Fiscal Year 2009 Pre-Disaster Mitigation - Joint Explanatory Statement guidance

Main Content

Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Pre-Disaster Mitigation - Joint Explanatory Statement Guidance

Guidelines for Determining Eligible Activities

Eligibility will be determined based on all applicable federal statutory and regulatory requirements including, but not limited to:

•Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) requirements as established by Stafford Act Section 203 (e.g., feasible cost-effective[1] activities that reduce the risk of future damages and have clearly identifiable outcomes; non-federal match).
•Environmental/Historic Preservation Compliance (e.g., National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) & Section 106)
•Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants (44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 13).
•Federal duplication of programs/augmentation of appropriations
 

The following Joint Explanatory Statement (JES) activities will be considered for funding if they meet all applicable federal requirements:

•Stand-alone (not portable) generators
•Warning sirens
•Cost-effective mitigation components of dams
•Risk analysis that results in updated local or state hazard mitigation plans as a deliverable of the grant performance
•Wildfire mitigation activities consistent with FEMA’s Wildfire Mitigation Policy issued September 8, 2008 (i.e. defensible space; structural protection through ignition-resistant construction; and hazardous fuels reduction)
•Engineering design for natural hazard mitigation projects that:
◦addresses a problem that has been repetitive or poses a significant risk to public health and safety if left unsolved; and
◦solves a problem independently or constitutes a functional portion of a solution where there is assurance that the project as a whole (to include construction) will be completed. [2]
 

The following activities will not be considered for funding:

•Preparedness activities such as Communicty Emergency Response Team (CERT) training, table top exercises, flood or other hazards monitoring for purposes of predicting hazard events or initiating response
•New construction for non-mitigation purposes (e.g., Emergency Operations Centers (EOCs), Fire Departments, 911 call centers) and other new construction that does not have quantifiable mitigation benefits
•Purchase of equipment and supplies
•Repairs or deferred maintenance
•Construction of water reservoirs for drinking water or fire suppression and other fire suppression activities
•Research or engineering design studies that merely develop project plans/proposals, conduct feasibility studies, conduct environmental studies, fund permitting type activities (including environmental permitting activities to support U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or other similar future projects), or identify or analyze hazards or problems.
•Activities that have been initiated or completed. [3] [4]


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


[1] Cost-effectiveness is governed by Office of Management & Budget (OMB) Circular A-94


[2] The engineering design resulting from the grant shall lead to actual construction of the project per the design and substantially reduce the risk of future damage, hardship, loss, or suffering resulting from a major disaster. The grantee must demonstrate this by documenting through the funded design effort that the resulting construction project: (i) addresses a problem that has been repetitive or a problem that poses a significant risk to public health and safety if left unsolved; (ii) will not cost more than the anticipated value of the reduction in both direct damages and subsequent negative impacts to the area if future disasters were to occur; (iii) has been determined to be the most practical, effective, and environmentally sound alternative after consideration of a range of options; (iv) contributes, to the extent practicable, to a long-term solution to the problem it is intended to address; and (v) is incorporated into the Local Mitigation Plan.


[3] See attached “Pre-Award Costs”


[4] Applications must also undergo an environmental and historic preservation (EHP) compliance review prior to initiation of work to ensure that projects meet various Federal EHP requirements.

 

Last Updated: 
08/02/2013 - 11:44
Back to Top