§ 201.4 - Standard State Mitigation Plans.

§ 201.4 Standard State Mitigation Plans.

Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 86 FR 50674, Sept. 10, 2021.

Cross Reference

The effective date of this amendment was corrected to read Oct. 1, 2021, at 86 FR 51832, Sept. 17, 2021.

(a) Plan requirement. States must have an approved Standard State Mitigation Plans meeting the requirements of this section as a condition of receiving non-emergency Stafford Act assistance and FEMA mitigation grants. Emergency assistance provided under 42 U.S.C. 5170a, 5170b, 5173, 5174, 5177, 5179, 5180, 5182, 5183, 5184, 5192 will not be affected. Mitigation planning grants provided through the Pre-disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, authorized under section 203 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5133, will also continue to be available. The mitigation plan is the demonstration of the State's commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards and serves as a guide for State decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards.

(b) Planning process. An effective planning process is essential in developing and maintaining a good plan. The mitigation planning process should include coordination with other State agencies, appropriate Federal agencies, interested groups, and be integrated to the extent possible with other ongoing State planning efforts as well as other FEMA mitigation programs and initiatives.

(c) Plan content. To be effective the plan must include the following elements:

(1) Description of the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how other agencies participated.

(2)Risk Statewide risk assessments that provide the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy portion of the mitigation plan. Statewide risk assessments must characterize and analyze natural hazards and risks to provide a statewide overview. This overview will allow the State to compare potential losses throughout the State and to determine their priorities for implementing mitigation measures under the strategy, and to prioritize jurisdictions for receiving technical and financial support in developing more detailed local risk and vulnerability assessments. The risk assessment shall must include the following:

(i) An overview of the type and location of all natural hazards that can affect the State, including information on previous occurrences of hazard events, as well as the probability of future hazard events, using maps where appropriate;

(ii) An overview and analysis of the State's vulnerability to the hazards described in this paragraph (c)(2), based on estimates provided in local risk assessments as well as the State risk assessment. The State shall must describe vulnerability in terms of the jurisdictions most threatened by the identified hazards, and most vulnerable to damage and loss associated with hazard events. State owned or operated critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas shall must also be addressed;

(iii) An overview and analysis of potential losses to the identified vulnerable structures, based on estimates provided in local risk assessments as well as the State risk assessment. The State shall must estimate the potential dollar losses to State owned or operated buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas.

(3) A Mitigation Strategy that provides the State's blueprint for reducing the losses identified in the risk assessment. This section shall must include:

(i) A description of State goals to guide the selection of activities to mitigate and reduce potential losses.

(ii) A discussion of the State's pre- and post-disaster hazard management policies, programs, and capabilities to mitigate the hazards in the area, including: an An evaluation of State laws, regulations, policies, and programs related to hazard mitigation as well as to development in hazard-prone areas; a discussion of State funding capabilities for hazard mitigation projects; and a general description and analysis of the effectiveness of local mitigation policies, programs, and capabilities.

(iii) An identification, evaluation, and prioritization of cost-effective, environmentally sound, and technically feasible mitigation actions and activities the State is considering and an explanation of how each activity contributes to the overall mitigation strategy. This section should be linked to local plans, where specific local actions and projects are identified.

(iv) Identification of current and potential sources of Federal, State, local, or private funding to implement mitigation activities.

(v) A State may request the reduced cost share authorized under § 79.4(c)(2) of this chapter for the FMA and SRL programs, if it has an approved State Mitigation Plan meeting the requirements of this section that also identifies specific actions the State has taken to reduce the number of repetitive loss properties (which must include severe repetitive loss properties), and specifies how the State intends to reduce the number of such repetitive loss properties. In addition, the plan must describe the strategy the State has to ensure that local jurisdictions with severe repetitive loss properties take actions to reduce the number of these properties, including the development of local mitigation plans In accordance with § 77.6(b) of this chapter, applicants and subapplicants for FMA project grants must have a FEMA-approved mitigation plan that addresses identified flood hazards and provides for reduction of flood losses to structures for which NFIP coverage is available.

(4) A section on the Coordination of Local Mitigation Planning that includes the following:

(i) A description of the State process to support, through funding and technical assistance, the development of local mitigation plans.

(ii) A description of the State process and timeframe by which the local plans will be reviewed, coordinated, and linked to the State Mitigation Plan.

(iii) Criteria for prioritizing communities and local jurisdictions that would receive planning and project grants under available funding programs, which should include consideration for communities with the highest risks, repetitive loss propertiesstructures, and most intense development pressures. Further, that for non-planning grants, a principal criterion for prioritizing grants shall will be the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of proposed projects and their associated costs.

(5) A Plan Maintenance Process that includes:

(i) An established method and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the plan.

(ii) A system for monitoring implementation of mitigation measures and project closeouts.

(iii) A system for reviewing progress on achieving goals as well as activities and projects identified in the Mitigation Strategy.

(6) A Plan Adoption Process. The plan must be formally adopted by the State prior to submittal to us for final review and approval.

(7) Assurances. The plan must include assurances that the State will comply with all applicable Federal statutes and regulations in effect with respect to the periods for which it receives grant funding, including 2 CFR parts 200 and 3002. The State will amend its plan whenever necessary to reflect changes in State or Federal statutes and regulations.

(d) Review and updates. Plan must be reviewed and revised to reflect changes in development, progress in statewide mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities and resubmitted for approval to the appropriate Regional Administrator every 5 years. The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the State, whenever possible. We also encourage a State to review its plan in the post-disaster timeframe to reflect changing priorities, but it is not required.

[67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 67 FR 61515, Oct. 1, 2002; 69 FR 55096, Sept. 13, 2004; 72 FR 61565, 61738, Oct. 31, 2007; 79 FR 22883, Apr. 25, 2014; 79 FR 76085, Dec. 19, 2014; 80 FR 59551, Oct. 2, 2015; 86 FR 50674, Sept. 10, 2021]