, CBRA, EO 11988 (Floodplain Management), EO 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), and EO 12898 (Environmental Justice). Funds will not be awarded, and the Applicant/subapplicant may not initiate the project, other than planning or preparatory work not involving construction or alteration of the land, until FEMA has completed this review and it is demonstrated that the project, when completed, will comply with all environmental laws and regulations.
A.5 HMA Efficiencies
FEMA accepts the engineering design for a project if
a registered Professional Engineer (or other design
professional) certifies that the design meets the
appropriate code, or industry design and construction
standards. FEMA will accept the certified
engineering design in lieu of the FEMA
comprehensive technical feasibility review. For
example, if a registered Professional Engineer
certifies that design of a community safe room project
HMA EFFICIENCIES
FEMA provides opportunities to
streamline application requirements by
allowing Applicants to use:
FEMA technical publications
National standards and codes
Design criteria such as ASCE criteria
Pre-calculated benefits
meets or exceeds FEMA P-361 standards for design and construction, FEMA will not perform a detailed design review to ensure compliance with the standard.
Additionally, in the development of applications and subapplications, the following resources and approaches should be considered as they will promote efficiencies in FEMA review and approval.
A.5.1 Safe Room Projects
Applicants must document that the proposed safe
room project is consistent with the requirements
of FEMA P-320 or FEMA P-361. Applicants
must use the expedited HMGP application for
PRE-CALCULATED BENEFITS
FOR SAFE ROOMS UNDER HMGP
If the Applicant submits a residential safe room
project with costs that are less than the precalculated benefit, then FEMA will consider the project to be cost effective.
Part VI. Application Review Information 55
DRAFT
Residential Safe Rooms to apply pre-calculated benefits under HMGP (see Part X, Appendix F).
This pre-calculated benefit provides standardized benefits associated with residential safe rooms so that individual BCAs are not required as long as the project costs do not exceed the benefits.
A.5.2 Wind Retrofit Projects
FEMA P-804 provides design guidance for wind-retrofit projects on existing one- and twofamily dwellings in coastal areas. Mitigation projects funded under HMGP and the PDM Program are required to be implemented in conformance with FEMA-804. If a subapplication complies with FEMA P-804, no additional technical information is required in the subapplication.
A.5.3 Certain Flood Mitigation Projects
FEMA recommends HMA flood mitigation projects be designed and constructed in conformance with the design criteria of ASCE/SEI 24-05 as a minimum standard. FEMA will consider a project application utilizing ASCE/SEI 24-05 as being consistent with HMA engineering feasibility and effectiveness requirements. Project applications that do not use ASCE/SEI 24-05 must submit documentation to demonstrate the project meets the engineering feasibility and effectiveness requirement.
B. Review and Selection Process
B.1 Technical Review
FEMA will conduct a technical review for all project subapplications that are forwarded from the initial FEMA review, for the following:
Cost-effectiveness;
Feasibility and effectiveness; and
EHP compliance.
B.2 Requests for Information
FEMA may request additional information or documentation from Applicants to resolve outstanding administrative or procedural requirements. RFIs can take various forms, including email requests, documented telephone calls, or formal letters. Failure to provide requested information by the deadline identified in the request may result in denial, because eligibility cannot be determined. Technical assistance is available, if requested.
Comments may be provided by FEMA on subapplications determined ineligible so that subapplicants can modify their subapplication for resubmission in future grant cycles.
Part VI. Application Review Information 56
DRAFT
B.2.1 Request for Information Timelines
Table 5 provides timelines for stepwise information
requests and assistance offers. Figure 4 outlines the
RFI process and assigned responsible party. The RFI
process involves an eligibility review to determine if
the subapplication and subapplicant are eligible, then
a completeness review is conducted to determine if a
complete subapplication was submitted. If the
subapplication is determined to be incomplete, there
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
If a subapplication does not meet the
administrative or procedural information
requirements, FEMA may request
additional information in the form of an RFI.
If the Regional Administrator does not
receive the requested information by the
final deadline, the project will be denied.
are three steps FEMA will take to request further information from the subapplicant. At each step throughout the RFI process, FEMA will work with the Applicant and subapplicant to determine available options to develop a viable project. Some options include technical assistance from FEMA or implementing a phased project. If the requested information is not received by the Regional Administrator before the deadline, the project will be denied as FEMA will have no basis to make an eligibility determination. Upon receipt of the requested information and confirmation it adequately addresses the RFI, FEMA will proceed with making a determination of project eligibility.
Table 5: RFI Timelines
Request
Format Timeline
Informal –
First Request
The Project Officer requests additional information. If the requested information is not received within 30 calendar days from the date of the request, FEMA will consider the application to be incomplete and not approvable. FEMA may provide technical assistance if requested, unless the HMA program is competitive. The Applicant may consider phasing the project if it is feasible to do so.
Informal –
Second Request
The Hazard Mitigation Branch Chief requests additional information. If the requested information is not received within 14 calendar days from the date of the request, FEMA will consider the application to be incomplete and not approvable. FEMA may provide technical assistance if requested, unless the HMA program is competitive. FEMA, Grantee, and Applicant staff should meet to resolve any open items within the allotted timeframe, if necessary.
Formal The Regional Administrator requests additional information and will document previous requests. If the requested information is not received within 30 calendar days from the date of the request, FEMA will consider the application to be incomplete and not approvable.
Formal If the Regional Administrator does not receive the requested information within 30 calendar days, he or she will determine the requested project application be ineligible for funding under HMGP. The second formal letter is a denial.
Part VI. Application Review Information 57
DRAFT
Figure 4: RFI Flowchart
Part VI. Application Review Information 58
DRAFT
The Regional Administrator may choose to allow more time, with justification. FEMA encourages Applicants to coordinate early with the State or eligible Indian Tribal government to identify potential technical assistance. If technical data is not readily available, the subapplicant should coordinate with Grantee to determine whether the project should be phased in order to develop required data. States or Indian Tribal governments with Grantee status could contact the FEMA regional office to request technical assistance, relevant training or other needed support.
B.3 Selection
FEMA selects eligible subapplications based on priorities set by the Applicant or program priorities, if applicable. For more information for the PDM Program, see Part IX, B.5, for FMA, see Part IX, C.4.
B.4 Notification
For the PDM Program and FMA, during the review and selection process FEMA will notify Applicants as to whether subapplications have been identified for further review, determined eligible but will not be funded, or determined ineligible for funding. A determination of “identified for further review” is not notification or guarantee of an award.
FEMA will work with Applicants on subapplications identified for further review. Applicants will be notified of activities required, such as an EHP review; verification of subapplicant commitments; verification of hazard mitigation plan status; and of the date by which all required activities must be completed.
Comments may be provided by FEMA on subapplications determined ineligible so that subapplicants can modify their subapplication for resubmission in future grant cycles.
The PDM Program and FMA have specific ranking criteria in addition to those described in this part. For information about ranking criteria and on the review and selection process for the PDM Program, see Part IX, B.4; and FMA, see Part IX, C.4.
B.5 Reconsideration Process
For the FMA and PDM programs, FEMA will reconsider its determination of a subapplication evaluated on a competitive basis only when there is an indication of a substantive technical or procedural error by FEMA. Only information provided in the submitted subapplication is considered supporting documentation for the request for reconsideration. The amount of funding available for Applicant management costs will not be reconsidered.
FEMA may evaluate subapplications on a competitive basis when:
Submitted subapplications exceed available funds;
Law or regulation requires the administration of a competitive program; or Part VI. Application Review Information 59
DRAFT
Circumstances merit the administration of funds in a competitive manner.
Applicants must send requests for reconsideration based upon technical or procedural error to FEMA within the time specified in the notification letter to the Applicant. A FEMA decision to uphold or overturn a decision regarding a subapplication evaluated on a competitive basis is final.
B.5.1 Consideration of Additional Information
FEMA may, at its discretion, notify Applicants that it will consider additional information in support of a subapplication.
FEMA will accept supplemental or corrected data in support of a subapplication when:
Submitted subapplications do not exhaust available program funds; Law or regulation do not require the administration of a competitive program; or When determined appropriate by the program office.
Instructions for submitting supplemental data will be provided within the FEMA notification letter, if applicable.
For information on appeal and administration of HMGP subapplications, see Part IX, A.11.
Part VI. Application Review Information 60
DRAFT
PART VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION
INFORMATION
Part VII describes how successful Applicants will receive award information. Additionally, this part describes administrative requirements from the time an award is made through closeout and the maintenance actions that must occur after an activity is complete.
A. Notice of Award
FEMA will provide an award package to the Applicant for successful subapplications.
Subapplicants will receive notice of award from the Applicant.
Award packages for the PDM Program and FMA include an award letter, FEMA Form 76-10A, Obligating Document for Awards/Amendments, and Articles of Agreement, EHP, and/or other conditions that must be signed by the Applicant in eGrants and returned to FEMA for approval before funds can be obligated.
For HMGP, award packages for subgrants include an approval letter, an obligation document, and EHP and/or other conditions.
When the Applicant or subapplicant accepts an award, they are denoted as Grantee and subgrantee, respectively. The Grantee and subgrantee agree to abide by the grant award terms and conditions as set forth in the Articles of Agreement or the FEMA-State Agreement.
B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
B.1 Cost-Share Documentation
Requirements for cash and third-party in-kind contributions can be found in 44 CFR Section
13.24. Third-party in-kind and cash contributions are only allowable for eligible program costs.
The following documentation is required for cash and third-party in-kind contributions:
Record of donor;
Dates of donation;
Rates for staffing, equipment or usage, supplies, etc.; Amounts of donation or value of donation; and
Deposit slips for cash contributions.
Such documentation must be kept on file by the Grantee and subgrantee.
Part VII. Award Administration Information 61
DRAFT
B.2 Scope of Work Changes
In accordance with 44 CFR Section 13.30,
Grantees must obtain FEMA’s prior approval
whenever there is a proposed SOW change.
Requests for changes to the SOW after award are
permissible as long as they are consistent with
the intent of the program. Requests must be
made in writing and demonstrate the need for the
scope change. The request also should include a revised scope, schedule, and budget. Any SOW changes are subject to all programmatic requirements. All approvals will be at FEMA’s discretion.
SCOPE CHANGE
Grantees and subgrantees must request FEMA’s
approval for a change in scope after the grant has
been awarded. The change must be consistent
with the intent of the program. Requests must be
made in writing and demonstrate the need for a
change.
B.3 Budget Changes
Grantees and subgrantees are permitted to rebudget within the approved direct cost budget to meet unanticipated
requirements and may make limited program changes to
the approved budget. For more information on direct cost categories, please see OMB Circular A-87 and 2 CFR Part 225, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments. Unless expressly waived by FEMA, the
following types of post-award changes to budgets will require the prior written approval of FEMA:
BUDGET CHANGE
In limited cases, Grantees and
subgrantees are permitted to make
adjustments within the approved direct
cost category to meet unanticipated
requirements.
B.3.1 Non-construction Projects
Non-construction subgrant adjustments of more than 10 percent in any direct cost categories; and
Any changes that would result in additional funding to the grant.
B.3.2 Construction Projects
All construction cost adjustments that lead to the need for additional funds.
When budget changes are made, all programmatic requirements continue to apply. Additional information regarding budget adjustments and revisions can be found in 44 CFR Section 13.30.
B.3.3 Cost Overruns and Underruns
A cost overrun or underrun can result from a scope, schedule, or budget change.
Part VII. Award Administration Information 62
DRAFT
Grantees must notify FEMA prior to redirecting funds from an underrun to other approved subgrants for which an overrun has been requested. The subgrant must continue to meet programmatic eligibility requirements including cost share.
B.4 Program Period of Performance
The POP is the period during which the Grantee is
expected to complete all grant activities and to incur
costs. The POP for the Program begins with the
opening of the application period and ends no later than 36 months from the close of the application period.
PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
With the publication of this HMA Unified
Guidance, the POP for the Program
begins with opening of the application
period and ends no later than 36 months
from the close of the application period.
FEMA will not establish activity completion timelines
for individual subgrants. Grantees are responsible for ensuring that all approved activities are completed by the end of the grant POP.
B.4.1 Extensions
Requests for extensions to a grant POP will be evaluated by FEMA but will not be approved automatically. The Regional Administrator can extend the POP for up to 12 months with justification. All requests to extend the grant POP beyond 12 months from the original grant POP end date must be approved by FEMA Headquarters.
All extension requests must be submitted to FEMA at least 60 days prior to the expiration of the grant POP and justifications must be submitted in writing. The justification must include:
Verification that progress has been made as described in quarterly reports; Reason(s) for delay;
Current status of the activity/activities;
Current POP termination date and new projected completion date; Remaining available funds, both Federal and non-Federal; Budget outlining how remaining Federal and non-Federal funds will be expended; and Plan for completion, including updated schedule.
B.5 Requests for Advances and Reimbursements
The Grantee’s responsibility of an HMA grant is to process requests for advances and reimbursements of funds. The Grantee should establish accounting procedures to disburse money to subgrantees in a timely manner and should provide to subgrantees a POC for information on requesting and receiving the funds, records that must be maintained, forms to be used, and timelines for requesting the funds.
Part VII. Award Administration Information 63
DRAFT
For the PDM Program and FMA, Payment and Reporting System (PARS) is used to transfer funds between FEMA and Grantees. Grantees shall submit to FEMA a copy of the Standard Form (SF-425).
For HMGP, the Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Payment Management, Payment Management System, SMARTLINK, is used to transfer funds between FEMA and Grantees. Grantees shall submit to FEMA a copy of the SF-425.
B.5.1 Strategic Funds Management
In accordance with the needs of the Disaster
Relief Fund as well as Grantee priorities and
ability to execute the project in a timely manner,
FEMA may elect to provide funding for certain
projects in incremental amounts, including
advance payments (Strategic Funds Management
or SFM). SFM allows FEMA to schedule
obligations to be available when the State is
ready to execute an HMGP subgrant or
components of the subgrant. SFM also allows
for incremental obligations as needed within the
3-year POP requirements to support project
activities as described in the project work
schedule.
SFM does not allow funds to be advanced for an
HMGP project that is not approved and eligible.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STRATEGIC
FUNDS MANAGEMENT, PHASED
PROJECTS, PRE-AWARD COSTS,
AND ADVANCE ASSISTANCE
SFM is designed to provide incremental funding
for eligible activities when the funds are
required.
Phased projects are those that receive
funding for only certain complex activities that
are approved to allow the Applicant to develop
a full work scope/data package to support the
full project description.
Pre-award costs are eligible costs incurred by
the Applicant in advance of receiving funds.
These activities are reimbursed when the
project is approved and funded.
Advance Assistance provides States and
Indian Tribal governments with resources to
develop mitigation strategies and obtain data
to prioritize, select, and develop complete
HMGP applications in a timely manner.
B.6 Program Income
FEMA encourages Grantees and subgrantees to generate program income to help defray program costs. Program income is gross income received by the Grantee or subgrantee directly generated by a grant-supported activity or earned only as a result of the grant during the grant POP.
Program income may be derived from use or rental of real or personal property acquired with grant funds, and sale of commodities or items fabricated under the grant award. Subgrantees deduct this income from total project costs as specified in 44 CFR Section 13.25(g)(1). This income may not count towards the non-Federal cost share.
B.7 Federal Income Tax on Mitigation Project Funds
FEMA mitigation payments that benefit property owners through the mitigation of their structures are not subject to Federal income taxation. FEMA mitigation payments to acquire a property will be treated as an involuntary conversion for tax purposes. These tax relief measures Part VII. Award Administration Information 64
DRAFT
are effective for such payments made in all prior years. For more information, property owners should consult the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) office or a tax advisor.
B.8 Noncompliance
If a Grantee or subgrantee materially fails to comply with any term of an award, whether stated in a Federal statute or regulation, an assurance, a State Administrative Plan or application, a notice of award, or elsewhere, including in this guidance, FEMA may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate:
Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the Grantee or subgrantee;
Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance;
Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the current award for the Grantee’s or subgrantee’s HMA grant program(s);
Withhold further awards for HMA grant program(s); or Take other remedies that may be legally available.
Additional details can be found in 44 CFR Section 13.43.
C. Reporting Requirements
Grantees and subgrantees must maintain records of work and expenditures. Grantees submit quarterly financial and performance reports to FEMA on January 30, April 30, July 30, and October 30. The first quarterly reports are due within 30 days of the end of the first Federal quarter following the initial grant award. FEMA may waive the initial reports. The Grantee shall submit quarterly financial status and performance reports thereafter until the grant ends.
Failure to submit financial and performance reports to FEMA in a timely manner may result in an inability to access grant funds until proper reports are received by FEMA. Grantees are encouraged to contact FEMA should this occur.
The PDM Program and FMA quarterly reports can be submitted via eGrants. For HMGP, quarterly performance reports can be submitted via NEMIS or a hard copy to the Region. PDM Program and FMA quarterly financial reports must be submitted via PARS.
C.1 Federal Financial Reports
Grantees shall submit a quarterly Federal Financial Report (FFR). Obligations and expenditures must be reported on a quarterly basis through the FFR (SF-425), which is due to FEMA within 30 days of the end of each calendar quarter (e.g., for the quarter ending March 31, the FFR is due no later than April 30). A report must be submitted for every quarter of the POP, including Part VII. Award Administration Information 65
DRAFT
partial calendar quarters, as well as for periods where no grant activity occurs. Future awards and fund drawdowns may be withheld if these reports are delinquent. The final FFR is due 90 days after the end date of the POP.
OMB has directed that the FFR (SF-425) replace the use of the SF-269, SF-269A, SF-272, and SF-272A. The SF-425 consolidates the Federal Status Report and the Federal Cash Transaction Report into a single report. The SF-425 is intended to provide Federal agencies and grant recipients with a standard format and consistent reporting requirements.
Reporting periods and due dates:
October 1 – December 31; Due January 30
January 1 – March 31; Due April 30
April 1 – June 30; Due July 30
July 1 – September 30; Due October 30
FEMA may suspend drawdowns from SMARTLINK or PARS if quarterly financial reports are not submitted on time.
C.2 Performance Reports
The Grantee shall submit a quarterly performance report for each grant award. Performance reports should include:
Reporting period, date of report, and Grantee POC name and contact information; Project identification information, including FEMA project number (including disaster number and declaration date for the HMGP), subgrantee, and project type using standard eGrants/NEMIS project type codes;
Significant activities and developments that have occurred or have shown progress during the quarter, including a comparison of actual accomplishments to the work schedule objectives established in the subgrant;
Percent completion and whether completion of work is on schedule; a discussion of any problems, delays, or adverse conditions that will impair the ability to meet the timelines stated in the subgrant; and anticipated completion date; Status of costs, including whether the costs are: (1) unchanged, (2) overrun, or (3) underrun. If there is a change in cost status, the report should include a narrative describing the change. Also, include amount dispersed to subgrantee by activity; A statement of whether a request to extend the grant POP is anticipated; Incremental funding amounts (SFM) and progress completed; Part VII. Award Administration Information 66
DRAFT
For acquisition projects, the Grantee must notify FEMA on the current status of each property for which settlement was completed in that quarter; and FEMA may require additional information as needed to assess the progress of a grant.
FEMA may suspend drawdowns from SMARTLINK or PARS if quarterly performance reports are not submitted on time.
C.3 Final Reports
The Grantee shall submit a Final SF-425 and Performance Report no later than 90 days after the end date of the POP, per 44 CFR Section 13.50.
D. Closeout
D.1 Subgrant Closeout
Upon subgrant completion, the Grantee must ensure that:
Each subgrant has been completed in compliance with the approved SOW. The Grantee must conduct a site visit or collect photographs for a project subgrant to ensure the approved SOW was completed;
Each subgrant has been completed in compliance with all environmental mitigation conditions attached to it;
Actual expenditures have been documented and are consistent with the SF-424A or SF424C; All program income has been deducted from total project costs as specified in 44 CFR Section 13.25(g)(1);
All project work was performed in accordance with all required permits and applicable building codes as modified or protected by the approved project; For projects involving an insurable facility, the required hazard insurance (e.g., NFIP) has been secured;
Geospatial coordinates, in the form of latitude and longitude with an accuracy of +/- 20 meters (64 feet), have been provided for the project. For minor localized flood reduction, hazardous fuels reduction, and soil stabilization projects, an accurate recording of the official acreage, using open file formats geospatial files (i.e., shapefiles), has been submitted;
For new or updated hazard mitigation plans, a final copy of the FEMA-approved and community-adopted plan has been submitted; and
For planning related activities, the activity is consistent with 44 CFR Parts 201 or 206 (HMGP).
Part VII. Award Administration Information 67
DRAFT
Part VII. Award Administration Information 68
For project-specific requirements, see the Appendices and the Addendum to this HMA Unified Guidance. Grantees should close out subgrants as activities are completed. In addition, as cost underruns are identified, the Grantee should submit de-obligation requests to FEMA.
The subgrantee is required to keep records for at least 3 years from the date when the Grantee submits to FEMA the single or final expenditure report for the subgrantee in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 705 and 44 CFR Section 13.42.
For additional information about closeout for property acquisition and structure demolition or relocation projects, see Addendum, Parts A.13 and A.15. For additional information about closeout for mitigation reconstruction projects, see Addendum, Part D.9.
D.2 Grant Closeout
The Grantee has up to 90 days following the expiration of the grant POP to liquidate valid expenditures incurred during the POP. Cost underruns remaining after the post-POP liquidation period date must be reported to FEMA for de-obligation. The closeout process for the Grantee involves the following steps:
The Grantee ensures all subgrants have been closed out as identified in Part VII, D.1; The Grantee reconciles/adjusts subgrant costs, ensures that non-Federal share costs are documented, and ensures that all costs submitted are eligible according to the FEMAapproved SOW; The Grantee receives and processes cost adjustments or returns unobligated funds to FEMA via SMARTLINK or PARS. Final payment is made to the Grantee; The Grantee submits a closeout letter to FEMA with supporting documentation, including:
Statement that SOW(s) has been completed as approved and all EHP requirements have been satisfied;
SF-425 (for PARS, the final SF-425 is also submitted via PARS); SF-270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement, if applicable, or request for deobligation of unused funds, if applicable; FEMA Form 20-18, Report on Government Property, if applicable; and The Grantee notifies FEMA that the grant is ready for final closeout.
The Grantee must maintain the complete grant closeout records file for at least 3 years from the submission date of its single or last expenditure report in accordance with 44 CFR Section
13.42. For HMGP, FEMA can track closeouts using the Project Closeout module in NEMIS.
DRAFT
Part VII. Award Administration Information 69
D.2.1 Update of Repetitive Loss Database
Grantees with projects that mitigate a repetitive loss property, as identified by the NFIP, must update the NFIP Repetitive Loss Database as project activities are completed.
For acquisition and demolition or relocation projects, Grantees must provide this update when there is no longer an insurable structure on the property; and For elevation, reconstruction, floodproofing, and minor flood control projects, Grantees must provide this update when the approved activity is complete or otherwise effective.
The NFIP defines a repetitive loss property as any insurable building for which two or more claims of more than $1,000 were paid by the NFIP within any rolling 10-year period since 1978.
At least two of the claims must be more than 10 days apart but within 10 years of each other. A repetitive loss property may or may not be currently insured by the NFIP.
Please note this definition of repetitive loss property is different from the FMA definition of repetitive loss property located in Part IX, C.1.
To gain access to sensitive NFIP data, government officials are required to obtain a User Name and Password for access to Data Exchange, the Repetitive Loss Database that is managed by the NFIP Legacy Systems Contractor. Currently, only two access accounts are permitted per State and are reserved for the State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) and the State NFIP Coordinator or their designee. To obtain a User Name and Password for access to Data Exchange, send an email with your name, title, contact information, and the reason that access to Data Exchange is needed to FEMA. Once FEMA authorizes you for NFIP Legacy Systems access to Data Exchange, you will be notified via email.
To maintain accurate, up-to-date records for all repetitive loss properties mitigated as a result of HMA grant funds, FEMA requires that the Grantee submit FEMA Form AW-501, NFIP Repetitive Loss Update Worksheet (OMB 1660-0022). Form AW-501 must be submitted along with documentation supporting the change in the mitigated status of a structure (e.g., elevation certificate). This form must be submitted for each property mitigated with HMA grant funds prior to closeout. The AW-501 form and instructions for completing and submitting it can be found on the FEMA Web site: http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3244. Detailed AW-501 forms for individual repetitive loss properties can be obtained by accessing Data Exchange and selecting the link to AW-501 data after selecting to look up property by property locator or repetitive loss number.
States accessing NFIP data via the electronic systems (Data Exchange) are advised of, and must acknowledge, the sensitive nature of the information and the need to prevent the release of the data to unauthorized users. When the data is released to a local government by either the State or the appropriate FEMA Regional Office, the local government must be notified in writing that the records relating to individuals and individual properties are:
DRAFT
being made available through the FEMA routine use policy for the specific purposes of mitigation planning, research, analysis, and feasibility studies consistent with the NFIP and for uses that further the floodplain management and hazard mitigation goals of the States and FEMA.
Part VII. Award Administration Information 70
DRAFT
PART VIII. FEMA CONTACTS
Part VIII identifies resources that may help Applicants and subapplicants request HMA funds.
If requested, FEMA will provide technical assistance to both Applicants and subapplicants regarding:
General questions about the HMA programs;
Specific questions about subapplications after the application period opens; Feasibility and effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and EHP compliance during the application period; and
The eGrants application processes.
For additional technical assistance resources, including HMA application and award resources, see Part X, C.7.
FEMA encourages Applicants and subapplicants to seek technical assistance early in the application period by contacting their appropriate FEMA Regional Office. Table 6 shows which States are served by each FEMA Region.
Contact information for FEMA Regional Offices is provided at http://www.fema.gov/regionaloperations.
Contact information for each SHMO is provided at http://www.fema.gov/state-hazardmitigation-officers.
Table 6: FEMA Regions
FEMA
Region Serving
I Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont II New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands III Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia IV Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee V Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin VI Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas
VII Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
VIII Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming IX Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands X Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington
Part VIII. FEMA Contacts 71
DRAFT
PART IX. ADDITIONAL PROGRAM
GUIDANCE
Part IX provides additional information applicable to assistance available under each particular HMA grant program. This section supplements the information provided in Parts I through VIII, and the unique project type guidance included in the Addendum. Part IX does not provide all of the information necessary to apply for funding through an HMA program and must be read in conjunction with other relevant sections of this guidance.
A. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Most of the information that an Applicant or subapplicant needs to apply for an HMGP award or that a Grantee or subgrantee needs to manage a HMGP award is provided in Parts I through VIII, and Part X. This section contains supplemental guidance specific to HMGP.
A.1 Grantee Request for HMGP Funds
HMGP is authorized through a Presidential major disaster declaration for activities that provide a beneficial impact to the disaster area. A Governor may request that HMGP funding be available throughout the State or only in specific jurisdictions. For information regarding the declaration process and authorization of HMGP, see 44 CFR Part 206, Subpart B, and seek assistance from the appropriate FEMA Regional Office.
The Governor’s Authorized Representative (GAR) serves as the grant administrator for all funds provided under HMGP 44 CFR Section 206.438 (d). The GAR responsibilities include providing technical advice and assistance to eligible subapplicants and/or subgrantees and ensuring that all potential subapplicants are aware of available assistance for the submission of all documents necessary for grant award.
A.2 State Administrative Plan
The State Administrative Plan is a procedural guide that details how the Grantee will administer HMGP. Grantees must have a current Administrative Plan approved by FEMA before receiving HMGP funds. The State Administrative Plan may become an annex or chapter of the State’s overall emergency response and operations plan or comprehensive mitigation program strategy.
At a minimum, the State Administrative Plan must:
Designate the State agency that will act as Grantee; Identify the SHMO;
Identify staffing requirements and resources, including a procedure for expanding staff temporarily following a disaster, if necessary;
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 72 DRAFT
Establish procedures to guide implementation activities, including Grantee management costs and distribution of subgrantee management costs; and Comply with 44 CFR Section 206.437.
A.2.1 Designation of Grantee and SHMO
Typically, the agency designated to act as Grantee manages the State responsibilities for Federal and State disaster assistance and is responsible for meeting the mitigation planning requirement.
Although a single agency may administer the funding, the Governor may establish an interagency mitigation team to manage the State mitigation program.
The SHMO is typically responsible for managing the State’s mitigation program, coordinating the mitigation team, and developing as well as implementing the hazard mitigation plan. States often rely on staff from the emergency management agency or other State agencies to augment the staff of the SHMO following a disaster.
A.2.2 Staffing Requirements and the Mitigation Team
The State Administrative Plan should identify the positions and minimum number of personnel needed to implement HMGP. Key positions may include clerical, administrative, and financial management staff; program specialists to support mitigation planning and the implementation of mitigation activities and to conduct BCAs; and environmental planners. However, the organizational structure of the staff should remain flexible as it may be augmented as needed with emergency management agency staff, staff from other State agencies, or temporary staff or contractors hired to administer HMGP effectively. The State Administrative Plan should include a procedure for expanding staff resources and using HMGP management costs.
The mitigation team may include representatives of agencies involved with emergency management, natural resources, floodplain management, environmental issues and historic and archeological preservation, soil conservation, transportation, planning and zoning, housing and economic development, building regulations, infrastructure regulations or construction, public information, insurance, regional and local government, academia, business, and non-profit organizations. With the varied backgrounds and specialized expertise of members, the team creates interagency, interdisciplinary insight regarding risks and potential solutions. The interagency aspect of the team can diffuse political pressure on the Grantee agency and increase the availability of resources. The mitigation team may support the Grantee agency by:
Developing a comprehensive mitigation strategy;
Supporting development and implementation of the State Mitigation Plan; Communicating with local governments regarding State mitigation priorities; Building public and business/industry support for mitigation initiatives; Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 73 DRAFT
Reviewing, assigning priority, and recommending mitigation actions for implementation; and
Seeking funding for implementation of mitigation measures.
A.2.3 Procedures to Guide Implementation Activities
The State Administrative Plan must establish procedures to:
Identify and notify potential subapplicants of the availability of HMGP funding; Provide potential subapplicants information on the application process, program
eligibility, and deadlines;
Determine subapplicant eligibility;
Provide information for environmental and floodplain management reviews in conformance with 44 CFR Parts 9 and 10;
Process requests for advances of funds and reimbursements; Monitor and evaluate the progress and completion of funded mitigation activities; Review and approve cost overruns;
Process appeals;
Provide technical assistance as required to subgrantees; Comply with the administrative requirements of 44 CFR Parts 13 and 206; Comply with audit requirements of 44 CFR Section 13.26 and OMB Circular A-133; and Provide quarterly progress reports to FEMA on funded mitigation activities.
A.2.4 Sliding Scale
The maximum amount of HMGP funding available is calculated using a “sliding scale” formula based on a percentage of the estimated total Federal assistance under the Stafford Act, excluding administrative costs for each Presidential major disaster declaration. Applicants with a FEMAapproved State or Tribal Standard Mitigation Plan may receive:
Up to 15 percent of the first $2 billion of the estimated aggregate amount of disaster assistance;
Up to 10 percent for the next portion of the estimated aggregate amount more than $2 billion and up to $10 billion; and
Up to 7.5 percent for the next portion of the estimated aggregate amount more than $10 billion and up to $35.333 billion.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 74 DRAFT
Applicants with a FEMA-approved State or Indian Tribal Enhanced Mitigation Plan are eligible for HMGP funding not to exceed 20 percent of the estimated total Federal assistance under the Stafford Act, up to $35.333 billion of such assistance, excluding administrative costs authorized for the disaster.
A.2.5 Management Costs
The Grantee must amend its State
Administrative Plan to include procedures for
determining the reasonable amount or
percentage of management costs that it will pass
through to the subgrantee, as well as closeout
and audit procedures before FEMA will obligate
any management costs (see 44 CFR Sections
207.4(c) and 207.7(b)). The State will
determine the amount, if any, of management
costs it will pass through to the subgrantee.
FEMA has not established any minimum for
what constitutes a reasonable amount.
A.2.6 Submission and Approval
Deadlines
THE HMGP FINAL LOCK-IN
Because lock-in estimates are subject to
change, FEMA will not obligate more than 75
percent of any estimate before the final lock-in
is calculated.
Total State Management Cost (SMC)
(4.89% of Total Available HMGP):
Prior to 12 Months:
FEMA obligates up to 75 percent of
total HMGP funding separate from SMC
At 12 Months:
FEMA establishes the full HMGP ceiling
amount
At 18 Months:
For a catastrophic disaster, the final
lock-in amount PD\EH adjusted upon
A State may forward a new or updated State Administrative Plan to FEMA for approval at any time. A State should review and update their plan annually and must review and update it following a Presidential major disaster declaration if required to meet current policy guidance or changes to the administration of the program. If a review indicates that there will be no changes to the current State Administrative Plan, the Grantee should notify FEMA of this within 90 days of the disaster declaration.
A.3 HMGP Funding
FEMA will determine the funding it will make available for the HMGP by a lock-in, which will act as a ceiling for funds available to a Grantee, including its subgrantees. The level of HMGP funding available for a given disaster is based on a percentage of the estimated total Federal assistance under the Stafford Act, excluding administrative costs for each Presidential major disaster declaration, as described in 44 CFR Section 206.432(b) and Part III, A of this guidance.
An initial estimate will be provided within 35 days of the disaster declaration or soon thereafter, in conjunction with calculation of the preliminary lock-in amount(s) for management costs.
The 6-month estimate is no longer the floor or a guaranteed minimum funding for HMGP. The 12-month lock-in is the maximum amount available. Prior to 12 months, total obligations are Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 75 DRAFT
limited to not more than 75 percent of any current estimate, without the concurrence of the Regional Administrator or Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) with Disaster Recovery Manager authority and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO).
FEMA will establish the HMGP funding ceiling for each disaster at 12 months after the disaster declaration. This amount, also known as the “lock-in” value for HMGP, is the maximum that FEMA can obligate for eligible HMGP activities. The OCFO will continue to provide HMGP estimates prior to 12 months; however, these estimates will not represent a minimum or floor amount.
In rare circumstances, when a catastrophic disaster has resulted in major fluctuations of projected disaster costs, FEMA may, at the request of the Grantee, conduct an additional review 18 months after the disaster declaration. If the resulting review shows that the amount of funds available for HMGP is different than previously calculated, the final lock-in amount will be adjusted accordingly.
The Grantee must justify in writing to the Regional Administrator any requests to change the amount of the lock-in or perform subsequent reviews. The Regional Administrator will recommend to the Chief Financial Officer whether to approve the change. Changes to the lockin will not be made without the approval of the Chief Financial Officer. The Chief Financial Officer may change the amount of the lock-in if it is determined that the projections used to determine the lock-in were inaccurate to such a degree that the change to the lock-in would be material, or for other reasons in his or her discretion that may reasonably warrant such changes.
The Chief Financial Officer will not make such changes without consultation with the Grantee and the Regional Administrator.
A.4 HMGP Management Costs
The amounts, allowable uses, and procedures for HMGP management costs are established in 44 CFR Part 207. Examples of allowable management costs are listed in Part IV, D.1.3. HMGP management costs will be provided at a rate of 4.89 percent of the HMGP ceiling. The Grantee, in its State Administrative Plan, will determine the amount, if any, of management costs it will pass through to the subgrantee (see Part IX, A.2.5). Management costs are provided outside of and separate from the HMGP ceiling amount. There is no additional cost-share requirement for HMGP management costs.
FEMA will establish the amount of funds that it will make available for management costs by a lock-in, which will act as a ceiling for management cost funds available to a Grantee, including its subgrantees. FEMA will determine, and provide to the Grantee, management cost lock-ins at 30 days (or soon thereafter), at 6 months, and at 12 months from the date of declaration, or upon the calculation of the final HMGP lock-in ceiling, whichever is later.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 76 DRAFT
Upon receipt of the initial 30-day lock-in, Grantees may request that FEMA obligate 25 percent of the estimated lock-in amount(s) to the Grantee. No later than 120 days after the date of declaration, the Grantee must submit documentation to support costs and activities for which the projected lock-in for management cost funding will be used. In extraordinary circumstances, FEMA may approve a request by a Grantee to submit supporting documentation after 120 days.
FEMA will work with the Grantee to approve or reject the documentation submitted within 30 days of receipt. If the documentation is rejected, the Grantee will have 30 days to resubmit it for reconsideration and approval. FEMA will not obligate any additional management costs unless the Grantee’s documentation is approved.
The documentation for management costs must include:
A description of activities, personnel requirements, and other costs for which the Grantee will use the management cost funding provided under this part; The Grantee’s plan for expending and monitoring the funds provided under this part and ensuring sufficient funds are budgeted for grant closeout; and An estimate of the percentage or amount of pass-through funds for management costs provided under this part that the Grantee will make available to subgrantees, and the basis, criteria, or formula for determining the subgrantee percentage or amount (e.g., number of projects, complexity of projects, etc.).
Upon receipt of the 6-month management costs lock-in, and if the Grantee can justify a bona fide need for additional management costs, the Grantee may submit a request to the Regional Administrator for an interim obligation. Any interim obligation must be approved by the Chief Financial Officer and will not exceed an amount equal to 10 percent of the 6-month lock-in amount, except in extraordinary circumstances.
The Grantee must justify in writing to the Regional Administrator any requests to change the amount of the lock-in or the cap, extend the time period before lock-in, or request an interim obligation of funding at the time of the 6-month lock-in adjustment. The Regional Administrator will recommend to the Chief Financial Officer whether to approve the extension, change, or interim obligation. Extensions, changes to the lock-in, or interim obligations will not be made without the approval of the Chief Financial Officer.
For additional information on HMGP management costs see 44 CFR Part 207.
A.5 Eligible Subapplicants
In addition to the eligible subapplicants described in Part IV, A.1, PNP organizations may act as the subapplicant for HMGP. PNP organizations or institutions that own or operate a PNP facility are defined in 44 CFR Section 206.221(e). Each subapplication from a PNP must include either:
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 77 DRAFT
An effective ruling letter from the IRS granting tax exemption under Section 501(c), (d), or (e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended; or State certification, under State law, of non-profit status.
A qualified conservation organization, as defined at 44 CFR Section 80.3(h), is the only PNP organization eligible to apply for property acquisition and demolition or relocation projects.
A.6 Submission of HMGP Subapplications
The Grantee must submit all HMGP subapplications to FEMA within 12 months of the date of the disaster declaration. Upon written request and justification from the Grantee, FEMA may extend the application submission timeline in 30- to 90-day increments not to exceed a total extension of 180 days, in the event of extraordinary conditions. For additional information see 44 CFR Section 206.436. Additional time may be available based on meeting the criteria of the Stafford Act, Section 301. To qualify, the requestor must justify how the event for which the additional time is needed created the situation in which the Grantee cannot meet the regulatory administrative deadline.
Extensions beyond regulatory time limits will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Stafford Act Section 301 provides relief for the rare circumstance when the magnitude of the event for which the extension is requested prevents the Grantee from meeting program administrative requirements. The Grantee must make the request to the Flood Insurance and Mitigation Administration Associate Administrator by submitting through the Regional Administrator, or if there is a Joint Field Office submit through the FCO. The Regional Administrator or FCO will provide his or her comments or concurrence and forward the request. The maximum time available is 90 days. The request must describe the conditions that preclude the Grantee from meeting the administrative requirements and must include a summary of current status, planned actions to meet the extension, and any resources that may be required. FEMA will consider the request and will provide a decision within 30 days.
A.7 Grant Cost-share Requirements
HMGP grants are required to have at least a 25 percent non-Federal cost share.
The Grantee may choose to meet the cost-share requirement by ensuring a minimum 25 percent non-Federal share for the overall HMGP grant award, rather than on an individual activity basis.
Grantees choosing this option should develop a cost-share strategy as part of their Administrative Plan for review and approval by FEMA.
If an Applicant chooses to fund individual projects with non-Federal cost shares below 25 percent, the Applicant must notify FEMA. If an Applicant intends to implement this approach, the State Administrative Plan must explain how the Applicant will:
Apply this approach in a fair and impartial manner to all subapplications; Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 78 DRAFT
Monitor the cost share for the overall grant throughout the POP; and Address any cost-share shortfalls that may occur during the POP and at closeout.
If, at closeout, the non-Federal cost share of the grant is less than 25 percent of the total amount, FEMA will recoup the amount of Federal funds needed to bring the cost share into compliance.
A.8 Post-Disaster Code Enforcement Projects
HMGP will fund extraordinary post-disaster code enforcement costs. Extraordinary needs associated with enforcing local building codes during post-disaster reconstruction may include the performance of building department functions, such as building inspections, and the performance of Substantial Damage determinations under the NFIP.
A post-disaster code enforcement project may be funded through HMGP if:
The Grantee assesses existing building code and/or zoning and land use management regulations and determines that they adequately address the identified natural hazard risks.
The Grantee determines that the local community has adopted a building code consistent with a recent edition of the International Code Series, conforms to State-model or Statemandated building codes, and, if the local community participates in the NFIP, has local floodplain management measures in place that meet the minimum requirements for participation in the NFIP;
The Grantee evaluates the building department and determines that its organization, funding, and enforcement and inspection processes are sufficient to ensure proper enforcement of all applicable laws and ordinances during normal operations; and The Grantee evaluates the building department and identifies deficiencies, and the local community agrees to address any deficiencies identified in this evaluation as a condition of receiving the subgrant. This agreement can be a simple statement attached to the evaluation and should include an implementation schedule that is mutually satisfactory to the Grantee, the subgrantee, and FEMA. The agreement should include an acknowledgment by the subgrantee that failure to meet the agreed upon implementation schedule can result in the loss of all current and/or future building department assistance used to support post-disaster operations.
The State’s assessment can be accomplished through various mechanisms. Any assessment should include a discussion of the community’s compliance with the NFIP. Suggested approaches include (but are not limited to):
Employing a mutual-aid agreement among communities to use other local building officials;
Entering into a contractual agreement with a State or regional government entity that is well versed in building codes and proper administration of a building department; Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 79 DRAFT
Entering into a contractual agreement with one of the model building code organizations; Employing building code experts temporarily;
Deploying FEMA mitigation staff knowledgeable of building codes and proper building department administration. Former local building officials can often provide the requisite knowledge; or
Requesting the Hazard Mitigation Technical Assistance Program.
HMGP funds only extraordinary post-disaster code enforcement costs. Extraordinary postdisaster code enforcement costs are the costs to ensure disaster-resistant codes are implemented during disaster reconstruction after normal costs of the building department are deducted. Costs might include staffing, equipment purchases, office rental, transportation, supplies, and similar expenses. Extraordinary costs equal disaster costs minus normal costs and cost of fees or fee waivers.
Disaster costs can be determined by the payroll and office expenses during the period of assistance. If the subapplicant must purchase new equipment, only the equivalent rental cost of this equipment for the period of assistance is considered a disaster cost. The revenues generated by fees for inspections or permits, whether collected or not, must be deducted;
Normal costs can be determined from a monthly average of payroll and office expenses during the most recent 12-month period that does not included Federal, State, or local disaster declarations; and
If a community has already received Federal assistance for meeting emergency building inspection needs (such as determining habitability), these costs must be deducted in determining extraordinary costs.
A.9 Advance Assistance
Advance Assistance is authorized by the SRIA, which
allows advancing up to 25 percent of the HMGP
ceiling or $10 million to Applicants, whichever is less.
The purpose of Advance Assistance is to provide
States and Tribes resources to develop mitigation
strategies and obtain data to prioritize, select, and
develop complete HMGP applications in a timely
manner. FEMA expects States and Tribes that receive
Advance Assistance to submit complete project
applications up to or over the HMGP ceiling by the
application deadline.
ADVANCE ASSISTANCE
FEMA may provide up to 25 percent
(with a limit of $10 million) of the amount
of estimated HMGP costs to States and
Indian Tribal governments in advance of
incurring eligible costs.
FEMA expects States that receive
Advance Assistance to submit complete
project applications up to or over the
available HMGP ceiling by the final
HMGP project application deadline.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 80 DRAFT
FEMA will continue to implement Advance Assistance on a pilot basis for any State or Indian Tribal government having a declaration with an open application period. Advance Assistance is not automatic.
States and Tribes may request Advance Assistance by submitting an HMGP application form to the Regional Mitigation Division Director. The application must identify the proposed use of the funds, including costs in sufficient detail for each proposed activity and milestones for submitting completed HMGP applications to FEMA. Advance Assistance is subject to the HMGP cost-share requirements and SFM (i.e., FEMA will not obligate funds until the State has an immediate need for the funds). Advance Assistance is part of the HMGP ceiling amount.
States may use Advance Assistance for the following activities:
Obtain staff or resources to develop a cost-share strategy and identify potential match funding;
Evaluate facilities or areas to determine appropriate mitigation actions; Incorporate environmental considerations early into program decisions; Collect data for BCAs, environmental compliance and other program requirements; Scope and prioritize hazard mitigation projects (including State coordination of local projects) to incorporate sustainability, resilience, and renewable building concepts; Develop hazard mitigation projects, including engineering design and feasibility actions; Incorporate SFM principles into mitigation project work schedules and budgets that will facilitate compliance with the legislative requirement to expend obligated funds within 24 months;
Conduct meetings, outreach, and coordination with potential subapplicants and community residents to identify potential participants for property acquisition and demolition or relocation projects;
Conduct engineering design and feasibility studies for larger or complex community drainage projects or critical facility retrofits (such as for phased projects); Conduct hydrologic and hydraulic studies for unmapped flood zones or Approximate A Zone areas where communities propose to submit hazard mitigation projects; Perform professional cost estimation services to aid consistency in project budgeting across subapplications;
Rectify data consistency needs for other project application categories, such as EHP, cost sharing mechanisms, and work schedules; and
Complete necessary documents for deed restricting properties such as acknowledgement of voluntary participation, or Model Acknowledgement of Conditions for Mitigation of Property in a Special Flood Hazard Area with FEMA Grant Funds for property acquisition projects.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 81 DRAFT
Requirements and Deliverables Associated with Advance Assistance and Resulting HMGP Applications may include:
Documentation of Advance Assistance Accomplishments: Applicants must submit documentation to FEMA to support that they accomplished all activities listed in their Advance Assistance application.
Submission of Projects up to the HMGP Ceiling: FEMA expects States that receive Advance Assistance to submit complete project applications up to or over the available HMGP ceiling by the final HMGP project application deadline. Accounting for Use of Advance Assistance Funds: For accounting and audit purposes, the State must submit sufficient financial detail to demonstrate that no costs claimed under Advance Assistance are duplicated in subsequent HMGP project applications or in State Management Cost budgets.
Documentation of Environmental Considerations: The Applicant must document that effects to environmental and historic resources were considered early in the planning and project scoping processes. This requirement is in addition to ensuring environmental compliance.
For additional information on Advance Assistance, please see Appendix L, Advance Assistance Optional Application.
A.10 Phased Projects
In general, sufficient technical information is provided by the Applicant or subapplicant to allow FEMA to make an eligibility determination on a subapplication. The costs to obtain this information are generally eligible as pre-award costs (See Part V, F.2 for more information).
However, in rare circumstances it is beyond the subapplicant’s technical and financial resources to provide the complete technical information required for a full eligibility or environmental review of a complex project. The Applicant and FEMA may provide technical assistance to the subapplicant to develop this complete body of technical data by approving a subapplication to complete a Phase I design, engineering, environmental, or feasibility study. The Phase I study provides FEMA with a technical body of information mutually concurred on by the subapplicant, the Applicant, and FEMA to determine project eligibility. If the results of the Phase I review indicate that the project meets HMGP requirements, the project would then be eligible for funding for construction under a Phase II approval. Phase I study funding is part of the project’s total estimated cost, and is subject to HMGP cost-share requirements.
The use of a Phase I study should be limited to complex projects that require technical or environmental data beyond the scope of that generally required for a typical HMGP project. The following provides guidelines and outlines the process for selecting projects for Phase I/Phase II project approval.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 82 DRAFT
A.10.1 Pre-Screening Process
The project must meet the following pre-screening criteria for a conditional Phase I approval in the following sequence:
State or Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan – The proposed project must be in conformance with the State or Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan; Justification for Selection of the Proposed Project – Justification must be provided for the selection of the proposed solution after consideration of a range of options; Potential Cost-effectiveness – The project demonstrates potential cost-effectiveness based on a preliminary assessment of anticipated project benefits and cost. The subapplicant must be aware that this preliminary assessment is solely for the purpose of the Phase I prescreening process and is not the final cost-effectiveness determination; EHP Review – Initial environmental review to identify major EHP compliance issues.
The Phase I study is categorically excluded from NEPA review; and Hydrologic and Hydraulic or Other Relevant Technical Data – The subapplicant provides available hydrologic and hydraulic data based on existing models and other relevant technical data, as appropriate.
A.10.2 Phase I Conditional Approval
The Applicant and FEMA may approve projects meeting the above pre-screening requirements for technical assistance under a Phase I conditional approval. FEMA and the Applicant will coordinate closely to ensure mutual concurrence on all data and technical information as the Phase I technical review process proceeds. The sequence for the process is as follows:
Hydrologic and Hydraulic or Other Relevant Technical Data – If appropriate, the Applicant and FEMA will review the hydrologic and hydraulic or other technical data provided by the subapplicant;
Preliminary Engineering Design – Based upon the technical data, the subapplicant develops a preliminary engineering design and layout and cost estimates with ad-hoc technical assistance from the Applicant and FEMA;
EO 11988 – If applicable, based upon the technical data and revised engineering design, the project must demonstrate compliance with floodplain management requirements under this EO. If a FIRM amendment or revision will be necessary, the Applicant and FEMA will provide the subapplicant with technical assistance to meet this requirement; Refinement of the Cost-Effectiveness Assessment – Based upon the revised design and cost estimates, the Applicant and FEMA will refine the preliminary assessment of costeffectiveness conducted in the Phase I pre-screening process. This will result in a final Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 83 DRAFT
BCR to evaluate the project’s cost-effectiveness, which will include all the project costs including Phase I; and
EHP Review – The Applicant and FEMA will conduct a review of the revised project design to ensure EHP compliance. The project will meet EHP requirements before Phase II approval.
A.10.3 Phase II Approval-Construction Process
If the project is determined to be eligible, technically feasible, cost-effective, and compliant with EHP requirements under the Phase I technical review, the project may then be approved for construction under Phase II.
A.11 The 5 Percent Initiative
Some mitigation activities are difficult to evaluate using FEMA-approved cost-effectiveness methodologies. Up to 5 percent of the total HMGP funds may be set aside by the Grantee to pay for such activities. These funds are not eligible to be used in situations where the mitigation activities can be evaluated under FEMA-approved cost-effectiveness methodologies but do not meet the required BCA threshold.
To be eligible for the 5 Percent Initiative, activities must:
Be difficult to evaluate against traditional program cost-effectiveness criteria; Comply with all applicable HMGP eligibility criteria as well as with Federal, State, and local laws and ordinances;
Be consistent with the goals and objectives of the State or Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) and local or Tribal mitigation plans; and
Be submitted for review with a narrative that indicates that there is a reasonable expectation that future damage or loss of life or injury will be reduced or prevented by the activity.
Activities that might be funded under the 5 Percent Initiative include:
The use, evaluation, and application of new, unproven mitigation techniques, technologies, methods, procedures, or products;
Equipment and systems for the purpose of warning citizens of impending hazards; Purchase of generators or related equipment, such as generator hook-ups; Hazard identification or mapping and related equipment for the implementation of mitigation activities;
GIS software, hardware, and data acquisition whose primary aim is mitigation; Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 84 DRAFT
Public awareness or education campaigns about mitigation; and Evaluation of model building codes in support of future adoption and/or implementation.
A.11.1 Availability of Additional Funds for Tornado Mitigation FEMA allows increasing the 5 Percent Initiative amount up to 10 percent for a Presidential major disaster declaration for tornadoes and high winds at the discretion of the Grantee. The increased initiative funding can be used for activities that address the unique hazards posed by tornadoes.
To qualify for this funding, the Grantee must, in its State or Indian Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan, or other comprehensive plan, address warning of citizens (ensuring 90 percent coverage), further the safe room concept in construction or rehabilitation of residences or commercial structures, and address sheltering in mobile home parks. The plan, also, must explain how the Grantee will implement an ongoing public education program so that citizens are aware of warning systems and their meaning and the availability of in-home shelter designs.
Similar information should be included in the subgrantee’s local or Indian Tribal mitigation plan.
A.12 Appeal Process
An eligible subapplicant, subgrantee, or Grantee may appeal any FEMA determination regarding subapplications or applications submitted for funding under HMGP. FEMA will only consider appeals in writing that contain documentation that justifies the request for reconsideration. The appeal should specify the monetary figure in dispute and the provisions in Federal law, regulation, or policy with which the appellant believes the initial action was inconsistent.
Whether the appeal is originated by the Grantee or by a subapplicant/subgrantee, the appeal must be submitted in writing to the Regional Administrator by the Grantee. The Regional Administrator is the decision-maker on first appeals. If there is an appeal of the Regional Administrator’s decision on any first appeal, the Assistant Administrator for Mitigation is the decision-maker for the second appeal. In some cases the appeal may involve highly technical issues. In these cases, FEMA may consult independent scientific or technical experts on the subject under appeal.
Appellants must make appeals within 60 days after receipt of a notice of the action that is being appealed. The Grantee must forward any appeal from a subapplicant/subgrantee with a written recommendation to the Regional Administrator within 60 days of receipt. Within 90 days following the receipt of an appeal, FEMA will notify the Grantee in writing of the disposition of the appeal or of the need for additional information.
If additional information is needed, FEMA will determine a date by which the information must be provided. Within 90 days following the receipt of the requested additional information (or 90 days after the information was due), FEMA will notify the Grantee in writing of the disposition of the appeal.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 85 DRAFT
FEMA will provide its decision to the Grantee in writing. If the decision is to grant the appeal, the Regional Administrator will take the appropriate action.
Additional information regarding appeals can be found at 44 CFR Section 206.440.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 86 DRAFT
B. Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program
Most of the information that an Applicant or subapplicant needs to apply for a PDM award or that a Grantee or subgrantee needs to manage a PDM award is provided in Parts I through VIII, and Part X. This section contains supplemental guidance specific to the PDM Program.
B.1 Allocation
FEMA will allocate funds for eligible projects to States and Territories consistent with applicable, statutory base and/or maximum allocations in the authorizing and appropriation laws.
FEMA will administer the program as directed by Congress.
B.2 Small Impoverished Communities
Grants awarded to small impoverished communities may receive a Federal cost share of up to 90 percent of the total amount approved under the grant award to implement eligible approved activities in accordance with the Stafford Act. A small impoverished community must:
Be a community of 3,000 or fewer individuals identified by the State as a rural community that is not a remote area within the corporate boundaries of a larger city; Be economically disadvantaged, with residents having an average per capita annual income not exceeding 80 percent of the national per capita income, based on best available data. For the most current information, go to http://www.bea.gov; Have a local unemployment rate that exceeds by 1 percentage point or more the most recently reported, average yearly national unemployment rate. For the most current information, go to http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm; and Meet other criteria required by the Applicant in which the community is located.
Applicants must certify and provide documentation of the community status with the appropriate subapplication to justify the 90 percent cost share. If documentation is not submitted with the subapplication, FEMA will provide no more than the standard 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
B.3 Information Dissemination
Under the PDM Program, subapplicants may include eligible information dissemination activities in their project or planning subapplication. Eligible information dissemination activities include public awareness and education (brochures, workshops, videos, etc.) that directly relate to the eligible mitigation activity proposed in the subapplication. Information dissemination activities are limited to a maximum of 10 percent of the total cost of a subapplication.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program 87 DRAFT
B.4 Applicant Ranking of Subapplications
Applicants must rank each subapplication included in their grant application in order of their priority for funding. Each subapplication must be assigned a unique rank in eGrants. Applicants must provide an explanation for the rank given to each subapplication and demonstrate how it is consistent with their State or Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan.
B.5 Selection
FEMA will identify subapplications for further review based on Applicant rank. FEMA may identify a subapplication for further review out of rank order based on considerations such as program priorities, available funds, and policy factors.
FEMA will notify Applicants whose subapplications are identified for further review; however, this notification and conducting FEMA-requested pre-award activities are not considered notification or guarantee of a grant award.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program 88 DRAFT
C. Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
Most of the information that an Applicant or subapplicant needs to apply for an FMA award or that a Grantee or subgrantee needs to manage an FMA award is provided in Parts I through VII, and Part IX. This section contains supplemental guidance specific to FMA.
C.1 Eligible Properties
Properties included in a project subapplication for FMA funding must be NFIP-insured at the time of the application submittal. Flood insurance must be maintained through completion of the mitigation activity and for the life of the structure.
Residential or non-residential properties currently insured with the NFIP are eligible to receive FMA funds. In order to receive an increased Federal cost share, properties must meet one of the definitions below (consistent with the legislative changes made in the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012):
A severe repetitive loss property is a structure that:
(a) Is covered under a contract for flood insurance made available under the NFIP; and (b) Has incurred flood related damage –
(i) For which 4 or more separate claims payments have been made under flood insurance coverage with the amount of each such claim exceeding $5,000, and with the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeding $20,000; or (ii) For which at least 2 separate claims payments have been made under such coverage, with the cumulative amount of such claims exceeding the market value of the insured structure.
A repetitive loss property is a structure covered by a contract for flood insurance made available under the NFIP that:
(a) Has incurred flood-related damage on 2 occasions, in which the cost of the repair, on the average, equaled or exceeded 25 percent of the market value of the structure at the time of each such flood event; and
(b) At the time of the second incidence of flood-related damage, the contract for flood insurance contains increased cost of compliance coverage.
C.2 Repetitive Loss Strategy
To be eligible for an increased Federal cost share, a FEMA-approved State or Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan that addresses repetitive loss properties must be in effect at the time of grant award and the property that is being submitted for consideration must be a repetitive loss property. Guidance on addressing repetitive loss properties can be found in the State MultiHazard Mitigation Planning Guidance and in 44 CFR Section 201.4(c)(3)(v). The Repetitive Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Flood Mitigation Assistance Program 89 DRAFT
Loss Strategy must identify the specific actions the State has taken to reduce the number of repetitive loss properties, which must include severe repetitive loss properties, and specify how the State intends to reduce the number of such repetitive loss properties. In addition, the hazard mitigation plan must describe the State’s strategy to ensure that local jurisdictions with severe repetitive loss properties take actions to reduce the number of these properties, including the development of local or Tribal mitigation plans. For information about the Repetitive Loss Database, see Part VII, D.2.1.
C.3 Cost Sharing
Consistent with the legislative changes made in the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012, cost-share availability under the FMA program depends on the type of properties included in the grant. For example, severe repetitive loss properties may receive up to 100 percent Federal funding and repetitive loss properties may receive up to 90 percent. In the case of mitigation activities to severe repetitive loss structures:
FEMA may contribute up to 100 percent Federal funding of all eligible costs, if the activities are technically feasible and cost-effective; or The expected savings to the NFIF from expected avoided damages through acquisition or relocation activities, if the activities will eliminate future payments from the NFIF for severe repetitive loss structures through an acquisition or relocation activity. In the case of mitigation activities to repetitive loss structures, FEMA may contribute up to 90 percent Federal funding of all eligible costs.
In the case of all other mitigation activities, FEMA may contribute up to 75 percent Federal funding of all eligible costs.
Structures with varying cost-share requirements can be submitted in one application. Applicants must provide documentation in the project application showing how the final cost share was derived. The final cost share will be entered into the eGrants system and documentation showing how the final cost share was derived must be attached to the application.
C.4 Applicant Ranking of Subapplications
Applicants must rank each subapplication included in their grant application in order of priority for funding. Each subapplication must be assigned a unique rank in eGrants. Applicants must provide an explanation for the rank given to each subapplication and demonstrate how it is consistent with their State or Tribal (Standard or Enhanced) Mitigation Plan.
C.5 Selection
FEMA will identify subapplications for further review based on a number of criteria, including but not limited to: savings to the NFIF, applicant rank, and property status (e.g., repetitive loss Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Flood Mitigation Assistance Program 90 DRAFT
property, severe repetitive loss property). FEMA also may identify a subapplication for further review out of rank order based on considerations such as program priorities, available funds, and other factors.
FEMA will notify Applicants whose subapplications are identified for further review; however, this notification and conducting FEMA-requested pre-award activities are not considered notification or guarantee of a grant award.
Part IX. Additional Program Guidance: Flood Mitigation Assistance Program 91 DRAFT
PART X. APPENDICES
A. Acronyms
ABFE Advisory Base Flood Elevation
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
BCA Benefit-Cost Analysis
BCR Benefit-Cost Ratio
BFE Base Flood Elevation
BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs
BLM Bureau of Land Management
CBRA Coastal Barrier Resource Act
CBRS Coastal Barrier Resource System
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CRS Community Rating System
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOB Duplication of Benefits
DOI Department of the Interior
DOP Duplication of Programs
DOT Department of Transportation
eGrants Electronic Grants
EHP Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation
EO Executive Order
EOC Emergency Operations Center
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Endangered Species Act
FCO Federal Coordinating Officer
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
Part X. Appendix A: Acronyms 92
DRAFT
FIMA Flood Insurance and Mitigation Administration
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FIS Flood Insurance Study
FMA Flood Mitigation Assistance
FY Fiscal Year
GAR Governor’s Authorized Representative
GIS Geographic Information System
GSTF Greatest Savings to the Fund
Hazus Hazards United States
HMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance
HMGP Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
IBC International Building Code
ICC Increased Cost of Compliance
IRS Internal Revenue Service
ITP Independent Third Party
NAP Non-Insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program
NEMIS National Emergency Management Information System
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NFIA National Flood Insurance Act
NFIF National Flood Insurance Fund
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPS National Park Service
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
O&M Operations and Maintenance
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OPA Otherwise Protected Area
PARS Payment and Reporting System
Part X. Appendix A: Acronyms 93
DRAFT
PDM Pre-Disaster Mitigation
PNP Private Non-profit
POC Point of Contact
POP Period of Performance
SBA Small Business Administration
SEI Structural Engineering Institute
SF Standard Form
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area
SFM Strategic Funds Management
SHMO State Hazard Mitigation Officer
SOW Scope of Work
SRIA Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013
Stafford Act Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act TB Technical Bulletin
URA Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S.C. United States Code
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFA U.S. Fire Administration
USFS U.S. Forest Service
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
WUI Wildland-Urban Interface Area
Part X. Appendix A: Acronyms 94
DRAFT
B. Glossary
Applicant: The entity, such as a State, Territory, or Indian Tribal government, applying to FEMA for a grant that will be accountable for the use of the funds. Once grant funds are awarded, the Applicant becomes the “Grantee.”
Base Flood: A flood having a 1 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.
Base Flood Elevation (BFE): The elevation shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Zones AE, AH, A1–A30, AR, AR/A, AR/AE, AR/A1–A30, AR/AH, AR/AO, V1–V30, and VE that indicates the water surface elevation resulting from a flood that has a 1 percent chance of equaling or exceeding that level in any given year.
Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA): A quantitative procedure that assesses the cost-effectiveness of a hazard mitigation measure by taking a long-term view of avoided future damages as compared to the cost of a project.
Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR): A numerical expression of the cost-effectiveness of a project calculated as the net present value of total project benefits divided by the net present value of total project costs.
Biomass: Biological material derived from living, or recently living organisms.
Building: A structure with two or more outside rigid walls and a fully secured roof that is affixed to a permanent site; a manufactured home or a mobile home without wheels, built on a chassis and affixed to a permanent foundation, that is regulated under the community’s floodplain management and building ordinances or laws. “Building” does not mean a gas or liquid storage tank or a recreational vehicle, park trailer, or other similar vehicle.
Clean-site certification: A letter from the appropriate local, State, Indian Tribal, or Federal entity determining that no further remedial action is required to protect human health or the environment.
Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS): A geographic unit designated to serve as a protective barrier against forces of wind and tidal action caused by coastal storms and serving as habitat for aquatic species. Congress restricted Federal spending and assistance for development-related activities within CBRS units to protect them from further development.
Federal flood insurance is unavailable in these areas. CBRS units are identified on FEMA FIRMs.
Coastal High Hazard Area: An area of special flood hazard extending from offshore to the inland limit of a primary frontal dune along an open coast and any other area subject to high velocity wave action from storms or seismic sources.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 95
DRAFT
Combustible material: Any material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions anticipated, will ignite and burn or will add appreciable heat to an ambient fire.
Community Rating System (CRS): A program developed by FEMA to provide incentives for those communities in the NFIP that have gone beyond the minimum floodplain management requirements to develop extra measures to provide protection from flooding.
Cost-effectiveness: Determined by a systematic quantitative method for comparing the costs of alternative means of achieving the same stream of benefits for a given objective. The benefits in the context of hazard mitigation are avoided future damages and losses. Cost-effectiveness is determined by performing a BCA.
Cost share: The portion of the costs of a federally assisted project or program not borne by the Federal Government.
Defensible space: An area that is either natural or manmade, where material capable of allowing a fire to spread unchecked has been treated, cleared, or modified to slow the rate and intensity of an advancing wildfire and to create an area for fire-suppression operations to occur.
Dwelling: A building designed for use as a residence for no more than four families or a singlefamily unit in a building under a condominium form of ownership.
Elevated Building: A building that has no basement and a lowest floor that is elevated to or above the BFE by foundation walls, shear walls, posts, piers, pilings, or columns. Solid perimeter foundations walls are not an acceptable means of elevating buildings in Zones V and VE.
Environmental Benefits: Environmental benefits are direct or indirect contributions that ecosystems make to the environment and human populations. For FEMA BCA, certain types of environmental benefits may be realized when homes are removed and land is returned to open space uses. Benefits may include flood hazard reduction; an increase in recreation and tourism; enhanced aesthetic value; and improved erosion control, air quality, and water filtration.
Equipment: Tangible, nonexpendable, personal property having a useful life of more than 1 year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit. A Grantee may use its own definition of equipment provided such definition would at least include all equipment defined above.
Federal Agency: Any department, independent establishment, Government corporation, or other agency of the executive branch of the Federal Government, including the U.S. Postal Service, but not the American National Red Cross.
Federal Cognizant Agency: The Federal agency responsible for reviewing, negotiating, and approving cost allocation plans or indirect cost proposals developed on behalf of all Federal agencies. The OMB publishes a list of Federal Cognizant Agencies.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 96
DRAFT
Firebreak: a strip of cleared land that provides a gap in vegetation or other combustible material that is expected to slow or stop the progress of a wildfire.
Fire-proofing: Removal or treatment of fuels to reduce the danger of fires igniting or spreading. (e.g., fire-proofing roadsides, campsites, structural timber).
Fire-resistant material: Material that has a property that prevents or retards the passage of excessive heat, hot gases, or flames under conditions of use.
Fire retardant: A chemical applied to lumber or other wood products to slow combustion and flame spread.
Fire Severity Zone: Three concentric zones around a building used to determine the most effective design for defensible space.
Flammability: The relative ease with which fuels ignite and burn regardless of the quantity of the fuels.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM): Official map of a community on which FEMA has delineated both the special hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the community.
Floodplain: Any land area that FEMA has determined has at least a 1 percent chance in any given year of being inundated by floodwaters from any source.
Floodplain Management: The operation of an overall program of corrective and preventive measures for reducing flood damage, including but not limited to, emergency preparedness plans, flood control works, and floodplain management regulations.
Floodway: The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height. Communities regulate development in these floodways to ensure that there are no increases in upstream flood elevations.
Freeboard: Freeboard is a factor of safety usually expressed in feet above a flood level for purposes of floodplain management. “Freeboard” tends to compensate for the many unknown factors that could contribute to flood heights greater than the height calculated for a selected size flood and floodway conditions, such as wave action, bridge openings, and the hydrological effect of urbanization of the watershed.
Fuel break: A natural or manmade change in fuel characteristics that affects fire behavior so that fires burning into them can be more readily controlled.
Fuel condition: Relative flammability of fuel as determined by fuel type and environmental conditions.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 97
DRAFT
Governor’s Authorized Representative (GAR): The individual, designated by the Governor, who serves as the grant administrator for all funds provided under HMGP; the person empowered by the Governor to execute, on behalf of the State, all necessary documents for disaster assistance.
Grant: An award of financial assistance for a specified purpose by the Federal government to an eligible Grantee.
Grantee: The entity, such as a State, Territory, or Indian Tribal government to which a grant is awarded and that is accountable for the use of the funds provided. The Grantee is the entire legal entity even if only a particular component of the entity is designated in the grant award document.
Green Open Space: Green open space is land that does not directly touch a natural body of water, such as a river, lake, stream, creek, or coastal body of water.
Hazardous fuels reduction: An area strategically located in relation to predicted fire hazard and occurrence where the vegetation has been permanently modified or replaced so that fires burning into it can be more easily controlled (e.g., vegetation management activities).
Hazard mitigation planning: A process used by governments to identify risks, assess vulnerabilities, and develop long-term strategies for protecting people and property from the effects of future natural hazard events.
HMGP Lock-In Ceiling: The level of HMGP funding available to a Grantee for a particular Presidential major disaster declaration.
Identified for Further Review: Subapplications identified for further review contain sufficient information for a preliminary determination of cost-effectiveness and feasibility. In certain instances, FEMA may work with Applicants to confirm cost-effectiveness and feasibility.
Identification for further review is not a notification of award.
Ignition-resistant construction: Construction standards based on use of fire-resistant materials, non-combustible materials, and 1-hour fire-rated assemblies.
Increased Cost of Compliance: Coverage for expenses a property owner must incur, above and beyond the cost to repair the physical damage the structure actually sustained from a flooding event, to comply with mitigation requirements of State or local floodplain management ordinances or laws; acceptable mitigation measures are structure elevation, dry floodproofing, structure relocation, structure demolition, or any combination thereof.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 98
DRAFT
Indian Tribal Government: A federally recognized governing body of an Indian or Alaska Native Tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of the Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian Tribe under the Federally Recognized Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. This does not include Alaska Native corporations, the ownership of which is vested in private individuals.
Indirect cost: Cost that is incurred by a Grantee for a common or joint purpose benefitting more than one cost objective that is not readily assignable to the cost objectives specifically benefited.
Indirect cost rate: Percentage established by a Federal department or agency for a Grantee to use in computing the dollar amount it charges to the grant to reimburse itself for indirect costs incurred in doing the work of the grant activity.
Management costs: Any indirect costs, administrative expenses, and any other expenses not directly chargeable to a specific project that are reasonably incurred by a Grantee or subgrantee in administering and managing a grant or subgrant award. For HMGP, management cost funding is provided outside of Federal assistance limits defined at 44 CFR Section 206.432(b).
Manufactured (Mobile) home: A structure, transportable in one or more sections that is built on a permanent chassis and designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when attached to the required utilities.
Mitigation: Any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property from a hazard event.
Mitigation activity: A mitigation measure, project, plan, or action proposed to reduce risk of future damage, hardship, loss, or suffering from disasters. The term “measure” is used interchangeably with the term “project” in this program.
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP): Provides the availability of flood insurance in exchange for the adoption of a minimum local floodplain management ordinance that regulates new and Substantially Improved development in identified flood hazard areas.
Non-combustible material: Material of which no part will ignite and burn when subjected to fire, such as any material conforming to ASTM E 136.
Nonflammable: Material unlikely to burn when exposed to flame under most conditions.
Non-Federal funds: Financial resources provided by sources other than the Federal Government. The term does not included funds provided to a State or local government through a Federal grant unless the authorizing statute for that grant explicitly allows the funds to be used as cost share for other Federal grants.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 99
DRAFT
Non-Residential structure: Includes, but is not limited to small business concerns, places of worship, schools, farm buildings (including grain bins and silos), pool houses, clubhouses, recreational buildings, mercantile structures, agricultural and industrial structures, warehouses, hotels and motels with normal room rentals for less than 6 months’ duration, and nursing homes.
Office of Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation: Integrates the protection and enhancement of environmental, historic, and cultural resources into the FEMA mission and FEMA programs and activities; ensures that FEMA activities and programs related to disaster response and recovery, hazard mitigation, and emergency preparedness comply with Federal environmental and historic preservation (EHP) laws and Executive orders; and provides EHP technical assistance to FEMA staff, local, State, and Federal partners, and Grantees and subgrantees.
Otherwise Protected Areas (OPAs): Designation created by the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act. Flood insurance is restricted in OPAs even though they are not in the CBRS and may receive other forms of Federal assistance. OPAs are identified on FEMA FIRMs.
Period of Performance (POP): The period of time during which the Grantee is expected to complete the grant activities and to incur and expend approved funds.
Pile burning: Piling removed vegetation into manageable piles and burning the individual piles during safe and approved burning conditions.
Post-FIRM Building: A building for which construction or Substantial Improvement occurred after December 31, 1974, or on or after the effective date of an initial FIRM, whichever is later.
Practicable: An action that is capable of being done within existing constraints. The test of what is practicable depends upon the situation and includes consideration of all pertinent factors, such as environment, cost, and technology.
Pre-FIRM Building: A building for which construction or Substantial Improvement occurred on or before December 31, 1974, or before the effective date of an initial FIRM.
Prescribed burning: The deliberate and managed use of fire ignited by management actions to meet specific fuels management objectives.
Presidential Major Disaster: Any natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind-driven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought) or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under the Stafford Act to supplement the efforts and available resources of States, local governments, and disaster relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 100
DRAFT
Private non-profit (PNP): Any non-governmental agency or entity that currently has: (i) an effective ruling letter from the Internal Revenue Service granting tax exemption under section 501(c), (d), or (e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; or (ii) satisfactory evidence from the State that the organization or entity is a non-profit one organized or doing business under State law.
Project: Any mitigation measure or action proposed to reduce risk of future damage, hardship, loss, or suffering from disasters.
Public Assistance: Supplementary Federal assistance provided under the Stafford Act to State and local governments or certain PNP organizations other than assistance for the direct benefit of individuals and families. For further information, see 44 CFR Part 206, Subparts G and H. Fire Management Assistance Grants under section 420 of the Stafford Act are also considered Public Assistance.
Replacement cost value: The cost to replace property with materials of like kind and quality, without any deduction for depreciation.
Riparian Area: The land that directly abuts a natural body of water, such as a river, lake, stream, creek, or coastal body of water.
Slash: The accumulation of vegetative materials such as tops, limbs, branches, brush, and miscellaneous residue results from forest management activities such as thinning, pruning, timber harvesting, and wildfire hazard mitigation.
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA): The land in the floodplain within a community subject to a 1 percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. An area having special flood, mudflow, or flood-related erosion hazards, and shown on a Flood Hazard Boundary Map or a FIRM as Zone A, AO, A1–A30, AE, A99, AH, AR, AR/A, AR/AE, AR/AH, AR/AO, AR/A1– A30, V1–V30, VE, or V.
State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO): The representative of a State government who is the primary point of contact with FEMA, other Federal agencies, and local units of government in the planning and implementation of pre- and post-disaster mitigation activities.
Structural fire protection: The protection of homes or other buildings from wildland fire.
Subapplicant: The entity, such as a community/local government, Tribal government, or PNP, that submits a subapplication for FEMA assistance to the Applicant. Once funding is awarded, the subapplicant becomes the “subgrantee.”
Subgrant: An award of financial assistance under a grant by a Grantee to an eligible subgrantee.
Subgrantee: The entity, such as a community/local government, Tribal government, or PNP to which a subgrant is awarded and who is accountable to the Grantee for the use of the funds provided.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 101
DRAFT
Substantial Damage: Damage of any origin sustained by a building whereby the cost of restoring the building to its before-damaged condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the building before the damage occurred.
Wildfire: An uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels, exposing and possibly consuming structures.
Wildland-Urban Interface Area: That geographical area where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with wildland or vegetative fuels.
All terms not listed above are used consistent with the term definitions used in 44 CFR unless otherwise specified.
Part X. Appendix B: Glossary 102
DRAFT
C. Additional Resources
Description Web Link or Contact Information
1. NFIP Resources
National Flood Insurance Program http://www.floodsmart.gov Floodplain Management http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program Map Service Center http://msc.fema.gov
Telephone: (877) FEMA-MAP (336-2627)
FIRMs http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-1/floodinsurance-rate-map-firm ABFEs Mississippi: http://www.fema.gov/news-release/abfes-are-bestresources-mississippians-rebuilding-now Louisiana: http://www.fema.gov/news-release/2006/02/06/postkatrina-policy-building-elevations Flood Insurance Studies http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-2/floodinsurance-study-fis FEMA Form AW-501 http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program1/mitigated-properties-updates
2. Mitigation Planning and Risk Assessment Resources
Hazard Mitigation Planning Overview http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-planning-overview Local Mitigation Planning Handbook
(FR302-094-1)
http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7209
Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?fromSearch=fromse arch&id=4859
Mitigation Planning Guidance http://www.fema.gov/mitigation-planning-laws-regulationsguidance Mitigation Planning Policies http://www.fema.gov/mitigation-planning-laws-regulationsguidance Mitigation Ideas: A Resource for Reducing
Risk to Natural Hazards
http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6938
Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local
Planning: Case Studies and Tools for
Community Officials
http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7130
Mitigation Planning How-To Guides (FEMA) http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-planning-resources Hazard Mitigation Planning Risk Assessment http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-planning-riskassessment IS-318: Mitigation Planning for Local and
Tribal Communities
http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/courseOverview.aspx?code =is-318
IS-328: Plan Review for Local Mitigation
Plans
http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/courseOverview.aspx?code =IS-328
Hazus http://www.fema.gov/hazus
USGS National Map http://nationalmap.gov/
USGS Natural Hazards Gateway http://www.usgs.gov/natural_hazards/ Part X. Appendix C: Additional Resources 103
DRAFT
Description Web Link or Contact Information
3. Benefit-Cost Analysis Resources
BCA Software and Helpline Telephone: (866) 222-3580
Email: [email protected]
BCA Overview http://www.fema.gov/benefit-cost-analysis
BCA Policies http://www.fema.gov/benefit-cost-analysis
4. Feasibility and Effectiveness Resources
Engineering Helpline Telephone: (866) 222-3580
Email: [email protected]
Engineering Case Studies http://www.fema.gov/grant-applicant-resources Property Acquisition Projects http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1861 Structure Elevation Projects http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1862 Minor Localized Flood Reduction Projects http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1863 Non-Structural Seismic Retrofit http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1865 Structural Seismic Retrofit http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1866 Wind Shutters http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1864
5. EHP Resources
EHP Program http://www.fema.gov/environmental-planning-and-historicpreservation-program EHP Helpline Telephone: (866) 222-3580
Email: [email protected]
EHP Guidance http://www.fema.gov/environmental-planning-and-historicpreservation-program/environmental-historic-preservation-1 EHP eLearning Tool http://www.fema.gov/environmental-planning-and-historicpreservation-program/elearning-tool-fema-grant-applicants-45 EHP Policies http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance-policy EHP Training http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/IS253a.asp National Register of Historic Places http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/
6. eGrants and NEMIS (HMGP) Resources
FEMA Enterprise Service Desk – for HMGP
(NEMIS-MT) issues
Telephone: (888) HLP-FEMA (1-888-457-3362)
Email: [email protected]
FEMA Enterprise Service Desk – eGrants
issues
Telephone: (877) 611-4700
eGrants Resources Web site http://www.fema.gov/mitigation-egrants-system eGrants Applicant Quick Reference Guide http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3266 eGrants Subapplicant Quick Reference Guide http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3267 eGrants System for Grant Applicants online
course (IS-31)
http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/is31a.asp
eGrants System for Subgrant Applicants
online course (IS-30)
http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/is30a.asp
Part X. Appendix C: Additional Resources 104
DRAFT
Description Web Link or Contact Information
eGrants Internal System online course (IS-32) http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/courseOverview.aspx?code =is-32
MT eGrants Internal Quick Reference Guide http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?fromSearch=fromse arch&id=5885
NEMIS-MT Frequently Asked Questions: http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-grant-program/nationalemergency-management-information-system-mitigation-module http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4913
NEMIS-MT User Manual http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4909
7. HMA Application and Award Resources
HMA Overview http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance HMA Helpline Telephone: (866) 222-3580
Email: [email protected]
HMA Policies http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance-policy
8. Acquisition Project Resources
Model Deed Restriction http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6327 Model Acknowledgement of Conditions for
Mitigation in Special Flood Hazard Area
http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3592
Model Statement of Assurances http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6365 Notice of Voluntary Interest http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3595 http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3596
Statement of Voluntary Participation http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3333
9. Mitigation Reconstruction References
ASCE/SEI 24-05, Flood Resistant Design and Construction, January 2006 ASCE/SEI 7-05, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, 2005 International Building Code (IBC), 2006 edition
International Code Council, Reducing Flood Losses Through the International Codes, 3rd Edition, 2008 FEMA P-55, Coastal Construction Manual, 4th Edition, August 2011 FEMA P-424, Design Guide for Improving School Safety in Earthquakes, Floods and High Winds, December 2010
FEMA 489, Mitigation Assessment Team Report: Hurricane Ivan in Alabama and Florida, August 2005 FEMA P-499, Home Builder’s Guide to Coastal Construction Technical Fact Sheet Series, December 2010 FEMA 543, Design Guide for Improving Critical Facility Safety from Flooding and High Winds, January 2007 FEMA 549, Mitigation Assessment Team Report: Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf Coast, July 2006 FEMA 550, Recommended Residential Construction for Coastal Areas: Building on Strong and Safe Foundations, 2nd Edition, December 2009
FEMA 551, Selecting Appropriate Mitigation Measures for Floodprone Structures, March 2007 FEMA 577, Design Guide for Improving Hospital Safety in Earthquakes, Floods, and High Winds: Providing Protection to People and Buildings, June 2007
Part X. Appendix C: Additional Resources 105
DRAFT
Description Web Link or Contact Information
10. Structure Elevation References
ASCE/SEI 24-05, Flood Resistant Design and Construction, January 2006 FEMA P-55, Coastal Construction Manual, 4th Edition, August 2011 FEMA P-259, Engineering Principles and Practices of Retrofitting Floodprone Residential Structures, 3rd Edition, January 2012
FEMA P-312, Homeowners Guide to Retrofitting, 2nd Edition, December 2009 FEMA 347, Above the Flood: Elevating Your Flood Prone House, May 2000 FEMA P-499, Home Builder’s Guide to Coastal Construction Technical Fact Sheet Series, December 2010 FEMA Technical Bulletin TB-1, Openings in Foundation Walls and Walls of Enclosures, 2008 FEMA Technical Bulletin TB-5, Free-of-Obstruction Requirements, 2008 FEMA Technical Bulletin TB-9, Design and Construction Guidance for Breakaway Walls, 2008 FEMA Form 81-31, NFIP Elevation Certificate, February 2013 Part X. Appendix C: Additional Resources 106
DRAFT
D. Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance Reference Description Web Link
REGULATIONS
2 CFR Part 215, Uniform
Administrative Requirements
for Grants and Agreements
with Institutions of Higher
Education, Hospitals, and
Other Non-Profit
Organizations (OMB Circular
A-110)
This part contains Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) guidance to Federal agencies on the
administration of grants to and agreements with
institutions of higher education, hospitals, and other
non-profit organizations. The guidance sets forth
standards for obtaining consistency and uniformity in
the agencies’ administration of those grants and
agreements.
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title 02/2cfr215_main_02.tpl
2 CFR Part 220, Cost
Principles For Educational
Institutions (OMB Circular A21)
Establishes principles for determining costs
applicable to grants, contracts, and other
agreements with educational institutions.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
circulars_a021_2004
2 CFR Part 225, Cost
Principles for State, Local,
and Indian Tribal
Governments (OMB Circular
A-87)
Establishes principles and standards for determining
costs for Federal awards carried out through grants,
cost reimbursement contracts, and other agreements
with State and local governments and federally
recognized Indian Tribal governments.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/te
xt/textidx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title
02/2cfr225_main_02.tpl
2 CFR Part 230, Cost
Principles for Non-Profit
Organizations (OMB Circular
A-122)
Establishes principles for determining costs of
grants, contracts and other agreements with nonprofit organizations. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
circulars_a122_2004
26 CFR Section 1.170A-14,
Qualified Conservation
Contributions
Discusses deductions allowable for charitable
contributions of interests in properties.
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgibin/retrieveECFR?gp=13&SID=7
e3a7c14f52556f38d469032c58a
4507&ty=HTML&h=L&r=SECTI
ON&n=26y3.0.1.1.1.0.2.19
40 CFR Part 312, Innocent
Landowners, Standards for
Conducting All Appropriate
Inquiries
Provide standards and practices for “all appropriate
inquiries” for the purposes of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act sections 101(35)(B)(i)(I) and
101(35)(B)(ii) and (iii).
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title 40/40cfr312_main_02.tpl
44 CFR Part 9, Floodplain
Management and Protection
of Wetlands
Sets forth policy, procedure, and responsibilities to
implement and enforce Executive Order (EO) 11988,
Floodplain Management, and EO 11990, Protection
of Wetlands.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part9.xml 44 CFR Part 10, FEMA procedures for implementing the National http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C Environmental Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Provides policy FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFRConsiderations and procedures to enable FEMA officials to account for environmental considerations when
authorizing/approving major actions that have a
significant impact on the environment.
2008-title44-vol1-part10.xml
44 CFR Part 13, Uniform
Administrative Requirements
for Grants and Cooperative
Agreements to State and
Local Governments
Establishes uniform administrative rules for Federal
grants and cooperative agreements and subgrants to
State, local, and Indian Tribal governments.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part13.xml Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 107 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
44 CFR Section 59.1,
General Provisions,
Definitions
Defines terms used in the Emergency Management
and Assistance Federal Regulations
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part59.xml 44 CFR Part 60, Criteria for Contains regulations for sale of flood insurance; http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C Land Management and Use criteria to determine the adequacy of a community’s floodplain management regulations; and the
minimum standards for the adoption of floodplain
management regulations in flood-prone areas.
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part60.xml 44 CFR Sections 60.3(b)(5)
and (c)(4), Criteria for Land
Management and Use and
Floodplain Management
Criteria for Floodprone
Areas
Regulations regarding obtaining the elevation of
residential and non-residential structures.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-
part60.xml#seqnum60.3
44 CFR Part 79, Flood
Mitigation Grants
Prescribes actions, procedures, and requirements
for the administration the Flood Mitigation Assistance
grant programs.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part79.xml 44 CFR Part 80, Property
Acquisition and Relocation
for Open Space
Provides actions, procedures, and requirements for
the administration of FEMA mitigation assistance for
projects to acquire property for open space purposes
under all Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part80.xml 44 CFR Part 201, Mitigation
Planning
Provides information on requirements and
procedures for mitigation planning as required by the
Stafford Act.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part201.xml 44 CFR Part 206, Federal Prescribes policies and procedures for implementing http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C Disaster Assistance for the sections of Public Law 93-288 (the Stafford Act) FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFRDisasters Declared On or that are delegated to the director of FEMA, including 2008-title44-vol1-part206.xml After November 23, 1988 the administration of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).
44 CFR Part 207,
Management Costs
Implements section 324, Management Costs, of the
Stafford Act, providing actions, procedures, and
policies for HMGP management costs.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/C
FR-2008-title44-vol1/xml/CFR2008-title44-vol1-part207.xml 49 CFR Part 24, Uniform
Relocation Assistance and
Real Property Acquisition for
Federal and Federally
Assisted Programs
Promulgates rules to ensure that owners of real
property displaced or acquired by Federal or
federally assisted programs are treated fairly,
consistently, and equitably, and that agencies who
implement these regulations do so efficiently and
cost effectively.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/te
xt/textidx?c=ecfr;rgn=div5;view=text;no
de=49%3A1.0.1.1.18;idno=49;si
d=4c3367f93b8162bf6daaf0a88f
e20a0e;cc=ecfr
49 CFR Part 29,
Governmentwide Debarment
and Suspension
(Nonprocurement)
This part adopts a government-wide system of
debarment and suspension for nonprocurement
activities.
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title 49/49cfr29_main_02.tpl
Federal Acquisition
Regulations (FAR) Subpart
31.2 The FAR codifies and publishes uniform policies and procedures for acquisition by all executive agencies.
Subpart 31.2 refers to Contracts with Commercial
Organizations.
http://www.acquisition.gov/far/
Internal Revenue Code of
1954, as amended, Sections
170(h) (3) and (4)
Provides definitions for qualified conservation
organizations and conservation purpose, including
specific information regarding historic structure
certification.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscod
e/text/26/170
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 108 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
Internal Revenue Code of
1954, as amended, Sections
501(c), (d), and (e)
Provides criteria for tax-exempt organizations. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscod e/text/26/501
National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) Technical
Bulletin 3-93, NonResidential Floodproofing –
Requirements and
Certification
Provides guidance on the NFIP regulations
concerning watertight construction and the required
certification for floodproofed non-residential buildings in Zones A, AE, A1–A30, AR, AO, and AH whose
lowest floors are below the Base Flood Elevation.
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=1716
STATUTES
Immigration and Nationality
Act
Provides a definition for the term “national of the
United States.”
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/u
scis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9a
c89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoi
d=f3829c7755cb9010VgnVCM1
0000045f3d6a1RCRD&vgnextch
annel=f3829c7755cb9010VgnV
CM10000045f3d6a1RCRD
Appalachian Regional Provides information on the authority of the http://www.arc.gov/about/USCod Commission Funds, 40 Appalachian Regional Commission to make grants eTitle40SubtitleIV.asp#14321 U.S.C. 14321(a)(3), Grants for administrative expenses and lists what those and other assistance expenses may and may not include. Also provides information on what the local development district’s
contributions should be.
Bunning-BereuterBlumenauer Flood Insurance
Reform Act of 2004 (Public
Law 108-264), Part 102
A bill to amend the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968 to reduce losses to properties for which
repetitive flood insurance claim payments have been
made.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PL
AW-108publ264/pdf/PLAW108publ264.pdf
Biggert-Waters Flood
Insurance Reform Act. P.L.
112-141 July 6, 2012
Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act that
proposed changes to Mitigation Assistance Grants
related to Flood Mitigation.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PL
AW-112publ141/pdf/PLAW112publ141.pdf
Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42
U.S.C. 2000d et seq., Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act
Prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color,
and national origin in programs and activities
receiving Federal financial assistance.
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/
cor/coord/titlevi.php
Coastal Barrier Resources Designated various undeveloped coastal barrier http://uscode.house.gov/downlo Act (Public Law 97-348; 16 islands, depicted by specific maps, for inclusion in ad/pls/16c55.txt U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Coastal Barrier Resource System. Areas so designated were made ineligible for direct or indirect
Federal financial assistance that might support
development, including flood insurance, except for
emergency life-saving activities.
Endangered Species Act Prohibits Federal agencies from funding actions that http://epw.senate.gov/esa73.pdf (Public Law 93-205; 16 would jeopardize the continued existence of U.S.C. 1531–1544) endangered or threatened species or adversely modify critical habitat.
Federal Crop Insurance Act,
as amended, 7 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.
Promotes the national welfare by improving the
economic stability of agriculture through a sound
system of crop insurance.
http://www.agriculturelaw.com/lin
ks/cropins/statute.htm
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 109 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) (Public
Law 91–190; 42 U.S.C. 4321
and 4331–4335)
Declares a national policy that encourages
productive and enjoyable harmony between man
and his environment; promotes efforts that will
prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and
biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of
man; enriches the understanding of the ecological
systems and natural resources important to the
Nation; and establishes a Council on Environmental
Quality.
http://www.nps.gov/history/locallaw/FHPL_NtlEnvirnPolcy.pdf National Flood Insurance Act
of 1968, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 4001 et seq.
The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 created
the Federal Insurance Administration and made
flood insurance available for the first time. The
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 made the
purchase of flood insurance mandatory for the
protection of property located in the Special Flood
Hazard Area.
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=2216
National Flood Insurance
Reform Act of 1994 (Public
Law 103-325)
Amended the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973,
providing tools to make the NFIP more effective in
achieving its goals of reducing the risk of flood
damage to properties and reducing Federal
expenditures for uninsured properties that are
damaged by floods.
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=2217
National Historic
Preservation Act (Public Law
89-665; 16 U.S.C. 470 et
seq.)
Establishes a program for the preservation of historic
and prehistoric resources deemed important to our
understanding of prehistory and U.S. history and
created the National Register of Historic Places.
http://www.achp.gov/docs/nhpa
%202008-final.pdf
National Register of Historic
Places
The official list of the Nation’s historic places worthy of preservation. It is part of a national program to
support public and private efforts to identify,
evaluate, and protect our historic and archeological
resources.
http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/
Non-Insured Crop Disaster
Assistance Program, 7
U.S.C. 7333
Provides financial assistance to producers of noninsurable crops when low yields, loss of inventory, or prevented planting occur due to natural disasters.
http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/ne
wsReleases?area=newsroom&s
ubject=landing&topic=pfs&newst
ype=prfactsheet&type=detail&ite
m=pf_20110830_distr_en_nap.h
tml
Privacy Act of 1974 (5
U.S.C. 552a)
Regulates the collection, maintenance, use, and
dissemination of personal information by Federal
executive branch agencies.
http://www.justice.gov/opcl/privst
at.htm
Public Health and Welfare,
42 U.S.C. 5133, PreDisaster Hazard Mitigation
Authorizes the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscod e/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00005
133----000-.html
Public Health and Welfare,
42 U.S.C. 5154 (a),
Insurance
Contains information on compliance with certain
regulations and maintaining insurance in regard to
Applicants and subapplicants requesting assistance
to repair, restore, or replace damaged facilities under this code.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscod
e/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00005
154----000-.html
Refugee Education
Assistance Act of 1980,
(Public Law 96-422) Part
501(e)
Allows the President to exercise authorities over
Cuban and Haitian immigrants identical to the
authorities exercised in the Immigration and
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1158.
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/c
omp2/F096-422.html
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 110 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq.
Constitutes the statutory authority for most Federal
disaster response activities, especially as they
pertain to FEMA and FEMA programs.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/st
afford_act.pdf
Secure Rural Schools and
Community SelfDetermination Act of 2000,
16 U.S.C. 500
Contains information regarding payment and
evaluation of receipts to State or Territory for schools and roads, moneys received, projections of
revenues, and estimated payments.
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/b
ills.text/106/h/h2389.pdf
Uniform Relocation Ensures that people whose real property is acquired, http://uscode.house.gov/downlo Assistance and Real or who move as a result of projects receiving Federal ad/pls/42c61.txt Property Acquisition Act of funds, will be treated fairly and equitably and will 1970 (Public Law 91-646) receive assistance in moving from the property they occupy.
DIRECTIVES
EO 11988, Floodplain Requires Federal agencies to avoid, to the extent http://www.fema.gov/plan/ehp/eh Management possible, the long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of
floodplains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a
practicable alternative.
plaws/eo11988.shtm
EO 11990, Protection of
Wetlands
Requires Federal agencies, in planning their actions,
to consider alternatives to wetland sites and limit
potential damage if an activity affecting a wetland
cannot be avoided.
http://www.fema.gov/environmen
tal-planning-and-historicpreservation-program/executiveorder-11990-protection-wetlands EO 12898, Environmental Directs Federal agencies “to make achieving http://www.fema.gov/environmen Justice for Low-Income and environmental justice part of its mission by tal-planning-and-historicMinority Populations identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs, policies, and
activities on minority and low-income populations in
the United States.”
preservation-program/executiveorder-12898-environmentaljustice EO 12372, July 14, 1982,
Intergovernmental Review of
Federal Programs
Fosters an intergovernmental partnership and
strengthens federalism by relying on State and local
processes for State and local coordination and
review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/codification/executiveorder/12372.html EO 12416, April 8, 1983,
Intergovernmental Review of
Federal Programs
Amends Section 8 of EO 12372 regarding the
content of the Director of the Office of Management
and Budget’s report and to whom the report is
submitted.
http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/codification/executiveorder/12372.html EO 12699, January 5, 1990,
Seismic Safety of Federal
and Federally assisted or
Regulated New Building
Construction
Requires that each Federal agency responsible for
the design and construction of each new Federal
building shall ensure that the building is designed
and constructed in accord with appropriate seismic
design and construction standards.
http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/FED/F
MEO/eo12699.pdf
GUIDANCE
FEMA P-85, Protecting
Manufactured Homes from
Floods and Other Hazards
(2nd Edition, November
2009)
Provides a best practices approach in reducing
damages from natural hazards to assist in protecting
manufactured homes from floods and other hazards.
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=1577
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 111 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
FEMA 317, Property
Acquisition Handbook for
Local Communities (October
1998)
A “how to” guide to help communities work through
one specific hazard mitigation alternative known as
property acquisition (also referred to as “buyout”).
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=1654
FEMA P-320, Taking Shelter Guide to help homeowners decide if they should http://www.fema.gov/plan/preven from the Storm: Building a build a shelter in their house; provides various t/saferoom/fema320.shtm Safe Room for Your Home shelter designs that can be given to a or Small Business (3rd contractor/builder.
Edition, August 2008)
FEMA P-361, Design and A guidance manual for engineers, architects, http://www.fema.gov/library/view Construction Guidance for building officials, and prospective shelter owners that Record.do?fromSearch=fromsea Community Safe Rooms presents important information about the design and rch&id=1657 (2nd Edition, August 2008) construction of residential and community safe rooms that protect people during tornado and
hurricane events.
FEMA P-424, Design Guide
for Improving School Safety
in Earthquakes, Floods, and
High Winds (December
2010)
This manual is intended to provide guidance for the
protection of school buildings from natural disasters.
This volume concentrates on grade schools, K-12.
FEMA P-424 covers earthquakes, floods, and high
winds. Its intended audience is design professionals
and school officials involved in the technical and
financial decisions of school construction, repair, and renovations.
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=1986
FEMA 489, Mitigation Summarizes the observations, conclusions, and http://www.fema.gov/library/view Assessment Team Report: recommendations that resulted from post-disaster Record.do?id=1569 Hurricane Ivan in Alabama assessments sponsored by FEMA in response to and Florida (August 2005) Florida’s 2004 hurricane season.
FEMA P-499, Home
Builder’s Guide to Coastal
Construction Technical Fact
Sheet Series (December
2010)
Presents information aimed at improving the
performance of buildings subject to flood and wind
forces in coastal environments.
http://www.fema.gov/technologytransfer/home-builders-guidecoastal-construction-technicalfact-sheet-series-fema-p-499 FEMA 543, Design Guide for Provides building professionals and decision-makers http://www.fema.gov/library/view Improving Critical Facility with information and guidelines for implementing a Record.do?id=2441 Safety from Flooding and variety of mitigation measures to reduce the High Winds: Providing vulnerability to damage and disruption of operations Protection for People and during severe flooding and high-wind events. It Buildings (January 2007) concentrates on critical facilities (hospitals, schools, fire and police stations, and emergency operation
centers).
FEMA 549, Mitigation
Assessment Team Report:
Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf
Coast (July 2006)
Evaluates and assesses damage from the hurricane
and provides observations, conclusions, and
recommendations on the performance of buildings
and other structures impacted by wind and flood
forces.
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=1857
FEMA P-55, Coastal Provides a comprehensive approach to sensible http://www.fema.gov/library/view Construction Manual, (4th development in coastal areas based on guidance Record.do?id=1671 Edition, August 2011) from over 200 experts in building science, coastal hazard mitigation, and building codes and regulatory
requirements.
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 112 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
FEMA P-550,
Recommended Residential
Construction for Coastal
Areas: Building on Strong
and Safe Foundations (2nd
Edition, December 2009)
Provides recommended designs and guidance for
rebuilding homes destroyed by hurricanes in the Gulf
Coast. The manual also provides guidance in
designing and building less vulnerable new homes
that reduce the risk to life and property.
http://www.fema.gov/library/view
Record.do?id=1853
FEMA 551, Selecting This manual is intended to provide guidance to http://www.fema.gov/library/view Appropriate Mitigation community officials for developing mitigation projects Record.do?id=2737 Measures for Floodprone that reduce or eliminate identified risks for Structures (March 2007) floodprone structures.
FEMA 577, Design Guide for The intent of the Design Guide is to provide its http://www.fema.gov/library/view Improving Hospital Safety in audience with state-of-the-art knowledge on the Record.do?id=2739 Earthquakes, Floods, and variety of vulnerabilities faced by hospitals exposed High Winds: Providing to earthquakes, flooding, and high-winds risks, as Protection to People and well as the best ways to mitigate the risk of damage Buildings (June 2007) and disruption of hospital operations caused by these events.
FEMA P-804, Wind Retrofit The purpose of this Guide is to provide guidance on http://www.fema.gov/library/view Guide for Residential how to improve the wind resistance of existing Record.do?id=4569 Buildings (December 2010) residential buildings. The content of this document should serve as guidance on retrofitting existing
buildings for improved performance during high-wind
events in all coastal regions.
Mitigation Planning
Guidance
This guidance provides information on preparing and
updating mitigation plans in compliance with the
mitigation planning regulations found at 44 CFR Part
201.
http://www.fema.gov/mitigationplanning-laws-regulationsguidance Mitigation Planning How-To
Guides (FEMA)
The guides focus on initiating and maintaining a
planning process that will result in safer communities
and are applicable to jurisdictions of all sizes and all resource and capability levels.
http://www.fema.gov/hazardmitigation-planning-resources Uniform Standards of The generally accepted standards for professional http://www.USPAP.org Professional Appraisal appraisal practice in North America. Standards are Practice (2012–2013) included for real estate, personal property, business, and mass appraisal.
Hazard Mitigation This guide provides instruction on what constitutes http://www.fema.gov/library/view Assistance Tool for Duplication of Benefits in the use of Hazard Record.do?fromSearch=fromsea Identifying Duplication of Mitigation Assistance funds for property mitigation. It rch&id=6815 Benefits (January 2013) gives direction regarding verification processes and actions that can be taken to ensure that Duplication
of Benefits does not occur.
OTHER RESOURCES
Government-to-Government
Relations with American
Indian and Alaska Native
Tribal Governments.
January 12, 1999 (Federal
Register vol. 64 no. 7)
Guides FEMA interactions with American Indian and
Alaska Native Tribal governments.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/F
R-1999-01-12/html/99-642.htm
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 113 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
OMB Circular A-94,
Guidelines and Discount
Rates for Benefit-Cost
Analysis of Federal
Programs (October 29,
1992)
Specifies certain discount rates that will be updated
annually when the interest rate and inflation
assumptions in the budget are changed.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
circulars/a094/a094.html
OMB Circular A-133, Audits
of States, Local
Governments, and NonProfit Organizations (revised
June 27, 2003 and June 26,
2007)
Sets forth standards for obtaining consistency and
uniformity among Federal agencies for the audit of
States, local governments, and non-profit
organizations expending Federal awards.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/
default/files/omb/assets/a133/a1
33_revised_2007.pdf
ASCE/SEI 24-05, Flood
Resistant Design and
Construction (2006)
Provides minimum requirements for flood-resistant
design and construction of structures located in flood
hazard areas.
https://secure.asce.org/files/esto
re/5419/40818_40818.pdf
ASCE/SEI 7-05, Minimum Provides requirements for general structural design https://secure.asce.org/files/esto Design Loads for Buildings and includes means for determining dead, live, soil, re/896/40809_40809.pdf and Other Structures (2005) flood, wind, snow, rain, atmospheric ice, and earthquake loads, and their combinations that are
suitable for inclusion in building codes and other
documents.
ASTM International
Standard E1527-05,
Standard Practice for
Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site
Assessment Process (2005)
Defines good commercial and customary practices
for conducting an environmental site assessment of
a parcel of commercial real estate.
http://www.astm.org/Standards/
E1527.htm
ASTM International
Standard E2247-08,
Standard Practice for
Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site
Assessment Process for
Forestland or Rural Property
(2008)
This practice is intended for use on a voluntary basis
by parties who wish to assess the environmental
condition of forestland or rural property of 120
acres or greater taking into account commonly
known and reasonably ascertainable information.
http://www.astm.org/Standards/
E2247.htm
International Building Code The scope of this code covers all buildings except http://publicecodes.cyberregs.co (International Code Council) three-story, and one- and two-family dwellings and townhomes. This comprehensive code features
time-tested safety concepts, structural, and fire and
life-safety provisions covering means of egress,
interior finish requirements, comprehensive roof
provisions, seismic engineering provisions,
innovative construction technology, occupancy
classifications, and the latest industry standards in
material design.
m/icod/ibc/index.htm
International Code Council,
International Wildland-Urban
Interface Code (2012)
Contains provisions addressing fire spread,
accessibility, defensible space, water supply, and
more for buildings constructed near wildland areas.
http://publicecodes.cyberregs.co
m/icod/iwuic/2012/index.htm
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 114 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
International Code Council, This guide is intended to help community officials http://www.fema.gov/library/view Reducing Flood Losses decide how to integrate the 2006 edition of the Record.do?id=2094 through the International International Codes (I-Codes) into their current Codes (3rd Edition, 2008) floodplain development and regulatory processes in order to meet the requirements to participate in the
NFIP.
International Residential
Code for One- and TwoFamily Dwellings
(International Code Council)
A comprehensive code for homebuilding that brings
together all building, plumbing, mechanical and
electrical provisions for one- and two-family
residences.
http://publicecodes.cyberregs.co
m/icod/irc/index.htm
National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) 225,
Model Manufactured Home
Installation Standard (2009
Edition)
Includes updated criteria covering the anchoring of
the home and protection against seismic events,
floods, and wind. Rules apply to single- and multisection units. http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/prod
uct.asp?pid=22509
NFPA 703, Standard for
Fire-Retardant Treated
Wood and Fire-Retardant
Coatings for Building
Materials
Provides enforcers, engineers, and architects with
the industry’s most advanced criteria for defining and
identifying fire retardant-treated wood and fireretardant coatings for building materials. http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/prod
uct.asp?pid=70312
NFPA 914, Code for Fire
Protection of Historic
Structures
Intended to improve or upgrade the fire protection
features in a wide range of historic buildings, and
address ongoing operations as well as renovation
and restoration projects.
http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/prod
uct.asp?pid=91410
NFPA 1141, Standard for Provides recommendations for planning and http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/prod Fire Protection Infrastructure installing fire protection infrastructure for new uct.asp?pid=114112 for Land Development in developments in a community.
Suburban and Rural Areas
NFPA 1144, Standard for
Reducing Structure Ignition
Hazards for Land
Development in Suburban
and Rural Areas
Covers minimum design, construction, and
landscaping elements for structures in the
wildland/urban interface.
http://www.nfpa.org/cataloghttp:/
/dnrc.mt.gov/forestry/Fire/Preven
tion/documents/WUIrewrite/NFP
A1144.pdf/
NFPA 5000 Code, Building Combines regulations controlling design, http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/prod Construction and Safety construction, quality of materials, use and uct.asp?pid=500012 Code (2012 Edition) occupancy, location, and maintenance of buildings and structures, with fire and life-safety requirements
found in NFPA codes and standards.
Firewise Communities A multi-agency effort designed to reach beyond the fire service by involving homeowners, community
leaders, planners, developers, and others in the
effort to protect people, property, and natural
resources from the risk of wildland fire—before a fire
starts.
http://www.firewise.org/
U.S. Department of Produces economic account statistics that enable http://www.bea.gov Commerce, Bureau of government and business decision-makers, Economic Analysis researchers, and the American public to follow and understand the performance of the Nation’s
economy.
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 115 DRAFT
Reference Description Web Link
U.S. Bureau of Labor and
Statistics
An independent national statistical agency that
collects, processes, analyzes, and disseminates
essential statistical data to the American public, the
U.S. Congress, other Federal agencies, State and
local governments, business, and labor.
http://stats.bls.gov
Part X. Appendix D: Referenced Regulations, Statutes, Directives, and Guidance 116 DRAFT
E. Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Project Subapplications
Applications submitted to FEMA that do not contain at least the basic components listed below may be immediately denied because there is no method to determine eligibility without this data.
Additional information may be requested during FEMA review. This information is required for all submittals, including potential substitutions.
Application Component Yes No Comment
General
Documentation included in the subapplication?
Is this a phased project?
Technical Assistance Needed? Subapplicant is encouraged to contact the State (Applicant) to request application development assistance. FEMA resources may be available but will only be provided if requested by the Applicant.
Applicants
Eligible Applicant is identified (State or local government; eligible Private, non-profit organization; or Indian Tribal government) Applicant participates in the National Flood Insurance Program Plan Requirement
Project conforms with State Mitigation Plan per 44 CFR Part 201 Project conforms with Local Mitigation Plan per 44 CFR Part 201 Project conforms with Indian Tribal Mitigation Plan per 44 CFR Part 201
Scope of Work
SOW describes the proposed solution
Alternatives considered as part of the decision-making process Project includes photographs of each structure and general project area
Project includes appropriate maps that orient the reviewer to the entire project area
Latitude and longitude are provided for each structure
SOW justifies the proposed solution as the best option over a range of alternatives
Project site is clearly identified using maps, GPS coordinates, or other means
Project addresses a repetitive problem or a significant risk to public health
Part X. Appendix E: Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Project Subapplications 117 DRAFT
Application Component Yes No Comment
Project solves a problem independently or constitutes a functional portion of a solution
Schedule
A work schedule of 3 years or less is provided
Budget/Match Source
A cost estimate/budget is provided that supports the SOW If project requires phased or incremental funding, the budget reflects amounts estimated for each funding increment
Non-Federal cost shares and match sources are identified Project should identify potential Duplication of Benefits such as Insurance, Small Business Administration loans if information is available during project development
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility
Project includes a benefit-cost analysis, or alternate costeffectiveness documentation, such as Substantial Damage verification, and located in a riverine floodplain; or a narrative supporting cost-effectiveness and request for consideration under 5 percent HMGP discretionary funding
Project includes technical information to support proposed action. For example, level of protection for drainage projects, engineering data to support proposed seismic retrofits, and population data to support safe room placement and size.
Elevations are technically feasible.
Environmental and Historic Preservation
Project includes information and documentation to demonstrate conformance with 44 CFR Part 9.6 and Part 10
Project demonstrates that it minimizes harm to the environment Project includes construction date for each structure
Project includes all available information relating to known historic, archaeological, or environmentally sensitive areas (e.g., critical Coastal Barrier Resources Act or Otherwise Protected Area)
All appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies have been consulted
Project includes environmental coordination letters or contact information to obtain required coordination information Assurances
FEMA Form 20-16A, Assurances Non-Construction Programs
FEMA Form 20-16B, Assurances Construction Programs
FEMA Form 20-16C, Certifications Regarding Lobbying, etc.
Part X. Appendix E: Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Project Subapplications 118 DRAFT
Application Component Yes No Comment
SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
Considers long-term changes to the area it proposes to protect and has manageable future maintenance and modification
requirements
Acquisition Demolition / Relocation Information
Project confirms compliance with timelines and all other criteria set forth in 44 CFR Part 80 requirements
Project includes Voluntary Participation Documentation for each property
Documentation (if needed) that the property owner is National of United States or qualified alien
For properties that are to be relocated, will the structure be relocated outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area?
Elevation Information
Project identifies the Base Flood Elevation or Advisory Base Flood Elevation
Project includes finished floor elevation (Elevation certificate is preferred)
Project includes proposed elevation height of the structure Designed and Implemented consistent with ASCE/SEI 24-05 Safe Room Information
Project includes population size and basis
Designed and implemented consistent with FEMA P-320 or
FEMA P-361
Wind Retrofit Information
Project includes proposed level of protection
Designed and implemented consistent with P-804
Drainage Information
Project includes initial technical information to support size, costs and local permitting requirements
Part X. Appendix E: Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Project Subapplications 119 DRAFT
F. Safe Room Application Using Pre-Calculated Benefits
Expedited HMGP Application for Residential Safe Rooms
The State must have an approved State Administrative Plan and State Hazard Mitigation Plan prior to grant award.
If a local jurisdiction is the subapplicant, they must have an approved local mitigation plan in place (or receive an Extraordinary Circumstances exception) prior to grant award. Each safe room included in this project must meet the criteria of FEMA P-320, Taking Shelter From the Storm, Building a Safe Room For your Home or Small Business, or FEMA P-361, Design and Construction Guidance for Community Safe Rooms.
Safe rooms cannot be placed in floodways, velocity zones, Coastal A Zones, or areas subject to coastal storm surge inundation associated with a Category 5 hurricane. If a residential safe room is sited in a Special Flood Hazard Area, the structure must be insured for Flood Damage, and a deed notice must be conveyed to retain this requirement. This project conforms with applicable Hazard Mitigation Grant Program eligibility criteria for all projects.
Applicant may request approval for pre-award costs. Implementation costs incurred prior to grant award are not eligible for reimbursement.
State (Grantee) Information
Disaster number: ____________________________
Eligible subapplicant: _____ State or local government _____ Private non-profit entity Does the project conform to the State/local mitigation plan? _____ Yes _____ No Applicant Information
Project Title: Residential Safe Room Construction/Installation Applicant ___________________________________________________________________________ Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) Code ________________________________________ Federal Tax ID Number (if required) ______________________________________________________ Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number _________________________________________ Community NFIP Status: Participating Community ID # ______________
In Good Standing ______ Non-participating _____ CRS _____ Legislative District(s) __________________________________________________________________ Part X. Appendix F: Safe Room Application Using Pre-Calculated Benefits 120 DRAFT
Application prepared by:
Name ______________________________________________________________________________ Title _______________________________________________________________________________ Address _____________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip ________________________________________________________________________ Telephone __________________ Email ___________________________________________________ Applicant Agent* _____________________________________________________________________ Title _______________________________________________________________________________ Address ____________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip ________________________________________________________________________ Telephone__________________ Email____________________________________________________ * Individual authorized to sign financial and legal documents on behalf of the Applicant Project Information
1. History of hazards and description of the vulnerability to be mitigated Sample language:
This project is being submitted in response to the recent, severe weather and tornado activity nationwide. It is the intent of the State and affected local jurisdictions to support the placement and availability of safe rooms as a means of providing life-safety level protection for our citizens.
2. Scope/description: Project includes population size and basis Sample language:
This project proposes to fund the purchase, construction/installation, and verification of 150 residential safe rooms. These safe rooms will be constructed and installed to meet FEMA P-320 or FEMA P-361 design and construction criteria, prior to reimbursement by the Applicant to the property owner; the safe rooms will be verified by a qualified professional to meet FEMA P-320 standards. Prior to closeout, all property-specific data will be provided for entry into NEMIS in order to capture full information for each mitigated property.
3. Project Useful Life: (30 years).
4. Property and Structure Information
Address, including geo-location
Floodplain map and flood zone information
Structure age
Photographs
Part X. Appendix F: Safe Room Application Using Pre-Calculated Benefits 121 DRAFT
Proposed action:
Safe room placed inside structure (no ground disturbance) Safe room placed above/below ground outside the structure (ground disturbance) Additional information if identified by FEMA/State/Applicant Environmental and Historic Preservation Compliance
Each site must be reviewed to determine compliance with environmental and historic preservation compliance requirements and to prepare necessary documentation. FEMA’s Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Hazard Mitigation Safe Room Construction (June 2011) provides efficiencies for completing the environmental review for this project.
NOTE: FEMA may enter into agreements or other negotiated arrangements with the respective State Historic Preservation Officers and Indian Tribes to allow for expedited review in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
Describe alternatives considered for this project:
Sample language:
Alternative 1 – Do nothing. This alternative will not result in substantial risk reduction and will leave many citizens exposed to future tornado and high-wind damages, including loss of life.
Alternative 2 – Community safe room or evacuation. Tornadoes do not allow for sufficient time to relocate household members to an off-site facility, and evacuation is not viable as travel in severe weather exposes evacuees to another set of risks and hazards with little certainty that they can reach safe haven.
Project Implementation Narrative
Briefly describe the Applicant’s process for selecting and prioritizing participants; describe any limits to funding, the proposed project management actions to be taken during implementation and any variations from standard quarterly reporting; and provide a list (or form) to be submitted by property owners to validate eligible costs.
Sample language:
This project limits the amount reimbursable to property owner to up to 50 percent of the cost of the safe room, not to exceed $3,500 OR This project limits the amount of each safe room to$7,000 (or other value).
Participants were prioritized based on damaged areas and dates costs were incurred. Participants will be accepted as long as funds are available. Over submittals will be considered if additional funds become available.
Quarterly reports will include current totals of completed, verified sites and associated costs for each completed site.
Part X. Appendix F: Safe Room Application Using Pre-Calculated Benefits 122 DRAFT
Applicant reserves the right to expand this project as long as the application period is open. Site verification form will be provided for each site location (Attachment 2).
Project Work Schedule (not to exceed 3 years)
Sample:
0–6 months: Initiate outreach-marketing; identify participants 3–12 months: Verify FEMA P-320 or FEMA P-361 criteria and all program eligibility requirements have been met for known sites.
12 months (prior to application period closing): Revise project if necessary to include more participants.
12–30 months: Provide quarterly progress reports indicating volume of completed verified actions; complete project implementation.
30–36 months: Collect all closeout data and complete data dissemination to local emergency medical services.
Cost-effectiveness Review
Sample language:
A cost-effectiveness evaluation has been performed for residential safe rooms in the (State of _____________ / County of ________________) and produced benefits as reflected on Table 1.
These benefits are based on general sampling statewide and are based on 3 persons per household served by each safe room.
Options for capturing additional benefits: If the benefits listed in Table 1 are not sufficient to produce a ratio greater than 1:1 for this project, additional benefits may be obtained by increasing household population, where appropriate, verifying the structure type (manufactured housing produces more benefits than standard construction), and/or using a more specific local valuation that may include higher benefits based on specific risk. Technical support is available if needed.
Budget/Funding Information
Sample budget:
Cost Item Quantity
Est. Cost
Each
Total Est.
Cost
Est. Fed
Share
Estimated
Match Share
Data Collection 150 $100 $15,000 $15,000 —
Material/Construction 150 $5,000 $750,000 $525,000(1) $225,000 Project Management 150 $200 $30,000 $30,000 —
Inspection Certification 150 $200 $30,000 $30,000 —
Design/Engineering Review 150 $200 $30,000 30,000 —
Part X. Appendix F: Safe Room Application Using Pre-Calculated Benefits 123 DRAFT
Cost Item Quantity
Est. Cost
Each
Total Est.
Cost
Est. Fed
Share
Estimated
Match Share
Verification/Closeout 150 $100 $15,000 $15,000 —
Outreach — — $15,000 $15,000 —
Data Dissemination(2) — — $15,000 $15,000 —
Grand Total NA NA $900,000 $675,000 $225,000
NOTES:
Line items for Data Collection, Project Management, Design, and Outreach could be phased. This would allow limited fund release to identify participants and collect data to complete required environmental and historic preservation reviews.
General-cost line items are samples, not all costs may be required; amounts are variable. Additional line items may be included as necessary. These values are based on historical submittals and averages. (1) This example limits reimbursement to property owner to $3,500. (2) With property owner authorization, provide safe room geo-data to local emergency medical services in usable format.
All Federal Share Obligations of $1,000,000 or More
Must Complete the Large Project Notification Process Prior to Approval Aggregate Benefits By State (Abridged List)
Alabama $13,336.96 Nebraska $9,921.78
Arkansas $16,717.85 North Carolina $5,723.26
Georgia $5,290.98 Ohio $11,469.38
Illinois $13,685.72 Oklahoma $18,366.36
Iowa $14,962.87 Pennsylvania $4,065.90
Indiana $18,126.34 South Carolina $6,139.38
Kansas $14,005.75 South Dakota $5,230.17
Kentucky $13,554.96 Tennessee $13,579.58
Louisiana $9,921.94 Texas $5,421.32
Michigan $6,522.49 Virginia $3,936.05
Missouri $15,654.96 West Virginia $4,973.50
Mississippi $20,067.64 Wisconsin $9,025.48
Minnesota $7,092.39
Final Documentation and Certification Variable by State/Region (FEMA/State/Applicant may include additional items)
Conforms to Local Floodplain Ordinance (if Property Owner Name applicable) Property Address, including geo-location Flood Insurance Deed Tag (if applicable) for Safe Room Final Cost list Verification of FEMA P-320 or FEMA P-361 Property owner permission to distribute GEO- criteria location to local emergency medical services Installation Inspection (optional) Conforms to Categorical Exclusion or
Environmental Assessment
Part X. Appendix F: Safe Room Application Using Pre-Calculated Benefits 124 DRAFT
G. Generator FAQ
Eligibility of Generators under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program General Eligibility and Application Development
1. How does the information in this guidance differ from current practice? This Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Guidance establishes that the purchase and installation of generators for the protection of critical facilities is an eligible, stand-alone project type under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and is no longer limited only to the 5 Percent Initiative.
Generators that constitute a functional portion of an otherwise eligible mitigation solution (critical or not) remain eligible.
2. Are generators still eligible under the 5 Percent Initiative? Yes. If there is insufficient data to evaluate a generator project using a standard, HMA-approved Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) method, the project may be eligible under the 5 Percent Initiative, as described in current HMA Unified Guidance. To perform this evaluation, a narrative description of the project’s cost-effectiveness must be provided in lieu of a BCA. However, when data is available to perform a standard, HMA-approved BCA, the standard method must be used.
3. Are eligible critical facilities limited to those listed in this guidance? No. The critical facilities listed in this guidance are not exhaustive. Eligible critical facilities are generally meant to include, but not be limited to, facilities such as hospitals, fire stations, police stations, and water and waste water treatment plants.
4. Must the generator be permanently installed in, or anchored to, the critical facility, or can it be portable?
Generators for a single facility or building should be permanently installed on site. Portable generators are eligible provided that they meet all HMGP requirements as described in 44 CFR Section 206.434, Eligibility. The Applicant must ensure that the generator will be in place to protect the facility functions specified in the project application. The Application should describe relevant transport, hook up, and fuel supply and storage requirements at multiple facilities and how these will be executed if the generator is portable.
5. Is the purchase of generators for residential structures an eligible activity? No. The purchase of a generator for the singular purpose of maintaining power for a single residential structure is not an eligible activity.
6. If a generator is required by code, is the purchase of a generator for these facilities eligible? Yes, provided that the generator project meets all HMGP requirements as described in 44 CFR Section 206.434, Eligibility.
Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 125
DRAFT
7. What size generator is appropriate for a facility?
This will vary by facility and usage. It is not always necessary for the generator to support facility operations to their full capacity, but it should be sized appropriately to ensure the facility is able to provide uninterrupted critical functions in the event of future power outages.
8. Is there a National Emergency Management Information System (NEMIS) code for generators as a stand-alone project type?
Yes. The new NEMIS code for stand-alone generator projects is 601.2 – Generator Regular. The NEMIS code for generator projects as part of the 5 percent discretionary allowance is 601.1 – Generator.
Cost-effectiveness
9. Will FEMA develop a separate BCA module for generators? No. A separate module is not necessary to perform the analysis. The Damage Frequency Assessment (DFA) module is able to perform this analysis for multiple hazards and project types. If you experience problems using the DFA module, contact the BC helpline at [email protected].
10. What are the key elements of a BCA for generator projects? Key inputs required are:
a. Project Useful Life: According to OMB Circular A-76, Performance of Commercial Activities, the useful life for generators or generator sets is 19 years. This value can be used as the default useful life value when performing the BCA. It may be altered based on manufacturer warranty or other documentation that can demonstrate that the generator may be able to provide service for longer than 19 years. Analysts should use the 19-year project useful life first.
b. Project Costs: The cost of generators varies by size, installation, and purpose. The generator’s size and specifications should be reasonable, appropriate, and necessary to continuing critical functions of the facility. The exact costs for generators, installation, and components should be provided by the subapplicant and included in the costs when performing the BCA.
c. Facility and Value of Service: Analysis for facilities for potable water, waste water, police stations, fire stations, and hospitals can be quickly performed using FEMA’s BCA toolkit and the DFA module, which provides service values for these facilities. To use these values, the analyst will need some information regarding the population served by the facility. For example, if a generator is to be installed at a waste water treatment plant, the analyst will need to know how many customers are served by the facility, as well as how many days the facility was not able to operate because of power failure. These values can typically be obtained from the facility manager and can be provided on official letterhead for documentation purposes.
Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 126
DRAFT
d. Recurrence Determination: Recurrence information used in the analysis may vary by location or by cause of power failure, such as wind or flood. See FAQ #17 for additional information.
e. Other Benefits: Other benefits (or costs avoided) may be included if they are addressed by the generator project.
11. What information is needed to perform a BCA for generator projects? Information needed for performing the BCA will vary by facility. However, the following inputs are required to run the BCA module:
11.1 For all BCAs performed, the subapplicant must provide the following:
a. The total project cost
b. Useful life (19 years for generators)
c. Estimated yearly maintenance costs
d. The frequency of the event used in analysis that would cause a power failure demonstrating the need for a backup power source (generator) e. The number of days that service was affected (without power) To calculate the value of services (benefits to society), the following inputs must be included for each specified facility type:
11.2 For Water or Waste Water Services:
a. The number of customers affected by the power outage at the treatment plants
11.3 For Hospitals
a. The number of people served by the hospital
b. The distance in miles between the hospital being analyzed and the hospital that would treat these people in the event the hospital was inoperative c. The number of people normally served by the alternate hospital
11.4 For Police Stations
a. The type of station (metropolitan, city, or rural)
b. The number of people served by the police station
c. The number of officers that work at the station and would serve the same area if the station were shut down as a result of a disaster
11.5 For Fire Stations
a. The number of people served by the station
b. The type of area served by the fire station (urban, suburban, rural, wilderness) c. The distance in miles to the nearest fire station that would provide protection for the area normally served by the fire station affected
Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 127
DRAFT
d. Does the fire station provide emergency medical services? Value of service for hospitals, police, and fire stations are in the DFA module by selecting Non Residential Buildings for the Facility Type for Loss of Function in the DFA modules as shown in the screen shots below.
12. Are the benefits limited to damages avoided to the facility? No, benefits are not limited to just damages avoided. The value of service for critical facilities can be used to demonstrate cost-effectiveness. The value of services for critical infrastructure and facilities are included in the BCA toolkit, which is available at http://www.fema.gov/benefit-costanalysis. All costs associated with power failure that would be mitigated by a generator should be considered.
Additional losses can be included in the BCA if those losses are a direct result of interrupted power service that a generator would have mitigated. For waste water treatment plants, additional costs are sometimes required to bring the facility back to operating status after an extended power failure.
This may include removal of sludge in equipment or additional man hours needed to bring the facility back to operational status. Those additional costs can be included above and beyond the value of service costs if a generator would have prevented those additional costs.
13. Can an Applicant consider multiple hazards in the BCA? Yes. Multiple hazards may disrupt power supply. The Applicant will need to provide the frequency of each hazard used in its analysis.
14. How does an Applicant develop the return interval for an event requiring the use of a generator?
The recurrence interval used in the analysis will depend on the hazard that caused or will cause the facility to lose power. For example, in the New York City metropolitan area, winds of 85 miles per hour could equate to a 25-year recurrence interval. For other hazards, such as extreme snow fall, information about prior snow fall totals could be validated to estimate the recurrence interval.
Recurrence interval data can be obtained from a number of sources, such as the National Weather Service for rainfall and ice storms and the U.S. Geological Survey for floods. If three or more past Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 128
DRAFT
events resulted in power failure, the DFA module can calculate the recurrence interval based on the years of the events. Question #17 provides some useful tools to assist in frequency determination.
Generally, two events are required to perform the analysis. Applicants/subapplicants are encouraged to provide as much historical damage information as they can. Projects submitted with one frequency will be considered acceptable.
15. In the case of a water treatment plant, is the cost of providing temporary water or other emergency protective measures considered a future cost avoided? Yes. If the generator will negate the need for temporary water in the future, then those costs should be included in the analysis.
16. Are environmental benefits included in the BCA?
To the extent they can be captured and justified, environmental costs associated with raw sewage discharge can be included in the BCA for waste water treatment plants. FEMA does not have a default value for these associated costs, and these costs will vary by location. The Applicant/ subapplicant should include all reasonable costs that will be mitigated by having a backup generator installed at a facility.
17. What resources are available to determine recurrence interval values? Recurrence intervals may be determined by using some of the tools provided below:
If the facility lost power as a result of wind damage to power lines feeding the facility, the analyst can utilize the Advanced Technology Council Wind Speed tool available at http://www.atcouncil.org/windspeed/index.php to determine the frequency of the coastal wind event.
If power outages are attributed to flooding, recurrence information for the flooding event should be used in the analysis. The National Weather Services provides the Precipitation Frequency Data Server at http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/, which can be utilized to establish a frequency for various precipitation events.
U.S. Geological Survey stream gauge data can also be used to extrapolate frequency information for flood events, details of which can be found in the Supplement to the Benefit-Cost Analysis Reference Guide in the FEMA library at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4830. National Snow and Ice Data Center (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Science Foundation) at http://nsidc.org/data/search/data-search.html.
Insurance claims, BureauNet information, damage repair records, data from the State/local agency, or local government Newspaper accounts citing credible sources (other than homeowner accounts) could be used in conjunction with the DFA module’s unknown frequency calculator.
Using this method may require more time as three events are required for analysis.
Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 129
DRAFT
18. How should emergency operations centers (EOCs) be evaluated for inclusion in the BCA toolkit?
Finding the value (in loss of service terms) of a State Emergency Operation Center to prove costeffectiveness of a generator project is difficult. FEMA will allow reasonable and justified “loss of service” costs for State and local EOCs that are identified by the Grantee to be entered into the DFA module to evaluate cost-effectiveness of an EOC generator project. Another or additional option is to investigate the costs of remobilizing an EOC to an alternate / continuity of operations location that could be avoided should the EOC be supplied with an uninterruptible power source such as a generator.
Scenarios
Different power failure scenarios at various facilities are outlined below. For analysis purposes, each facility was reviewed using 4 days of loss of service due to power failure at the 25-year recurrence. The 25-year recurrence interval for the test cases is based on observed wind speeds and the frequency was extrapolated using the Advanced Technology Council Wind Speed tool for the New York metropolitan area. Other project locations should use the appropriate recurrence intervals for the hazard being mitigated. Analysis was performed using the DFA module in the BCA Toolkit.
The scenarios are for demonstration purposes only. Dollar amounts and frequency intervals were chosen for comparison purposes only. Analysts should use the appropriate values for the facility being examined. For those performing the analysis, assistance is available through the benefit-cost helpline at [email protected] or at 1-855-540-6744. The helpline is not allowed to perform or review analyses but can provide answers to specific questions regarding methodologies.
When performing the BCA, inputs used in the module should be documented, as with all analysis.
Documentation sources may include, but are not limited to, correspondence with facility or site managers, data available from the county or facility Web site, information from other government Web sites, media releases, engineering analysis, and letters from the facility manager. Discussion of data documentation is available in the BCA training materials available on FEMA.gov. There are no special or extraordinary data documentation requirements for this project type.
Scenario 1: The Purchase and Installation of a Generator at an Urban Police Station Assumptions:
The police station has 119 officers who serve up to 27,000 residents The police station loses power and the efficiency of the police station drops to 50 percent (assumes 50 percent of the force are working out of other facilities or within the community) The power is not fully restored for 4 days
The project useful life for the generator is 19 years The project cost is $50,000
Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 130
DRAFT
Benefit-Cost Ratio:
The resulting benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is 1.23
Scenario 2: The Purchase and Installation of a Generator at an Urban Fire Station Assumptions:
The fire station has 119 firefighters who serve up to 27,000 residents The fire station loses power and the efficiency of the fire station drops to 50 percent The power is not fully restored for 4 days
The project useful life for the generator is 19 years The project cost is $50,000
Benefit-Cost Ratio:
The resulting BCR is 0.80
Scenario 3: The Purchase and Installation of a Generator at an Urban Hospital Assumptions:
The hospital serves up to 27,000 residents
The power is not fully restored for 4 days
The project useful life for the generator is 19 years The project cost is $200,000
Benefit-Cost Ratio:
The resulting BCR is 1.0
Scenario 4: The Purchase and Installation of a Generator at a Rural Area Water Treatment Plant (Potable Water)
Assumptions:
The water treatment plant serves up to 15,000 customers The plant loses power for 3 days
A 100-year recurrence interval is used
The project cost is $200,000
Benefit-Cost Ratio
The resulting BCR is 1.05
Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 131
DRAFT
Scenario 5: The Purchase and Installation of a Generator at an Urban Area Waste Water Treatment Plant
Assumptions:
The waste water treatment plant serves up to 500,000 residents The waste water treatment plant loses power and there is no service The power is not fully restored for 4 days
The project useful life for the generator is 19 years The project cost is $1,500,000
Benefit-Cost Ratio:
The resulting BCR is 24.8
Part X. Appendix G: Generator FAQ 132
DRAFT
H. Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Planning Subapplications
Applications submitted to FEMA that do not contain at least the basic components listed below may be immediately denied because there is no method to determine eligibility without this data.
Additional information may be requested during FEMA review. This information is required for all submittals, including potential substitutions.
Application Component Yes No Comments
General
Documentation included in the subapplication?
Technical Assistance Needed? Subapplicant is encouraged to contact the State (Applicant) to request application development assistance. FEMA resources may be available but will only be provided if requested by the Applicant.
Applicants
Applicant included management costs for delivery of technical assistance for mitigation planning (e.g., plan reviews, planning workshops, training)
Scope of Work (SOW)
Proposed planning activity is consistent with 44 CFR Part 201 Proposed planning activity is described, including whether it will result in a new or updated hazard mitigation plan (including public involvement, identification of hazards, development of a comprehensive risk/vulnerability assessment, identification of mitigation goals and strategies, and plan implementation) or enhance an existing mitigation plan through a planning-related activity
Participating jurisdiction(s) are identified and described A statement is provided on how the overall planning effort will be coordinated
SOW is consistent with work schedule and cost estimate
(describes entire planning process)
For mitigation plan updates, the SOW describes the process that each jurisdiction will complete to review each section of the previous plan and address gaps, as needed; new information (including hazard, land use, and development trends); how the previous plan was implemented; and what process will be used Copy of the plan review document (i.e., review tool or
crosswalk) from the FEMA approval of the previous plan is included, if available/applicable
Part X. Appendix H: Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Planning Subapplications 133 DRAFT
Application Component Yes No Comments
Schedule
Work schedule of 3 years or less is provided and allows sufficient time for State and FEMA reviews; preparation of required revisions, if needed; formal adoption by the
jurisdiction(s); and FEMA approval
Cost Estimate
Cost estimate supports the SOW and is reasonable for the jurisdictions participating
Assurances
FEMA Form 20-16A, Assurances Non-Construction Programs
FEMA Form 20-16C, Certifications Regarding Lobbying, etc.
SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
Part X. Appendix H: Eligibility and Completeness Review Checklist for Planning Subapplications 134 DRAFT
I. EHP Checklist
“Yes” indicates that the environmental regulation or statute may apply to your project.
Environmental Regulation or Statute Yes No
National Historic Preservation Act
1.A Would the proposed project affect, or is the proposed project in close proximity to, any buildings or structures 50 years or more in age?
1.B Will the proposed project involve disturbance of ground? Endangered Species Act and Wildlife Coordination Act
2.A Are federally listed or endangered species, or their critical habitat, present in or near the project area and, if so, which species are present?
2.B Will the proposed project remove or affect vegetation?
2.C Is the proposed project in or near (within 200 feet), or likely to affect, any type of waterbody or body of water?
Clean Water Act, Rivers and Harbors Act
3.A Will the proposed project involve dredging or disposal of dredged material, excavation, the addition of fill material, or result in any modification to water bodies or wetlands designated as “waters of the United States” as identified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or on the National Wetland Inventory? Executive Order 11988 (Protection of Floodplains) and Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands)
4.A Does a Flood Insurance Rate Map, Flood Hazard Boundary Map, hydrological study, or some other source indicate that the project is located in, or will affect, a 100-year floodplain, a 500-year floodplain (if a critical facility), an identified regulatory floodway, or an area prone to flooding?
4.B Is the proposed project located in, or will it affect, a wetland as listed in the National Wetland Inventory?
4.C Will the proposed project alter a watercourse, water flow patterns, or a drainage way, regardless of its floodplain designation?
4.D Is the proposed project located in, or will it affect, a floodplain or wetland? If yes, the 8-step process summarized in Appendix J must be completed.
Coastal Zone Management Act
5.A Is the proposed project located in the State’s designated coastal zone? Farmland Protection Policy Act
6.A Will the proposed project convert more than 5 acres of “prime or unique” farmland outside city limits to a non-agricultural use?
Resource Conservation Recovery Act and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
7.A Is there reason to suspect there are contaminants from a current or past use on the property associated with the proposed project?
7.B Are there are any studies, investigations, or enforcement actions related to the property associated with the proposed project?
7.C Will any project construction or operation activities involve the use of hazardous or toxic materials?
Part X. Appendix I: EHP Checklist 135
DRAFT
Environmental Regulation or Statute Yes No
7.D Are any of the current or past land uses of the property associated with the proposed project or are any of the adjacent properties associated with hazardous or toxic materials?
Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice for Low Income and Minority Populations)
8.A Are there any low-income or minority populations in the project’s area of effect or adjacent to the project area?
Other Environmental/Historic Preservation Laws (including applicable State laws) or Issues
9.A Are other environmental/historic preservation requirements associated with this project?
9.B Are any controversial issues associated with this project?
9.C Have any public meetings been conducted, or public comment solicited, on the proposed project?
Part X. Appendix I: EHP Checklist 136
DRAFT
J. 8-Step Decision Making Process
for Floodplain Management Considerations
Step 1. Determine whether the proposed action is located in a wetland and/or the 100-year floodplain (500-year floodplain for critical actions) and whether it has the potential to affect or be affected by a floodplain or wetland (see 44 CFR Section 9.7).
Step 2. Notify the public at the earliest possible time of the intent to carry out an action in a floodplain or wetland, and involve the affected and interested public in the decision-making process (see 44 CFR Section 9.8).
Step 3. Identify and evaluate practicable alternatives to locating the proposed action in a floodplain or wetland (including alternative sites, actions, and the “no action” option) (see 44 CFR Section
9.9). If a practicable alternative exists outside the floodplain or wetland, FEMA must locate the action at the alternative site.
Step 4. Identify the potential direct and indirect impacts associated with the occupancy or modification of floodplains and wetlands and the potential direct and indirect support of floodplain and wetland development that could result from the proposed action (see 44 CFR Section 9.10).
Step 5. Minimize the potential adverse impacts and support to or within floodplains and wetlands to be identified under Step 4, restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains, and preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values served by wetlands (see 44 CFR Section 9.11).
Step 6. Reevaluate the proposed action to determine first, if it is still practicable in light of its exposure to flood hazards, the extent to which it will aggravate the hazards to others, and its potential to disrupt floodplain and wetland values, and second, if alternatives preliminarily rejected at Step 3 are practicable in light of the information gained in Steps 4 and 5. FEMA shall not act in a floodplain or wetland unless it is the only practicable location (see 44 CFR Section 9.9).
Step 7. Prepare and provide the public with a finding and public explanation of any final decision that the floodplain or wetland is the only practicable alternative (see 44 CFR Section 9.12).
Step 8. Review the implementation and post-implementation phases of the proposed action to ensure that the requirements stated in 44 CFR Section 9.11 are fully implemented. Oversight responsibility shall be integrated into existing processes.
Part X. Appendix J: 8-Step Decision Making Process for Floodplain Management Considerations 137 DRAFT
K. Section 106 Process under the National Historic Preservation Act Part X. Appendix K: Section 106 Process under the National Historic Preservation Act 138 DRAFT
Part X. Appendix K: Section 106 Process under the National Historic Preservation Act 139 DRAFT
L. Application for Advance Assistance
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Advance Assistance Pilot Optional Application
The State of _____________ requests $____________ in Advance Assistance1 for DR_________ pursuant to Section 1104 of the Sandy Recovery and Improvement Act (SRIA) of 2013 to accelerate implementation of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). The State will use Advance Assistance to develop mitigation strategies and obtain data to prioritize, select and develop complete HMGP applications in a timely manner, as described in the Project Description (Work Scope) below.
Disaster and Project Number ____________________________________________________________ Project Title: Advance Funding Request
Applicant ___________________________________________________________________________ Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) Code ________________________________________ Applicant’s Agent and Contact Information ________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ Project Description (Work Scope)
List proposed activities, estimated costs and deliverables. (See Advance Assistance Frequently Asked Questions for list of eligible activities).
Activity Estimated Cost Deliverable
1. 2.
3. (Etc.)
Work Schedule
Following is a schedule of proposed milestones by quarter for all major activities by which the State proposes to monitor progress for Advance Assistance:
1 States may apply for up to 25 percent of the estimated total HMGP grant amount or $10 million, whichever is less.
Part X. Appendix L: Application for Advance Assistance 140 DRAFT
Q1 (First Quarter Following Initial Approval)
Activity Milestone Deliverables
1. 2.
3. (Etc.)
Budget Information
Total Estimated Cost (Federal and non-Federal cost) _________________________________________ Total Federal Cost ____________________________________________________________________ Line Item Budget
The State may request that FEMA obligate Advance Assistance funds incrementally, based on when the State needs the funds. Please list the obligation schedule by activity below.
Activity
Initial Amount
Requested
Second Amount
Requested
Third Amount
Requested
Total
Requested
1,
2,
3. (Etc.)
Additional Information Section
Provide any relevant information or explanation.
Part X. Appendix L: Application for Advance Assistance 141 DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-1
HAZARD ANALYSIS
The hazard identification and ranking were obtained primarily from the Paramount Hazard Identification Workshop. The Hazard Identification Workshop was conducted as a participatory Steering Committee workshop to identify the potential hazards within the City.
The Hazard Identification Workshop was facilitated using an interactive software spreadsheet that asked specific questions on potential hazards and then rated them accordingly. These questions guide the team in the correct facilitation and application of the program. The following information summarizes the Hazard Identification Workshop risk ranking results, including the descriptions of each hazard factor, and provides the specific descriptor choices for each risk factor and description. Additionally, a risk ranking matrix is provided to designate the overall ranking score and categorization of each hazard.
Hazard Identification and Risk Ranking
Each hazard profile included a profile ranking of the hazard (ranging from low risk to high risk). The Steering Committee determined this initial profile ranking based on all of the hazard identification and profile research summarized and group discussion and evaluation of all of the data, including numerical rankings (1-5) of the following criteria:
• Consequence/Severity – How widespread is the impact
area?
• Secondary Effects – Could the event trigger another
event and separate response?
• Probability/Frequency – Historical view of how often this type of event occurs locally and projected recurrence intervals.
• Warning/Onset – Advance warning of the event, or none. • Duration – Length of elapsed time where response resources are active. • Recovery – Length of time until lives and property return to normal.
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-2
Table C.1: Risk Factor for Hazard Identification
Risk Factor Description Descriptors Value
Probability/
Frequency
Prediction of how often a
hazard will occur in the future
Infeasible event - not applicable due to geographic location characteristics 0 Rare event - occurs less than once every 50 years 1
Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2
Regular event - occurs between once a year and once every 7 years 3 Frequent event - occurs more than once a year 4
Consequence/
Severity
Physical Damage - structures
and lifelines
Economic Impact – loss of
function for power, water,
sanitation, roads, etc.
No damage 1
Minor/slight damage to buildings and structures, no loss of lifelines 2 Moderate building damage, minor loss of lifelines (less than 12 hours) 3 Moderate building damage, lifeline loss (less than 24 hours) 4 Extensive building damage, widespread loss of lifelines (water, gas, electricity, sanitation, roads), loss of life 5
Vulnerability
Impact Area - area impacted
by a hazard event
Secondary Impacts -
Capability of triggering
additional hazards
Onset - Period of time
between initial recognition of
an approaching hazard and
when the hazard begins to
impact the community
No physical damage, no secondary impacts 1
Localized damage area 2
Localized damage area, minor secondary impacts, delayed hazard onset 3 Moderate damage area, moderate secondary impacts, moderate warning time 4
Widespread damage area, significant secondary impacts, no warning time DRAFT
5 City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-3
Each profile includes a ranking of the hazard. The hazard rankings were determined by assigning each hazard the appropriate risk factors as described above. The risk factors were then used with a hazard ranking matrix to determine the final hazard score. The following table provides the matrix used for determining each hazard’s score.
Table C.2: Risk Ranking Matrix
Probability/Frequency Description Risk Ranking Matrix
Rare Event:
Occurs less than once every 50 years
Probability/Frequency Consequence/Severity
Value 1 1 2 3 4 5
Vulnerability
1 1 2 3 4 5
2 2 4 6 8 10
3 3 6 9 12 15
4 4 8 12 16 20
5 5 10 15 20 25
Infrequent Event:
Occurs between once every 8 years
and once every 50 years (inclusive)
Probability/Frequency Consequence/Severity
Value 2 1 2 3 4 5
Vulnerability
1 2 4 6 8 10
2 4 8 12 16 20
3 6 12 18 24 30
4 8 16 24 32 40
5 10 20 30 40 50
Regular Event:
Occurs between once a year and
once every 7 years
Probability/Frequency Consequence/Severity
Value 3 1 2 3 4 5
Vulnerability
1 3 6 9 12 15
2 6 12 18 24 30
3 9 18 27 36 45
4 12 24 36 48 60
5 15 30 45 60 75
Frequent Event:
Occurs more than once a year
Probability/Frequency Consequence/Severity
Value 4 1 2 3 4 5
Vulnerability
1 4 8
1 2 16 20
2 8 16
2 4 32 40
3 12 24
3 6 48 60
4 16 32
4 8 64 80
5 20 40
6 0 80 100
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-4
The hazard scores from the Hazard Ranking Matrix were compared to the hazard rank criteria to finally categorize each hazard with a hazard ranking. The table below provides the value determinations for each hazard ranking.
Table C.3: Risk Rank Categorization
High Hazard 50 to 100
Moderately High Hazard 25 to 49
Moderate Hazard 15 to 24
Moderately Low Hazard 5 to 14
Low Hazard 1 to 4
The hazard ranking worksheets are provided in the following pages.
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-5
Table C.4: Hazard Identification and Risk Ranking
Earthquake
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability/Frequency Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence/Severity Extensive building damage, widespread loss of lifelines (water, gas, electricity, sanitation, roads), loss of life 5 Vulnerability Widespread damage area, significant secondary impacts, no warning time 5 Risk High 50
Comments
Adversarial Events
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Vulnerability Moderate building damage, lifeline loss (less than 24 hours), severe injury or disability 4 Consequence Moderate damage area, moderate secondary impacts, moderate warning time 4 Risk Moderately High 32
Comments Consider Adversarial events - Jefferey Dorner - targeted LAPD 10 years ago Utility Loss
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence Minor/slight damage to buildings and structures, no loss of lifelines, first aid injury and no disability 3 Vulnerability Localized damage area 3
Risk Moderate 18
Comments
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-6
Hazardous Material Release
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence Moderate building damage, minor loss of lifelines (less than 12 hours), lost time injury but no disability 3 Vulnerability Localized damage area, minor secondary impacts, delayed hazard onset 3 Risk Moderate 18
Comments Focus on World Energy and one other RMP site. 30 years ago, a facility released a hazmat. Some injury.
Homelessness
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 3 Consequence Minor/slight damage to buildings and structures, no loss of lifelines, first aid injury and no disability 2 Vulnerability No physical damage, no secondary impacts 3 Risk Moderate 18
Comments
Urban Fire
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence Moderate building damage, minor loss of lifelines (less than 12 hours), lost time injury but no disability 3 Vulnerability Localized damage area 2
Risk Moderately Low 12
Comments
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-7
Pipeline Failure
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Rare event - occurs less than once every 50 years 1 Consequence Moderate building damage, minor loss of lifelines (less than 12 hours), lost time injury but no disability 3 Vulnerability Localized damage area, minor secondary impacts, delayed hazard onset 3 Risk Moderately Low 9
Comments The Steering Committee noted that there are many small explosions at the refinery Flood/Dam Failure
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence Minor/slight damage to buildings and structures, no loss of lifelines, first aid injury and no disability 2 Vulnerability Localized damage area 2
Risk Moderately Low 8
Comments The Steering Committee noted that the potential flood hazard was previously higher, but, since the previous Plan, additional work has been performed to reduce the risk of Flood. Balancing dam failure probability with localized events Destructive Winds
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence Minor/slight damage to buildings and structures, no loss of lifelines, first aid injury and no disability 2 Vulnerability Localized damage area 2
Risk Moderately Low 8
Comments
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-8
Drought
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Regular event - occurs between once a year and once every 7 years 3 Consequence Minor/slight damage to buildings and structures, no loss of lifelines, first aid injury and no disability 2 Vulnerability No physical damage, no secondary impacts 1 Risk Moderately Low 6
Comments According to many new outlets, a “Megadrought” might be expected in the near future.
Disease Outbreak
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence No damage 1
Vulnerability Localized damage area, minor secondary impacts, delayed hazard onset 3 Risk Moderately Low 6
Comments
Civil Unrest
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Infrequent event - occurs between once every 8 years and once every 50 years (inclusive) 2 Consequence Minor/slight damage to buildings and structures, no loss of lifelines, first aid injury and no disability 2 Vulnerability No physical damage, no secondary impacts 1 Risk Low 4
Comments
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan C-9
Transportation Accident/Incident
Rank Factors Hazard Factor Description Rank
Probability Regular event - occurs between once a year and once every 7 years 3 Consequence No damage 1
Vulnerability No physical damage, no secondary impacts 1 Risk Low 3
Comments The Steering Committee noted that an incident occurred where a car hit a transformer resulting in a loss of power to a hospital DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan D-1
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
In order to facilitate the development of a Hazard Mitigation Plan that includes valuable input from the community, the City of Paramount (City) solicited public involvement on the Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, which had the primary responsibility of providing guidance for detailing and ranking the hazards included within the Plan. The table on the following page provides the information and attendance for the Steering Committee participants.
Participation on the Steering Committee included attending periodic Steering Committee meetings, identifying and ranking hazards, developing mitigation goals and objectives, compiling the asset inventory and conducting the loss estimates, identifying current mitigation efforts and potential mitigation projects, and reviewing chapters of the Plan throughout the development process. The pages following the Steering Committee Participants table provide announcements, presentation materials and discussion topics from the Steering Committee meetings.
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan D-2
Name Affiliation Title SCM 1 SCM 2 SCM 3 SCM 4 SCM 5
Ryan Bray Risk Management Professionals Project Coordinator X X X X X Terry Cahoon City of Paramount Assistant Finance Director X Mike Carrillo City of Paramount Finance X X X X
Bill Clausen American Red Cross Volunteer Board Member X X X Jaime DeGuzman City of Paramount PT Accountant X
Lou Demari Los Angeles County Fire Department Captain X Cindy DiPaola Paramount Unified School District Director of Operations X X Dez Ganillo Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department Detective X Jason Jacobsen City of Paramount Management Analyst X X X X X Stephen Kucharczk - Resident X
Jeff Lee Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Inspector X Adriana Lopez City of Paramount Assistant Public Safety Director X X X X X Wendy Macias City of Paramount Community Development
Planner X X X X
DRAFT
City of Paramount Hazard Mitigation Plan D-3
Name Affiliation Title SCM 1 SCM 2 SCM 3 SCM 4 SCM 5
Carlos Mendoza City of Paramount Public Safety X X X X
Sara Ho City of Paramount Management Analyst X X X X
Janene Ottaiano City of Paramount Human Resources Manager X X X X Tony Pena City of Paramount Recreation Supervisor X X X X La Fonda Riggins Los Angeles County Fire Department Community Service Representative X
Carlos Sanchez Los Angeles County Sherriff’s Department Sergeant X Colin Scholtz Risk Management Professionals Project Engineer X X X X X Martene Vargas City of Paramount Recreation Supervisor X Justin Willis Promise Hospital: Suburban Medical
Center Director of Facilities X
Michael Zymkowitz Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department DRAFT
Detective Bureau Sargent X X
Steering Committee Announcements
DRAFT
Risk Management Professionals 1
Potential Steering Committee Participants
The following list outlines potential Steering Committee participants that should be invited to the initial meeting. The invitation should be documented to be included in the Hazard Mitigation Plan as evidence of public and stakeholder outreach. An article should also be run in the local newspaper and on the City website to solicit public involvement.
1. City of Paramount Planning and Safety Representatives
2. Public Works Representatives
3. Engineering Representatives
4. Local Fire Department Representatives
5. Local Police Department Representatives
6. Los Angeles County Office of Emergency Services Representatives
7. Local Hospital Representatives
8. Local School Representatives
9. Interested Public Representatives
10. Neighboring Communities
DRAFT
Steering Committee Meeting #1
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CITY OF PARAMOUNT
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
STEERING COMMITTEE #1
Ryan Bray
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DISCUSSION TOPICS
• Project Overview and Background
• Planning Team Goals
• Risk Assessment & Hazard Ranking
• Information Collection
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
PROJECT OVERVIEW
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DISASTER
MITIGATION ACT OF
2000
• Revitalized Federal Planning
Requirements
• State and Local Hazard Mitigation
Plans
• Plans must be updated every five
years
• Federal Grant Funding Eligibility
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP)
• Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program
(PDM)
• Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 is
intended to facilitate cooperation
between state and local authorities on
risk reduction measures and to expedite
funding allocation
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
PUBLIC
PROCESS
• DMA 2000 Stresses Public Participation
• An open public involvement process that is
comprehensive, starts early and continuous
• Coordination with neighboring communities and
DRAFT
various interest groups in Plan development
www.RMPCorp.com
CLIMATE CHANGE
• California Adaptation Planning Guide (APG) Revised 2020 • APG released in response to several Executive Orders
encouraging research of and response to climate change
• Paramount is located in the South Coast Region. The City should consider the following hazards
▪ Increased Temperatures
▪ Reduced Precipitation
▪ Sea Level Rise
▪ Wildfire Risk
▪ Public Health (heat and air quality)
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
PLANNING TEAM GOALS
Review existing Plan for
implementation
Review the list of
potential hazards and
add additional hazards
for the revision
Determine the hazard
impacts throughout the
City of Paramount
Interface with partner
agencies to determine
existing mitigation
measures
Develop possible
approaches to projects
which will reduce the
impacts
Prioritize mitigation
projects for
implementation
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
PLANNING TEAM MEETING SCHEDULE
• Meeting #1– Project Initiation and Hazard Identification • Meeting #2 - Review and Update Goals and Objectives
• Meeting #3 - Asset Inventory and Vulnerability Assessment • Meeting #4 - Mitigation Action Identification
• Meeting #5 - Mitigation Project Benefit-Cost Review
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK ASSESSMENT
METHODOLOGY
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK ASSESSMENT – POTENTIAL HAZARDS
• Earthquake
• HazMat Release/Industrial
Accident/Refinery
Explosion
• Terrorism/WMD
• Pipeline Failure
• Urban Fire
• Transportation Accident
• Drought
• Utility Loss
• Flood
• Severe Weather &
Destructive Winds
• Biological/Human
Disease
• Civil Unrest/Riots
DRAFT
• Other?
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK ASSESSMENT –
CLIMATE CHANGE HAZARDS
• Increased Temperatures
• Reduced Precipitation
• Sea Level Rise
• Reduced Tourism
• Reduced Water Supply
• Wildfire Risk
• Public Health – heat and air quality
• Coastal Erosion
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK RANK
METHODOLOGY
• The risk ranking is facilitated using an
automated interactive software
spreadsheet program that asks specific
questions on potential hazards and
then assigns a relative value to each
potential hazard accordingly.
• The result of the workshop will be a
ranked list of hazards to be studied in
DRAFT
detail in the Hazard Mitigation Plan.
www.RMPCorp.com
HAZARD RANKING WORKSHEET
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK RANKING –
PROBABILITY/
FREQUENCY
• Recurrence Interval – Prediction
of how often a hazard will occur
in the future, including projected
return intervals
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK RANKING –
CONSEQUENCE/
SEVERITY
• Physical Damage – Structures
and lifelines
• Economic Impact – Loss of
power, water, sanitation, roads,
etc.
Consequence/ Severity Rank Descriptors
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK RANKING –
VULNERABILITY
• Impact Area – Area impacted by
a hazard event
• Secondary Impacts – Capability
of triggering additional hazards
• Onset - Period of time between
initial recognition of an
approaching hazard and when
the hazard begins to impact the
community
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK
RANKING
MATRIX
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Ryan Bray
Technical Consultant
[email protected]
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
Steering Committee Meeting #2
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CITY OF PARAMOUNT
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
STEERING COMMITTEE #2
Ryan Bray
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DISCUSSION
TOPICS
• Review Hazard Rankings
• HMP Goals and Objectives
•DRAFTReview and Update Asset Inventory List
www.RMPCorp.com
HAZARD RANKING REVIEW
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK RANKING
METHODOLOGY
• The risk ranking is facilitated
using an automated interactive
software spreadsheet program
that asks specific questions on
potential hazards and then
assigns a relative value to each
potential hazard accordingly.
• The result of the exercise was a
ranked list of hazards to be
studied in detail in the Hazard
Mitigation Plan.
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK RANKING METHODOLOGY
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK RANKING METHODOLOGY
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK
RANKING
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
MITIGATION GOALS &
OBJECTIVES
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
GOALS &
OBJECTIVES
• Review Previous HMP Goals and Objectives
• Engage in discussions to review and develop Goals and DRAFT
Objectives specific to the needs of the City of Paramount www.RMPCorp.com
PREVIOUS PLAN GOALS
Protect Lives and
Property
Support the priorities of the City of
Paramount, its mandates, employees,
students, residents and the business
community.
Promote development consistent with seismic,
floodplain and risk management guidance as
developed by the City of Paramount and its
agencies and/or organizations.
Promote the recognition of
the real value of hazard
mitigation to public
facilities, public safety and
the welfare of all residents
in the City of Paramount.
Support the mitigation efforts of residents,
non-profit organizations, communitybased organization and private business throughout the City.
Ensure all codes and
standards are consistent
with hazard mitigation.
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
NEXT STEPS…
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
ASSET
INVENTORY
• Types and number of
existing and future
buildings
• Infrastructure
• Critical Facilities
Review Asset
Inventory
• Review each asset
category and assign
potential percentage of
damage expected due to
each identified hazard
Loss Estimates
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Ryan Bray
Technical Consultant
[email protected]
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
DRAFT
Steering Committee Meeting #3
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CITY OF PARAMOUNT
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
STEERING COMMITTEE #3
Ryan Bray
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DISCUSSION
TOPICS
• Validate Asset Inventory List
• Complete Vulnerability Assessment (Loss Estimate
Calculations)
▪ Assign estimated percent damage to each asset from the identified DRAFT
hazards
www.RMPCorp.com
HAZARD RANKING REVIEW
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
RISK
RANKING
Rank Score
High
Earthquake 50
Moderately High
Adversarial Events 32
Moderate
Urban Fire 18
Hazardous Materials Release 18
Homelessness 18
Moderately Low
Utility Loss 12
Pipeline Failure 9
Flood/Dam Failure 8
Destructive Winds 8
Drought 6
Disease Outbreak 6
Civil Unrest 4
Transportation Accident/Incident 3
Low
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
ASSET
INVENTORY AND
VULNERABILITY
ASSESSMENT
• Validate Asset Inventory
•DRAFTConduct Vulnerability Assessment (Loss Estimates) www.RMPCorp.com
ASSET INVENTORY
• Validate Asset Inventory
▪ Types and number of existing and future buildings
▪ Infrastructure
▪ Critical Facilities
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ESTIMATES
• Review each asset and assign potential percentage of
damage expected due to each identified hazard
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
NEXT STEPS…
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
MITIGATION
ACTION
WORKSHEET
• Summarize mitigation project
specifications
• Identify project goal
categories
• Capital Improvements
Develop Mitigation
Actions
• Prevention
• Property Protection
• Public Awareness
• Natural Resource Protection
• Emergency Services
• Structural Projects
Action Categories
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Ryan Bray
Technical Consultant
[email protected]
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
DRAFT
Steering Committee Meeting #4
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CITY OF PARAMOUNT
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
STEERING COMMITTEE #4
Ryan Bray
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DISCUSSION
TOPICS
• Review Mitigation Goals and Objectives
• Develop Potential Mitigation Projects
• Discuss Next Steps
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
HAZARD RANKING REVIEW
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
HAZARD
RANKING
SUMMARY
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
MITIGATION GOALS &
OBJECTIVES REVIEW
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
HMP GOALS
• Protect Life, Property, and Commerce
• Improve Environmental Sustainability
• Encourage Participation in Resiliency Efforts
• Update Codes & Standards to Promote
Resiliency
• Enhance Emergency Management Capabilities
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
IDENTIFY POTENTIAL
MITIGATION ACTIONS
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
MITIGATION ACTION CATEGORIES
• Prevention
• Property Protection
• Public Education and Awareness
• Natural Resource Protection
• Emergency Services
• Structural Projects
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
EARTHQUAKE EXAMPLE
MITIGATION PROJECTS
• Building Retrofits
• Anchor Electrical
Transformers
• Install Expansion Joints
• Reinforce Well Shaft or
Install Submersible
Pump
• Restrain Pipes
• Improve Pipe Materials
• Install Tank Anchors
• Install Friction Dampers
DRAFT
on Elevated Tanks
www.RMPCorp.com
ADVERSARIAL EVENTS
EXAMPLE MITIGATION
PROJECTS
• Emergency Plans
• Emergency Response
Teams
• Security
• Training
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
URBAN FIRE EXAMPLE
MITIGATION PROJECTS
• Community Awareness
• Fire-safe Practices for
Structures and
Landscaping
• Enhancement of FireSuppression Capabilities
• Fire Risk Mapping
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
HAZMAT RELEASE EXAMPLE
MITIGATION PROJECTS • Emergency Plans
• Transportation
• Disposal
• Emergency Response
Teams
• Industrial Site Buffering
• Pipeline Location and
Design
• Digging Hotlines
• Contingency Planning
• Improvements to Maps
DRAFT
and Records
www.RMPCorp.com
HOMELESSNESS EVENT
EXAMPLE MITIGATION
PROJECTS
• Emergency Plans
• Outreach Campaigns
• Housing Options
• Rehabilitation Programs
• Training
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
UTILITY LOSS EVENT
EXAMPLE MITIGATION
PROJECTS
• Contingency Planning
• Enhancement of
Emergency Response
Teams
• Emergency Fuel and
Water Distribution and
Storage Systems
• Preparedness and
Response Plans
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
PIPELINE FAILURE EXAMPLE
MITIGATION PROJECTS • Emergency Plans
• Transportation
• Disposal
• Emergency Response
Teams
• Industrial Site Buffering
• Pipeline Location and
Design
• Digging Hotlines
• Contingency Planning
• Improvements to Maps
DRAFT
and Records
www.RMPCorp.com
FLOOD/DAM FAILURE
EXAMPLE MITIGATION
PROJECTS
• Acquisition, Relocation, & Elevation
Projects
• Dry-Floodproofing (e.g., plastic
sheeting)
• Wet-Floodproofing (e.g., water
resistant materials)
• Stormwater Management
Ordinances or Amendments
• Floodplain Ordinances or
Amendments
• Storm Drainage System
Improvements
• Structural Flood Control Measures
(e.g., levees, dams, floodwalls)
Inundation Zone Mapping
• Preparedness and Response Plans
• Notification Systems
• Structural Storage Tank Reservoir
Improvements
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DESTRUCTIVE WINDS
EXAMPLE MITIGATION
PROJECTS
• Implement Tree
Trimming
• Retrofits
• Anchoring
• Traffic Light Upgrades
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DROUGHT EXAMPLE
MITIGATION PROJECTS
• Water Use Ordinances
• Contingency Plans
• Emergency Water
Distribution and Storage
Systems
• Water Conservation
Education
• System Retrofits
• Leak Detection
DRAFT
Programs
www.RMPCorp.com
DISEASE OUTBREAK
EXAMPLE MITIGATION
PROJECTS
• Emergency Planning
• Coordination with
appropriate agencies
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CIVIL UNREST EVENT
EXAMPLE MITIGATION
PROJECTS
• Emergency Plans
• Emergency Response
Teams
• Security
• Training
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
TRANSPORTATION
ACCIDENT EXAMPLE
MITIGATION PROJECTS
• Enhancement of
Emergency Response
Teams
• Airport/Freeway/Rail Site
Buffering
• Contingency and
Emergency Planning
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
NEXT STEPS…
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
NEXT STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
• The Next Steering Committee meeting will consist of
a Benefit-Cost Review of the identified Mitigation
Actions:
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Ryan Bray
Technical Consultant
[email protected]
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
DRAFT
Steering Committee Meeting #5
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CITY OF PARAMOUNT
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
STEERING COMMITTEE #5
Ryan Bray
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
DISCUSSION
TOPICS
• Conduct a Benefit-Cost Review of Mitigation
Projects
• Discuss schedule for last steps of update
process
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
BENEFIT-COST REVIEW
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
PURPOSE OF BENEFIT-COST REVIEW
• FEMA requires the Steering Committee to prioritize actions for implementation
• The process is designed to help the Steering Committee weigh pros and cons for each action
• RMP’s method utilizes a qualitative methodology with a High, Medium, and Low range
▪ High – Benefits are perceived to exceed costs without further study or evaluations; or the action is critical
▪ Medium – Benefits are perceived to exceed costs, but may require further study or evaluation prior to implementation
▪ Low – Benefits and costs require evaluation prior to implementation DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
BENEFIT-COST REVIEW
• Review each identified mitigation project and quantify the benefits and costs of implementing each project
▪ Assign a priority based on the benefit-cost review
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
BENEFIT-COST REVIEW EXAMPLE
• Example from FEMA
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
NEXT STEPS…
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
NEXT
STEPS…
The Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan will be provided to each member for review. Once comments are implemented, the Public Review Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan will be presented at a City Council meeting:
City Council Meeting:
Date TBD
DRAFT
www.RMPCorp.com
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Ryan Bray
Technical Consultant
[email protected]
Risk Management Professionals, Inc.
(949) 282-0123
(877) 532-0806
www.RMPCorp.com
DRAFT
City Council Meeting and Public Review
DRAFT