FY 2010 PSGP Program Guidance

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

FISCAL YEAR 2010
PORT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM
GUIDANCE AND APPLICATION KIT

DECEMBER 2009

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Title of Opportunity: FY 2010 Port Security Grant Program (PSGP)
Funding Opportunity Number: DHS-10-GPD-056-000-01
Federal Agency Name: U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Announcement Type: Initial
Dates: Completed applications must be submitted no later than 11:59 p.m. EST,
February 12, 2010.
Additional overview information: The Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Port Security Grant
Program (PSGP) contains significant improvements based on extensive outreach and
feedback from our maritime partners, including:
Investment Justifications
Investment Justifications for Group I and II port areas will be due 45 business days from
the FY 2010 PSGP application deadline.
Ferry Systems
There is no designated Ferry allocation. Ferry Systems in Group I and II apply through
the designated Fiduciary Agent. All other Ferry Systems apply following the guidance
with the Group III and All Other Port Areas.
Management and Administration
Management and Administration (M&A) may not exceed five percent (5%) of the total
award for grantees, and three percent (3%) for sub-grantees.
Cost Sharing Requirements
There is no required cost sharing, matching, or cost participation for the FY 2010 PSGP.
Unallowable Costs
Not all items that were allowable under FY 2009 PSGP are allowable under FY 2010
PSGP. The following costs are unallowable under FY 2010 PSGP:
 Funding for standard operations vehicles utilized for routine duties, such as patrol
cars and fire trucks
 Cost of conducting vulnerability assessments to evaluate and make
recommendations with respect to security
Maintenance and Sustainment
The use of FEMA preparedness grant funds for maintenance contracts, warranties,
repair or replacement costs, upgrades, and user fees are allowable under all active and
future grant awards, unless otherwise noted. Please refer to “Other Allowable Costs –
Maintenance and Sustainment” in this kit for more information.

i

FY 2011 PSGP Structure
Subject to available funding, for the FY 2011 and future PSGP cycles, DHS intends to
require Group I and II port areas to submit Investment Justifications at the time of
application. This modification will consolidate the review process and improve the
efficiency of the program.

ii

CONTENTS
Contents......................................................................................................................... 1
Part I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION......................................................... 2
Part II. AWARD INFORMATION .................................................................................... 7
Part III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION ............................................................................ 8
A.
Eligible Applicants................................................................................... 8
B.
Restrictions ............................................................................................ 14
C.
Other ....................................................................................................... 14
Part IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION ...................................... 18
A.
Address to Request Application Package ........................................... 18
B.
Content and Form of Application ......................................................... 18
C.
Submission Dates and Times ............................................................... 22
D.
Intergovernmental Review .................................................................... 22
E.
Funding Restrictions ............................................................................. 22
F.
Other Submission Requirements ......................................................... 34
Part V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION ........................................................ 35
A.
Review Criteria....................................................................................... 35
B.
Review and Selection Process ............................................................. 35
C.
Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates .................................... 36
Part VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION ................................................. 37
A.
Notice of Award ..................................................................................... 37
B.
Administrative and National Policy Requirements ............................. 37
C.
Reporting Requirements ....................................................................... 46
Part VII. FEMA CONTACTS......................................................................................... 50
Part VIII. OTHER INFORMATION ............................................................................... 53
A.
Investment Justification Template ....................................................... 53
B.
Sample Budget Detail Worksheet......................................................... 56
C.
Sample MOU/MOA Template................................................................. 59
D.
Other ....................................................................................................... 60

1

PART I.

FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION
The Port Security Grant Program (PSGP) is one of five grant programs that constitute
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 focus on
transportation infrastructure security activities. The PSGP is one tool in the
comprehensive set of measures authorized by Congress and implemented by the
Administration to strengthen the Nation’s critical infrastructure against risks associated
with potential terrorist attacks. Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act
of 2002, as amended (Public Law 107-295), established the PSGP at 46 U.S.C. §70107
to implement Area Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security plans
among port authorities, facility operators, and State and local government agencies
required to provide port security services.
The vast bulk of U.S. critical infrastructure is owned and/or operated by State, local and
private sector partners. PSGP funds support increased port-wide risk management;
enhanced domain awareness; training and exercises; and further capabilities to prevent,
detect, respond to, and recover from attacks involving improvised explosive devices
(IEDs) and other non-conventional weapons.
Federal Investment Strategy
The PSGP is an important part of the Administration’s larger, coordinated effort to
strengthen homeland security preparedness, including the security of the country’s
critical infrastructure. The PSGP implements objectives addressed in a series of post9/11 laws, strategy documents, plans, Executive Orders and Homeland Security
Presidential Directives (HSPDs). Of particular significance are the National
Preparedness Guidelines and its associated work products, including the National
Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) and its sector-specific plans. The National
Preparedness Guidelines provides an all-hazards vision regarding the Nation’s four core
preparedness objectives: prevent, protect, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks
and catastrophic natural disasters.
The Guidelines first define a vision of what to accomplish and then provide a set of tools
to forge a unified national consensus about what to do and how to work together at the
Federal, State, local, and tribal levels. Private sector participation is integral to the
Guidelines’ success.1 The Guidelines outline 15 scenarios of terrorist attacks or
national disasters that form the basis of much of the Federal exercise and training
regime. In addition, they identify 37 critical target capabilities that will be DHS’ focus for
key investments with State, local, and tribal partners.

1

The National Preparedness Guidelines and its supporting documents were published in final form and released on
September 13, 2007. The Guidelines are available at: http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/publications.

2

DHS expects its critical infrastructure partners to be familiar with this national
preparedness architecture and to incorporate elements of this architecture into their
planning, operations, and investment to the degree practicable. DHS funding priorities
outlined in this document reflect the National Preparedness Guidelines’ priority
investments as appropriate. Programmatic requirements or priority investment
categories reflecting the national preparedness architecture are expressly identified
below. Additional information may be found at
http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/publications.
Overarching Funding Priorities
The funding priorities for the FY 2010 PSGP reflect the Department’s overall investment
strategy, in which two priorities have been paramount: risk-based funding and regional
security cooperation.
First, DHS will focus the bulk of its available port security grant dollars on the highestrisk port systems. This determination is based on ongoing intelligence analysis,
extensive security reviews, and consultations with port industry partners.
At the recommendation of the United States Coast Guard (USCG), some ports are
being considered as a single cluster due to geographic proximity, shared risk, and a
common waterway. As with other DHS grant programs, applications from these port
clusters must be locally coordinated and include integrated security proposals to use
PSGP grant dollars.
Eligible port areas, as well as ferry systems, were identified using a comprehensive,
empirically-grounded risk analysis model. Risk methodology for PSGP programs is
consistent across transportation modes and is linked to the risk methodology used to
determine eligibility for the core DHS State and local grant programs.
Within the PSGP, eligibility for all grant awards is first predicated on a systematic risk
analysis that reviews and rates eligible ports in a given area for comparative risk. All
port areas will be comparably rated.
The PSGP risk formula is based on a 100 point scale comprising “threat” (20 points)
and “vulnerability/consequences” (80 points). Risk data for eligible port areas is
gathered individually and then aggregated by region. The DHS risk formula
incorporates multiple normalized variables, meaning that for a given variable, all eligible
port areas are empirically ranked on a relative scale from lowest to highest.
DHS’s risk assessment methodology for PSGP considers critical infrastructure system
assets and characteristics from four areas that might contribute to their risk: intelligence
community assessments of threat; economic consequences of attack; port assets; and
area risk (to people and physical infrastructure immediately surrounding the port). The
relative weighting of variables reflects DHS’ overall risk assessment, as well as the FY
2010 program priorities. Specific variables include multiple data sets regarding military
mission variables; adjacent critical asset inventories; USCG Maritime Security Risk
Analysis Model (MSRAM) data; and international cargo value and measures of cargo
throughput (container, break bulk, international and domestic).

3

Second, DHS places a very high priority on ensuring that all PSGP applications reflect
robust regional coordination and an investment strategy that institutionalizes regional
security strategy integration. This priority is a core component in the Department’s
statewide grant programs and the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) grants.
The program will build on the successes of previous years by continuing to encourage
port-wide partnerships, regional management of risk, and business continuity.
Group I and II port areas are completing development of Port-Wide Risk Management
Plans (PRMP) and Business Continuity/Resumption of Trade Plans (BCRTP). These
plans address the gaps in authorities, capabilities, capacities, competencies, and
partnerships in these ports and identify their prioritized projects for the next five years
and support the Area Maritime Security Plan (AMSP).
In FY 2010, the PSGP will continue to fund those eligible projects identified in the
PRMP and BCRTP. Adoption of a deliberate risk management planning process,
consistent with that employed in the UASI and State programs, is also a key focus of
the Security and Accountability For Every (SAFE) Port Act (Public Law 109-347)
amendments to the PSGP.
During 2010, DHS will continue its effort to encourage and help coordinate port security
planning efforts through coordination with USCG and the Captain of the Port (COTP),
along with the Area Maritime Security Committee (AMSC) and the use of the AMSP.
This is part of an important evolution in the focus of the PSGP – from a program that is
primarily focused on the security of individual facilities within ports, to a port-wide risk
management/mitigation and continuity-of-operations/resumption-of-trade program that is
fully integrated into the broader regional planning construct that forms the core of the
UASI, as well as applicable statewide initiatives.
PSGP Priorities
In addition to these two overarching priorities, the Department has identified the
following four priorities as its selection criteria for all FY 2010 PSGP applicants:
1. Enhancing Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA)
MDA is the critical enabler that allows leaders at all levels to make effective
decisions and act early against threats to the security of the Nation’s seaports. In
support of the National Strategy for Maritime Security, port areas should seek to
enhance their MDA through projects that address knowledge capabilities within the
maritime domain. This could include access control/standardized credentialing,
command and control, communications, and enhanced intelligence sharing and
analysis. This may also include construction or infrastructure improvement projects
that are identified in the PRMP and/or Facility Security Plans (FSPs) and/or Vessel
Security Plans (VSPs).
The first step toward meeting MDA is to ensure stakeholders at all levels know what
they can do to help; how they can do it; and why MDA is in their collective best
interest. MDA will demand a common purpose and agreed upon procedures.

4

MDA requires a coordinated unity of effort within and among public and private
sector organizations and international partners. The need for security is a mutual
interest requiring the greatest cooperation between industry and government.
MDA depends upon unparalleled information sharing. MDA must have protocols to
protect private sector proprietary information. Bi-lateral or multi-lateral information
sharing agreements and international conventions and treaties will greatly assist
enabling MDA.
Public safety and economic security are mutually reinforcing. All members must
recognize that the safe and efficient flow of commerce is enhanced and harmonized
by an effective understanding of the maritime domain. The converse is also true,
that MDA is enhanced by responsible participation in an accountable system of
commerce. The two concepts are mutually reinforcing.
2. Enhancing Improvised Explosive Device (IED) and Chemical, Biological,
Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive (CBRNE) prevention, protection, response
and recovery capabilities
Port areas will continue to enhance their capabilities to prevent, detect, respond to
and recover from terrorist attacks employing IEDs, CBRNE and other nonconventional weapons. Of particular concern in the port environment are attacks
that employ IEDs delivered via small craft (similar to the attack on the USS Cole), by
underwater swimmers (such as underwater mines) or on ferries (both passenger and
vehicle). Please refer to the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) section in
Part VIII. The DHS Small Vessel Security Strategy April 2008 document can be
found at http://www.dhs.gov/files/publications/gc_1209408805402.shtm.
3. Training and Exercises
Port areas should seek to ensure that appropriate capabilities exist among staff and
managers, and then regularly test these capabilities through emergency exercises
and drills. Exercises must follow the Area Maritime Security Training Exercise
Program or the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Intermodal Security
Training Exercise Program (I-STEP) guidelines that test operational protocols that
would be implemented in the event of a terrorist attack. The efforts include live
situational exercises involving various threat and disaster scenarios, table-top
exercises, and methods for implementing lessons learned.
4. Efforts supporting implementation of the Transportation Worker Identification
Credential (TWIC)
TWIC is a congressionally mandated security program through which DHS will
conduct appropriate background investigations and issue biometrically enabled and
secure identification cards for individuals requiring unescorted access to U.S. port
facilities. Regulations outlining the initial phase of this program (card issuance) were
issued by TSA in cooperation with the Coast Guard in 72 Federal Register 3492
(January 25, 2007).
PSGP Program Management: Roles and Responsibilities at DHS
Effective management of the PSGP entails a collaborative effort and partnership within
DHS, the dynamics of which require continuing outreach, coordination, and interface.
For the FY 2010 PSGP, FEMA is responsible for designing and operating the
5

administrative mechanisms needed to implement and manage the grant program. The
USCG provides programmatic subject matter expertise for the maritime industry and
assists by coordinating the myriad of intelligence information and risk/vulnerability
assessments resulting in ranking and rating critical infrastructure and key resources
nationwide against threats associated with potential terrorist attacks and in defining the
parameters for identifying, protecting, deterring, responding, and recovering from such
incidents. Together, these two agencies with additional assistance and cooperation
from TSA, the Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD) and
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), as needed for port operations, determine the
primary security architecture of the PSGP.

6

PART II.

AWARD INFORMATION
Authorizing Statutes
The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-83)
and Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, as amended (46
U.S.C. §70107).
Period of Performance
The period of performance of this grant is 36 months. Extensions to the period of
performance will be considered only through formal requests to FEMA with specific and
compelling justifications as to why an extension is required.
Available Funding
In FY 2010, the total amount of funds distributed under this grant will be $288,000,000.
FY 2010 PSGP funds will be allocated based on the following table:
Table 1
FY 2010 PSGP Available Funding
Group
Group I
Group II
Group III
All Other Port Areas
TOTAL

7

FY 2010 PSGP
Funding
$172,800,000
$86,400,000
$14,400,000
$14,400,000
$288,000,000

PART III.

ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
A. Eligible Applicants
A synopsis of 46 U.S.C. §70107 states that a grant program shall be established for the
allocation of funds based on risk to implement AMSPs and FSPs among port
authorities, facility operators, and State and local government agencies required to
provide port security services. In administering the grant program; national, economic,
energy, and strategic defense concerns based upon the most current risk assessments
available shall be taken into account.
Congress has specifically directed DHS to apply these funds to the highest risk ports.
In support of this, the PSGP includes a total of 147 specifically identified critical ports,
representing approximately 95 percent of the foreign waterborne commerce of the
United States. Based upon USCG recommendations, these ports are aggregated into
91 discrete port funding areas. As described below, “All Other Port Areas” covered by
an AMSP are eligible to apply for grant funds from a PSGP funding pool created for that
purpose.
Within the PSGP, the following entities are specifically encouraged to apply:
 Owners or operators of federally regulated terminals, facilities, U.S. inspected
passenger vessels or ferries as defined in the Maritime Transportation Security
Act (MTSA) and Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 101,
104, 105, and 106
 Port authorities or other State and local agencies that are required to provide
security services to eligible Ferry System applicants (MTSA regulated facilities)
pursuant to an AMSP, a FSP or VSP
 Consortia composed of local river organizations, ports and terminal associations,
and other local stakeholder groups representing federally regulated ports,
terminals, U.S. inspected passenger vessels or ferries that are required to
provide security services to federally regulated facilities or federally regulated
vessels in accordance with an AMSP, a FSP or VSP; and recognized as AMSC
members by the Captain of the Port (COTP
 Group I and II Fiduciary Agents (FA) (including newly identified Group II port
areas who choose to begin the FA process)
As a condition of eligibility, all PSGP applicants are required to be fully compliant
with relevant Maritime Security Regulations (33 CFR Parts 101-106). Any open or
outstanding Notice of Violation (NOV), as of the grant application submission
deadline date, which has been issued to an applicant, and the applicant has (1)
failed to pay within 45 days of receipt; (2) failed to decline the NOV within 45 days
of receipt (in which case a finding of default will be entered by the Coast Guard in
accordance with 33 CFR § 1.07-11(f)(2)); or (3) the applicant has appealed the
8

NOV as provided for in 33 CFR § 1.07-70 and is in receipt of a final appeal
decision from Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, as described in 33 CFR § 1.07-75,
and has failed to come into compliance with the final adjudication within the
timelines noted therein, will not be allowed to make application for a Port Security
Grant. COTP will verify security compliance eligibility during the field review
process.
Table 2 lists the specific port areas by Group that are eligible for funding through the FY
2010 PSGP.
Group I and II
Seven port areas have been selected as Group I (highest risk) and forty-eight port areas
have been selected as Group II. Each Group I and Group II port area has been
designated a specific amount of money based upon the FY 2010 risk analysis.
Group I and II port areas identified in the FY 2007 Supplemental PSGP and the FY
2008 or FY 2009 PSGP that remain in Group I for FY 2010 are required to continue with
the FA process and have the option of retaining their current FA or selecting a new FA
to deal specifically with the FY 2010 PSGP award. Those port areas newly identified as
Group I or II will have the option of selecting an FA and beginning the FA process, or
opting out of the FA process. If opting out of the FA process, individual eligible entities
will apply directly to FEMA for funding within the Group they originally resided, and
applicants must comply with all requirements of Group III and All Other Port Areas, with
the identified port’s allocation of money incorporated within the respective Group III or
“All Other Port Areas” funding pool.
For Group I and II port areas (excluding newly identified port areas that opt out) the FY
2010 PSGP will only accept applications from the FA for that port area. All individual
entities (including ferry systems) within one of these port areas will apply for PSGP
funds through their port area’s designated FA.
Group III
Ports not identified in Group I or II are eligible to apply as a Group III and will compete
for the funding identified in their corresponding Group. Eligible Group III port entities will
submit their application and associated documentation directly to FEMA.
All Other Port Areas
Ports not identified in Group I, II, or III will compete for the funding identified for the “All
Other Port Areas” Group. “All Other Port Areas” included within Group I, II or III’s AMSP
are allowed to receive grant funds from their geographically proximate higher Group if
the project has regional impact across the entire port area, but not from both funding
groups for the same project. “All Other Port Areas” eligible entities will submit their
application and associated documentation directly to FEMA.

9

Table 2
FY 2010 PSGP Port Area Groupings
Group

State/Territory

California

Louisiana

I
New Jersey /
Pennsylvania /
Delaware

New York / New
Jersey
Texas

Washington

Port Area
Los Angeles-Long Beach
Long Beach
Los Angeles
San Francisco Bay
Carquinez Strait
Martinez
Oakland
Richmond
San Francisco
Stockton
New Orleans
Baton Rouge
Gramercy
New Orleans
Plaquemines, Port of
South Louisiana, Port of
St. Rose
Delaware Bay
Camden-Gloucester, NJ
Chester, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
New Castle, DE
Paulsboro, NJ
Philadelphia, PA
Trenton, NJ
Wilmington, DE
New York, NY and NJ
Houston-Galveston
Galveston
Houston
Puget Sound
Anacortes
Bellingham
Everett
Olympia
Port Angeles
Seattle
Tacoma

10

FY 2010 Target
Allocation
$31,390,136

$19,874,162

$22,777,670

$15,949,462

$33,774,108
$28,867,900

$20,166,562

Group

State/Territory
Alabama
California

Connecticut

Florida

Georgia
Guam
Hawaii

II

Indiana/
Illinois
Kentucky
Louisiana
Massachusetts
Maryland
Maine
Michigan
Minnesota
Minnesota/
Wisconsin
Missouri
Missouri/
Illinois
Mississippi
North Carolina

Port Area
Mobile
San Diego
Port Hueneme

FY 2010 Target
Allocation
$1,569,644
$2,748,751
$1,156,116

Long Island Sound
Bridgeport
New Haven
New London

$2,250,077

Jacksonville
Port Everglades
Miami

$3,137,877
$2,221,586
$1,718,156

Tampa Bay
Port Manatee
Tampa
Port Canaveral
Panama City
Pensacola
Savannah
Apra Harbor
Honolulu
Barbers Point, Oahu
Honolulu, Oahu
Southern Tip Lake Michigan
Burns Waterway Harbor, IN
Chicago, IL
Gary, IN
Indiana Harbor, IN
Louisville
Lake Charles
Port Fourchon/The LOOP
Morgan City
Boston
Baltimore
Portland
Detroit
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Minneapolis
St. Paul

$1,692,578
$1,510,215
$1,000,761
$1,000,732
$2,744,559
$1,000,466
$3,082,600

$3,731,955

$1,000,666
$2,083,130
$1,479,538
$1,121,325
$2,358,154
$3,214,934
$1,022,818
$1,000,679
$1,010,690

Duluth-Superior, MN and WI

$1,052,913

Kansas City

$1,002,615

St. Louis, MO and IL

$1,557,434

Pascagoula
Wilmington
Morehead City

$1,000,000
$2,824,581
$1,108,247

11

Group

State/Territory
New York

Ohio
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
South Carolina
Tennessee

Texas

Virginia
II

Washington/
Oregon/
Idaho

West Virginia

Port Area
Albany
Buffalo
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Toledo
Pittsburgh
San Juan
Ponce
Charleston
Memphis
Nashville
Sabine-Neches River
Beaumont
Port Arthur
Corpus Christi
Freeport
Hampton Roads
Newport News
Norfolk Harbor

FY 2010 Target
Allocation
$1,041,494
$1,033,563
$1,000,889
$1,000,674
$1,000,411
$1,301,431
$2,199,761
$1,014,027
$2,779,565
$1,402,102
$1,000,683
$4,425,350
$3,825,437
$1,707,107
$4,253,186

Columbia-Snake River System
Kalama, WA
Longview, WA
Portland, OR
Vancouver, WA
Benton, WA
Clarkston, WA
Ilwaco, WA
Kennewick, WA
Pasco, WA
Walla Walla, WA
Whitman County, WA
Astoria, OR
Boardman, OR
The Dalles, OR
Hood River, OR
St. Helens, OR
Umatilla, OR
Lewiston, ID

$1,620,750

Huntington - Tristate

$1,180,905

12

Group

State/Territory
Alaska
Alabama
Arkansas
California
Florida
Georgia
Indiana
Massachusetts /
Rhode Island

Michigan

Minnesota
III

Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Tennessee

Texas

Virginia
Wisconsin
All Other
Port
Areas
Total:

Port Area

FY 2010
Allocation

Valdez
Guntersville
Helena
El Segundo
Sacramento
Fort Pierce
West Palm Beach
Brunswick
Mount Vernon
Narragansett/Mt. Hope Bays
Fall River, MA
Newport, RI
Providence, RI
Port Huron
Sault Ste Marie
Marine City
Muskegon
Monroe
Two Harbors
Vicksburg
Gulfport,
Greenville
Portsmouth
Perth Amboy
Lorain
Tulsa, Port of Catoosa
Coos Bay
Erie
Guayanilla
Humacao
Jobos
Chattanooga
Matagorda Bay
Matagorda Port
Port Lavaca
Victoria
Port O'Connor
Brownsville
Richmond
Green Bay
Milwaukee

Eligible entities not located within one of the port areas
identified above, but operating under an AMSP, are eligible to
compete for funding within “All Other Port Areas” Group

$14,400,000

$14,400,000
$288,000,000

Presence on this list does not guarantee grant funding

13

National Incident Management System (NIMS) Implementation Compliance
In accordance with Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD)-5, Management of
Domestic Incidents, the adoption of the NIMS is a requirement to receive Federal
preparedness assistance, through grants, contracts, and other activities. The NIMS
provides a consistent nationwide template to enable all levels of government, tribal
nations, nongovernmental organizations, and private sector partners to work together to
prevent, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of incidents,
regardless of cause, size, location, or complexity.
Federal FY 2009 NIMS implementation must be considered prior to allocation of any
Federal preparedness awards in FY 2010. In April 2009, the National Integration
Center Incident Management Systems Integration (IMSI) Division advised State, tribal
nation, and local governments to respond to metric assessments in the NIMS
Compliance Assistance Support Tool (NIMSCAST) to assess on-going progress and
achievement.2 The list of objectives against which progress and achievement are
assessed and reported can be found at
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/ImplementationGuidanceStakeholders.shtm#item2.
All State, tribal nation, and local government grantees were required to update their
respective NIMSCAST assessments by September 30, 2009. State, tribal, and local
grantees unable to meet implementation objectives were required to submit a Corrective
Action Plan via NIMSCAST no later than October 31, 2009. Comprehensive information
concerning NIMS implementation for States, tribal nations, local governments,
nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector is available through IMSI via its
NIMS Resource Center at www.fema.gov/nims.
States, tribal nations, and local governments should continue to implement the training
guidance contained in the Five-Year NIMS Training Plan, released in February 2008.
The primary grantee/administrator of FY 2010 PSGP award funds is responsible for
determining if sub-awardees have demonstrated sufficient progress to disburse awards.
B. Restrictions
Please see Part IV.E. for Management & Administration (M&A) limits and
allowable/unallowable costs guidance.
C. Other
Fiduciary Agent Requirement
For the past three rounds of funding, each Group I and Group II port area was required
to select a single entity to act as the Fiduciary Agent (FA) for that port area. Those port
areas remaining in Group I and Group II have been designated a specific amount of
money for which eligible entities within that port area may apply through the FA.

2

As defined in the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296), the term "State" means "any State of the
United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any possession of the United States" 6 U.S.C. 101 (14).

14

The FA will serve as the principal point of contact with FEMA for application and
management and administration of the FY 2010 PSGP award. The FA is responsible for
ensuring that all sub-recipients are compliant with the terms and conditions of the award,
including the organizational audit requirements of OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States,
Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations and Federal Acquisition Regulation. The
FA, however, is not the decision maker as to the use of these funds. The awards are
conditioned so that a regional consensus, in conjunction with the COTP and AMSC, must
be reached.
Fiduciary Agent Selection
1. Group I and Group II Port Areas
For FY 2010, Group I and Group II port areas will have the option of continuing with
their current FA or selecting a new FA. If a port area elects to change their FA, the
designated COTP must certify in writing to the FEMA Program Office via USCG
Headquarters (CG-5142) as to their new selection. This certification will be via a
USCG memorandum format. Certifications to FEMA and USCG Headquarters (CG5142) must be submitted 30 days prior to the application due date. In those cases
where the FEMA Program Office has not received a certification from the COTP
within 30 days prior to the application due date about a FA change, the same FA
which was responsible for those port areas in FY 2009 will continue to be used in FY
2010. The FA, whether current or new, must submit an application SF-424 for the
FY 2010 PSGP. Those ports selecting a new FA are to ensure that their new
selectee is capable of professionally performing the duties of an FA as outlined
above.
2. New Group II Port Areas
Those port areas, which, as a result of the FY 2010 PSGP risk methodology are new
to Group II, have the option of selecting an FA and beginning the FA process, or
opting out of the FA process. If opting out of the FA process, individual eligible
entities will apply directly to FEMA for funding and applicants must comply with all
requirements of Group III and All Other Port Areas. Working through its AMSC
process, each new Group II port area must certify in writing to the FEMA
programmatic office via USCG Headquarters (CG-5142) which option their
respective port area will pursue for FY 2010. This certification will be via a USCG
memorandum format from the COTP. Certifications to FEMA and USCG
Headquarters must be done 30 days prior to the application due date. As the FA
represents the interests of the entire AMSC, it is highly recommended that, if
choosing to follow the FA process, AMSCs select a FA with the capacity to manage
federal grants and be responsible for complying with the full breadth and scope of
FA responsibilities. The FA must be able to meet and comply with the
administrative, National policy, and reporting requirements outlined in this guidance.
In particular, the FA must be able to comply with requirements set forth in applicable
regulations and OMB Circulars, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html.
Port-Wide Risk Management Planning
In order to receive FY 2010 PSGP funds, Group I and II port areas are required to have
in place an approved PRMP. They are also encouraged, but not required, to develop a
BCRTP. For purposes of strategic planning, Group I and II port areas must take into

15

consideration all other port areas covered by their AMSP in their plans and Investment
Justifications.
The PRMP and BCRTP will align with and support the port areas’ AMSP and the
National Preparedness Guidelines, considering the entire port system strategically as a
whole, and will identify and execute a series of actions designed to effectively mitigate
risks to the system’s maritime critical infrastructure. Building on the successes of
previous years, during FY 2010, Group I and Group II ports are to seek PSGP funding
which will ensure alignment with the programs and projects identified within the Plan(s)
aimed at the following priorities:
 Expand the emphasis on port-wide partnerships, regional management of risk,
and business continuity/resumption of trade
 Prioritize port-wide security strategies and actions that address surface,
underwater, and land-based threats
 Target best risk-mitigation strategies achieving sustainable port-wide security
and business continuity/resumption of trade planning
 Provide the basis for aligning specific grant-funded security projects under this
and future year PSGP awards within the requirements of the AMSP
Deliverables for Existing Group I and II Port Areas
Existing Group I and II port areas are required to submit Investment Justifications by
April 19, 2010 through the Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN). The
designated Fiduciary Agent for each port area will submit this package, which must
contain the following documents:
 Complete Investment Justifications
 Individual Budgets for each Investment Justification
 Total Budget for entire award
 COTP Comments
 COTP Project Ranking/Final List
Group I and II port areas that have an approved PRMP as of December 8, 2009 must
submit Investment Justifications that align with their PRMP.
Group I and II port areas that do not have an approved PRMP as of December 8, 2009
must submit Investment Justifications that align with their AMSP. If the sub-grantee is
an MTSA regulated facility, the Investment Justifications will align with the FSP. If the
sub-grantee is an MTSA regulated vessel, the Investment Justifications will align with
the VSP.
Deliverables for New Group II Port Areas
In order to provide a strong level of fiscal and programmatic oversight, timelines for the
development of the plans will be imposed upon those ports new to Group II (see Table
2), who do not opt out of Group II, detailing specific deliverables that must be reviewed
and approved at the Federal and local level. The first deliverables will be a Concept of
Operations (CONOPS) for developing the PRMP and Investment Justifications based
on previously approved AMSP, FSP, and VSP. Any projects eligible for grant funding
must be certified by the COTP as having a port-wide benefit.

16

The second deliverable will be a PRMP and an optional BCRTP, that will be provided to
the local COTP and their AMSC for review and comment, and then to the Executive
Steering Committee (ESC) for review and comment. The port areas will then be given a
set amount of time to respond to the comments, and resubmit the Plan(s) for approval
by FEMA. The Federal partners will provide comments and feedback on each
deliverable. The deadlines for the deliverables are as follows:
Table 3
Timetable for Developing and Implementing
New Group II Port-Wide Plans
Deliverable

Due Date

Federal Comments

Concept of
Operations

At the time of application

Provided within 30 days

Investment
Justifications

April 19, 2010

Provided within 30 days

Draft Plan

180 calendar days after CONOPS
approval

Provided within 21 days

Final Plan

90 calendar days after review and
comments are received on the Draft Plan

Provided within 21 days

No more than 20% of the total award amount may be used in the development of the
PRMP and optional BCRTP. Remaining funds will then be used to implement prioritized
projects that provide the greatest risk reduction benefit for the port area as a whole, and
which support the developed plan.
Allocated funding will be awarded through a Cooperative Agreement (CA) to allow a
higher level of Federal involvement in assisting port areas in plan development and
implementation.

17

Part IV.

APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION
INFORMATION
A. Address to Request Application Package
All applications for DHS grants will be filed using the common electronic “storefront” –
www.grants.gov. To access application forms and instructions, select “Apply for
Grants,” and then select “Download Application Package.” Enter the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) and/or the funding opportunity number located on the
cover of this announcement. Select “Download Application Package,” and then follow
the prompts to download the application package. To download the instructions, go to
“Download Application Package” and select “Instructions.” If you experience difficulties
or have any questions, please call the www.grants.gov customer support hotline at
(800) 518-4726.
DHS may request original signatures on forms at a later date.
B. Content and Form of Application
The on-line application must be completed and submitted using www.grants.gov after
Central Contractor Registry (CCR) registration is confirmed. The on-line application
includes the following required forms and submissions:













Investment Justification (for Group I and Group II port areas, submitted
through HSIN by April 19, 2010)
Detailed Budget Worksheet (for Group I and Group II port areas, submitted
through HSIN by April 19, 2010)
MOUs/MOAs, if applicable
Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance
Standard Form 424A, Budget Information
Standard Form 424B, Assurances
Standard Form 424C, Budget Information – Construction Form
Standard Form 424D, Assurances – Construction Programs
Lobbying Form – Certification Regarding Lobbying (this form must be
completed by all grant applicants)
Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (if the grantee has
engaged or intends to engage in lobbying activities)
Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility
Matters
Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace Requirements

18

The program title listed in the CFDA is “Port Security Grant Program.” The CFDA
number is 97.056.
1. Application via www.grants.gov. All applicants must file their applications using
the Administration’s common electronic “storefront” - www.grants.gov. Eligible
grantees must apply for funding through this portal, accessible on the Internet at
www.grants.gov.
2. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. The
applicant must provide a DUNS number with their application. This number is a
required field within www.grants.gov and for CCR Registration. Organizations
should verify that they have a DUNS number, or take the steps necessary to obtain
one, as soon as possible. Applicants can receive a DUNS number at no cost by
calling the dedicated toll-free DUNS number request line at (866) 705-5711.
3. Valid CCR Registration. The application process also involves an updated and
current registration by the applicant. Eligible applicants must confirm CCR
registration at http://www.ccr.gov, as well as apply for funding through
www.grants.gov.
4. Investment Justification. As part of the FY 2010 PSGP application process,
applicants must develop a formal Investment Justification that addresses each
initiative being proposed for funding. A separate Investment Justification should be
submitted for each proposed project. Each entity within a Group III or All Other Port
Area may apply for up to three projects. Due to the nature of the FA process, FA’s
are not limited to three projects. Investment Justifications must demonstrate how
proposed projects address gaps and deficiencies in current programs and
capabilities. The Investment Justification must demonstrate the ability to provide
enhancements consistent with the purpose of the program and guidance provided by
FEMA. Applicants must ensure that the Investment Justification is consistent with all
applicable requirements outlined in this application kit.
The Investment Justification must address or answer the following questions:
 Is your organization a member of the AMSC?
 Is your facility a MTSA regulated facility?
 If you are a MTSA regulated facility, what is your facility’s operation?
 If you are not a regulated facility under MTSA, do you have a facility security
plan, and if you have a plan what authority approved your security plan?
 Have you applied for any other security related grants, and if you have what
grant program and when?
 If you are a recognized Law Enforcement Agency, how many MTSA regulated
facilities or vessels are in your immediate area of responsibility?
 How many members of your company or agency have taken an Incident
Command System course: ICS 100, ICS 200, ICS 300, ICS 700, and ICS 800?
 If you are a Fire Department, how many MTSA regulated facilities and MTSA
regulated vessels are in your immediate area of responsibility?
 Is your organization listed in a risk mitigation plan, and if so, which ones?

19



Is there an MOU/MOA in place for this investment, to share this investment
with other agencies?

Group I and II Port Areas
Group I and II port areas will submit Investment Justifications by April 19, 2010
through the Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN).
Group III
Group III Investment Justifications must be submitted with the grant application as a
file attachment within http://www.grants.gov. The individual investments comprising
a single application must take place within the same port area. Private MTSA
regulated companies that operate in more than one eligible port area must submit
separate applications for investments in each port area.
All Other Port Areas
All Other Port Areas Investment Justifications must be submitted with the grant
application as a file attachment within http://www.grants.gov. The project must take
place within the same port area. Private companies that operate in more than one
eligible port area must submit separate applications for investment in each port area.
Applicants will find an Investment Justification Template in Part VIII. This worksheet
may be used as a guide to assist applicants in the preparation of the Investment
Justification.
Applicants must provide information in the following categories for each proposed
Investment:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Background
Strategic and program priorities
Impact
Funding and Implementation Plan

Applicants must use the following file naming convention when submitting required
documents as part of the FY 2010 PSGP:
COTP Zone Abbreviation_Port Area_Name of Applicant_ IJ Number
(Example: Hous_Galveston_XYZ Oil_IJ#1)
5. Detailed Budget. Applicants must provide detailed budgets for the funds
requested. The budget must be complete, reasonable, and cost-effective in relation
to the proposed project. The budget should provide the basis of computation of all
project-related costs (including M&A) and any appropriate narrative.
The National Review Panel must be able to thoroughly evaluate the projects being
submitted based on the information provided here. Applicants must ensure they
provide an appropriate level of detail within the Detailed Budget to clarify intent.

20

Group I and II Port Areas
Detailed Budgets must be submitted by April 19, 2010 through the Homeland
Security Information Network (HSIN).
Group III and All Other Port Areas
Detailed Budgets must be submitted with the grant application as a file attachment
within http://www.grants.gov.
Applicants will find a sample Budget Detail Worksheet in Part VIII. This worksheet
may be used as a guide to assist applicants in the preparation of the budget and
budget narrative.
6. Memorandum of Understanding/Memorandum of Agreement (MOU/MOA)
Requirement. State and local agencies, as well as consortia or associations that
are required to provide security services to MTSA regulated facilities pursuant to an
AMSP, are eligible applicants. However, the security services provided must be
addressed in the regulated entities’ security plans. A copy of an MOU/MOA with the
identified regulated entities will be required prior to funding, and must include an
acknowledgement of the security services and roles and responsibilities of all
entities involved. This information may be provided using one of the attachment
fields within http://www.grants.gov.
The security services provided must be addressed in the regulated entities’ security
plan. A copy of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between those identified entities will be required prior to funding,
and must include an acknowledgement of the security services and roles and
responsibilities of all entities involved. The MOU/MOA must address the following
points:
 The nature of the security that the applicant agrees to supply to the regulated
facility (waterside surveillance, increased screening, etc.)
 The roles and responsibilities of the facility and the applicant during different
MARSEC levels
 An acknowledgement by the facility that the applicant is part of their facility
security plan
If the applicant is mentioned as a provider of security services under the port’s
AMSP, in lieu of an MOA/MOU, written acknowledgement from the AMSC members,
or a letter from the Federal Maritime Security Coordinator validating this status, will
be acceptable. In addition, MOA/MOUs submitted in previous PSGP award rounds
will be acceptable, provided the activity covered also addresses the capability being
requested through the FY 2010 PSGP.
If applicable, the signed MOU/MOA for state or local law enforcement agencies
and/or consortia providing layered protection to regulated entities must be submitted
with the grant application as a file attachment within http://www.grants.gov. A
sample MOU/MOA can be found in Part VIII.
COTP Zone Abbreviation_Port Area_Name of Applicant_MOU
(Example: Hous_Galveston_Harris County_MOU)
21

C. Submission Dates and Times
Application submissions will be received by 11:59 p.m. EST, on February 12, 2010.
Only applications made through www.grants.gov will be accepted.
D. Intergovernmental Review
Executive Order 12372 requires applicants from State and local units of government or
other organizations providing services within a State to submit a copy of the application
to the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC), if one exists, and if this program has been
selected for review by the State. Applicants must contact their State SPOC to
determine if the program has been selected for State review. Executive Order 12372
can be referenced at http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executiveorder/12372.html. The names and addresses of the SPOCs are listed on OMB’s home
page available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html.
E. Funding Restrictions
DHS grant funds may only be used for the purpose set forth in the grant, and must be
consistent with the statutory authority for the award. Grant funds may not be used for
matching funds for other Federal grants/cooperative agreements, lobbying, or
intervention in Federal regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings. In addition, Federal
funds may not be used to sue the Federal government or any other government entity.
Pre-award costs are allowable only with the written consent of DHS and if they are
included in the award agreement.
1. Management and Administration Limits
A maximum of five percent (5%) of the total award may be retained by the applicant.
Any funds retained are to be used solely for management and administrative
purposes associated with the PSGP award. Sub-recipients receiving pass-through
funds from the FA may use up to three percent (3%) of their sub-award for M&A
purposes. FY 2010 PSGP M&A funds may be used for the following M&A costs:
 Hiring of full-time or part-time staff, contractors or consultants and M&A
expenses related to meeting compliance with grant reporting or data
collection requirements, including data calls
 Development of operating plans for information collection and processing
necessary to respond to DHS data calls
 Travel expenses
2. Allowable Costs
This section provides guidance on allowable costs for the FY 2010 PSGP.
Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA)
Funds may be used for the following types of MDA projects:
 Deployment of access control/standardized credentialing systems
 Deployment of detection and security surveillance equipment

22





Development/enhancement of information sharing systems for risk mitigation
purposes, including equipment (and software) required to receive, transmit,
handle, and store classified information
Enhancements of command and control facilities
Enhancement of interoperable communications/asset tracking for sharing
terrorism threat information (including ensuring that mechanisms are
interoperable with Federal, State, and local agencies)

Applicants interested in addressing MDA are encouraged to familiarize themselves
with the National Strategy for Maritime Security, National Plan to Achieve Maritime
Domain Awareness that can be found at:
http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0753.shtm
IED and CBRNE Prevention, Protection, Response, Recovery Capabilities
Funds may be used for the following types of IED and CBRNE prevention,
protection, response and recovery capabilities:
Port Facilities, Including Public Cruise Line and Terminals under 33 CFR Part 105
 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive (CBRNE) agent
detection sensors
 Canines
 Intrusion detection
 Small boats for State and local law enforcement marine patrol or port security
incident response
 Video surveillance systems that specifically address and enhance security
Access control/standardized credentialing
 Improved lighting
 Hardened security gates and vehicle barriers
 Floating protective barriers
 Underwater intrusion detection systems
 Communications equipment for risk mitigation (including interoperable
communications)
 Reconfiguring of docks to prevent small boat access
Vessels under 33 CFR Part 104
 Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive agent detection sensors
 Restricted area protection (cipher locks, hardened doors, closed circuit television
(CCTV) for bridges and engineering spaces)
 Communications equipment for risk mitigation (including interoperable
communications)
 Canines for explosives detection
 Access control and standardized credentialing
 Floating protective barriers
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)
The TWIC is designed to be an open architecture, standards-based system. Port
projects that involve new installations or upgrades to access control and credentialing
systems, should exhibit compliance with TWIC standards and program specifications.
23

Recipients of grant funding for the implementation of TWIC systems may be requested
by the Federal government to apply these systems in a field test of TWIC readers in
accordance with the SAFE Port Act. Systems implemented with grant funding may be
used by recipients to comply with the TWIC rulemaking requirements. However, the
fees associated with the application for and issuance of the TWIC cards themselves
are ineligible for award consideration.
Allowable costs under this section include those projects that will ensure the safe
and secure transit of foreign seafarers and shore staff/support [who are not eligible
for TWIC] to and from the vessel while at MTSA regulated facilities.
PSGP TWIC funding recipients may be required to provide data and lessons learned
from the application of card readers and associated systems. Systems implemented
with grant funding may be used by recipients to comply with all TWIC rulemaking
requirements once established.
Training
Funding used for training will be limited to those courses that have been approved
by DHS or MARAD (including MTSA 109 courses). More information may be
obtained at:
 http://www.marad.dot.gov/documents/MTSA_Updated_list_of_MTSA_certified
_courses_SB.pdf
 http://www.uscg.mil/nmc/approved_courses.asp
 http://www.fema.gov/prepared/train.shtm
Funds may be used for the following training activities:
 Training workshops and conferences. Grant funds may be used to plan
and conduct training workshops or conferences to include costs related to
planning, meeting space and other meeting costs, facilitation costs, materials
and supplies, travel, and training plan development.
 Hiring of Full or Part-Time Staff or Contractors/Consultants to support
training-related activities. Payment of salaries and fringe benefits must be in
accordance with the policies of the State or unit(s) of local government and
have the approval of the State or awarding agency, whichever is applicable.
Such costs must be included within the funding allowed for program
management personnel expenses, which must not exceed 15 percent (15%)
of the total allocation. In no case is dual compensation allowable (see
above).
 Overtime and Backfill. The entire amount of overtime costs, including
payments related to backfilling personnel, which are the direct result of
attendance at FEMA and/or approved training courses and programs are
allowable. These costs are allowed only to the extent the payment for such
services is in accordance with the policies of the State or unit(s) of local
government and has the approval of the State or the awarding agency,
whichever is applicable. In no case is dual compensation allowable. That is,
an employee of a unit of government may not receive compensation from
their unit or agency of government AND from an award for a single period of
time (e.g., 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.), even though such work may benefit both
activities.
24








Travel. Travel costs (e.g., airfare, mileage, per diem, hotel) are allowable as
expenses by employees who are on travel status for official business related
to approved training.
Supplies. Supplies are items that are expended or consumed during the
course of the planning and conduct of the training project(s) (e.g., copying
paper, gloves, tape, and non-sterile masks). These costs will contribute to
the five percent (5%) M&A cap.
Other items. These costs may include the rental of space/locations for
planning and conducting training.
Funds used to develop, deliver, and evaluate training, including costs
related to administering the training, planning, scheduling, facilities, materials
and supplies, reproduction of materials, and equipment.
Certification/Recertification of Instructors is an allowable cost. States are
encouraged to follow the FEMA Instructor Quality Assurance Program to
ensure a minimum level of competency and corresponding levels of
evaluation of student learning. This is particularly important for those courses
that involve training of trainers. This information is contained in an
Information Bulletin #193, issued October 20, 2005.

Exercises
Funding used for exercises will only be permitted for those exercises that are in direct
support of a facility or port area’s MTSA required exercises. These exercises must be
coordinated with the COTP and AMSC and adhere to the guidelines outlined in DHS
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). More information on
HSEEP may be found at: https://hseep.dhs.gov. Funds may be used for the following
exercise activities:
 Funds Used to Design, Develop, Conduct and Evaluate an Exercise.
Includes costs related to planning, meeting space and other meeting costs,
facilitation costs, materials and supplies, travel, and documentation.
 Hiring of Full or Part-Time Staff or Contractors/Consultants. Full or parttime staff may be hired to support exercise-related activities. Such costs
must be included within the funding allowed for program management
personnel expenses, which must not exceed 15 percent of the total allocation.
The applicant's formal written procurement policy or the Federal Acquisition
Regulations (FAR) – whichever is more stringent – must be followed. In no
case is dual compensation allowable.
 Overtime and Backfill. The entire amount of overtime costs, including
payments related to backfilling personnel, which are the direct result of time
spent on the design, development and conduct of exercises are allowable
expenses. These costs are allowed only to the extent the payment for such
services is in accordance with the policies of the State or unit(s) of local
government and has the approval of the State or the awarding agency,
whichever is applicable. In no case is dual compensation allowable. That is,
an employee of a unit of government may not receive compensation from
their unit or agency of government AND from an award for a single period of
time (e.g., 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.), even though such work may benefit both
activities.

25





Travel. Travel costs are allowable as expenses by employees who are on
travel status for official business related to the planning and conduct of
exercise project(s).
Supplies. Supplies are items that are expended or consumed during the
course of the planning and conduct of the exercise project(s) (e.g., copying
paper, gloves, tape, non-sterile masks, and disposable protective equipment).
Other Items. These costs include the rental of space/locations for exercise
planning and conduct, rental of equipment (e.g., portable toilets, tents), food,
gasoline, exercise signs, badges, etc.

Unauthorized exercise-related costs include:
 Reimbursement for the maintenance and/or wear and tear costs of general
use vehicles (e.g., construction vehicles) and emergency response apparatus
(e.g., fire trucks, ambulances).
 Equipment that is purchased for permanent installation and/or use, beyond
the scope of exercise conduct (e.g., electronic messaging signs).
Examples of security exercise programs include:
 Area Maritime Security Training and Exercise Program (AMSTEP): AMSTEP
is the USCG developed mechanism by which AMSCs and Federal Maritime
Security Coordinators will continuously improve security preparedness in the
port community. It is an integral part and a strategic implementation of the
DHS HSEEP for the maritime sector. Rooted in long-standing USCG
exercise policy and procedures, AMSTEP aligns to support the National
Preparedness Guidelines and the National Strategy for Maritime Security.
Through a structured approach, AMSTEP focuses all exercise efforts, both
public and private, on improving the AMSPs and individual vessel and facility
security plans of the nation’s seaports.
 Intermodal Security Training Exercise Program: I-STEP was established by
TSA to enhance the preparedness of our nation’s surface-transportation
sector network with meaningful evaluations of prevention, preparedness, and
ability to respond to terrorist-related incidents. I-STEP improves the
intermodal transportation industry’s ability to prepare for and respond to a
transportation security incident (TSI) by increasing awareness, improving
processes, creating partnerships, and delivering transportation-sector network
security training exercises. I-STEP provides security-exercise tools and
services to modal operators through TSA general managers. The tools
include software for exercise design, evaluation and tracking for a mix of
tabletop, advanced tabletop and functional exercises. More information on ISTEP is available at: http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/istep/index.shtm.
 National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program: The USCG National
Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (NPREP) focuses on exercise
and evaluation of government area contingency plans and industry spill
response plans (oil and hazardous substance). NPREP is a coordinated effort
of the four Federal agencies with responsibility for oversight of private-sector
oil and hazardous substance pollution response preparedness: USCG, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of
Transportation’s Research and Special Programs Administration, and the
26

U.S. Department of the Interior’s Minerals Management Service. These
agencies worked with Federal, State, and local governments, the oil and
marine transportation industry, cleanup contractors, and the general public to
develop the program. NPREP meets the OPA mandate for exercises and
represents minimum guidelines for ensuring overall preparedness within the
response community. The guidelines, which are reviewed periodically
through a public workshop process, outline an exercise program that satisfies
the exercise requirements of the four Federal regulatory agencies. More
information on PREP is available at:
http://www.uscg.mil/top/missions/Protect_NR.asp.
Planning
FY 2010 PSGP funds may be used for the following types of planning activities:
 Public education and outreach (such as the America’s Waterways Watch or
Transit Watch), and where possible, such activities should be coordinated
with local Citizen Corps Council(s)
 Public Alert and warning systems and security education efforts in conjunction
with America’s Waterways Watch Program
 Development and implementation of homeland security support programs and
adoption of ongoing DHS national initiatives (including building or enhancing
preventive radiological and nuclear detection programs)
 Development and enhancement of security plans and protocols within the
AMSP and/or PRMP
 Hiring of part-time staff and contractors or consultants to assist with planning
activities (not for the purpose of hiring public safety personnel)
 Materials required to conduct planning activities
 Travel and per diem related to professional planning activities
 Other project planning activities with prior approval from DHS
Equipment Acquisition
FY 2010 PSGP funds may be used for the following types of equipment:
 Personal protection equipment
 Explosive device mitigation and remediation equipment
 CBRNE, operational search and rescue equipment, logistical support
equipment for risk mitigation, reference materials or incident response
vehicles, including response watercraft
 Information technology
 Cyber security enhancement equipment
 Interoperable communications equipment
 Detection equipment
 Decontamination equipment
 Power equipment, such as electrical generators for emergency security use
and not operational use
 Terrorism incident prevention equipment
 Physical security enhancement equipment
Ports that are using FY 2010 PSGP funds to purchase Interoperable
Communications Equipment (Category 6) must consult SAFECOM’s coordinated
27

grant guidance which outlines standards and equipment information to enhance
interoperable communications. This guidance can be found at
http://www.safecomprogram.gov. Additionally, grantees are required to coordinate
with other State and local partners in integrating their interoperable communications
plans and projects as outlined in each State’s Statewide Communication
Interoperability Plan.
Unless otherwise noted, equipment requested by any applicant must be certified that
it meets required regulatory and/or DHS-adopted standards to be eligible for
purchase using these funds; e.g., equipment must comply with the OSHA
requirement for certification of electrical equipment by a nationally recognized testing
laboratory (NRTL), and demonstrate compliance with relevant DHS-adopted
standards through a supplier’s declaration of conformity (SDOC) with appropriate
supporting data and documentation per ISO/IEC 17050, parts 1 and 2. In addition,
agencies must have all necessary certifications and licenses for the requested
equipment, as appropriate, prior to the request and so certify within the Investment
Justification. A comprehensive listing of allowable equipment categories and types
is on the web-based Authorized Equipment List (AEL) on the Responder Knowledge
Base at https://www.rkb.us/lists.cfm.
Specific Guidance on Sonar Devices
The four types of allowable sonar devices are: imaging sonar, scanning sonar, side
scan sonar, and 3-dimensional sonar. These types of sonar devices are intended to
support the detection of underwater improvised explosive devices and enhance
MDA. The eligible types of sonar, and short descriptions of their capabilities, are
provided below:
 Imaging sonar: A high-frequency sonar that produces “video-like” imagery
using a narrow field of view. The sonar system can be pole-mounted over the
side of a craft or hand carried by a diver.
 Scanning sonar: Consists of smaller sonar systems that can be mounted on
tripods and lowered to the bottom of the waterway. Scanning sonar produces
a panoramic view of the surrounding area and can cover up to 360 degrees.
 Side scan sonar: Placed inside of a shell and towed behind a vessel. Side
scan sonar produces strip-like images from both sides of the device.
 3-dimensional sonar: Produces 3-dimensional imagery of objects using an
array receiver.
Other Allowable Costs – Maintenance and Sustainment
The use of FEMA preparedness grant funds for maintenance contracts, warranties,
repair or replacement costs, upgrades, and user fees are allowable under all active
and future grant awards, unless otherwise noted. Grantees are reminded to be
sensitive to supplanting issues. Maintenance contracts, warranties, repair or
replacement costs, upgrades, and user fees previously purchased with State and/or
local funds cannot be replaced with Federal grant funding. Routine upkeep (i.e.
gasoline, tire replacement, routine oil changes, monthly inspections, grounds and
facility maintenance, etc.) is the responsibility of the grantee and may not be funded
with preparedness grant funding.
 Maintenance Contracts and Warranties. To increase the useful life of the
equipment, maintenance contracts and warranties may be purchased using
28







grant funding from one fiscal year to cover equipment purchased with funding
from a different fiscal year. The use of grant funding for the purchase of
maintenance contracts and warranties must meet the following conditions:
o Maintenance contracts and warranties may only be purchased for
equipment that has been purchased using FEMA preparedness grant
funding
o To avoid supplementing Congressional appropriations for specific
programs, maintenance contracts and warranties must be purchased
using funds from the same grant program used to purchase the original
equipment
o The term of the maintenance contract or warranty shall not exceed the
period of performance of the grant to which the contract is being charged
Repair and Replacement Costs. The cost of repair and replacement parts
for equipment purchased using FEMA preparedness grant funding is an
allowable expense, except for those included in Information Bulletin # 293
Repair and replacement parts may only be purchased for equipment that has
been purchased using FEMA preparedness grant funding.
o To avoid supplementing Congressional appropriations for specific
programs, repair and replacement parts must be purchased using the
same grant program used to purchase the original equipment.
Upgrades. FEMA preparedness grant funding may be used to upgrade
previously purchased allowable equipment. For example, if the grantee
purchased risk management software with Homeland Security Grant
Programs (HSGP) funds in FY 2005 and would like to use FY 2010 grant
funding to upgrade the software, this is allowable.
o Upgrades may only be purchased for equipment that has been purchased
using FEMA preparedness grant funding
o To avoid supplementing Congressional appropriations for specific
programs, upgrades must be purchased using the same grant program
used to purchase the original equipment
User fees. User fees are viewed as costs for specific services required to
maintain and provide continued operation of equipment or systems. An
example would be the recurring service fees associated with handheld radios
or mobile data computers.
o User fees may only be paid for equipment that has been purchased using
FEMA preparedness grant funding
o To avoid supplementing Congressional appropriations for specific
programs, user fees must be paid for using the same grant program used
to purchase the original equipment. The service time purchased shall not
exceed the period of performance of the grant to which the user fee is
being charged.

Grantees must comply with all the requirements in 44 CFR Part 13 and 2 CFR Part
215.
Specific Guidance on Construction and Renovation
The following types of construction and renovation projects are allowable under the
FY 2010 PSGP:
 MDA Fusion Centers
29








Maritime Security Operations Centers
Port Security Operations Centers
Port Security Emergency Communications Centers
Buildings to house generators that support risk mitigation
Hardened Security fences at access points
Any other building or physical facility that enhances access control to the
port/facility area

The above facilities would allow access only to public safety personnel and others
on an as needed/need to know basis in accordance with the National Response
Framework.
Eligible costs for construction may not exceed the greater of $1,000,000 per project
or such greater amount as may be approved by the Secretary, which may not
exceed ten percent (10%) of the total amount of the grant, as stated in 46 U.S.C. §
70107(b)(2).
Grant recipients are not permitted to use FY 2010 PSGP funds for construction
projects that are eligible for funding under other Federal grant programs. PSGP
funds may only be used for construction activities directly related to port security
enhancements.
All proposed construction and renovation activities must undergo an Environmental
Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) review, including approval of the review
from FEMA, prior to undertaking any action related to the project. These types of
projects have the potential to affect environmental resources and historic properties
through ground disturbance, impact to wetlands, floodplains, coastal zones, and
other water resources, alteration of historically-significant properties, and impact to
threatened and endangered species, and migratory birds. While all projects
receiving Federal funding require an EHP review, any applicant that is proposing a
construction project under the FY 2010 PSGP should pay special attention to the
EHP requirements contained in Part VI (B, 5.7) of the Guidance. Failure of a grant
recipient to meet these requirements may jeopardize Federal funding.
Furthermore, FY 2010 PSGP recipients using funds for construction projects must
comply with the Davis-Bacon Act. Grant recipients must ensure that their
contractors or subcontractors for construction projects pay workers employed
directly at the work-site no less than the prevailing wages and fringe benefits paid on
projects of a similar character. Additional information, including Department of Labor
wage determinations, is available from the following website:
http://www.dol.gov/esa/programs/dbra/. See also, Part VI.5.7, EHP Compliance and
Part VI, B 1.4 for requirements related to Duplication of Benefits.
Specific Guidance on Canines Not Part of an Operational Package
The USCG has identified canine explosive detection as the most effective solution
for the detection of vehicle borne IEDs. Eligibility for funding of canine explosive
detection programs is restricted to U.S. Ferry Systems regulated under 33 CFR
Parts 101, 103, 104 & 105, specifically U.S. Ferry Vessels carrying more than 500
passengers with vehicles, U.S. Ferry Vessels carrying more than 2,000 passengers,
30

and the passenger terminals these specific ferries service. Additionally, only owners
and operators of these specific ferries and terminals and port authorities or State,
local authorities that provide layered protection for these operations and are defined
in the vessel’s/terminal’s security plans as doing so are eligible.
 Eligible costs. Eligible costs include: purchase, contract canine services,
training and certification of canines; all medical costs associated with initial
procurement of canines; kennel cages used for transportation of the canines
and other incidentals associated with outfitting and set-up of canines (such as
leashes, collars, initial health costs and shots, etc.). Eligible costs also
include initial training and certification of handlers.
 Ineligible costs. Ineligible costs include but are not limited to: hiring, costs
associated with handler annual salary (unless otherwise specifically
applicable per the OPack requirements outlined on the following pages),
travel and lodging associated with training and certification; meals and
incidentals associated with travel for initial certification; vehicles used solely to
transport canines; and maintenance or recurring expenses (such as annual
medical exams, canine food costs, etc).
 Certification. Canines used to detect explosives must be certified by an
appropriate, qualified organization. Such canines should receive an initial
basic training course and weekly maintenance training sessions thereafter to
maintain the certification. The basic training averages ten weeks for the
canine team (handler and canine together) with weekly training and daily
exercising. Comparable training and certification standards, such as those
promulgated by the TSA Explosive detection canine program, the National
Police Canine Association (NPCA), the U.S. Police Canine Association,
(USPCA) or the International Explosive Detection Dog Association (IEDDA)
may be used to meet this requirement.3
 Submission requirements. Successful applicants will be required to submit
an amendment to their approved VSP as per 33 CFR Part §104.415 detailing
the inclusion of a canine explosive detection program into their security
measures. Applicants are encouraged to thoroughly review the fiscal
obligations of maintaining a long-term canine explosive detection program. If
applicable, successful applicants will be required to submit an amendment to
their approved VSP or FSP per 33 CFR Parts 104 and/or 105. detailing the
inclusion of a canine explosive detection program into their security
measures.
 Additional resources available for canine costs. DHS is aware that the
financial obligations of a Explosive Detection Canine Program can be
burdensome. The PSGP, while providing the ability to defray some start up
costs, does not cover any recurring costs associated with such programs.
However, the Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP) and HSGP are two
additional DHS grant programs that can provide funding for certain
operational costs associated with heightened states of alert within the port
area and nationally. DHS strongly encourages applicants to investigate their

3

Training and certification information can be found at: http://www.tsa.gov/public/display?theme=32,
http://www.npca.net, http://www.uspcak9.com/html/home.shtml, and http://www.bombdog.org/.

31

eligibility, and potential exclusions, for these resources when developing their
canine programs.
Explosive Detection Canine Team Operational Packages (OPacks)
OPacks will not be used to supplant existing canine explosive detection capabilities.
Explosive Detection Canine Team Operational Packages (OPacks) are available for
funding to Group I, Group II, Group III, and All Other Port Areas with MTSA
regulated facilities and ferry systems with MTSA regulated facilities and vessels. As
previously noted, DHS considers OPacks to be effective tactics for supporting
security priorities. When combined with the existing capability of a port or ferry
security/police force, the added value provided through the addition of a canine team
is significant. OPacks are a proven, reliable resource to detect explosives and are a
key component in a balanced counter-sabotage program. Canine teams also
provide the added psychological deterrent achieved solely through their presence.
Such operational efficiency cannot be obtained through borrowed use of local police
force-operated canine teams, as the needs of the local jurisdiction will always be
their first priority. Therefore, the PSGP will provide funds to establish dedicated port
or ferry system security/police force canine teams.
DHS encourages port and ferry systems to develop innovative layered approaches
to enhance both human, facility, and vessel(s) security. Helping port and ferry
systems increase randomness, unpredictability, and ultimate effectiveness of
monitoring and patrol in their security and terrorism prevention programs is critical to
National port and ferry security. The use of OPacks supports these efforts.
The funding for OPacks will be a one-time allowance. The period of performance for
OPacks is 36 months. Applicants may apply for up to $450,000 ($150,000/year for
three years) to support this endeavor. At the end of the grant period (36 months)
grantees will be responsible for maintaining the heightened level of capability
provided by the OPack.
Funds for these canine teams may not be used to fund drug detection and
apprehension technique training. Only explosives detection training for these canine
teams will be funded. The PSGP OPack funds may only be used for new
capabilities/programs and cannot be used to pay for existing capabilities/programs
(e.g. canine teams) already supported by the port area or system. Non-supplanting
restrictions apply.
OPacks must meet the following requirements:
 Each canine team, composed of one dog and one handler, must be certified
by an appropriate, qualified organization
 Canines should receive an initial basic training course and also weekly
maintenance training sessions thereafter to maintain the certification
 The basic training averages ten weeks for the team, with weekly training and
daily exercising (comparable training and certification standards, such as
those promulgated by the TSA Explosive Detection Canine Program, the

32




NPCA, the USPCA, or the IEDDA may be used to meet this requirement4).
Certifications will be kept on file with the grantee and made available to DHS
upon request
33 CFR 104 and 105 requirements
OPack contracted services

Allowable expenses for OPacks include:
 Salary and fringe benefits
 Training and certifications (travel costs associated with training for personnel,
handlers, and canines are allowable)
 Equipment costs
 Purchase and train a canine (training specific to the detection of common
explosives odors is allowable)
 Canine costs (canine costs include but are not limited to: veterinary, housing,
and feeding costs)
3. Unallowable Costs
The following projects and costs are considered ineligible for award consideration:
 The development of risk/vulnerability assessment models and methodologies
 Cost of conducting vulnerability assessments to evaluate and make
recommendations with respect to security
 Projects in which Federal agencies are the primary beneficiary or that
enhance Federal property
 Projects that study technology development for security of national or
international cargo supply chains (e.g., e-seals, smart containers, container
tracking or container intrusion detection devices)
 Proof-of-concept projects
 Projects that do not provide a compelling security benefit (e.g., primarily
economic or safety vs. security)
 Projects that duplicate capabilities being provided by the Federal government
(e.g., vessel traffic systems)
 Proposals in which there are real or apparent conflicts of interest
 Personnel costs (except for those specifically identified in this guidance)
 Business operating expenses (certain security-related operational and
maintenance costs are allowable—see “Maintenance and Sustainment” for
further guidance)
 TWIC card fees
 Signage, projects for placarding and billboards, or hard fixed structure
signage
 Reimbursement of pre-award security expenses
 Outfitting facilities, vessels, or other structures with equipment or items
providing a hospitality benefit rather than a direct security benefit. Examples
of such equipment or items include, but are not limited to: office furniture, CD
players, DVD players, AM/FM radios and the like
 Weapons and associated equipment (i.e. holsters, optical sights, and
scopes), including, but not limited to: non-lethal or less than lethal weaponry
4

Training and certification information can be found at: http://www.tsa.gov/lawenforcement/programs,
http://www.npca.net, http://www.uspcak9.com, and http://www.bombdog.org.

33








including firearms, ammunition, and weapons affixed to facilities, vessels, or
other structures
Expenditures for items such as general-use software (word processing,
spreadsheet, graphics, etc), general-use computers, and related equipment
(other than for allowable M&A activities, or otherwise associated)
preparedness or response functions), general-use vehicles and licensing fees
Other items not in accordance with the AEL or previously listed as allowable costs
Land acquisitions and right of way purchases
Funding for standard operations vehicles utilized for routine duties, such as
patrol cars and fire trucks
Fuel costs

F. Other Submission Requirements
Federal employees are prohibited from serving in any capacity (paid or unpaid) on any
proposal submitted under this program. Federal employees may not receive funds
under this award.

34

PART V.

APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION
A. Review Criteria
The four core PSGP application review criteria are as follows:
 Criteria #1. Projects that support PSGP funding priorities identified in the PSGP
Guidance and Application Kit package:
o Enhancement of the port area’s MDA (e.g., access control/standardized
credentialing, command and control, communications, and enhanced
intelligence sharing and analysis)
o Enhancement of the port area’s prevention, protection, response and
recovery capabilities (e.g., capabilities that would help mitigate potential IED,
CBRNE attacks via small craft, underwater swimmers, or onboard passenger
and vehicle ferries)
o Training and exercises
o TWIC implementation projects (minus application and card purchase costs)
 Criteria #2. Projects that address priorities outlined in the applicable AMSP, as
mandated under the MTSA and/or the FEMA PRMP
 Criteria #3. Projects that address additional security priorities based on the
COTP’s expertise and experience with the specific port area
 Criteria #4. Projects that offer the highest potential for risk reduction for the least
cost
B. Review and Selection Process
1. Initial Screening. FEMA will conduct an initial review of all FY 2010 PSGP
applications for completion. Applications passing this review will be grouped by port
area and provided to the applicable COTP for further review.
2. Field Review. Field-level reviews will be managed by the applicable COTP in
coordination with the Director of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Maritime
Administration’s Gateway Office and appropriate personnel from the AMSC, as
identified by the COTP. To support coordination of and regionalization of security
grant application projects with State and Urban Area homeland security strategies,
as well as other State and local security plans, the COTP is asked to coordinate the
results with the applicable State administrative agency or agencies and State
homeland security advisor(s).
The COTP will submit field review evaluations that include the following:
 Field reviews for all Groups occur immediately following the initial screening.
Each specific project is scored for compliance with criteria enumerated in the
previous section;

35




A total score is computed with all proposals received from each port being
ranked from highest to lowest in terms of their contributions to regional risk
reduction and cost effectiveness; and
Specific notation if other entities within the port region have similar
capabilities and the need for or lack thereof for redundancy

After completing field reviews, COTPs will submit the field review project scores and
prioritized lists to FEMA who will begin coordination of the national review process.
3. National Review. Following the field review, a National Review Panel (NRP) will
convene with subject matter experts drawn from DHS and the Department of
Transportation (DOT). The purpose of the National Review is to identify a final,
prioritized list of eligible projects for funding. The NRP will conduct an initial review
of the prioritized project listings for each port area submitted by the USCG’s COTP
to ensure that the proposed projects will accomplish intended risk mitigation goals.
The NRP will validate and normalize the Field Review COTP Project Priority List and
provide a master list of prioritized projects by port area.5
A risk-based algorithm will then be applied to the National Review Panel’s validated,
prioritized list for each port area in all groups. The algorithm considers the following
factors to produce a comprehensive national priority ranking of port security
proposals:
 Relationship of the project to one or more of the national port security
priorities
 Relationship of the project to the local port security priorities
 COTP ranking (based on each COTP’s prioritized list of projects)
 Risk level of the port area in which the project would be located (based on a
comprehensive risk analysis performed by DHS)
The NRP will be asked to evaluate and validate the consolidated
and ranked project list resulting from application of the algorithm and submit their
determinations to FEMA.
C. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
FEMA will evaluate and act on applications within 60 days following close of the
application period, consistent with the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations
Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-83). Awards will be made on or before September 30, 2010.

5

The NRP will have the ability to recommend partial funding for individual projects and eliminate others that are
determined to be duplicative or require a sustained Federal commitment to fully realize the intended risk mitigation.
The NRP will also validate proposed project costs. Decisions to reduce requested funding amounts or eliminate
requested items deemed inappropriate under the scope of the FY 2010 PSGP will take into consideration the ability
of the revised project to address the intended national port security priorities and achieve the intended risk mitigation
goal. Historically, the PSGP has placed a high priority on providing full project funding rather than partial funding.

36

PART VI.

AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
A. Notice of Award
Upon approval of an application, the grant will be awarded to the grant recipient. The
date that this is done is the “award date.” Notification of award approval is made
through the Grants Management System (GMS). Once an award has been approved, a
notice is sent to the authorized grantee official. Follow the directions in the notification
to accept your award documents. The authorized grantee official should carefully read
the award and special condition documents. If you do not receive a notification, please
contact your FEMA Program Analyst for your award number. Once you have the award
number, contact the GMS Help Desk at (888) 549-9901, option three, to obtain the
username and password associated with the new award.
The period of performance is 36 months and begins on the Project Period/Budget
Period start date listed in the award package. Any unobligated funds will be deobligated at the end of the close-out period. Extensions to the period of performance
will be considered only through formal requests to FEMA with specific and compelling
justifications why an extension is required. All extension requests must be submitted to
FEMA at least 60 days prior to the expiration of the grant period of performance. The
justification must address:








Reason for delay;
Current status of the activity/activities;
Approved period of performance termination date and new project completion date;
Remaining available funds, both Federal and non-Federal;
Budget outlining how remaining Federal and non-Federal funds will be expended;
Plan for completion including milestones and timeframe for achieving each
milestone and the position/person responsible for implementing the plan for
completion; and
Certification that the activity/activities will be completed within the extended
period of performance without any modification to the original Statement of Work
approved by FEMA.

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
The recipient and any sub-recipient(s) must, in addition to the assurances made as part
of the application, comply and require each of its subcontractors employed in the
completion of the project to comply with all applicable statutes, regulations, executive
orders, OMB circulars, terms and conditions of the award, and the approved application.

37

1. Standard Financial Requirements. The grantee and any subgrantee(s) shall
comply with all applicable laws and regulations. A non-exclusive list of regulations
commonly applicable to DHS grants are listed below:
1.1 – Administrative Requirements.
 44 CFR Part 13, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments
 2 CFR Part 215, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and
Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other
Non-Profit Organizations (formerly OMB Circular A-110)
1.2 – Cost Principles.
 2 CFR Part 225, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian tribal
Governments (formerly OMB Circular A-87)
 2 CFR Part 220, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions (formerly
OMB Circular A-21)
 2 CFR Part 230, Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations (formerly
OMB Circular A-122)
 Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), Part 31.2 Contract Cost Principles
and Procedures, Contracts with Commercial Organizations
1.3 – Audit Requirements.
 OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit
Organizations
1.4 – Duplication of Benefits. There may not be a duplication of any Federal
assistance, per 2 CFR Part 225, Basic Guidelines Section C.3 (c), which states:
Any cost allocable to a particular Federal award or cost objective under the
principles provided for in this Authority may not be charged to other Federal
awards to overcome fund deficiencies, to avoid restrictions imposed by law or
terms of the Federal awards, or for other reasons. However, this prohibition
would not preclude governmental units from shifting costs that are allowable
under two or more awards in accordance with existing program
agreements. Non-governmental entities are also subject to this prohibition per 2
CFR Parts 220 and 230 and FAR Part 31.2.
2. Payment. DHS/FEMA uses the Direct Deposit/Electronic Funds Transfer (DD/EFT)
method of payment to Recipients. To enroll in the DD/EFT, the Recipient must
complete a Standard Form 1199A, Direct Deposit Form.
FEMA uses the FEMA Payment and Reporting System (PARS) for payments
made under this program, https://isource.fema.gov/sf269/ (Note: link connects
to Federal Financial Report [SF-425]).
2.1 – Advance Payment. In accordance with Treasury regulations at 31 CFR
Part 205, the Recipient shall maintain procedures to minimize the time elapsing
between the transfer of funds and the disbursement of said funds (see 44 CFR
Part 13.21(c)) regarding payment of interest earned on advances. In order to
38

request an advance, the Recipient must maintain or demonstrate the willingness
and ability to maintain procedures to minimize the time elapsing between the
transfer of funds from DHS and expenditure and disbursement by the recipient.
When these requirements are not met, the recipient will be required to be on a
reimbursement for costs incurred method.
2.2 – Forms. In order to download the Standard Form 1199A, the Recipient may
use the following Internet site: http://www.fms.treas.gov/eft/1199a.pdf.
NOTE: FUNDS WILL NOT BE AUTOMATICALLY TRANSFERRED UPON
ISSUANCE OF THE GRANT. GRANTEES MUST SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR
ADVANCE/REIMBURSEMENT IN ORDER FOR THE FUNDS TO BE
TRANSFERRED TO THE GRANTEE’S ACCOUNT.
3. Non-supplanting Requirement. Grant funds will be used to supplement existing
funds, and will not replace (supplant) funds that have been appropriated for the
same purpose. Applicants or grantees may be required to supply documentation
certifying that a reduction in non-Federal resources occurred for reasons other than
the receipt or expected receipt of Federal funds.
4. Technology Requirements.
4.1 – National Information Exchange Model (NIEM). FEMA requires all
grantees to use the latest NIEM specifications and guidelines regarding the use
of Extensible Markup Language (XML) for all grant awards. Further information
about the required use of NIEM specifications and guidelines is available at
http://www.niem.gov.
4.2 – Geospatial Guidance. Geospatial technologies capture, store, analyze,
transmit, and/or display location-based information (i.e., information that can be
linked to a latitude and longitude). FEMA encourages grantees to align any
geospatial activities with the guidance available on the FEMA website at
http://www.fema.gov/grants.
4.3 – 28 CFR Part 23 Guidance. FEMA requires that any information
technology system funded or supported by these funds comply with 28 CFR Part
23, Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating Policies, if this regulation is
determined to be applicable.
4.4 – Best Practices for Government Use of CCTV. DHS recommends that
grantees seeking funds to purchase and install closed circuit television (CCTV)
systems, or funds to provide support for operational CCTV systems, review and
utilize the guidance in Best Practices for Government Use of CCTV:
Implementing the Fair Information Practice Principles available on the DHS
Privacy Office website at
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_rpt_cctv_2007.pdf.

39

5. Administrative Requirements.
5.1 – Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). FEMA recognizes that much of the
information submitted in the course of applying for funding under this program or
provided in the course of its grant management activities may be considered law
enforcement sensitive or otherwise important to national security interests. While
this information under Federal control is subject to requests made pursuant to the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. §552, all determinations concerning
the release of information of this nature are made on a case-by-case basis by the
FEMA FOIA Office, and may likely fall within one or more of the available
exemptions under the Act. The applicant is encouraged to consult its own State
and local laws and regulations regarding the release of information, which should
be considered when reporting sensitive matters in the grant application, needs
assessment, and strategic planning process. The grantee should be familiar with
the regulations governing Sensitive Security Information (49 CFR Part 1520), as
it may provide additional protection to certain classes of homeland security
information.
5.2 – Protected Critical Infrastructure Information (PCII). The PCII Program,
established pursuant to the Critical Infrastructure Act of 2002 (Public Law 107296) (CII Act), created a framework which enables members of the private
sector, States, local jurisdictions, and tribal nations to voluntarily submit sensitive
information regarding critical infrastructure to DHS. The Act provides statutory
protection from public disclosure and civil litigation for CII that is validated as
PCII. When validated as PCII, the information can only be shared with
Government employees who complete the training requirement, who have
homeland security duties, and a need to know.
PCII accreditation is a formal recognition that the covered government entity has
the capacity and capability to receive and store PCII appropriately. DHS
encourages all States, local jurisdictions, and tribal nations to pursue PCII
accreditation to cover their government agencies. Accreditation activities include
signing a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with DHS, appointing a PCII Officer
and developing a standard operating procedure for handling PCII. For additional
information about PCII or the accreditation process, please contact the DHS PCII
Program Office at [email protected].
5.3 – Compliance with Federal civil rights laws and regulations. The grantee
is required to comply with Federal civil rights laws and regulations. Specifically,
the grantee is required to provide assurances as a condition for receipt of
Federal funds that its programs and activities comply with the following:


Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42. U.S.C. §2000 et.
seq. – Provides that no person on the grounds of race, color, or national
origin be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be
otherwise subjected to discrimination in any program or activity receiving
Federal financial assistance. Title VI also extends protection to persons
with Limited English Proficiency (LEP). (42 U.S.C. §2000d et seq.)

40



Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended, 20 U.S.C.
§1681 et. seq. – Provides that no person, on the basis of sex, be excluded
from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to
discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal
financial assistance.



Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C.
§794 – Provides that no otherwise qualified individual with a disability in
the United States, shall, solely by reason of his or her disability, be
excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or subject to
discrimination in any program or activity receiving Federal financial
assistance.



The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, 20 U.S.C. §6101 et.
seq. – Provides that no person in the United States shall, on the basis of
age, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be
subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal
financial assistance.

Grantees must comply with all regulations, guidelines, and standards adopted
under the above statutes. The grantee is also required to submit information, as
required, to the DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties concerning its
compliance with these laws and their implementing regulations.
5.4 – Services to Limited English Proficient (LEP) persons. Recipients of
FEMA financial assistance are required to comply with several Federal civil rights
laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. These laws
prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, natural origin, and sex
in the delivery of services. National origin discrimination includes discrimination
on the basis of limited English proficiency. To ensure compliance with Title VI,
recipients are required to take reasonable steps to ensure that LEP persons have
meaningful access to their programs. Meaningful access may entail providing
language assistance services, including oral and written translation, where
necessary. The grantee is encouraged to consider the need for language
services for LEP persons served or encountered both in developing their
proposals and budgets and in conducting their programs and activities.
Reasonable costs associated with providing meaningful access for LEP
individuals are considered allowable program costs. For additional information,
see http://www.lep.gov.
5.5 – Certifications and Assurances. Certifications and assurances regarding
the following apply:


Lobbying. 31 U.S.C. §1352, Limitation on use of appropriated funds to
influence certain Federal contracting and financial transactions – Prohibits
the use of Federal funds in lobbying members and employees of
Congress, as well as employees of Federal agencies, with respect to the
award or amendment of any Federal grant, cooperative agreement,
41

contract, or loan. FEMA and DHS have codified restrictions upon lobbying
at 44 CFR Part 18 and 6 CFR Part 9. (Refer to form included in
application package.)


Drug-free Workplace Act, as amended, 41 U.S.C. §701 et seq. – Requires
the recipient to publish a statement about its drug-free workplace program
and give a copy of the statement to each employee (including consultants
and temporary personnel) who will be involved in award-supported
activities at any site where these activities will be carried out. Also,
place(s) where work is being performed under the award (i.e., street
address, city, state and zip code) must be maintained on file. The
recipient must notify the Grants Officer of any employee convicted of a
violation of a criminal drug statute that occurs in the workplace. For
additional information, see 44 CFR Part 17.



Debarment and Suspension – Executive Orders 12549 and 12689 provide
protection from fraud, waste, and abuse by debarring or suspending those
persons that deal in an irresponsible manner with the Federal government.
The recipient must certify that they are not debarred or suspended from
receiving Federal assistance. For additional information, see 44 CFR Part
17.



Federal Debt Status – The recipient may not be delinquent in the
repayment of any Federal debt. Examples of relevant debt include
delinquent payroll or other taxes, audit disallowances, and benefit
overpayments. (OMB Circular A-129) (Refer to SF 424, item number 17)



Hotel and Motel Fire Safety Act of 1990 – In accordance with section 6 of
the Hotel and Motel Fire Safety Act of 1990, 15 U.S.C. §2225a, the
recipient agrees to ensure that all conference, meeting, convention, or
training space funded in whole or in part with Federal funds, complies with
the fire prevention and control guidelines of the Federal Fire Prevention
and Control Act of 1974, 15 U.S.C. §2225.

Grantees must comply with all regulations, guidelines, and standards adopted
under the above statutes.
5.6 – Integrating individuals with disabilities into emergency planning.
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, prohibits
discrimination against people with disabilities in all aspects of emergency
mitigation, planning, response, and recovery by entities receiving financial
funding from FEMA. In addition, Executive Order 13347, Individuals with
Disabilities in Emergency Preparedness signed in July 2004, requires the
Federal Government to support safety and security for individuals with disabilities
in situations involving disasters, including earthquakes, tornadoes, fires, floods,
hurricanes, and acts of terrorism. Executive Order 13347 requires the Federal
government to encourage consideration of the needs of individuals with

42

disabilities served by State, local, and tribal governments in emergency
preparedness planning.
FEMA has several resources available to assist emergency managers in
planning and response efforts related to people with disabilities and to ensure
compliance with Federal civil rights laws:


Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 301 (CPG-301): Interim
Emergency Management Planning Guide for Special Needs
Populations. CPG-301 is designed to aid State, tribal, local, and
territorial governments in planning for individuals with special needs.
CPG-301 outlines special needs considerations for: Developing Informed
Plans; Assessments and Registries; Emergency Public
Information/Communication; Sheltering and Mass Care; Evacuation;
Transportation; Human Services/Medical Management; Congregate
Settings; Recovery; and Training and Exercises. CPG-301 is available at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/media/2008/301.pdf.



Guidelines for Accommodating Individuals with Disabilities in
Disaster. The Guidelines synthesize the array of existing accessibility
requirements into a user friendly tool for use by response and recovery
personnel in the field. The Guidelines are available at
http://www.fema.gov/oer/reference/.



Disability and Emergency Preparedness Resource Center. A web-based
“Resource Center” that includes dozens of technical assistance materials to
assist emergency managers in planning and response efforts related to
people with disabilities. The “Resource Center” is available at
http://www.disabilitypreparedness.gov.



Lessons Learned Information Sharing (LLIS) resource page on
Emergency Planning for Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs. A
true one-stop resource shop for planners at all levels of government, nongovernmental organizations, and private sector entities, the resource page
provides more than 250 documents, including lessons learned, plans,
procedures, policies, and guidance, on how to include citizens with disabilities
and other special needs in all phases of the emergency management cycle.
LLIS.gov is available to emergency response providers and homeland
security officials from the Federal, State, and local levels. To access the
resource page, log onto http://www.LLIS.gov and click on Emergency
Planning for Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs under Featured
Topics. If you meet the eligibility requirements for accessing LLIS.gov,
you can request membership by registering online.

5.7 – Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) Compliance.
FEMA is required to consider the potential impacts to the human and natural
environment of projects proposed for FEMA grant funding. FEMA, through its
43

EHP Program, engages in a review process to ensure that FEMA-funded
activities comply with various Federal laws including: National Environmental
Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, the
Clean Water Act, and Executive Orders on Floodplains (11988), Wetlands
(11990), and Environmental Justice (12898). The goal of these compliance
requirements is to protect our Nation’s water, air, coastal, wildlife, agricultural,
historical, and cultural resources, as well as to minimize potential adverse effects
to low-income and minority populations.
The grantee shall provide all relevant information to FEMA’s Grant Programs
Directorate (GPD) to ensure compliance with applicable Federal EHP
requirements. Any project with the potential to impact natural or biological
resources or historic properties cannot be initiated until FEMA has completed the
required EHP review. In addition to a detailed project description that describes
what is to be done with the grant funds, how it will be done, and where it will be
done, grantees shall provide detailed information about the project (where
applicable), including, but not limited to, the following:










Project location (i.e., exact street address or map coordinates)
Total extent of ground disturbance and vegetation clearing
Extent of modification of existing structures
Construction equipment to be used, staging areas, etc.
Year that any affected buildings or structures were built
Natural, biological, and/or cultural resources present within the project
area and vicinity, including wetlands, floodplains, geologic resources,
threatened or endangered species, or National Register of Historic Places
listed or eligible properties, etc.
Visual documentation such as good quality, color and labeled site and
facility photographs, project plans, aerial photos, maps, etc.
Alternative ways considered to implement the project (not applicable to
procurement of mobile and portable equipment)

For projects that have the potential to impact sensitive resources, FEMA must
consult with other Federal, State, and tribal agencies such as the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, State Historic Preservation Offices, and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, as well as other agencies and organizations responsible for the
protection and/or management of natural and cultural resources, including
Federally-recognized Indian tribes, Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, and the
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs. For projects with the
potential to have adverse effects on the environment and/or historic properties,
FEMA’s EHP review process and consultation may result in a substantive
agreement between the involved parties outlining how the grantee will avoid the
effects, minimize the effects, or, if necessary, compensate for the effects.
Grantees who are proposing communication tower projects are encouraged to
complete their Federal Communications Commission (FCC) EHP process prior to
preparing their EHP review materials for GPD, and to include their FCC EHP
materials with their submission to GPD. Completing the FCC process first and

44

submitting all relevant EHP documentation to GPD will help expedite FEMA’s
review.
Because of the potential for adverse effects to EHP resources or public
controversy, some projects may require an additional assessment or report, such
as an Environmental Assessment, Biological Assessment, archaeological survey,
cultural resources report, wetlands delineation, or other document, as well as a
public comment period. Grantees are responsible for the preparation of such
documents, as well as for the implementation of any treatment or mitigation
measures identified during the EHP review that are necessary to address
potential adverse impacts. Grantees may use grant funds toward the costs of
preparing such documents. The use of grant funds for mitigation or treatment
measures that are not typically allowable expenses will be considered on a caseby-case basis. Failure of the grantee to meet Federal, State, local, and territorial
EHP requirements, obtain required permits, and comply with any conditions that
may be placed on the project as the result of FEMA’s EHP review may
jeopardize Federal funding.
Recipients shall not undertake any project without the prior approval of GPD, and
must comply with all conditions placed on the project as the result of the EHP
review. Any change to the approved project description will require re-evaluation
for compliance with these EHP requirements. If ground disturbing activities occur
during project implementation, the recipient must ensure monitoring of ground
disturbance, and if any potential archeological resources are discovered, the
recipient will immediately cease construction in that area and notify their GPD
Program Analyst, and the appropriate State Historic Preservation Office. Any
projects that have been initiated prior to approval will result in a non-compliance
finding and will not be eligible for funding.
For more information on FEMA’s EHP requirements, grantees should refer to
FEMA’s Information Bulletin #329, Environmental Planning and Historic
Preservation Requirements for Grants, available at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/bulletins/info329.pdf. Additional
information and resources can also be found at
http://www.fema.gov/plan/ehp/ehp-applicant-help.shtm.
5.8 – Royalty-free License. Applicants are advised that FEMA reserves a
royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or
otherwise use, and authorize others to use, for Federal government purposes: (a)
the copyright in any work developed under an award or sub-award; and (b) any
rights of copyright to which an award recipient or sub-recipient purchases
ownership with Federal support. Award recipients must agree to consult with
FEMA regarding the allocation of any patent rights that arise from, or are
purchased with, this funding.
5.9 – FEMA GPD Publications Statement. Applicants are advised that all
publications created with funding under any grant award shall prominently
contain the following statement: "This document was prepared under a grant
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Grant Programs Directorate
45

(FEMA/GPD) within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Points of view
or opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not
necessarily represent the official position or policies of FEMA/GPD or the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security."
5.10 – Equipment Marking. Awardees may consider marking equipment in the
following manner, "Purchased with funds provided by the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security," in order to facilitate their own audit processes, as well as
Federal audits and monitoring visits, which may result from receiving Federal
funding. Equipment maintenance requirements are outlined in 44 CFR Part
13.32.
5.11 – Disadvantaged Business Requirement. Applicants are advised that, to
the extent that recipients of a grant use contractors or subcontractors, such
recipients shall use small, minority, women-owned or disadvantaged business
concerns and contractors or subcontractors to the extent practicable.
5.12 – National Preparedness Reporting Compliance. The Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-62) (GPRA) requires that
the Department collect and report performance information on all programs. For
grant programs, the prioritized Investment Justifications and their associated
milestones provide an important tool for assessing grant performance and
complying with these national preparedness reporting requirements. FEMA will
work with grantees to develop tools and processes to support this requirement.
FEMA anticipates using this information to inform future-year grant program
funding decisions. Award recipients must agree to cooperate with any
assessments, national evaluation efforts, or information or data collection
requests, including, but not limited to, the provision of any information required
for the assessment or evaluation of any activities within their grant agreement.
This includes any assessments, audits, or investigations conducted by DHS, the
Office of the Inspector General, or the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO).
C. Reporting Requirements
Reporting requirements must be met throughout the life of the grant (refer to the
program guidance and the special conditions found in the award package for a full
explanation of these requirements). Any reports or documents prepared as a result of
this grant shall be in compliance with Federal “plain English” policies, directives, etc.
Please note that PARS contains edits that will prevent access to funds if reporting
requirements are not met on a timely basis.
1. Federal Financial Report (FFR) – required quarterly. Obligations and
expenditures must be reported on a quarterly basis through the FFR (SF-425), which
is due within 30 days of the end of each calendar quarter (e.g., for the quarter
ending March 31, the FFR is due no later than April 30). A report must be submitted
for every quarter of the period of performance, including partial calendar quarters, as
well as for periods where no grant activity occurs. Future awards and fund draw

46

downs may be withheld if these reports are delinquent. The final FFR is due 90
days after the end date of the performance period.
OMB has directed that the FFR SF-425 replace the use of the SF-269, SF-269A,
SF-272, and SF-272A, which are no longer available as of October 1, 2009. The
SF-425 is intended to provide Federal agencies and grant recipients with a standard
format and consistent reporting requirements throughout the government.
FFRs must be filed online through PARS.
Reporting periods and due dates:
 October 1 – December 31; Due January 30
 January 1 – March 31; Due April 30
 April 1 – June 30; Due July 30
 July 1 – September 30; Due October 30
2. Semi-Annual Assistance Progress Report (SAPR). Following an award, the
awardees will be responsible for providing updated obligation and expenditure
information on a semi-annual basis. The applicant is responsible for completing and
submitting the SAPR reports.
The SAPR is due within 30 days after the end of the reporting period (July 30 for the
reporting period of January 1 through June 30; and January 30 for the reporting
period of July 1 though December 31). Future awards and fund drawdowns may be
withheld if these reports are delinquent.
SAPRs must be filed online at https://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov. Guidance and
instructions can be found at https://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov/gmsHelp/index.html.
Required submission: SAPR (due semi-annually).
3. Exercise Evaluation and Improvement. Exercises, implemented with grant funds,
should be capabilities and performance-based and should evaluate performance of
the targeted capabilities required to respond to the exercise scenario. Guidance
related to exercise evaluation and the implementation of improvements is defined in
the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program located at
https://hseep.dhs.gov. Grant recipients must report on scheduled exercises and
ensure that an After Action Report (AAR) and Improvement Plan (IP) are prepared
for each exercise conducted with FEMA support (grant funds or direct support) and
submitted to the FEMA Grants and preparedness Community of Interest (COI) on
the Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN) within 90 days following
completion of the exercise.
The AAR documents the demonstrated performance of targeted capabilities and
identifies recommendations for improvements. The IP outlines an exercising
jurisdiction(s) plan to address the recommendations contained in the AAR. At a
minimum, the IP must identify initial action items and be included in the final AAR.
Guidance for the development of AARs and IPs is provided in the HSEEP manual.
47

Required submissions: AARs and IPs (as applicable).
4. Financial and Compliance Audit Report. Recipients that expend $500,000 or
more of Federal funds during their fiscal year are required to submit an organizationwide financial and compliance audit report. The audit must be performed in
accordance with GAO’s Government Auditing Standards, located at
http://www.gao.gov/govaud/ybk01.htm, and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States,
Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations, located at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a133/a133.html. Audit reports are
currently due to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse no later than nine months after the
end of the recipient’s fiscal year. In addition, the Secretary of Homeland Security
and the Comptroller General of the United States shall have access to any books,
documents, and records of recipients of FY 2010 PSGP assistance for audit and
examination purposes, provided that, in the opinion of the Secretary or the
Comptroller, these documents are related to the receipt or use of such assistance.
The grantee will also give the sponsoring agency or the Comptroller, through any
authorized representative, access to, and the right to examine all records, books,
papers or documents related to the grant.
The State shall require that sub-grantees comply with the audit requirements set
forth in OMB Circular A-133. Recipients are responsible for ensuring that subrecipient audit reports are received and for resolving any audit findings.
5. Monitoring. Grant recipients will be monitored periodically by FEMA staff, both
programmatically and financially, to ensure that the project goals, objectives,
performance requirements, timelines, milestone completion, budgets, and other
related program criteria are being met. Programmatic monitoring may also include
the Regional Federal Preparedness Coordinators, when appropriate, to ensure
consistency of project investments with regional and national goals and policies, as
well as to help synchronize similar investments ongoing at the Federal, State, and
local levels.
Monitoring will be accomplished through a combination of desk-based reviews and
on-site monitoring visits. Monitoring will involve the review and analysis of the
financial, programmatic, performance and administrative issues relative to each
program and will identify areas where technical assistance and other support may be
needed.
The recipient is responsible for monitoring award activities, to include sub-awards, to
provide reasonable assurance that the Federal award is administered in compliance
with requirements. Responsibilities include the accounting of receipts and
expenditures, cash management, maintaining of adequate financial records, and
refunding expenditures disallowed by audits.
6. Grant Close-Out Process. Within 90 days after the end of the period of
performance, grantees must submit a final FFR and final SAPR detailing all
accomplishments throughout the project. After these reports have been reviewed
and approved by FEMA, a close-out notice will be completed to close out the grant.
48

The notice will indicate the project as closed, list any remaining funds that will be
deobligated, and address the requirement of maintaining the grant records for three
years from the date of the final FFR. The grantee is responsible for returning any
funds that have been drawn down but remain as unliquidated on grantee financial
records.
Required submissions: (1) final SF-425, due 90 days from end of
grant period; and (2) final SAPR, due 90 days from the end of the
grant period.

49

PART VII.

FEMA CONTACTS
This section describes several resources that may help applicants in completing a
FEMA grant application.
1. Centralized Scheduling and Information Desk (CSID). CSID is a non-emergency
comprehensive management and information resource developed by DHS for grants
stakeholders. CSID provides general information on all FEMA grant programs and
maintains a comprehensive database containing key personnel contact information
at the Federal, State, and local levels. CSID can be reached by phone at (800) 3686498 or by e-mail at [email protected], Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 6:00
p.m. (EST).
2. Grant Programs Directorate (GPD). FEMA GPD will provide fiscal support,
including pre- and post-award administration and technical assistance, to the grant
programs included in this solicitation. Additional guidance and information can be
obtained by contacting the FEMA Call Center at (866) 927-5646 or via e-mail to
[email protected].
3. National Exercise Division (NED). The NED within the FEMA National
Preparedness Directorate maintains program management for the Homeland
Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). All questions pertaining to
HSEEP may be addressed to [email protected] or contact the NED at (202) 7869873.
4. Homeland Security Preparedness Technical Assistance Program (HSPTAP)
and Planning Support. The HSPTAP provides direct support assistance on a firstcome, first-served basis (and subject to the availability of funding) to eligible
organizations to enhance their capacity and preparedness to prevent, protect
against, respond to, and recover from terrorist and all hazard threats. In addition to
the risk assessment assistance already being provided, FEMA also offers a variety
of other direct support assistance programs.
The HSPTAP also provides access to planning support. The planning support aids
jurisdictions by increasing their understanding of the complex issues faced in
planning for various hazards and threats. This support includes leveraging subjectmatter experts from around the country as well as enabling knowledge transfer from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
More information can be found at http://www.fema.gov/about/divisions/pppa_ta.shtm
or by e-mailing [email protected] or [email protected].

50

5. Lessons Learned Information Sharing (LLIS) System. LLIS is a national, online,
secure website that houses a collection of peer-validated lessons learned, best
practices, and other relevant homeland security documents. LLIS facilitates
improved preparedness nationwide by providing response professionals with access
to a wealth of validated front-line expertise on effective planning, training, equipping,
and operational practices for homeland security.
The LLIS website also includes a national directory of homeland security officials, as
well as an updated list of homeland security exercises, events, and conferences.
Additionally, LLIS includes online collaboration tools, including secure email and
message boards, where users can exchange information. LLIS uses strong
encryption and active site monitoring to protect all information housed on the
system. The LLIS website can be found at: http://www.LLIS.gov.
6. Information Bulletins. Information Bulletins (IBs) provide important updates,
clarifications, and policy statements related to FEMA preparedness grant programs.
Grantees should familiarize themselves with the relevant publications. Information
Bulletins can be found at:
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/bulletins/index.shtm.
7. Information Sharing Systems. FEMA encourages all State, regional, local, and
tribal entities using FY 2010 funding in support of information sharing and
intelligence fusion and analysis centers to leverage available Federal information
sharing systems, including Law Enforcement Online (LEO) and the Homeland
Security Information Network (HSIN). For additional information on LEO, contact the
LEO Program Office at [email protected] or (202) 324-8833. For additional
information on HSIN and available technical assistance, contact the HSIN Help Desk
at (703) 674-3003.
8. U.S. General Services Administration’s (GSA’s) State and Local Purchasing
Programs. The GSA offers two efficient and effective procurement programs for
State and local governments to purchase products and services to fulfill homeland
security and other technology needs. The GSA Schedules (also referred to as the
Multiple Award Schedules and the Federal Supply Schedules) are long-term,
indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity, government-wide contracts with commercial
firms of all sizes.


Cooperative Purchasing Program
Cooperative Purchasing, authorized by statute, allows State and local
governments to purchase a variety of supplies (products) and services under
specific GSA Schedule contracts to save time, money, and meet their
everyday needs and missions.
The Cooperative Purchasing program allows State and local governments to
purchase alarm and signal systems, facility management systems, firefighting
and rescue equipment, law enforcement and security equipment, marine craft
and related equipment, special purpose clothing, and related services off of
Schedule 84 and Information Technology products and professional services
off of Schedule 70 and the Consolidated Schedule (containing IT Special Item
51

Numbers) only. Cooperative Purchasing for these categories is authorized
under Federal law by the Local Preparedness Acquisition Act (Public Law
110-248) and Section 211 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107347).
Under this program, State and local governments have access to GSA
Schedule contractors who have voluntarily modified their contracts to
participate in the Cooperative Purchasing program. The GSA provides a
definition of State and local governments as well as other vital information
under the frequently asked questions section on its website at:
http://www.gsa.gov/cooperativepurchasing.


Disaster Recovery Purchasing Program
GSA plays a critical role in providing disaster recovery products and services
to Federal agencies. Now State and local governments can also benefit from
the speed and savings of the GSA Federal Supply Schedules. Section 833 of
the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(Public Law 109-364) amends 40 U.S.C. §502 to authorize GSA to provide
State and local governments the use of ALL GSA Federal Supply Schedules
for purchase of products and services to be used to facilitate recovery from a
major disaster declared by the President under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act or to facilitate recovery from
terrorism or nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological attack.

Products and services being purchased to facilitate recovery from one of the above
listed events, may be purchased both in advance of and in the aftermath of a major
disaster, as long as the products and services being purchased, will be used to
facilitate recovery.
GSA provides additional information on the Disaster Recovery Purchasing Program
website at http://www.gsa.gov/disasterrecovery.
State and local governments can find a list of contractors on GSA’s website,
http://www.gsaelibrary.gsa.gov, denoted with a
or symbol.
Assistance is available from GSA on the Cooperative Purchasing and Disaster
Purchasing Program at the local and national levels. For assistance at the local
level, visit http://www.gsa.gov/csd to find a local customer service director in your
area. For assistance at the national level, contact Tricia Reed at
[email protected] or (571) 259-9921. More information is available on all GSA
State and local programs at: www.gsa.gov/stateandlocal.

52

PART VIII.

OTHER INFORMATION
A. Investment Justification Template
Investment Heading
Port Area
State
Applicant Organization
Investment Name
Investment Amount

$

I. Background
Note: This section only needs to be completed once per application, regardless of the number of
Investments proposed. The information in this section provides background and context for the
Investment(s) requested, but does not represent the evaluation criteria used by DHS for rating individual
Investment proposals.
I. Provide an overview of the port area, MTSA regulated facility, or MTSA regulated vessel
Narrative
Response Type
Not to exceed 1 page
Page Limit
Response Instructions  Area of Operations:
o Identify COTP Zone
o Identify eligible port area
o Identify exact location of project site (i.e. physical address of facility
being enhanced)
o Identify who the infrastructure (project site) is owned or operated by, if
not by your own organization
 Point(s) of contact for organization (include contact information):
o Identify the organization’s Authorizing Official for entering into grant
agreement, including contact information (include sub-grantee entering
agreement within Group 1 and 2 port areas under FA process)
o Identify the organization’s primary point of contact for management of
the project(s)
 Ownership or Operation:
o Identify whether the applicant is: (1) a private entity; (2) a state or local
agency; or (3) a consortium composed of local stakeholder groups (i.e.,
river groups, ports, or terminal associations) representing federally
regulated ports, terminals, US inspected passenger vessels or ferries.
 Role in providing layered protection of regulated entities (applicable to
State or local agencies, consortia and associations only):
o Describe your organization’s specific roles, responsibilities and activities
in delivering layered protection
 Important features:
o Describe any operational issues you deem important to the
consideration of your application (e.g., interrelationship of your
operations with other eligible high-risk ports, etc.)
 Ferry systems required data:
 Infrastructure
 Ridership data
 Number of passenger miles

53






Number of vehicles per vessel, if any
Types of service and other important features
System map
Geographical borders of the system and the cities and counties served
Other sources of funding being leveraged for security enhancements

Response

II. Strategic and Program Priorities
II.A. Provide a brief abstract of the Investment list just ONE investment.
Narrative
Response Type
Not to exceed 1/2 page
Page Limit
Response Instructions Provide a succinct statement summarizing this Investment
Response
II.B. Describe how the Investment will address one or more of the PSGP priorities and Area
Maritime Security Plan or COTP Priorities (how it corresponds with PRMP for Group I and II)
Narrative
Response Type
Not to exceed 1/2 page
Page Limit
Response Instructions  Describe how, and the extent to which, the investment addresses:
o Enhancement of Maritime Domain Awareness
o Enhancement of IED and CBRNE prevention, protection, response and
recovery capabilities
o Training and exercises
o Efforts supporting the implementation of TWIC
 Area Maritime Security Plan and/or Captain of the Port Priorities
Response
III. Impact
III.A. Describe how the project offers the highest risk reduction potential at the least cost.
Narrative
Response Type
Not to exceed 1/2 page
Page Limit
Response Instructions  Discuss how the project will reduce risk in a cost effective manner
o Discuss how this investment will reduce risk (e.g., reduce vulnerabilities
or mitigate the consequences of an event) by addressing the needs and
priorities identified in earlier analysis and review.
Response
III.B. Describe current capabilities similar to this Investment
Narrative
Response Type
Not to exceed 1/2 page
Page Limit
Response Instructions  Describe how many agencies within the port have existing equipment that
are the same or have similar capacity as the proposed project
 Include the number of existing capabilities within the port that are identical
or equivalent to the proposed project
Response

54

IV. Funding & Implementation Plan
 Complete the IV.A. to identify the amount of funding you are requesting for this investment only
 Funds should be requested by allowable cost categories as identified below
 Applicants must make funding requests that are reasonable and justified by direct linkages to
activities outlined in this particular Investment
The following template illustrates how the applicants should indicate the amount of FY 2010 PSGP
funding required for the investment and how these funds will be allocated across the cost elements.
IV.A. Investment Funding Plan

FY 2010 PSGP
Request Total

Match
(Optional)

Grand Total

Maritime Domain Awareness
IED and CBRNE Prevention,
Protection, Response and Recovery
Capabilities
Training
Exercises
TWIC Implementation
Operational Packages (OPacks)
M&A
Total
IV.B. Provide a high-level timeline, milestones and dates, for the implementation of this
Investment such as stakeholder engagement, planning, major acquisitions or purchases,
training, exercises, and process/policy updates. Up to 10 milestones may be provided.
Narrative
Response Type
Not to exceed 1 page
Page Limit
Response Instructions  Only include major milestones that are critical to the success of the
Investment
 Milestones are for this discrete Investment – those that are covered by the
requested FY 2010 PSGP funds and will be completed over the 36-month
grant period starting from the award date, giving consideration for review
and approval process up to 12 months (estimate 24 month project period)
 Milestones should be kept to high-level, major tasks that will need to occur
(i.e. Design and development, begin procurement process, site
preparations, installation, project completion, etc.)
 List any relevant information that will be critical to the successful
completion of the milestone (such as those examples listed in the question
text above)
Note: Investments will be evaluated on the expected impact on security
relative to the amount of the investment (i.e., cost effectiveness). An
itemized Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative must also be
completed for this investment. See following section for a sample format
Response

55

B. Sample Budget Detail Worksheet
Purpose. The Budget Detail Worksheet may be used as a guide to assist applicants in the
preparation of the budget and budget narrative. You may submit the budget and budget
narrative using this form or in the format of your choice (plain sheets, your own form, or a
variation of this form). However, all required information (including the budget narrative) must
be provided. Any category of expense not applicable to your budget may be deleted.
A. Personnel. List each position by title and name of employee, if available. Show the annual
salary rate and the percentage of time to be devoted to the project. Compensation paid for
employees engaged in grant activities must be consistent with that paid for similar work within
the applicant organization.
Name/Position

Computation

Cost
$
Total Personnel $

B. Fringe Benefits. Fringe benefits should be based on actual known costs or an established
formula. Fringe benefits are for the personnel listed in budget category (A) and only for the
percentage of time devoted to the project.
Name/Position

Computation

Cost
$
Total Fringe Benefits $

C. Travel. Itemize travel expenses of project personnel by purpose (e.g., staff to training, field
interviews, advisory group meeting, etc.). Show the basis of computation (e.g., six people to 3day training at $X airfare, $X lodging, $X subsistence). In training projects, travel and meals for
trainees should be listed separately. Show the number of trainees and unit costs involved.
Identify the location of travel, if known. Indicate source of Travel Policies applied, Applicant or
Federal Travel Regulations.
Purpose of Travel

Location

Item

Computation

Cost
$
Total Travel $

D. Equipment. List non-expendable items that are to be purchased. Non-expendable
equipment is tangible property having a useful life of more than one year. (Note: Organization’s
own capitalization policy and threshold amount for classification of equipment may be used).
Expendable items should be included either in the “Supplies” category or in the “Other”
category. Applicants should analyze the cost benefits of purchasing versus leasing equipment,
especially high cost items and those subject to rapid technical advances. Rented or leased
equipment costs should be listed in the “Contractual” category. Explain how the equipment is
necessary for the success of the project. Attach a narrative describing the procurement method
to be used.
Budget Narrative: Provide a narrative budget justification for each of the budget items
identified.
Item

Computation

56

Cost
$
Total Equipment $

E. Supplies. List items by type (office supplies, postage, training materials, copying paper, and
other expendable items such as books, hand held tape recorders) and show the basis for
computation. (Note: Organization’s own capitalization policy and threshold amount for
classification of supplies may be used). Generally, supplies include any materials that are
expendable or consumed during the course of the project.
Supply Items

Computation

Cost
$
Total Supplies $

F. Consultants/Contracts. Indicate whether applicant’s formal, written Procurement Policy or
the Federal Acquisition Regulations are followed.
Consultant Fees: For each consultant enter the name, if known, service to be provided, hourly
or daily fee (8-hour day), and estimated time on the project.
Budget Narrative: Provide a narrative budget justification for each of the budget items
identified.
Name of Consultant

Service Provided

Computation

Cost
$
Subtotal – Consultant Fees $

Consultant Expenses: List all expenses to be paid from the grant to the individual consultant in
addition to their fees (i.e., travel, meals, lodging, etc.)
Budget Narrative: Provide a narrative budget justification for each of the budget items
identified.
Item

Location

Computation

Cost
$
Subtotal – Consultant Expenses $

Contracts: Provide a description of the product or services to be procured by contract and an
estimate of the cost. Applicants are encouraged to promote free and open competition in
awarding contracts. A separate justification must be provided for sole source contracts in
excess of $100,000.
Budget Narrative: Provide a narrative budget justification for each of the budget items
identified.
Item

Cost
$
Subtotal – Contracts $
Total Consultants/Contracts $

57

G. Other Costs. List items (e.g., reproduction, janitorial or security services, and investigative
or confidential funds) by major type and the basis of the computation. For example, provide the
square footage and the cost per square foot for rent, and provide a monthly rental cost and how
many months to rent.
Budget Narrative: Provide a narrative budget justification for each of the budget items
identified.
Important Note: If applicable to the project, construction costs should be included in this
section of the Budget Detail Worksheet.
Description

Computation

Cost
$
Total Other $

H. Indirect Costs. Indirect costs are allowed only if the applicant has a federally approved
indirect cost rate. A copy of the rate approval, (a fully executed, negotiated agreement), must
be attached. If the applicant does not have an approved rate, one can be requested by
contacting the applicant’s cognizant Federal agency, which will review all documentation and
approve a rate for the applicant organization, or if the applicant’s accounting system permits,
costs may be allocated in the direct costs categories.
Description

Computation

Cost
$
Total Indirect Costs $

Budget Summary - When you have completed the budget worksheet, transfer the totals for
each category to the spaces below. Compute the total direct costs and the total project costs.
Indicate the amount of Federal funds requested and the amount of non-Federal funds that will
support the project.
Budget Category
A. Personnel
B. Fringe Benefits
C. Travel
D. Equipment
E. Supplies
F. Consultants/Contracts
G. Other
H. Indirect Costs

Federal Amount

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

Non-Federal Amount

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Total Requested
Federal Amount

$

Total Non-Federal
Amount

$
Combined Total Project Costs

$

58

C. Sample MOU/MOA Template
Memorandum of Understanding / Agreement
Between [provider of layered security] and [recipient of layered security]
Regarding [provider of layered security’s] use of port security grant program funds
1. PARTIES. The parties to this Agreement are the [Provider of Layered Security] and the [Recipient of
security service].
2. AUTHORITY. This Agreement is authorized under the provisions of [applicable Area Maritime Security
Committee authorities and/or other authorities].
3. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth terms by which [Provider of security service]
shall expend Port Security Grant Program project funding in providing security service to [Recipient of
security service]. Under requested FY 2010 PSGP grant, the [Provider of security service] must provide
layered security to [Recipient of security service] consistent with the approach described in an approved
grant application.
4. RESPONSIBILITIES: The security roles and responsibilities of each party are understood as follows:
(1).

[Recipient of security service]

Roles and responsibilities in providing its own security at each MARSEC level
(2)

[Provider of security service]

- An acknowledgement by the facility that the applicant is part of their facility security plan.
- The nature of the security that the applicant agrees to supply to the regulated facility (waterside
surveillance, increased screening, etc).
- Roles and responsibilities in providing security to [Recipient of security service] at each MARSEC level.
5. POINTS OF CONTACT. [Identify the POCs for all applicable organizations under the Agreement;
including addresses and phone numbers (fax number, e-mail, or internet addresses can also be
included).]
6. OTHER PROVISIONS. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to conflict with current laws or
regulations of [applicable state] or [applicable local Government]. If a term of this agreement is
inconsistent with such authority, then that term shall be invalid, but the remaining terms and conditions of
this agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
7. EFFECTIVE DATE. The terms of this agreement will become effective on (EFFECTIVE DATE).
8. MODIFICATION. This agreement may be modified upon the mutual written consent of the parties.
9. TERMINATION. The terms of this agreement, as modified with the consent of both parties, will remain
in effect until the grant end dates for an approved grant. Either party upon [NUMBER] days written notice
to the other party may terminate this agreement.
APPROVED BY:
_________________________
Organization and Title
(Date)

___________________________
Signature

(Date)

59

D. Other
The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO)
The DNDO is responsible for developing the global nuclear detection architecture and
acquiring and supporting the deployment of the domestic detection system to detect and
report attempts to import or transport a nuclear device or fissile or radiological material,
intended for illicit use. The DNDO is conducting both evolutionary (near-term) and
transformational (long-term) research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E)
programs to improve the Nation’s capabilities for detection and identification of rad/nuc
materials. By integrating RDT&E programs with operational support responsibilities,
DNDO will ensure technologies are appropriately deployed, with training materials and
well-developed operational response protocols. Working with Federal, State, local, and
tribal partners, DNDO has piloted initial training programs and developed detection
alarm protocols that can be customized for specific operational missions.
DNDO’s activities support a layered defense incorporating a variety of detection
capabilities to ensure the greatest probability of detection for radioactive substances
entering and transported within the country. This layered detection strategy includes
detection equipment and facilities that are specifically chosen based on the local
operating environment.
While these technologies are a critical tool to combat terrorism, the nuclear threat is not
one that can be effectively countered by technology alone. Accordingly, DNDO
supports the development of preventative rad/nuc detection (PRND) capabilities across
State, local and tribal entities through training, exercise support, equipment test reports,
and information sharing capabilities. These resources include: providing technical
reachback support to Federal, State, local and tribal operators; development of
standardized training curricula and response protocols; conducting comprehensive
assessments of existing technologies to inform application and acquisition; and the
development of a national situational awareness and analysis capability through the
Joint Analysis Center. Such resources can be used by State, local and tribal entities to
build or enhance a comprehensive PRND program, or to develop specific PRND
capabilities in areas such as commercial vehicle inspection, special events screening,
small maritime craft monitoring, and fixed infrastructure protection.
Requirements Specific to For-Profit Entities
For-profit organizations are eligible to apply for funding under the PSGP. The following
requirements apply specifically to for-profit entities receiving Federal funding from
FEMA.
1. Recipients of PSGP funds must comply with the contract cost principles as defined
in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), Part 31.2 Contract Cost Principles and
Procedures, Contracts with Commercial Organizations
2. For purposes of financial and procedural administration of the PSGP, recipients
must comply with 2 CFR Part 215, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants
and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other
Nonprofit Organizations (OMB Circular A-110).

60

3. Recipient of PSGP funds agree that this award may be terminated in accordance
with 2 CFR Part 215.61. If the Federal Government determines that a grant will be
terminated, it will be carried out in accordance with the process specified in Part 49
of the FAR.
4. Recipients of PSGP funds may not make a profit as a result of this award or charge
a management fee for the performance of this award.
5. Recipients of PSGP funds must have a financial audit and compliance audit
performed by qualified individuals who are organizationally, personally, and
externally independent from those who authorize the expenditure of federal funds.
This audit must be performed in accordance with the United States General
Accountability Office Government Auditing Standards. The audit threshold
contained in OMB Circular A-133 applies. This audit must be performed on a
program-wide basis to ascertain the effectiveness of financial management systems
and internal procedures that have been established to meet the terms and
conditions of the award. The management letter must be submitted with the audit
report. Recipient audit reports must be submitted no later than nine (9) months after
the close of each fiscal year during the term of the award. The distribution of audit
reports shall be based on requirements in the current edition of 2 CFR Part 215,
Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of
Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular A110). Note: If your audit disclosed findings or recommendations, you must include
with your audit report a corrective action plan containing the following: (1) The name
and number of the contact person responsible for the corrective action plan; (2)
specific steps taken to comply with the recommendations; (3) a timetable for
performance or implementation dates for each recommendation; and (4)
descriptions of monitoring to be conducted to ensure implementation.

61

Helpful Hints for Applicants
Are the following components included in the application package?














Investment Justification(s) for projects
Detailed Budget(s) containing only allowable costs
Memorandum of Understanding/Memorandum of Agreement (if applicable)
Any additional Required Attachments
Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance
Standard Form 424A, Budget Information
Standard Form 424B Assurances
Standard Form 424C, Budget Information – Construction Form
Standard Form 424D, Assurances – Construction Programs
Lobbying Form – Certification Regarding Lobbying (this form must be completed
by all grant applicants)
Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (if the grantee has
engaged or intends to engage in lobbying activities)
Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility
Matters
Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace Requirements

Are the following items addressed within the Investment Justification (IJ) narratives and
detailed budgets?











Do the IJ and the detailed budget include only allowable costs?
Are all of the expenses in the detailed budget addressed in the IJ narrative? (for
example, a camera equipment budget line item should be addressed in narrative
form in the investment justification as it pertains to the overall security program)
Does the information in the detailed budget align with the budget summary in the
IJ narrative?
Do the IJs clearly explain how the projects address one or more of the funding
priorities?
Do the IJs describe current capabilities similar to the proposed investments?
Do the IJs detail the value that each investment has in reducing the risk?
Is the cost effectiveness of each project clearly explained in the IJs? How do the
projects provide a high security return on investment?
Are timelines realistic and detailed?
Does the M&A total no more than five percent (5%) of the total award?

62

Acronyms
ACCCP
Authorities, Capabilities, Capacities, Competencies, Partnerships
AMSC
Area Maritime Security Committee
AMSP
Area Maritime Security Plan
AOPs
All Other Ports
BCRTP
Business Continuity Resumption of Trade Plan
CBRNE
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive
CCP
Citizen Corps Program
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
COTP
Captain of the Port
DHS
Department of Homeland Security
DNDO
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
DOT
Department of Transportation
EHP
Environmental Planning and Historical Preservation
E.O
Executive Order
FA
Fiduciary Agent
FAQs
Frequently Asked Questions
FEMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Maritime Security Coordinator
FMSC
FTA
Federal Transit Authority
FY
Fiscal Year
GPD
Grants Program Directorate
HP
HOMEPORT
HSIN………..Homeland Security Information Network
HSEEP
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program
HSGP
Homeland Security Grant Program
HSPD
Homeland Security Presidential Directive
ICS
Incident Command System
IED
Improvised Explosive Device
IJ
Investment Justification
MARAD
Maritime Administration
M&A
Management and Administration
MDA
Maritime Domain Awareness
MMRS
Metropolitan Medical Response System
MOA
Memorandum of Agreement
MOU
Memorandum of Understanding
MTSA
Maritime Transportation Security Act
NIPP
National Infrastructure Protection Plan
NPF
National Preparedness Framework
OPack
Operational Package
PARS
Payment and Reporting System
PrepPort
Preparedness Portal
PSGP
Port Security Grant Program
SAA
State Administrative Agency
SHSP
State Homeland Security Grant
TCL
Target Capabilities List
TSA
Transportation Security Administration
TWIC
Transportation Worker Identification Credential
UASI
Urban Areas Security Initiative
U.S.C
United States Code
USCG
United States Coast Guard
WMD
Weapons of Mass Destruction

63