FEMA s Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program An Overview

Transcription

1 FEMA s Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program An Overview Presented by Seth Ahrens, P.E., CFM sahrens@pbsj.com (480) North Tatum Boulevard Suite 300 Phoenix, Arizona June 17, 2010

2 Who wants free money? $ $ $ $ $ $

3 FEMA s PDM Program What is it? Provides funds for hazard mitigation planning and the implementation of mitigation projects before a disaster event Funding split: 75% (Federal) / 25% (Local) Small/Impoverished: 90% (Fed) / 10% (Local) States, Territories, Federally-recognized Indian Tribal governments, and local communities are eligible

4 Recent History of the Program Fiscal Year Program Funding 2011 TBD 2010 $100 M 2009 $90 M 2008 $114 M 2007 $100 M 2006 $50 M FEMA has made available over a HALF BILLION DOLLARS via PDM since FY 2006

5 FEMA s PDM Program Mitigation planning: Federal Share Caps $800,000 for new hazard mitigation plans $400,000 to update existing hazard mitigation plans Mitigation projects: $3 million No cap on local share

6 Eligibility Requirement For local governments. If the project is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), then the community where the project is located must be participating in the NFIP. Special insurance requirements also apply.

7 Why Did FEMA Establish the PDM Program? Because

8 Sample PDM Drainage Project Every other monsoon season, the same five houses upstream of an undersized culvert flood Each event incurs $4,000 in damages Problem could be solved with a new larger $75,000 culvert Assuming a 50-year life, a $75,000 culvert is cheaper than $100,000 in damages

9 Sample PDM Drainage Project Key point Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) BCA Benefit Cost $100,000 $75, FEMA uses the results of the BCA to help rank the applications.

10 Eligible Activities Mitigation planning activities Mitigation projects

11 Eligible Mitigation Planning Activities Develop a new hazard mitigation plan Update an existing hazard mitigation plan

12 Ineligible Mitigation Planning Activities Flood studies/flood mapping Mapping activities not part of a risk assessment Activities that do not result in a FEMAapproved hazard mitigation plan Preparedness measures/response equipment

13 Eligible Mitigation Projects Voluntary property acquisition and structure demolition/relocation Structure elevation Dry floodproofing of structures Minor localized flood reduction projects Structural/non-structural retrofitting

14 Eligible Mitigation Projects continued Wildfire mitigation Soil stabilization Infrastructure retrofits that reduce risk

15 Ineligible Mitigation Projects Projects that do not reduce the risk to people, structures, or infrastructure A project that is not a stand-alone project Projects that solely address operation or maintenance issues Projects that do not meet Environmental and Historical Preservation compliance

16 Ineligible Mitigation Projects Major flood control projects Levees, dikes, floodwalls, or dams Water quality infrastructure Projects that address ecological or agricultural issues Forest management activities Projects that result in temporary measures

17 Application Process There are two parties involved: The Applicant is the Arizona Division of Emergency Management (ADEM) The Subapplicant is the community There are two kinds of applications: Plans Projects Subapplicant may apply to more than one HMA program

18 Application Process Applications submitted to ADEM by Subapplicants via FEMA s egrants system Due to ADEM in mid-november 2010 (?) ADEM reviews applications for completeness ADEM forwards applications to FEMA by December 3, 2010

19 The Application Detailed scope of work Work schedule 36-month limit Cost estimate No lumps sums Include Pre-Award, Management, and Information Dissemination costs Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Additional information as needed Documentation is critical!

20 Review Process Three layers of reviews: National Ranking Process National Evaluation Process National Technical Review Following this process: Projects are identified for further review Distribution of awards

21 Review Process Subapplicant ADEM (Applicant) FEMA National Ranking Process National Technical Review ADEM (Applicant) Award Further Review National Evaluation Process

22 National Ranking Process Focuses on predetermined, objective, quantitative factors Priority assigned by ADEM based on State Mitigation Plan Does Subapplicant have a hazard mitigation plan? Community mitigation factors (e.g. Community Rating System, CTP status, etc.) Percentage of population that benefits Does project protect critical facilities? Is Subapplicant small/impoverished?

23 National Evaluation Process Focuses on qualitative factors Demonstration by Subapplicant of risk reduction Durability of financial/social benefits of project Performance measures to assure success Protection of critical facilities Leveraging of local partnerships Inclusion of outreach activities for projects

24 National Technical Review All project applications go through BCA review Engineering feasibility review Environmental planning and historic preservation review

25 BCA Review Each project application BCA reviewed for: Technical accuracy Supporting documentation Source credibility BCAs that are technically correct and thoroughly documented will pass Review team reserves right to alter BCA BCA must exceed 1.0 Use FEMA-approved software

26 Engineering Feasibility Review Each project application reviewed for: Conformance to accepted engineering practices, codes, standards, techniques, etc. Effectiveness at mitigating the hazard for which the project was designed Accuracy of cost estimate Whether project schedule is reasonable Supporting documentation and source credibility

27 Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Review Each project application reviewed for compliance with: National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Endangered Species Act (ESA) Certain Executive Orders (EO) Other applicable regulations

28 Selection Process FEMA ranks subapplications National Ranking Process score National Evaluation Process score National Technical Review determinations Highest scoring projects identified for further review

29 Further Review This is a good thing but not a guarantee of funding Applicant/Subapplicant funding commitment is confirmed Applicant/Subapplicant consent to understanding of grant terms

30 Finally..Awards! FEMA s Regional Office provides award packages to Applicant for successful subapplications Applicant must agree to abide by terms Applicant or Subapplicant may decline award Awards typically made in May/June

31 What Makes a Good Application? Remember. All a reviewer knows about your project is what is in the subapplication. FEMA forbids reviewers to seek additional information outside of the application.

32 What Makes a Good Application? Details, Details, Details In-depth engineering calculations Calculations that are sealed by an AZ P.E. Documentation of sources Use of respected sources Use of standardized codes where possible When in doubt, include additional information

33 Useful Websites PDM program overview FY2011 PDM program information FEMA egrants portal Info on PDM Program and other grant programs

34 Useful Websites Arizona Division of Emergency Management PDM Coordinator at ADEM: Darlene Trammell State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) (602)

35 Questions?