HMEP Application Kit 12.04.07

U.S. Department of Transportation

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) Grant Program

Application Kit and Program Reporting Guidance

Hazardous Materials Public Sector

Training and Planning Grants for States and Territories

Table of Contents

HMEP Grant Guidance for States and Territories 3

Application Submission Requirements 6

Progress Reporting 7

Checklist for Grant Application Preparation 8

Narrative Outline 9

Planning Grant Guidance 13

Training Grant Guidance 16

Closeout, Payment Reporting Guidance 20

SF-270 – Request for Advance or Reimbursement 22

SF-269 – Financial Status Report 23

Sample 269 showing zero balance 24

HMEP Grant Accountability Questions 25

HMEP Grant Guidance for States and Territories

Preparation of Application for Assistance

Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) Grant

Application Kit

This document is intended to guide States and Territories in applying for training and planning grants under the Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) program (49 CFR Part 110).

For further information, contact Charles Rogoff, Manager, HMEP Grants Program of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) at (202) 366-0001.

Purpose of this Grant Program

The Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety and Security Reauthorization Act of 2005 authorizes the U.S. DOT to provide assistance to public sector employees through training and planning grants to States, Territories, and Native American tribes for emergency response. The purpose of this grant program is to increase State, Territorial, Tribal, and local effectiveness in safely and efficiently handling hazardous materials accidents and incidents, enhance implementation of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA), and encourage a comprehensive approach to emergency training and planning by incorporating the unique challenges of responses to transportation situations.

Proposal Development

Training and planning are two parts of the comprehensive national grant program. State and Territory applicants are encouraged to request funds to conduct one or both parts in a single application package (if both are included in one package, separate budgets for training and planning must be included). DOT/PHMSA will simplify the grant process by awarding funds for both parts in one grant document.

Because training and planning components for the grant program are funded separately by a special national registration fee program, DOT/PHMSA has a fiduciary responsibility to obligate and account for training and planning funds separately. Therefore, separate accounts for costs must be established for each in the application and grantee records.

Training and Planning

Application Requirements

A training and planning grant application from a State or Territory must be accompanied by a letter from the Governor designating an entity to receive Federal funds if it has not already been provided to PHMSA. DOT encourages the designated entity to obtain substantive knowledge of the status of training and planning under EPCRA, familiarity with State and local emergency preparedness and response capabilities and training needs. Also required is a statement that all members of the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) have been given an opportunity to review the grant application.

To be approved for a planning grant, a State or Territory must agree that it is complying with Sections 301 and 303 of EPCRA and the National Incident Management System (NIMS). With respect to Section 301, the State or Territory must state that a SERC has been established, emergency planning districts have been designated, and Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPC) have been appointed by the SERC. The State or Territory also must describe the status of the LEPCs' emergency response plans and their compliance with Section 303. In addition, the State or Territory must agree that the aggregate expenditure of funds (as defined by the State or Territory), exclusive of Federal funding, for planning activities will not fall below its average expenditure for its last 2 fiscal years. The State or Territory also must agree to make available to LEPCs at least 75 % of the Federal planning grant funds provided.

To be eligible for a training grant, a State or Territory must agree that it is complying with Sections 301 and 303 of EPCRA. With respect to Section 301, the State or Territory must state that a SERC has been established, emergency planning districts have been designated, and LEPCs have been appointed by the SERC. The State or Territory also must describe the status of the LEPCs' emergency response plans and their compliance with Section 303. In addition, the State or Territory must agree to make at least 75 % of the awarded Federal funds available for the purpose of training employees either employed or used by political subdivisions. The State or Territory also must agree that it will maintain a 2-fiscal-year average of its own aggregate level of expenditures (as defined by the State or Territory) for training public sector employees and volunteers to respond to accidents and incidents involving hazardous materials and agree to use courses consistent with the National Curriculum Guidelines developed under HMEP.

Project and Budget Periods

Funding will be provided on the basis of approximately one-year budget periods. Each budget period will be funded according to a specifically defined budget and statement of work.

Matching Funds

For both training and planning grants, States must contribute a minimum of 20 % matching share to the total cost of the grant project. Thus, if the total cost of the project is $50,000, the State or Territory must provide at least $10,000, and DOT will provide no more than $40,000. The matching requirement must be satisfied by costs incurred by the grantee or by the value of in-kind contributions. Funds or costs used for matching purposes under any other Federal grant or cooperative agreement may not be used for matching proposes. The 2-year averaged non-Federal aggregate amount cannot be used for matching (in other words, the State's or Territory's matching share must be new money, either new State or Territory funds or new in-kind contributions).

Grant Target Amounts

The letter transmitting the continuation application kit advises applicants of the target amount of Federal funds available that may be applied for. The scope of work and the budget (Federal and non-Federal funds) should reflect the proposed activities to be conducted during the continuation grant period.

For planning grants, approved applicants who include all required information and agree to comply with Sections 301 and 303 of EPCRA will receive an amount determined by using the following key factors: (1) number of 302 facilities filing to date (Section 302 of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1987 [SARA], Title Ill, requires any facility with one or more emergency hazard sites above a threshold quantity to identify itself to the SERC and the LEPC. In turn, the LEPC must develop a comprehensive emergency plan that includes all covered 302 facilities and transportation routes as well as other hazardous materials risks); (2) population; and (3) hazardous materials truck miles within the State or Territory.

For training grants, approved applicants who include all required information will receive an amount determined by using, the following key factors: (1) population; (2) the number of chemical facilities listed in the summary provided by the Bureau of Census, Bureau of Economic Analysis; and (3) highway miles (within the State or Territory).

Application Submission Requirements

PHMSA is posting grant opportunities and collecting application packages through the grant store-front system called Grants.gov. Separate specific instructions on completing the application package will be provided with the grant package in Grants.gov.

1. A complete application package must be submitted electronically in Grants.gov by July 1 to assure funding on or before October 1.

2. A signed hard copy package (one original, one copy) must be mailed within seven business days of the electronic submittal to:

HMEP Grants Manager

USDOT

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

East Building Second Floor PHH-64

1200 New Jersey Ave SE

Washington, DC 20590

Grant Specialists Contacts

Grant Content and Program Inquiries:

Charles Rogoff – DOT (202)366-0001

Windy Hamilton - DOT (202) 366-8007

Kyra Stewart - DOT (202) 366-8752

FAX (202) 366-3753

Grants.gov Application Processing:

Carrie Brown – DOT (617) 494-3318

FAX 617-494-2972

Progress Reporting

The HMEP grant program, supporting State, Territorial and Tribal planning and training to enhance the response procedures for emergencies involving transportation of hazardous materials has relied heavily on recipient organizations to operate the best possible program for their jurisdiction. The latitude given grant recipients has resulted in a rapid increase, by all accounts received to date, in both planning and training.

It is important that we assess at all jurisdictional levels what has been accomplished just as you are continuing your assessments of planning and training needs.

Your insight and cooperation would be appreciated in developing a relatively concise and easy reporting scheme that will provide data that can be used to support all hazardous materials projects.

For example, planning should at least reflect the following:

1. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of development, improvement and implementation of emergency plans

2. Systems to determine and maintain information on flow patterns of hazardous materials

3. Need for regional response teams

4. Local response capabilities

5. Plans for conducting drills and exercises

6. Description of progress made toward meeting planning objectives as stated in your application

7. Description of unmet planning objectives and proposed approach to meet the objectives

Examples of training should at least reflect the following:

1. Number of public sector employees needing training

2. Training delivered to public sector employees

3. Training drills and exercises completed and planned

4. Description of progress made toward meeting training objectives as stated in your application

5. Description of unmet training objectives and proposed approach to meet the objectives

Checklist for Grant Application Preparation

ITEMS TO BE SUBMITTED VIA GRANTS.GOV BY STATES AND TERRITORIES

FOR HMEP GRANTS

• Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)

• Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A)

• Assurances for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424B)

• Combined Assurances (ED-80-0013)
  
  

• Written narrative in electronic format following the outline in the next section

Narrative Outline

Your written narrative in electronic format must follow the following outline:

All Grant Applications – Items Required:

1. Agency Identification {Please indicate the agency name and address, and Agency Director’s name}
   
   

2. Transportation Fees {Explain whether the State/Territory assesses and collects fees on the transportation of hazardous materials and whether such assessments or fees are used solely to carry out purposes related to the transportation of hazardous materials}.

3. Contact Information {State the designated project manager including the name, position, address, email address, and telephone number of that individual who will be responsible for coordinating the funded activities with other agencies and organizations}.

4. Report of Progress

• Planning Grant – {Report progress made toward achieving the project objectives stated in the preceding budget periods for the Planning Grant.}.

• Training Grant – {Report progress made toward achieving the project objectives stated in the preceding budget periods for the Training Grant.}

5. Report of Changes in Program Goals and Objectives. {Report any proposed changes to the previously approved project goals and objectives.}

6. Statement of Work for upcoming budget period

• Planning Grant - {Provide a statement of work for the upcoming budget period that describes and sets priorities for the activities and tasks to be conducted, the costs associated with each activity, the number and types of deliverables and products to be completed, and a schedule for implementation.}

• Training Grant - {Provide a statement of work for the upcoming budget period that describes and sets priorities for the activities and tasks to be conducted, the costs associated with each activity, the number and types of deliverables and products to be completed, and a schedule for implementation.}

7. SERC and LEPC Involvement. {Provide a statement detailing appropriate SERC and LEPC involvement}

8. Supplies and Equipment. {Provide a description of supplies and equipment needed to implement the statement of work and justification for these needs.}

Planning Grant – Items Required (Items below may be referenced above or attached as a separate document (such as spreadsheets, scanned images, etc.))

1. State compliance with the EPCRA, Sections 301 and 303. {Provide an explanation of how the State or Territory is complying with Sections 301 and 303 of EPCRA.}
   
   

2. State compliance agreement with NIMS. {Provide an explanation of how the State or Territory is complying with NIMS.}
   
   

3. SERC review of grant application. {Provide a statement indicating that all members or the SERC were provided the opportunity to review the grant application.}
   
   

4. Emergency planning activities being conducted by adjacent States and Native American Tribes. {Provide a description of the coordination with emergency planning activities being conducted by adjacent States and Native American Tribes.}
   
   

5. Statement of aggregate expenditures. {Provide a written statement specifying the aggregate expenditure of funds by the State or Territory, exclusive of Federal funds, for each of its last 2 fiscal years (as defined by the State or Territory) for developing, improving, and implementing emergency plans under EPCRA. A written certification that the applicant's aggregate expenditure of funds for this purpose, exclusive of Federal funds, will not fall below the average level of its expenditures for its last 2 fiscal years.}

6. Statement of at least 75% of funds for LEPCs. {Provide a statement agreeing to provide at least 75% of funds for training of public sector employees.}
   
   

7. Goals and Objectives. {Provide a project narrative statement describing the goals and objectives of the proposed project, see page 17 for details to include.}

8. Long-term goals and objectives. {Provide a statement describing the applicant's long-term goals and objectives with respect to:
   
   The current abilities and authorities of the applicant's program for preparedness planning;
   The need to sustain or increase program capability;
   The current degree of participation in or intention to assess the need for a regional hazardous materials emergency response team;
   The impact that the grant will have on the program;
   A discussion of whether the applicant knows, or intends to assess, transportation flow patterns of hazardous materials within the State and between the State and another State;
   A schedule for implementing the proposed grant activities; and
   A statement describing the ways in which planning will be monitored by the recipient.}

Training Grant – Items Required (Items below may be referenced above or attached as a separate document (such as spreadsheets, scanned images, etc.))

1. State compliance with the EPCRA, Sections 301 and 303. {Provide an explanation of how the State or Territory is complying with Sections 301 and 303 of EPCRA.
   
   

2. State compliance agreement with NIMS. {Provide an explanation of how the State or Territory is complying with NIMS.}
   
   

3. Statement: SERC review of grant application. {Provide a statement indicating that all members or the SERC were provided the opportunity to review the grant application.}
   
   

4. Statement of aggregate expenditures. {Provide a written statement specifying the aggregate expenditure of funds by the State or Territory, exclusive of Federal funds, for each of its last 2 fiscal years (as defined by the State or Territory) for developing, improving, and implementing emergency plans under EPCRA. A written certification that the applicant's aggregate expenditure of funds for this purpose, exclusive of Federal funds, will not fall below the average level of its expenditures for its last 2 fiscal years.}

5. Statement of at least 75% of funds for training of public sector employees. {Provide a statement agreeing to provide at least 75% of funds for training of public sector employees.}

6. Point of Contact for coordinated training, and designation of location for course materials. {Provide the designation of a primary point of contact for coordinating training funded under this program, and identify a single repository for copies of course materials delivered under this grant.}

7. Training Plan. {To ensure that proposed training activities are part of a broader and coordinated training effort for a State or Territory, a project narrative statement describing the State's or Territory's overall training plan and changes anticipated during the upcoming budget period should be submitted. This statement should include the following information:
   a)Short- and long-range goals and objectives of each proposed project and of overall program;
   
   b)A description of the overall training needs of the jurisdiction, quantified in terms of number of persons needing training and the number of persons currently trained in the different disciplines and planning and response functions (e.g., number of firefighters, EMTs, EMSs to be trained with grant funds);
   
   c)An explanation of the ways in which the training grant will support the diversity of needs in the jurisdiction, such as decentralized delivery of training to meet the needs and time considerations of local responders or how the grant program will accommodate the different training needs for rural versus urban environments; and
   d)An explanation of quality control measures, including but not limited to random examinations, inspections, and audits of training, to maximize the cost effectiveness and impact of the program.}

8. Course Information. {Provide information on the individual courses for which funding is being requested in the grant application, including confirmation that the course is compliant with the guidelines.}
   
   

9. Training activities Schedule. {Provide a schedule for implementing the proposed training grant activities in the upcoming budget period.}
   
   

10. Estimate of levels of training and funds. {Provide a general estimate of the levels of training and funds that might be needed to fully address the State's or Territory's training requirements during the project period. This estimate will probably involve projected annual expenditures and grant requests that are greater than the amount allocated for a jurisdiction in the previous budget period of the grant program.}

Planning Grant Guidance

The purpose of this planning grant guidance is to help you make better informed decisions regarding your grant application. In addition to providing an outline of the information needed in your application, it identifies technical assistance materials that can provide useful information for selecting grant-eligible activities. Examples of transportation-related projects undertaken by SERCs and LEPCs across the country also are included.

The primary objective of the planning grants program is to develop, improve, and implement emergency plans under EFCRA as well as determine the need for regional hazardous materials emergency response teams. To accomplish these objectives, specific activities that will improve planning have been identified by Congress as those that are eligible for funding. Among these are conducting commodity flow assessments, hazards analysis, drills and exercises; assessing local response capabilities; and enhancing emergency plans.

The general guidance document suggests the development of a multiyear program strategy. If you did not set out a clear multiyear strategy in your previous application, you should consider doing so as part of your continuation application. To implement a multiyear application strategy, you should know where your State currently stands in the planning process and how HMEP funds will be prioritized and made available for use by LEPCs. You can then build a revised program mission, chart the priority activities for the coming years, and begin your continuation application project narrative statement. What are your broad program objectives? How can you supplement the previous activities? For example, if you focused attention on certain LEPCs during the previous years, do you plan to continue with that strategy, or will you pinpoint a different group during each budget period?

Beginning the Process

Several questions should be considered to determine where the State is in the planning process. What percentage of the population is covered by emergency plans? Are these emergency plans based on technically-sound hazards analyses? To what degree is transportation-related risk considered in these plans? Have the plans been tested by conducting exercises?

Establishing Priorities

HMEP funds will be provided to the State, but according to the statute, at least 75 % of those funds must be passed through to LEPCs. Because each State has unique risks and unique planning organizations associated with it, each State should consider prioritizing the uses of its HMEP allocation. Depending on the circumstances in your State, it might make the most sense to allocate an equal amount of money to each LEPC. Another option is to provide larger sums to specific areas with the greatest need. Questions to consider when making this determination include: Are there certain geographical areas that are of particular concern, especially considering transportation-related concerns? Is there a way to distribute HMEP funds based on the presence of specific high-risk, high-priority chemicals?

What Should the Planning Project Narrative Include?

The project narrative required sets out the goals and objectives of your HMEP program. You should update and include changes to the following elements for each major activity you are proposing:

• Background Statement. This is the long-term goals and objectives for the program and should include:

- Current Authorities. Describe your State legislation and the funding mechanism(s) that provide the structure to your program.

- Increasing Program Capability. What are your State's primary planning needs? By linking your needs with the grant-eligible activities, you will justify your proposal.

-Regional Hazardous Materials Teams. Does your State presently participate in regional hazardous materials emergency response teams? Do you see a need for such involvement in the future?

• Impact on the Program. What impact will HMEP have in your State? How will it fit into your overall plan to implement EPCRA?

• Transportation-Related Work. What is the potential for problems associated with transportation flow patterns of hazardous materials within your State and between your State and others? If commodity flow information is not available, do you plan to assess these patterns? This type of study can provide you with valuable information on potential transportation accidents within your State.

• Time Line. Include a realistic schedule for implementing the activities you have proposed. This could include a single-year or multiyear plan.

• Monitoring Efforts. How do you intend to monitor the program? Describe the types of mechanisms required by your State and within your agency for financial and programmatic monitoring.

• Coordination of Planning. Include a description of how planning under the grant will be coordinated with emergency planning conducted by adjacent States and Indian Tribes.

Eligible Project Activities for Continuation Planning

Planning grants may be made to reimburse States and Territories for (1) developing, improving, and implementing emergency plans under the EPCRA; (2) determining the flow patterns of hazardous materials within a State or between one State and another State; and (3) determining the need for regional hazardous materials emergency response teams.

States are required to pass through at least 75 % of the grant amount to LEPCs.

An application should reflect how these funds were passed through from the applicant's current grant to the LEPCs and the applicant's proposed actions for use of continuation grant funds.

The following specific activities continue to be eligible for planning grants:

• Development, improvement, and implementation of emergency plans required under EPCRA as well as exercises that test the emergency plans. Enhancement of emergency plans to include hazards analysis as well as response procedures for emergencies involving transportation of hazardous materials, including radioactive materials;

• Management activities associated with the pass-through of funds to the LEPCs;

• An assessment to determine flow patterns of hazardous materials within a State or between one State and another State, Territory or Native American land; also development and maintenance of a system to keep such information current;

• An assessment of the need for regional hazardous materials emergency response teams;

• An assessment of local response capabilities;

• Conducting emergency response drills and exercises associated with emergency preparedness plans;

• Technical staff to support the planning effort staff funded under planning grants cannot be diverted to support other requirements of EPCRA; and

• Additional activities that the DOT Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety deems appropriate to implement the scope of work for the proposed project.

An application should reflect progress made toward accomplishing the objectives stated in an applicant's previous award documents. Should the applicant wish to modify its project, the applicant must identify the changes wanted, establish specific outputs to be achieved during the upcoming budget period, and reflect the proposed revised activities in the upcoming budget period.

Training Grant Guidance

Eligible Project Activities for Continuation Training

Training grants will be made available to States and Territories for training public sector employees to respond safely and efficiently to accidents and incidents, including those involving transportation of hazardous materials. Training may be designed for public officials who are not responders but who perform activities associated with emergency response plans developed under EPCRA. Operational equipment to be used in response to hazmat exercises is excluded from consideration for funding under this grant program.

States and Territories must ensure that at least 75 % of training grant funds are used to benefit public sector employees. The continuation application should reflect how the current grant is being used to benefit public sector employees and how the applicant expects to accomplish this goal using continuation grant funds. The following training delivery options may be used by the State or Territory to meet the 75 % requirement:

• Develop and deliver training to the public sector employees according to the priority needs and requests of the LEPCs;

• Distribute training grant funds directly to the LEPCs to support public sector employee training delivered by any provider; and

• Distribute training grant funds directly to the public sector employees so that the employees can attend approved training courses.

The following activities are also eligible for HMEP training grant support:

• Training audience assessment to determine the number of public sector employees employed or used by a political subdivision who need the proposed training and to select courses consistent with the National Curriculum guidelines;

• Delivery of comprehensive preparedness and response training to public sector employees to include design of preparedness and response training to meet specialized needs; student and instructor course materials and manuals; student tuition, travel, and per diem costs; instructor costs; training facility rental; and equipment rental necessary to deliver an approved course. For training grants, equipment purchases for use as props for training may be approved with a proper justification. Costs for such equipment will be determined as reasonable based on a review by DOT;

• Training by a person (including a department, agency, or instrumentality of a State, Territory, or political subdivision thereof or a Native American tribe) and activities necessary to monitor such training including examinations, critiques, and instructor evaluations;

• Management of the training effort to achieve increased benefits, proficiency, and rapid deployment of public service employees who respond to accidents and incidents involving hazardous materials;

• Emergency response drills and exercises associated with training, a course of study, and tests and evaluation of emergency preparedness plans; and

• Additional activities that the DOT Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety deems appropriate to implement the scope of work for the proposed project and that are approved in the grant.
  
  

Allowable Training Grant Expenses

Reasonable costs required to accomplish "eligible project activities" and reflected in the continuation application and grant agreement are allowable. States will be given the option to award subcontracts, supported in their applications, to another entity, such as an institution of higher education or a private contractor.

A charge for student tuition will be allowable as long as the proceeds are used for HMEP training activities. If the course is provided at no cost to the student, costs incurred to provide the course are allowable.

On request, participating Federal agencies will provide States "camera-ready" copies of Federal course materials needed for training, which States can duplicate themselves. Such duplication costs will be allowable expenses under HMEP. Materials purchased from the private sector also will be allowable expenses.

Non-allowable Training Grant Expense

Overtime for participation in exercises is not an allowable personnel expense.

CURRICULUM GUIDANCE

Background

In 1994, DOT first provided the Guidelines for Public Sector Hazardous Materials Training to HMEP grantees to assist in the curriculum management of the training programs funded by the HMEP grant program.

In addition, in an ongoing effort, DOT coordinated with the HMEP grantees the self-assessment of response training courses for public sector employees. The list of courses that have been assessed for compatibility with the HMEP curriculum guidelines includes the State, Federal and professional association programs used by the HMEP grantees in their respective training curriculums. The results of the response course self-assessment program are provided to the HMEP grantees in the document HMEP List of Assessed Response Courses, which is enclosed with this grant guidance. The HMEP assessment of response training courses will be an on-going process, and new or updated courses will continuously be assessed and added to the HMEP List of Assessed Response Courses. Therefore, this catalog will be regularly updated and updates provided to HMEP grantees as additional course assessments are made available.

Current Training Grant Curriculum Directions

Planning and Prevention Training

For planning and prevention training to be reimbursed under the HMEP training grant program, grantees should review the current edition of the Guidelines for Public Sector Hazardous Materials Training and should ensure that proposed training courses are within the scope and focus of the curriculum guidance for these training areas.

Response Training

For response training to be reimbursed under the HMEP training grant program, the courses used should be assessed using the HMEP response course self-assessment materials. The HMEP grant program maintains the policy of supporting each grantee's independent authority over their respective training curriculums. To both continue this policy and ensure that response courses assessed, grantees are asked to either:

1. Use response courses that have been assessed for compliance with guidelines and are so indicated in the enclosed HMEP List of Assessed Response Courses. Later editions of courses on the list are acceptable if the grantee judges that the updated edition does not significantly alter the substance and scope of the training course. The list of assessed hazmat courses is available from FEMA/USFA, 301-447-1009.

OR

2. Provide a completed self-assessment to FEMA/USFA, 301-447-1009 for courses not in the current HMEP List of Assessed Response Courses.
   
   

HMEP curriculum guidance materials

• Current Guidelines for Public Sector Hazardous Materials Training

• HMEP List of Assessed Response Courses

• HMEP Hazardous Materials Response Course Self-Assessment Kit

Closeout, Payment Reporting Guidance

CLOSEOUT OF GRANT AWARD

Background

When PHMSA awards an HMEP grant, the agreement defines a specific "budget period" during which the funds are available to the grantee. For HMEP grants each budget period will be approximately 1 year. A financial status report and a progress report are required at the end of each budget period

The recipient uses the award agreement as its authority to enter into its own obligations for internal expenses, contracts, etc., to carry out agreed-on activities during the approved budget period. The grant agreement serves as the document that obligates DOT funds for purposes of accomplishing project objectives during an approved budget period. At the end of each quarter the recipient must provide to PHMSA a Financial Status Report (Form 269) (see page 30). If the fourth quarter report is not a “final” report, then the recipient must provide a final report showing obligations and liquidations for the covered grant period.

State and Territorial recipients of HMEP training and planning grants should be aware of grant policy regarding closeout of each grant award and disposition of any unused funds awarded to carry out projects authorized by HMEP. Often, particularly in the early stages of a project, expenditures of grant funds do not proceed as planned. This situation may occur for many reasons; for example, inability to hire a staff person, inability to conduct or schedule training sessions prior to the end of a budget period, changing priorities, or modifications to the initially proposed scope of work. For whatever reason, there are many instances when a recipient has not obligated significant amounts of its Federal grant funds at the conclusion of a budget period. This section clarifies procedures for disposing of unobligated balances and closing out the financial accounting for each grant award.

One aspect of financial closeout is the payment of grantee outlays. All recipients are encouraged to request reimbursement for the Federal share of outlays as needed or as soon as possible after completion of each budget period. Standard Form 270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement, (see page 28) is to be used for requesting payments. If balances are not drawn down, they may be deobligated and will no longer be available for grantee use.

GENERAL FINANCIAL CLOSEOUT PROCEDURES

Closeout Reporting Requirements

Both program progress and financial status reports must be submitted for each budget period. The progress report must be submitted to the HMEP Grants Manager no later than 90 days after the budget period is completed. See page 9 for guidance on progress reporting.

The Financial Status Report (FSR), Standard Form 269 (see page 30), must be used to complete financial reporting for each grant period funded. Copies of the FSR may be made or may be requested from the HMEP Grants Manager. A final FSR should be submitted to the HMEP Grants Manager within 90 days of the completion of each budget period.

Zero Balance Closeout

When all Federal funds and all required matching non-Federal funds have been used for purposes approved in the grant, line 10.m. of the FSR will be zero. This zero unobligated balance of Federal funds authorizes DOT to close out the funding period identified by the FSR, subject only to a future audit.

Decreases in Obligation Amounts

Unobligated balances of funds may exist at the end of a grant period and a determination must be made by the grantee that the unused funds should be decreased from the grant funds available. Usually these situations involve relatively small amounts of grant funds; however, decreases may be needed for many reasons, and thus the amount of the decrease, if any, will vary from grant to grant. The amount of the decrease will be identified on line 10.m. of the final FSR. Any recovery of grant unobligated balances will be considered a recovery to the registration fee fund and will be used to accomplish HMEP objectives.

SF-270 – Request for Advance or Reimbursement

This form may be obtained online here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/sf270.pdf

SF-269 – Financial Status Report

Sample 269 showing zero balance

HMEP Grant Accountability Questions

Beginning with the application for FY 2008 funds, applicants will be asked to respond to the following additional questions:

Hazardous Materials Fees

1.  Does your state or tribe assess a fee or fees in connection with the transportation of hazardous materials?

2.  If the answer to question 1 is “yes,”

a.  What state agency administers the fee?

b.  What is the amount of the fee and the basis on which the fee is assessed?  Examples of the bases on which fees may be assessed include:  (1) an annual fee for each company which transports hazardous materials within your state or tribal territory; (2) a fee for each truck or vehicle used to transport hazardous materials within your state or tribal territory; (3) a fee for certain commodities or quantities of hazardous materials transported in your state or tribal territory; or (4) a fee for each hazardous materials shipment transiting your state or tribal territory. 

c.  Is company size considered when assessing the fee?  For instance, do companies meeting the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) definition of a small business pay the same or lesser fee amount than companies that do not meet the SBA definition?

d.  For what purpose(s) is the revenue from the fee used?  For example, is the revenue used to support hazardous materials transportation enforcement programs?  Is the fee used to support planning, developing, and maintaining an emergency response capability?

e.  What is the total annual amount of the revenue collected for the last fiscal year or 12-month accounting period?

 Planning Grants

 

1.  Of the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds, what amount was used to assist Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs)?  How many were assisted using HMEP funds? 

a.  Did the LEPCs complete or update assessments of commodity flow patterns in their jurisdictions?  If so, how many?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to this effort?

b.  Did the LEPCs complete or update assessments of the emergency response capabilities in their jurisdictions?  If so, how many?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to this effort?

c.  Did the LEPCs develop or improve emergency plans for their jurisdictions?  If so, how many plans were either developed or updated?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to this effort?

d.  Did the LEPCs conduct exercises to support their emergency plans?  If so, how many exercises were conducted?  Did any of these exercises include shipper or carrier participation?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to emergency response drills or exercises of all types?

e.  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to other authorized activities by LEPCs (e.g., providing technical staff in support of emergency response planning efforts)?

2.  Other than to assist LEPCs as addressed in Question 1, of the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds, what amount was used by the grantee (state or tribal government) to improve emergency response planning within the grantee’s jurisdiction? 

a.  Did the grantee complete or update an assessment of commodity flow patterns in its entire jurisdiction?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to this effort?

b.  Did the grantee complete or update an assessment of emergency response capabilities in its entire jurisdiction?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to this effort?

c.  Did the grantee develop or improve an emergency plan for its entire jurisdiction?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to this effort?

d.  Did the grantee conduct exercises to support its emergency plan?  How many exercises were conducted?  Did any of these exercises include shipper or carrier participation?  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to emergency response drills or exercises of all types?

e.  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to other authorized planning activities by the grantee (e.g., providing technical staff in support of emergency response planning efforts)?

3.  Based on the activities outlined above, how well has the HMEP grants program met emergency response planning needs within your jurisdiction?  Does your current ability to provide planning enable you to meet the needs you have identified?  Do you have any recommendations for additional activities or programs that could further enhance your emergency response planning capabilities?

Training Grants

1.  What was the total amount of HMEP training grant funds utilized to assess training needs and provide training for emergency response personnel in your jurisdiction?

a. Did you complete or update an assessment of the training needs of the emergency response personnel in your jurisdiction?  What was the total amount of HMEP training grant funds devoted to this effort? 

b. How many individuals were trained in whole or in part using HMEP training grant funds?  You should include separate totals for numbers of fire, police, emergency medical services (EMS) or other personnel who were trained and the type of training provided.  (Note that “other” personnel include public works employees, accident clean-up crews, and liaison and support officers.  Note also that if HMEP training grant funds were used in any way to support the training, such as for books or equipment, you should show that the training was partially funded by HMEP training grant funds.)  What was the total amount of HMEP training grant funds devoted to this effort? 

c.  Did you provide incident command systems training?  If so, provide separate indications for the numbers of fire, policy, EMS, or other personnel who were trained.  What was the total amount of HMEP training grant funds devoted to this effort? 

d. Did you develop new training using HMEP training grant funds in whole or in part, such as training in handling specific types of incidents of specific types of materials?  If so, briefly describe the new programs.  Did a commodity flow assessment influence the development of new training programs? Was the program qualified using the HMEP Curriculum Guidelines process?  What was the total amount of HMEP training grant funds devoted to this effort? 

e.  What was the total amount of HMEP planning grant funds devoted to other authorized training activities (e.g., activities necessary to monitor training, including examinations, critiques, and instructor evaluations; management activities to increase the benefits, proficiency, and rapid deployment of emergency responders)?

2.  Do you have a system in place for measuring the effectiveness of emergency response to hazardous materials incidents in your jurisdiction?  Describe the criteria you use (total response time, total time at an accident scene, communication among different agencies or jurisdictions, or other criteria).  How many state and local response teams are located in your jurisdiction?  What is the estimated coverage of these teams (e.g., the percent of state jurisdictions covered)? 

3.  Based on the activities outlined above, how well has the HMEP grants program met emergency response training needs within your jurisdiction?  Does your current ability to provide training enable you to meet the needs you have identified?  Do you have any recommendations for additional activities or programs that could further enhance the effectiveness of emergency response to hazardous materials incidents in your jurisdiction?

HMEP Application Page 27 of 27