House Report 111-83 - PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2009

[House Report 111-83]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

111th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 111-83
======================================================================

PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2009

_______

April 23, 2009.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Oberstar, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 1746]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 1746) to amend the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to
reauthorize the pre-disaster mitigation program of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.

Purpose of the Legislation

H.R. 1746, the ``Pre-Disaster Mitigation Act of 2009'',
reauthorizes the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program for
three years, at a level of $250 million for each of fiscal
years 2010 through 2012. The bill increases the minimum amount
that each State can receive under the program from $500,000 to
$575,000, and codifies the competitive selection process of the
program, as currently administered by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA).

Background and Need for Legislation

In the 1990s, under the leadership of FEMA Administrator
James Lee Witt, FEMA developed a pre-disaster mitigation pilot
program known as ``Project Impact''. Congress appropriated
funds for Project Impact in each of fiscal years 1997 through
2001. The PDM Mitigation program is the successor to the
Project Impact pilot program.
The PDM program was first authorized in section 102 of the
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000.\1\ The program is administered
by FEMA through its Mitigation Division. It is currently
authorized under section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (``Stafford Act'').\2\
Pursuant to section 203(m) of the Stafford Act, the PDM program
terminates on September 30, 2009, unless Congress reauthorizes
the program.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\See Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-390,
Sec. 102, 114 Stat. 1552, 1553 (2000).
\2\See 42 U.S.C. Sec. 5133 (2008).
\3\42 U.S.C. Sec. 5133(m)(2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PDM program provides cost-effective technical and
financial assistance to state and local governments to reduce
injuries, loss of life, and damage to property caused by
natural hazards. Examples of mitigation activities include the
seismic strengthening of buildings and infrastructure,
acquiring repetitively flooded homes, installing shutters and
shatter resistant windows in hurricane-prone areas, and the
building of ``safe rooms'' in houses and other buildings to
protect from high winds. For instance, in 2005, FEMA provided
PDM program funds to finance roll-down storm shutter systems at
five fire stations in Broward County, Florida. Soon after
completion of the project, Hurricane Wilma struck Florida. The
retrofitted fire stations were not damaged and were able to
operate effectively during and after the storm.
The PDM program provides grants to States, Territories,
Tribal governments, and local communities on a competitive
basis, with each State receiving a statutory minimum of
$500,000, or one percent, of the funds appropriated, whichever
is less.\4\ The Federal share of the PDM project costs is up to
75 percent, or up to 90 percent for small or impoverished
communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\42 U.S.C. Sec. 5133(f)(2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2007, 47 States, seven Tribal governments, and three
Territories submitted applications for 430 communities
requesting $292 million--about three times the available
funding of $100 million.\5\ In 2008, 45 States, five Tribal
governments, and one Territory submitted 485 applications
requesting $318.6 million--almost three times the available
funding of $114 million. In 2009, 46 States, six Tribal
governments, and six Territories submitted 485 applications
requesting $310.3 million--more than three times the available
funding of $90 million.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Potential Cost Savings from
the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (2007), at 1 (hereinafter CBO
Report). This report was prepared pursuant to Sec. 209 of the Disaster
Mitigation Act of 2000, as amended.
\6\Source: FEMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA's mitigation programs, including the PDM program and
the post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
authorized by section 404 of the Stafford Act, are effective in
accomplishing their goals of reducing the risk of future
damage, hardship, and loss from all hazards. A number of
reports, including two mandated by Congress, have cited the
cost-effectiveness of these programs. In 2005, the Multihazard
Mitigation Council (``Council''), an advisory body of the
National Institute of Building Sciences, found that ``a dollar
spent on mitigation saves society an average of $4.''\7\ The
Council found that flood mitigation measures yield even greater
savings.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\Multihazard Mitigation Council, National Institute of Building
Sciences, Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: An Independent Study to
Assess the Future Savings from Mitigation Activities, 5 (2005).
Congress mandated this report pursuant to the Departments of Veterans
Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act of 2000; Pub. L. No. 106-74 (2000); see also Senate
Report 106-161.
\8\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2007, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the
reduction in Federal disaster assistance that is likely to
result from the PDM program.\9\ CBO estimated that PDM-funded
projects from 2004 to June 2007 had total costs of almost $500
million and that the reduction in future losses associated with
those projects is $1.6 billion (present value).\10\ According
to CBO, ``on average, future losses are reduced by about $3
(measured in discounted present value) for each $1 spent on
those projects, including both federal and nonfederal
spending.''\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\See note 5, supra.
\10\Id. at 2.
\11\Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of the Legislation

Section 1. Short title
Section 1 designates the short title of the Act as the
``Pre-Disaster Mitigation Act of 2009''.
Section 2. Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation
Subsection (a) amends section 203(f) of the Stafford Act.
This subsection increases the minimum allocation that each
State receives from $500,000 under current law to $575,000, but
maintains that each State shall receive the lesser of this
amount or one percent of the total funds appropriated for the
fiscal year. The section codifies the competitive aspects of
the program as currently administered by FEMA, and retains a
provision that any State may not receive more than 15 percent
of the total funds appropriated for the fiscal year.
Subsection (b) authorizes appropriations for the PDM
program of $250 million for each of fiscal years 2010, 2011,
and 2012. This subsection also eliminates the provision in
section 203(m) of the Stafford Act to sunset the PDM program on
September 30, 2009.
Subsection (c) changes references in section 203 of the
Stafford Act from ``Predisaster'' to ``Pre-Disaster,''
consistent with how FEMA refers to the program.

Additional Matters

On April 30, 2008, the Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management held a
hearing on FEMA's PDM program. At this hearing, there was a
discussion of the important role of building codes in reducing
damage to buildings from natural hazards. The Committee reminds
FEMA that adoption and enforcement of appropriate building
codes should be considered under section 203(g)(2).
At the hearing, emergency management representatives also
suggested that private non-profits (``PNPs'') be allowed to be
sub-applicants and sub-grantees for the PDM program, when local
governments do not have the resources to perform this function
on the PNPs behalf. The Committee is not aware of any specific
cases of this problem, and believes that if a local government
is unable to serve as the sub-applicant and sub-grantee on
behalf of a PNP, an appropriate State agency may do so on its
behalf.
One of the few criticisms of the PDM program has been the
time that it takes for FEMA to obligate PDM funds.\12\ The
Committee notes that FEMA is taking steps to streamline grant
processes and encourages FEMA to use all appropriate
flexibility. The Committee reminds the Department of Homeland
Security that Congress specifically exempted the PDM Mitigation
Program from grant administration and other requirements
imposed in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53), to avoid additional
administrative requirements that would slow down the
disbursement of funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\Francis X. McCarthy, Congressional Research Service, Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Program (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee is aware of the difficulties that several
small localities in Minnesota faced when attempting to apply
for PDM grants, due in part to the limited application
timeframes. In addition, the Committee is aware of the
challenges that communities in Minnesota and other small
communities around the country have faced in completing well-
developed applications due to the time-consuming requirement of
using FEMA's eGrants application system. The Committee urges
FEMA to continue develop a streamlined application process and
continue to seek ways by which small communities can make the
most efficient use of their limited resources during the
application process.
FEMA has begun a multi-year effort to harmonize
administrative requirements for all of FEMA's hazard mitigation
programs; these include the all hazards PDM program and HMGP
authorized by the Stafford Act, as well as flood mitigation
programs (Flood Mitigation Assistance, Repetitive Flood Loss,
and Severe Repetitive Loss). FEMA's goal is to unify the
administrative requirements of hazard mitigation assistance
programs by using common systems and tools, and by simplifying
and streamlining the application and eligibility determination
process. FEMA expects this will improve program implementation,
management and close-out. The focus is on simplifying the
process for both FEMA and the communities they serve. The
Committee supports these efforts.
The Committee recognizes that some communities have less
capability than others to develop competitive hazard mitigation
applications, and that some States are less able than others to
build and maintain the capacity to provide needed technical
assistance. The Committee encourages FEMA to continue to make
available technical assistance, and allow States the greatest
flexibility permitted to provide technical assistance to
communities that require such assistance and capacity building
to identify and develop applications in accordance with the
specifications of the nationally competitive program.

Legislative History and Committee Consideration

In 2000, Congress enacted the Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000 (Public Law 106-390). In 2005, Congress reauthorized the
program through fiscal year 2008 (Public Law 109-139). In 2008,
Congress extended the program's authorization for one year
(Public Law 110-329). Under current law, the PDM program
terminates on September 30, 2009, unless Congress reauthorizes
the program.
On April 30, 2008, the Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management held a
hearing on FEMA's Pre-Disaster Mitigation program.
On May 21, 2008, Chairman James L. Oberstar introduced H.R.
6109, the ``Pre-Disaster Mitigation Act of 2008''. On May 22,
2008, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure met in
open session to consider H.R. 6109. The Committee ordered the
bill reported favorably to the House by voice vote with a
quorum present. On June 19, 2008, the Committee reported the
bill to the House (H. Rept. 110-275). On June 23, 2008, the
House passed H.R. 6109 by voice vote with a quorum present. No
further action was taken on the bill.
On July 30, 2008, Chairman James L. Oberstar introduced
H.R. 6658, the ``Disaster Response, Recovery and Mitigation
Enhancement Act of 2008'', which included reauthorization of
the PDM program. On July 31, 2008, the Committee ordered H.R.
6658 reported favorably to the House by voice vote with a
quorum present. No further action was taken on the bill.
On March 26, 2009, Chairman James L. Oberstar introduced
H.R. 1746, the ``Pre-Disaster Mitigation Act of 2009''. On
April 2, 2009, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure met in open session to consider H.R. 1746. The
Committee ordered the bill reported favorably to the House by
voice vote with a quorum present.

Record Votes

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives
requires each committee report to include the total number of
votes cast for and against on each record vote on a motion to
report and on any amendment offered to the measure or matter,
and the names of those members voting for and against. There
were no recorded votes taken in connection with consideration
of H.R. 1746 or ordering the bill reported. A motion to order
H.R. 1746 reported favorably to the House was agreed to by
voice vote with a quorum present.

Committee Oversight Findings

With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in this report.

Cost of Legislation

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is
included in this report.

Compliance with House Rule XIII

1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee
references the report of the Congressional Budget Office
included in the report.
2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
performance goals and objectives of this legislation are to
reauthorize the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program for three
years.
3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Committee has received the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1746
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, April 16, 2009.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1746, the Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2009.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Daniel
Hoople.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Sunshine
(For Douglas W. Elmendorf).
Enclosure.

H.R. 1746--Pre-Disaster Mitigation Act of 2009

Summary: H.R. 1746 would authorize appropriations to the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for grants to states
and localities for pre-disaster mitigation programs, such as
constructing levies, relocating homes from flood-prone areas,
and retrofitting buildings in earthquake zones. CBO estimates
that implementing H.R. 1746 would cost $700 million over the
2010-2014 period and $50 million in later years, assuming
appropriation of the specified amounts. Enacting H.R. 1746
would not affect direct spending or revenues.
H.R. 1746 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 1746 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 450
(community and regional development).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
------------------------------------------------------------
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Authorization Level 250 250 250 0 0 750
Estimated Outlays 25 100 200 225 150 700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basis of estimate: Under current law, FEMA is authorized
through 2009 to provide grants and technical assistance to
state and localities to implement measures that prevent damage
in areas frequented by natural disasters. This legislation
would extend this authority through 2012 and authorize the
appropriation of $250 million in each year over the 2010-2012
period, an increase of $160 million over the 2009 appropriation
level of $90 million (as provided in Public Law 110-329). CBO's
estimate of outlays is based on historical spending patterns
for such grants.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1746
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, and
tribal governments. Assuming appropriation of authorized
amounts, those governments would benefit from $700 million in
grants over the 2010-2014 period for pre-disaster mitigation
activities. Any costs to those governments, including matching
funds, would be incurred voluntarily.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Daniel Hoople; Impact
on state, local, and tribal governments: Melissa Merrell;
Impact on the private sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director
for Budget Analysis.

Compliance With House Rule XXI

Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, H.R. 1746 does not contain any
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of rule XXI
of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

Constitutional Authority Statement

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or joint
resolution of a public character shall include a statement
citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in the
Constitution to enact the measure. The Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure finds that Congress has the
authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.

Federal Mandates Statement

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (Public Law 104-4).

Preemption Clarification

Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt State, local,
or tribal law. The Committee states that H.R. 1746 does not
preempt any State, local, or tribal law.

Advisory Committee Statement

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this
legislation.

Applicability to the Legislative Branch

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law
104-1).

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):

ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER RELIEF AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT

* * * * * * *

TITLE II--DISASTER PREPAREDNESS AND MITIGATION ASSISTANCE

* * * * * * *

SEC. 203. [PREDISASTER] PRE-DISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION.

(a) * * *
(b) Establishment of Program.--The President may establish a
program to provide technical and financial assistance to States
and local governments to assist in the implementation of
[predisaster] pre-disaster hazard mitigation measures that are
cost-effective and are designed to reduce injuries, loss of
life, and damage and destruction of property, including damage
to critical services and facilities under the jurisdiction of
the States or local governments.
(c) Approval by President.--If the President determines that
a State or local government has identified natural disaster
hazards in areas under its jurisdiction and has demonstrated
the ability to form effective public-private natural disaster
hazard mitigation partnerships, the President, using amounts in
the National [Predisaster] Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund
established under subsection (i) (referred to in this section
as the ``Fund''), may provide technical and financial
assistance to the State or local government to be used in
accordance with subsection (e).

* * * * * * *

(e) Uses of Technical and Financial Assistance.--
(1) In general.--Technical and financial assistance
provided under this section--
(A) shall be used by States and local
governments principally to implement
[predisaster] pre-disaster hazard mitigation
measures that are cost-effective and are
described in proposals approved by the
President under this section; and

* * * * * * *

[(f) Allocation of Funds.--The amount of financial assistance
made available to a State (including amounts made available to
local governments of the State) under this section for a fiscal
year--
[(1) shall be not less than the lesser of--
[(A) $500,000; or
[(B) the amount that is equal to 1.0 percent
of the total funds appropriated to carry out
this section for the fiscal year;
[(2) shall not exceed 15 percent of the total funds
described in paragraph (1)(B); and
[(3) shall be subject to the criteria specified in
subsection (g).]
(f) Allocation of Funds.--
(1) In general.--The President shall award financial
assistance under this section on a competitive basis
and in accordance with the criteria in subsection (g).
(2) Minimum and maximum amounts.--In providing
financial assistance under this section, the President
shall ensure that the amount of financial assistance
made available to a State (including amounts made
available to local governments of the State) for a
fiscal year--
(A) is not less than the lesser of--
(i) $575,000; or
(ii) the amount that is equal to one
percent of the total funds appropriated
to carry out this section for the
fiscal year; and
(B) does not exceed the amount that is equal
to 15 percent of the total funds appropriated
to carry out this section for the fiscal year.

* * * * * * *

(i) National [Predisaster] Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund.
(1) Establishment.--The President may establish in
the Treasury of the United States a fund to be known as
the ``National [Predisaster] Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Fund'', to be used in carrying out this section.
(2) Transfers to fund.--There shall be deposited in
the Fund--
(A) * * *
(B) sums available from gifts, bequests, or
donations of services or property received by
the President for the purpose of [predisaster]
pre-disaster hazard mitigation.

* * * * * * *

[(m) Termination of Authority.--The authority provided by
this section terminates September 30, 2009.]
(m) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this section $250,000,000 for each
of fiscal years 2010, 2011, and 2012.

* * * * * * *