[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 6, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50890-50891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-19792]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY


Competitive Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Process

AGENCY: Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 budget proposal includes 
$300 million under the National Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund to 
initiate a competitive grant program for pre-disaster mitigation. While 
Congress has not acted on the President's proposal, the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is preparing to implement the 
program competitively if enacted by Congress. As part of a preliminary 
exploration of the issues, FEMA is soliciting ideas from all interested 
parties on the process for implementing the grant program on a 
competitive basis. During the comment period, FEMA also will hold 
meetings on this subject with invited representatives from the State 
and local stakeholders and overall emergency management profession for 
the purpose of obtaining a variety of individual opinions.

DATES: Comments must be received by September 30, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to the Rules Docket Clerk, 
Office of the General Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 
C Street, SW., room 840, Washington DC 20472, (facsimile) 202-646-4536, 
or (e-mail) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Baker, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, 500 
C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4648 or e-mail 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The President's FY 2003 budget proposal 
includes $300 million to initiate a competitive pre-disaster mitigation 
grant program, which would replace the formula-based Hazard Mitigation 
Grant Program for FY 2003.
    This proposed funding would represent a change in funding source 
for mitigation (annual funding versus funding linked to disasters), but 
would continue to support the goals of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 
2000. While there are specific mitigation opportunities that occur 
immediately after a disaster, an annual grant program that provided a 
consistent source of funding would allow States and communities to 
develop more comprehensive proposals and projects to reduce their 
overall risks. Communities would no longer be dependent on a disaster 
declaration in order to obtain a FEMA mitigation grant. However, FEMA 
would continue to work with State and local governments to take 
advantage of post-disaster mitigation opportunities.
    The President's budget proposal outlines a program whereby grants 
would be awarded on a competitive basis to ensure that the most 
worthwhile, cost-beneficial projects receive funding. Funded activities 
would reduce the risks of future damage in hazard prone areas, thereby 
reducing the need for future disaster assistance. Grant awards would be 
made without reference to State allocations, quotas or other formula-
based allocation of funds. Consistent with funding available under the 
FY 2002 Pre-Disaster Mitigation grant program, authorized by Sec. 203 
of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Assistance and Emergency Relief Act, 
eligible activities under a competitive grant program would include: 
risk assessments; State and local mitigation planning; the 
reinforcement of structures against seismic, wind, and other hazards; 
elevation, acquisition, or relocation of flood-prone structures; and 
minor flood control or drainage management projects.
    State emergency management authorities currently play an essential 
role in the implementation of all of FEMA mitigation grant programs. 
They provide technical assistance to communities, solicit and review 
applications, and coordinate statewide mitigation activities. FEMA's 
Pre-Disaster Mitigation implementation strategy will include the 
States, and we will collaborate with our State and local partners and 
stakeholders to develop a means for competitive review of grant 
proposals.
    Although FEMA does not know whether this proposal for a competitive 
pre-disaster mitigation grant program will be included in the FY 2003 
appropriations or what our authority will be in implementing such a 
program, we would like to prepare for the possibility by gathering 
comments on the proposal from our partners and stakeholders. In 
preliminary exploration of the issues surrounding design of the 
President's proposed Competitive Pre-Disaster Mitigation grant program, 
FEMA is soliciting responses to the following questions:
    1. What key factors should FEMA consider in developing a 
competitive grant program?
    2. What role should the States play in a competitive grant process?
    3. If FEMA was authorized to set aside funds for States in addition 
to the competitive process, do you think there should be a set aside 
that States could depend on annually to maintain a level of capability 
in mitigation? What types of activities should be eligible for such 
funding?
    4. Should mitigation planning funds be set aside for States in 
addition to competitive pre-disaster mitigation grants?
    5. How could FEMA ensure that funds would be spent to address all 
hazards?
    6. Should activities addressing multi-hazard vs. single hazard be 
more heavily weighted in a ranking system?
    7. What methodologies could FEMA use to distribute funding based on 
risk?
    8. How could the evaluation of applications be designed to ensure 
that the most worthwhile, cost-beneficial projects receive funding?
    9. What should FEMA consider in addition to cost benefit analysis 
in developing a ranking system to evaluate applications (e.g., 
repetitive loss, life safety)?
    10. What factors does FEMA need to consider in developing a process 
where agencies such as departments of economic development or natural 
resources were encouraged to engage in natural hazard risk reduction by 
applying for a competitive pre-disaster mitigation grant?
    11. Should there be a cap on project costs in order to ensure a 
broader distribution of funds? How would a project cap amount be 
determined?


[[Page 50891]]


    Dated: July 31, 2002.
Robert F. Shea,
Deputy Administrator for Mitigation, Federal Insurance and Mitigation 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 02-19792 Filed 8-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-04-P