44 Cfr 206.47

§ 206.46

44 CFR Ch. I (10–1–13 Edition)

(2) The damages caused by such disasters or disaster are so overwhelming
and severe that it is not possible for
the State or other eligible disaster assistance applicant to immediately assume their financial responsibility
under the Act; and
(3) The State and the other eligible
disaster applicants are not delinquent
in payment of any debts to FEMA incurred as a result of Presidentially declared major disasters or emergencies.
(b) Repayment of loans. Any loan
made to a State under paragraph (a) of
this section must be repaid to the
United States. The Governor must include a repayment schedule as part of
the request for advance.
(1) The State shall repay the loan
(the principal disbursed plus interest)
in accordance with the repayment
schedule approved by the Assistant Administrator for the Disaster Assistance
Directorate together with the Chief Financial Officer.
(2) If the State fails to make payments in accordance with the approved
repayment schedule, FEMA will offset
delinquent amounts against the current, prior, or any subsequent disasters, or monies due the State under
other FEMA programs, in accordance
with the established Claims Collection
procedures.
(c) Interest. Loans or advances under
paragraph (a) of this section shall bear
interest at a rate determined by the
Secretary of the Treasury, taking into
consideration the current market
yields on outstanding marketable obligations of the United States with remaining periods to maturity comparable to the reimbursement period of
the loan or advance. Simple interest
will be computed from the date of the
disbursement of each drawdown of the
loan/advance by the State based on 365
days/year.
§ 206.46 Appeals.
(a) Denial of declaration request. When
a request for a major disaster declaration or for any emergency declaration
is denied, the Governor may appeal the
decision. An appeal must be made within 30 days after the date of the letter
denying the request. This one-time request for reconsideration, along with
appropriate additional information, is

submitted to the President through the
appropriate Regional Administrator.
The processing of this request is similar to the initial request.
(b) Denial of types of assistance or
areas. In those instances when the type
of assistance or certain areas requested
by the Governor are not designated or
authorized, the Governor, or the GAR,
may appeal the decision. An appeal
must be submitted in writing within 30
days of the date of the letter denying
the request. This one-time request for
reconsideration, along with justification and/or additional information, is
sent to the Assistant Administrator for
the
Disaster
Assistance
Directoratethrough the appropriate
Regional Administrator.
(c) Denial of advance of non-Federal
share. In those instances where the
Governor’s request for an advance is
denied, the Governor may appeal the
decision. An appeal must be submitted
in writing within 30 days of the date of
the letter denying the request. This
one-time request for reconsideration,
along with justification and/or additional information, is sent to the Assistant Administrator for the Disaster
Assistance Directoratethrough the appropriate Regional Administrator.
(d) Extension of time to appeal. The 30day period referred to in paragraphs
(a), (b), or (c) of this section may be extended by the Assistant Administrator
for the Disaster Assistance Directorate
provided that a written request for
such an extension, citing reasons for
the delay, is made during this 30-day
period, and if the Assistant Administrator for the Disaster Assistance Directorate agrees that there is a legitimate basis for extension of the 30-day
period. Only the Governor may request
a time extension for appeals covered in
paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section.
The Governor, or the GAR if one has
been named, may submit the time extension request for appeals covered in
paragraph (b) of this section.
§ 206.47

Cost-share adjustments.

(a) We pay seventy-five percent (75%)
of the eligible cost of permanent restorative work under section 406 of the
Stafford Act and for emergency work
under section 403 and section 407 of the

400

VerDate Mar<15>2010

12:15 Nov 19, 2013

Jkt 229192

PO 00000

Frm 00410

Fmt 8010

Sfmt 8010

Q:\44\44V1.TXT

ofr150

PsN: PC150

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS
Stafford Act, unless the Federal share
is increased under this section.
(b) We recommend an increase in the
Federal cost share from seventy-five
percent (75%) to not more than ninety
percent (90%) of the eligible cost of
permanent work under section 406 and
of emergency work under section 403
and section 407 whenever a disaster is
so extraordinary that actual Federal
obligations under the Stafford Act, excluding FEMA administrative cost,
meet or exceed a qualifying threshold
of:
(1) Beginning in 1999 and effective for
disasters declared on or after May 21,
1999, $75 per capita of State population;
(2) Effective for disasters declared
after January 1, 2000, and through December 31, 2000, $85 per capita of State
population;
(3) Effective for disasters declared
after January 1, 2001, $100 per capita of
State population; and,
(4) Effective for disasters declared
after January 1, 2002 and for later
years, $100 per capita of State population, adjusted annually for inflation
using the Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers published annually
by the Department of Labor.
(c) When we determine whether to
recommend a cost-share adjustment we
consider the impact of major disaster
declarations in the State during the
preceding twelve-month period.
(d) If warranted by the needs of the
disaster, we recommend up to one hundred percent (100%) Federal funding for
emergency work under section 403 and
section 407, including direct Federal assistance, for a limited period in the initial days of the disaster irrespective of
the per capita impact.
[64 FR 19498, Apr. 21, 1999]

§ 206.48 Factors considered when evaluating a Governor’s request for a
major disaster declaration.
When we review a Governor’s request
for major disaster assistance under the
Stafford Act, these are the primary
factors in making a recommendation
to the President whether assistance is
warranted. We consider other relevant
information as well.
(a) Public Assistance Program. We
evaluate the following factors to evalu-

§ 206.48

ate the need for assistance under the
Public Assistance Program.
(1) Estimated cost of the assistance. We
evaluate the estimated cost of Federal
and
nonfederal
public
assistance
against the statewide population to
give some measure of the per capita
impact within the State. We use a figure of $1 per capita as an indicator that
the disaster is of such size that it
might warrant Federal assistance, and
adjust this figure annually based on
the Consumer Price Index for all Urban
Consumers. We are establishing a minimum threshold of $1 million in public
assistance damages per disaster in the
belief that we can reasonably expect
even the lowest population States to
cover this level of public assistance
damage.
(2) Localized impacts. We evaluate the
impact of the disaster at the county
and local government level, as well as
impacts at the American Indian and
Alaskan Native Tribal Government levels, because at times there are extraordinary concentrations of damages that
might warrant Federal assistance even
if the statewide per capita is not met.
This is particularly true where critical
facilities are involved or where localized per capita impacts might be extremely high. For example, we have at
times seen localized damages in the
tens or even hundreds of dollars per
capita though the statewide per capita
impact was low.
(3) Insurance coverage in force. We
consider the amount of insurance coverage that is in force or should have
been in force as required by law and
regulation at the time of the disaster,
and reduce the amount of anticipated
assistance by that amount.
(4) Hazard mitigation. To recognize
and encourage mitigation, we consider
the extent to which State and local
government measures contributed to
the reduction of disaster damages for
the disaster under consideration. For
example, if a State can demonstrate in
its disaster request that a Statewide
building code or other mitigation
measures are likely to have reduced
the damages from a particular disaster,
we consider that in the evaluation of
the request. This could be especially

401

VerDate Mar<15>2010

12:15 Nov 19, 2013

Jkt 229192

PO 00000

Frm 00411

Fmt 8010

Sfmt 8010

Q:\44\44V1.TXT

ofr150

PsN: PC150