PSGP Program Guidance

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)
Fiscal Year 2016 Port Security Grant Program (PSGP)
NOTE: Eligible recipients who plan to apply for this funding opportunity but who have
not obtained a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and/or are not
currently registered in the System for Award Management (SAM), should take immediate
action to obtain a DUNS Number, if applicable, and then to register immediately in SAM.
It may take 4 weeks or more after the submission of a SAM registration before the
registration becomes active in SAM, then an additional 24 hours for Grants.gov to
recognize the information. Information on obtaining a DUNS number and registering in
SAM is available from Grants.gov at: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.
Detailed information regarding DUNS and SAM is also provided in Section D of this NOFO,
subsection, Content and Form of Application Submission.
A. Program Description
Issued By
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), Grant Programs Directorate (GPD)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number
97.056
CFDA Title
Port Security Grant Program
Notice of Funding Opportunity Title
Port Security Grant Program
NOFO Number
DHS-16-GPD-056-00-01
Authorizing Authority for Program
Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, as amended, (Pub. L.
No. 107-295) (46 U.S.C. § 70107)
Appropriation Authority for Program
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. No. 114-113)
Program Type
New

Page 1 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Program Overview, Objectives, and Priorities
Overview
The Department of Homeland Security Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Port Security Grant
Program (PSGP) plays an important role in the implementation of the National
Preparedness System by supporting the building, sustainment, and delivery of core
capabilities essential to achieving the National Preparedness Goal (the Goal) of a secure
and resilient Nation. Delivering core capabilities requires the combined effort of the
whole community, rather than the exclusive effort of any single organization or level of
government. The FY 2016 PSGP’s allowable costs support efforts to build and sustain
core capabilities across Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery
mission areas, with specific focus on addressing the security needs of our Nation’s
maritime ports. The PSGP supports the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Mission
to Strengthen National Preparedness and Reslience.
Objectives
Recipients under the FY 2016 PSGP are encouraged to build and sustain core capabilities
through activities such as:









Strengthening governance integration;
Enhancing strategic ports within the National Port Readiness Network;
Enhancing Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA);
Enhancing Improvised Explosive Device (IED) and Chemical, Biological,
Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive (CBRNE) prevention, protection, response and
supporting recovery capabilities within the maritime domain;
Enhancing cybersecurity;
Maritime security risk mitigation projects that support port resilience and
recovery capabilities, as identified in an Area Maritime Security Plan or facility
security plan;
Training and exercises; and
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) implementation.

Priorities
The vast majority of U.S. maritime critical infrastructure is owned or operated by state,
local, and private sector maritime industry partners. PSGP funds available to these
entities are intended to improve port-wide maritime security risk management; enhance
maritime domain awareness; support maritime security training and exercises; and to
maintain or reestablish maritime security mitigation protocols that support port recovery
and resiliency capabilities. PSGP investments must address the U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) and Area Maritime Security Committee (AMSC) identified vulnerabilities in
port security and support the prevention, protection, response, and recovery from attacks
involving IED and other non-conventional weapons.
For additional information on program priorities and objectives for the FY 2016 PSGP,
refer to Appendix A – PSGP Program Priorities.

Page 2 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

B. Federal Award Information
Award Amounts, Important Dates, and Extensions
Available Funding for the PSGP:
Period of Performance:

$100,000,000
Thirty-six (36) months

Extensions to the period of performance are allowed. For additional information on
period of performance extensions, refer to Section H of this NOFO, Additional
Information (Extensions).
Projected Period of Performance Start Date:

September 1, 2016

Projected Period of Performance End Date:

August 31, 2019

Funding Instrument:

Grant

C. Eligibility Information
Eligible Applicants
All entities subject to an Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan (AMSP), as defined
by 46 U.S.C. § 70103(b), may apply for PSGP funding. Eligible applicants include, but
are not limited to: port authorities, facility operators, and state and local government
agencies.
Eligibility Criteria
Pursuant to the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, as amended (MTSA),
DHS established a risk-based grant program to support maritime security risk
management. Funding is directed towards the implementation of AMSPs and Facility
Security Plans (FSP) among port authorities, facility operators, and state and local
government agencies that are 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 will be considered.
 Port Area Definition
A port area is a location on a coast, shore, or inland waterway containing one or more
harbors where vessels can dock and transfer people or cargo to or from land. For the
purpose of PSGP, the presence of Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA)
regulated facilities are the primary consideration of harbors that defines the port area.
 Ineligible Entities
Applications for the purpose of providing a service, product, project, or investment
justifications (IJ) on behalf of another entity such as sub-recipients or a consortia are
ineligible for funding. Applications will only be accepted and considered for funding
from direct recipients.
Page 3 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Only one (1) application per eligible entity within each Port Area is permitted. Each
application may contain multiple IJs. An entity is a port authority, facility operator, state
or local government agency required to provide port security services. An investment
justification supports the funding of a proposed project. The location where the project is
primarily implemented is considered the Port Area of the application. Applicants with
facilities in multiple Port Areas may submit one (1) application per Port Area. Program
funding is risk based by Port Area, no single application should include investment
justifications for projects intended to be implemented in multiple Port Areas. For
example, state entities that operate in multiple Port Areas within the state must submit
separate applications to fund projects in each of these Port Areas.
Applicants may submit up to five (5) investment justifications within the single
application. Eligibility does not guarantee grant funding.
As a condition of eligibility, all PSGP applicants are required to be fully compliant with
relevant Maritime Security Regulations (33 C.F.R. Parts 101-106). Any applicant who,
as of the grant application deadline, has an open or outstanding Notice of Violation
(NOV), will not be considered for PSGP funding if:
1) the applicant has failed to pay the NOV within 45 days of receipt; or
2) the applicant has failed to decline the NOV within 45 days of receipt resulting in
the Coast Guard entering a finding of default in accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 1.0711[f][2]; or
3) the applicant has appealed the NOV pursuant to 33 C.F.R. § 1.07-70 and has
received a final appeal decision from the Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, as
described in 33 C.F.R. § 1.07-75, and has failed to come into compliance with the
terms of the final appeal decision within the timelines noted therein.
The local U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) will verify security compliance
eligibility during the field review process.
Ferry Systems
Ferry systems are eligible to apply for FY 2016 PSGP funds. However, any ferry system
receiving funds under the FY 2016 PSGP will not be eligible to participate under the FY
2016 Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP). Likewise, any ferry system that
participates in the TSGP will not be eligible for funding under the PSGP.
Other Eligibility Criteria:
National Incident Management System (NIMS) Implementation
Prior to allocation of any Federal preparedness awards in FY 2016, recipients must
ensure and maintain adoption and implementation of NIMS.
Emergency management and incident response activities require carefully managed
resources (personnel, teams, facilities, equipment and/or supplies) to meet incident needs.
Page 4 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Utilization of standardized resource management concepts such as typing, inventorying,
and cataloging, promote strong national mutual aid capabilities that are needed to support
the delivery of core capabilities. Additional information on resource management and
NIMS Resource Typing definitions and job titles/position qualifications are available
under FEMA’s website under NIMS Resource Management.
FEMA developed NIMS Guideline for Credentialing of Personnel to describe national
credentialing standards and to provide written guidance regarding the use of those
standards. This guideline describes credentialing and typing processes, and identifies
tools which Federal Emergency Response Officials (FERO) and emergency managers at
all levels of government may use both routinely and to facilitate multi-jurisdictional
coordinated responses.
Although state, local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners—including
nongovernmental organizations—are not required to credential their personnel in
accordance with these guidelines; DHS/FEMA strongly encourages them to do so in
order to leverage the Federal investment in the Federal Information Processing Standards
(FIPS) 201 infrastructure and to facilitate interoperability for personnel deployed outside
their home jurisdiction. Additional information is available at
http://www.fema.gov/nims-doctrine-supporting-guides-tools.
Sub-Awards of PSGP Funding
The PSGP program provides direct funding to eligible applicants to support their specific
needs regarding maritime security risk management. For this reason, applicants who are
selected for funding under the PSGP program may not subaward funding to other entities.
Cost Share or Match
There is a cost share requirement for this program. The non-Federal share can be cash or
in-kind, with the exception of construction activities, which must be a cash-match (hard).
All PSGP award recipients must provide a non-Federal match (cash or in-kind)
supporting 25 percent of the total of all project costs. Cost share should be specifically
identified for each proposed project. Cost match, whether cash or in-kind, has the same
eligibility requirements as the Federal share (e.g. operational costs for routine patrol is
ineligible; operational costs for overtime to conduct an approved exercise may be eligible
as part of the investment justification).
For example, if the Federal award requires a 25 percent cost share and the total project
cost is $100,000, then:



Federal share is 75 percent of $100,000 = $75,000
Recipient cost share is 25 percent of $100,000 = $25,000

Page 5 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Exceptions to the cost match requirement may apply. Please see Appendix B – FY 2016
PSGP Funding Guidelines for details.
D. Application and Submission Information
Key Dates and Times
Date Posted to Grants.gov:

February 16, 2016

Application Submission Deadline:

April 25, 2016 at 11:59 PM EDT

All applications must be received by the established deadline. The Non-Disaster (ND)
Grants System has a date stamp that indicates when an application is submitted.
Applicants will receive an electronic message confirming receipt of the full application.
In general, DHS/FEMA will not review applications that are not received by the deadline
or consider them for funding. DHS/FEMA may, however, extend the application
deadline on request for any applicant who can demonstrate that good cause exists to
justify extending the deadline. Good cause for an extension may include technical
problems outside of the applicant’s control that prevent submission of the application by
the deadline, or other exigent or emergency circumstances. Applicants experiencing
technical issues, must notify the respective Headquarters (HQ) Program Analyst prior to
the application deadline.
Anticipated Funding Selection Date:

June 29, 2016

Anticipated Award Date:

No later than September 30, 2016

Other Key Dates
The chart below outlines suggested/estimated deadlines for completing the five steps
required for a successful application submission prior to the deadline. These dates are
only recommendations as applicants are responsible for planning far enough in advance
to complete their application. The requirements outlined in the chart below are outside of
FEMA’s purview. Therefore, FEMA does not guarantee the timeframes for completing
those processes. Failure of an applicant to comply with any of the required steps before
the deadline for submitting their application may disqualify their application from
funding.
Applicants are encouraged to register early for Authorized Organizational
Representative (AOR) authorization. The registration process can take four weeks
or more to be completed. Therefore, registration should be done in sufficient time
to ensure it does not impact the applicant’s ability to meet required submission
deadlines.

Page 6 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Event
Obtain DUNS Number
Obtain valid Employer Identification
Number (EIN)
Update SAM registration
Submit initial application in Grants.gov
Submit final application in ND Grants

Suggested Deadline for Completion
March 18, 2016
March 18, 2016
March 18, 2016
April 15, 2016
April 25, 2016 (firm)

Address to Request Application Package
Application forms and instructions are available at Grants.gov. To access these materials, go to
http://www.grants.gov , select “Applicants” then “Apply for Grants.” In order to obtain the
application package select “Download a Grant Application Package.” Enter the CFDA and/or the
funding opportunity number located on the cover of this NOFO, select “Download Package,”
and then follow the prompts to download the application package.
Applicants experiencing difficulties accessing information or who have any questions please call
the Grants.gov customer support hotline at (800) 518-4726.
Hard copies of the FY 2016 PSGP NOFO are not available.
In addition, the Telephone Device for the Deaf (TDD) and/or Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) number available for this Notice is (800) 462-7585.
Applications will be processed through the Grants.gov portal and FEMA’s Non-Disaster Grants
(ND Grants) System.
Content and Form of Application Submission
Applying for an award under this program is a multi-step process and requires time to complete.
To ensure that an application is submitted on time applicants are advised to start the required
steps well in advance of their submission. Please review the table above under “Submission
Dates and Other Key Dates and Times” for estimated deadlines to complete each of the six steps
listed below. Failure of an applicant to comply with any of the required steps before the deadline
for submitting their application may disqualify their application from funding.
The steps involved in applying for an award under this program are:
1. Applying for, updating or verifying their DUNS Number;
2. Applying for, updating or verifying their EIN Number;
3. Updating or verifying their SAM Number;
4. Establishing an AOR in Grants.gov;
5. Submitting an initial application in Grants.gov; and
6. Submitting the complete application in ND Grants.
For additional information regarding the DUNS Number, EIN Number, SAM Number, and AOR
requirements, please see the section below entitled Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering

Page 7 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

System (DUNS) Number, System for Award Management (SAM), and Authorized
Organizational Representative (AOR).
Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)
Before applying for a DHS grant at grants.gov, applicants must have a DUNS number, be
registered in SAM, and be approved as an AOR.
Applicants are encouraged to register early. The registration process can take four
weeks or more to be completed. Therefore, registration should be done in sufficient time
to ensure it does not impact the applicant’s ability to meet required submission
deadlines.
Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number
The DUNS number must be included in the data entry field labeled "Organizational DUNS" on
the SF-424 form. Instructions for obtaining a DUNS number can be found at the following
website: http://www.grants.gov//web/grants/applicants/organization-registration/step-1-obtainduns-number.html.
The applicant must provide a DUNS number with their application. This number is a required
field for all subsequent steps in the application submission. Applicants should verify they have a
DUNS number, or take the steps necessary to obtain one.
Applicants can receive a DUNS number at no cost by calling the DUNS number request line at
(866) 705-5711. DHS/FEMA cannot assist applicants with questions related to obtaining a
current DUNS number.
Obtain an Employer Identification Number (EIN)
DHS/FEMA requires both the EIN and a DUNS number prior to the issuance of a financial
assistance award and for grant award payment; both the EIN and a DUNS number are required to
register with SAM (see below). The EIN base for an organization is the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) Tax ID number; for individuals it is their social security number. The social
security and IRS Tax ID numbers are both nine-digit numbers. Organizations and individuals
submitting their applications must correctly identify the EIN from the DUNS since both are 9digit numbers.
If these numbers are not correctly identified in the application, a delay in the issuance of the
funding award and/or incorrect payment to a recipient organization may result.
Organizations applying for an EIN should plan on a minimum of two full weeks to obtain an
EIN. For assistance registering an EIN, please contact the IRS helpline. DHS/FEMA cannot
assist applicants with questions related to obtaining a current EIN.
System for Award Management (SAM)
Applicants applying for grant funds electronically through Grants.gov must register with the
SAM. Step-by-step instructions for registering with SAM can be found here:
http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration/step-2-register-withPage 8 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

sam.html. All applicants must register with SAM in order to apply online. Failure to register
with the SAM will result in the application being rejected by Grants.gov during the submissions
process.
Payment under any DHS/FEMA award is contingent on the recipient’s having a current SAM
registration. The SAM registration process must be completed by the applicant. It is imperative
that the information provided by the applicant is correct and current. Please ensure that the
organization’s name, address, DUNS number and EIN are up to date in SAM and that the DUNS
number used in SAM is the same one used to apply for all other DHS/FEMA awards.
SAM registration is a multi-step process including validating the EIN with the IRS to obtain a
Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code. The CAGE code is only valid for one year
after issuance and must be current at the time of application.
SAM sends notifications to the registered user via email 60, 30, and 15 days prior to expiration
of the SAM registration for the Entity. SAM registration may lapse due to inactivity. To update
or renew Entity records(s) in SAM, applicants will need to create a SAM User Account and link
it to the migrated Entity records.
For assistance registering, please go to SAM or call 866-606-8220. DHS/FEMA cannot assist
applicants with questions related to registering in SAM or obtaining a current CAGE code.
Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR)
The next step in the registration process is creating a username and password with Grants.gov to
become an AOR. AORs will need to know the DUNS number of the organization for which they
will be submitting applications to complete this process. Applicants must register the individual
who is able to make legally binding commitments for the applicant organization as the AOR; this
step is often missed and it is crucial for valid submissions. To read more detailed instructions for
creating a profile on Grants.gov visit: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organizationregistration/step-3-username-password.html.
AOR Authorization
After creating a profile on Grants.gov, the E-Biz Point of Contact (POC), who is a representative
from the applicant organization listed as the contact for SAM, will receive an email to grant the
AOR permission to submit applications on behalf of the organization. The E-Biz POC will then
log in to Grants.gov and approve an individual as the AOR, thereby granting permission to
submit applications. To learn more about AOR Authorization, visit:
http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration/step-4-aorauthorization.html. To track AOR status, visit:
http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration/step-5-track-aorstatus.html.
Electronic Signature
Applications submitted through Grants.gov constitute a submission as electronically signed
applications. When submitting the application through Grants.gov, the name of the applicant’s
AOR will be inserted into the signature line of the application.
Page 9 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Applicants experiencing difficulties accessing information or who have questions should call the
grants.gov customer support hotline at (800) 518-4726 or email grants.gov at
[email protected].
The federal awarding agency may not make a federal award to an applicant until the applicant
has complied with all applicable DUNS and SAM requirements and, if an applicant has not fully
complied with the requirements by the time the federal awarding agency is ready to make a
federal award, the federal awarding agency may determine that the applicant is not qualified to
receive a federal award.
Submitting an Initial Application in Grants.gov
Applicants must submit their initial application through Grants.gov. Applicants may need to first
create a Grants.gov user profile by visiting the Get Registered section of the Grants.gov website.
Successful completion of this step is necessary for FEMA to determine eligibility of any
applicant. Applicants should complete this initial step online which requires completing:
 Standard Form 424 (SF-424), Application for Federal Assistance, and
 Grants.gov (GG) Form Certification Regarding Lobbying Form.
Both forms are available in the Forms tab under the SF-424 Family. The initial application
cannot be started or submitted in Grants.gov until the applicant’s registration in SAM is
confirmed.
Application forms and instructions are available at Grants.gov by selecting Apply for Grants.
Enter the CFDA number or the Opportunity ID Number noted in this NOFO, select Download
Application Package, and follow the prompts to download the application package. The
information submitted in Grants.gov will be retrieved by ND Grants, which will allow FEMA to
determine if an applicant is eligible. Applicants are encouraged to submit their initial
application in Grants.gov at least ten days before the April 25, 2016, application deadline.
For assistance applying through Grants.gov, please go to the Grant Application page, contact
[email protected], or call 800-518-4726. DHS/FEMA cannot assist with questions related to
registering with Grants.gov.
Submitting the Complete Application in Non-Disaster Grants System (ND Grants)
Eligible applicants will be notified by DHS/FEMA and asked to proceed with submitting their
complete application package in ND Grants. Applicants can register early with ND Grants and
are encouraged to begin their ND Grants registration at the time of this announcement. Early
registration will allow applicants to have adequate time to start and complete their application.
In ND Grants, applicants will be prompted to submit all of the information contained in the
following forms. Applicants should review these forms before applying to ensure they include
all required information.
 Standard Form 424A, Budget Information (Non-construction);
 Standard Form 424B, Standard Assurances (Non-construction); and
Page 10 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP



Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (if the recipient has engaged or
intends to engage in lobbying activities).

In addition applicants must submit copies of the following in ND Grants:
 Standard Form 424C, Budget Information (Construction);
 Standard Form 424D, Standard Assurances (Construction);
 Investment Justification(s);
 Detailed Budget Worksheet(s); and
 Indirect Cost Agreement, if applicable.
For assistance registering for the ND Grants system, please contact [email protected] or (800)
865-4076.
Intergovernmental Review
An intergovernmental review may be required. Applicants must contact their state’s Single Point
of Contact (SPOC) to comply with the state’s process under Executive Order 12372 (see
http://www.fws.gov/policy/library/rgeo12372.pdf). Name and addresses of the SPOCs are
maintained at the Office of Management and Budget’s home page at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_spoc to ensure currency.
Funding Restrictions
Federal funds made available through this award may only be used for the purpose set forth in
this award and must be consistent with the statutory authority for the award. Award funds may
not be used for matching funds for any other Federal award, 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.
Additionally, pursuant to Executive Order 13688, DHS/FEMA has issued IB 407 which has
placed further restrictions on controlled equipment. For more information on the Controlled
Equipment List and Prohibited Equipment, see Appendix B: FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines.
Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) Compliance
As a Federal agency, DHS/FEMA is required to consider the effects of its actions on the
environment and historic properties to ensure that all activities and programs funded by the
agency, including grants-funded projects, comply with Federal EHP regulations, laws and
Executive Orders as applicable. Recipients proposing projects that have the potential to impact
the environment, including, but not limited to construction of communication towers,
modification or renovation of existing buildings, structures and facilities, or new construction
including replacement of facilities, must participate in the DHS/FEMA EHP review
process. The EHP review process involves the submission of a detailed project description that
explains the goals and objectives of the proposed project along with supporting documentation
so that DHS/FEMA may determine whether the proposed project has the potential to impact
environmental resources and/or historic properties. In some cases, DHS/FEMA also is required
to consult with other regulatory agencies and the public in order to complete the review
process. The EHP review process must be completed before funds are released to carry out the
Page 11 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

proposed project. DHS/FEMA will not fund projects that are initiated without the required EHP
review.
Additionally, all recipients are required to comply with FEMA EHP Policy Guidance. This EHP
Policy Guidance can be found in FP 108-023-1, Environmental Planning and Historic
Preservation Policy Guidance, and FP 108.24.4, Environmental Planning and Historical
Preservation Policy
SAFECOM
Recipients who receive awards under the PSGP that wholly or partially provide funding for
emergency communication projects and related activities must comply with the most recent
version of the SAFECOM Guidance on Emergency Communications Grants. This guidance
provides recommendations to recipients regarding interoperable emergency communications
projects, including allowable costs, eligible activities, grants management best practices for
emergency communications grants, and information on technical standards that ensure greater
interoperability. The guidance is intended to ensure that Federally-funded investments are
compatible, interoperable, and support the national goals and objectives for improving
emergency communications nationwide. Recipients investing in broadband-related investments
should review FEMA Grant Programs Directorate (GPD) Information Bulletin (IB) 386, titled
“Clarification on Use of DHS/FEMA Public Safety Grant Funds for Broadband-Related
Expenditures and Investments,” and consult their DHS/FEMA HQ Program Analyst on such
investments before developing applications.
Pre-Award Costs
Pre-award costs are allowable only with the prior written approval of FEMA and if they are
included in the award agreement. To request pre-award costs, a written request must be included
with the application. The request must be signed by the Authorized Representative of the entity.
The letter must outline what the pre-award costs are for, including a detailed budget break-out of
pre-award costs from the post-award costs, and a justification for approval.
Direct Costs
Cost Principles
Costs charged to this award must be consistent with the Cost Principles for Federal
Awards located at 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Subpart E.
Planning
Planning related costs are allowed under this program only as described in this NOFO.
Organization
Organization costs are allowed under this program only as described in this NOFO.
Equipment
Equipment costs are allowed under this program only as described in this NOFO.
Training
Page 12 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Training related costs are allowed under this program only as described in this NOFO.
Exercise
Exercise related costs are allowed under this program only as described in this NOFO.
Travel
Domestic travel costs are allowed under this program as described in this NOFO.
International travel is not an allowable cost under this program unless approved in
advance by FEMA.
Construction and Renovation
Construction and renovation costs to achieve capability targets related to preventing,
preparing for, protecting against, or responding to acts of terrorism are allowed under this
program. For construction costs to be allowed, they must be specifically approved by
FEMA in writing prior to the use of any program funds for construction or renovation.
Limits on the total amount of grant funding that may be used for construction or
renovation may apply. See Appendix B for additional details. Additionally, recipients
are required to submit a SF-424C Budget and budget detail worksheet citing the project
costs.
Operational Overtime
Operational Overtime costs are allowed under this program only as described in this
NOFO.
Maintenance and Sustainment
Maintenance and Sustainment related costs, such as maintenance contracts, warranties,
repair or replacement costs, upgrades, and user fees are allowable as described in FEMA
Policy FP 205-402-125-1 (http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/32474).
For additional details on allowable costs under the PSGP, see Appendix B: FY 2016
PSGP Funding Guidelines.
Management and Administration (M&A) Costs
Management and Administration (M&A) costs are allowed. Recipients may use up to five
percent (5%) of the amount of the award for their M&A. M&A activities are defined as those
directly relating to the management and administration of PSGP funds, such as financial
management and monitoring.
Indirect (Facilities and Administrative [F&A]) Costs
Indirect costs are allowable under this program as described in 2 C.F.R. § 200.414. With the
exception of recipients who have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate as described in 2
C.F.R. § 200.414(f), recipients must have an approved indirect cost rate agreement with their
cognizant Federal agency to charge indirect costs to this award. A copy of the approved rate (a
fully executed, agreement negotiated with the applicant’s cognizant Federal agency) is required

Page 13 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

at the time of application, and must be provided to FEMA before indirect costs are charged to the
award.
PSGP Specific Application Instructions
All applicants will submit their PSGP grant application, the associated IJs to include detailed
budget worksheets including project milestones, and associated MOUs/MOAs as a file
attachment in the ND Grants System prior to the application deadline date and time.
Investment Justification (IJ)
As part of the FY 2016 PSGP application process, applicants must develop a formal IJ
that addresses each initiative being proposed for funding. A separate IJ should be
submitted for each proposed project. Only one (1) application per eligible entity within
each Port Area is permitted. Applicants with projects in multiple Port Areas should
submit one (1) application per Port Area based on the implementation location of the
proposed projects. No single application should include projects intended to be
implemented in different ports. Applicants may submit up to five (5) IJs within the single
application.
IJs must demonstrate how proposed projects address gaps and deficiencies in one or more
of the core capabilities outlined in the Goal. The applicant must demonstrate within the
IJ the ability to provide enhancements consistent with the purpose of the program and
guidance provided by DHS/FEMA. PSGP projects must be: 1) both feasible and
effective at reducing the risks for which the project was designed; and 2) able to be fully
completed within the thirty-six (36) month period of performance. Applicants must
ensure that the IJ is consistent with all applicable requirements outlined in Appendix C.
For the purposes of the PSGP application, the Port Area is selected based on the project
location. Agencies that have multiple facilities in multiple port areas should apply for
projects based on the facility where the project/asset will be implemented,
housed/maintained, not the entity headquarters location. For entities submitting
applications for a single project that span multiple Port Areas, such as one patrol vessel
that may be deployed outside of the primary port area, the project location is considered
to be the predominant location in which the project will be housed and maintained. Large
projects that implement multiple components in multiple ports, such as state agency
purchases of multiple patrol vessels for multiple ports, should be submitted as separate
applications (i.e., State Police vessel project in Port #1 is one application; State Police
vessel project in Port #2 is a separate application). All eligible and complete applications
will be provided to the applicable COTP for further review.
Applicants will find an IJ Template in Appendix C – FY 2016 PSGP Investment
Justification Template. This worksheet may be used as a guide to assist applicants in the
preparation of the IJ.
Applicants must provide information in the following categories for each proposed
investment:
Page 14 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

A.
B.
C.
D.

Background
How the proposed investment supports strategic and program priorities
Impact
Funding/Implementation Plan

Applicants must use the following file naming convention when submitting required
documents as part of the FY 2016 PSGP:
COTP Zone Abbreviation_Port Area_Name of Applicant_ IJ Number (Example:
Hous_Galveston_XYZ Oil_IJ#1)
Detailed Budget
All applicants must provide detailed budget worksheets that include project milestones
for the funds requested at the time of application. The detailed budget must be complete,
reasonable, and cost-effective in relation to the proposed project and should provide the
basis of computation of all project-related costs (including M&A) and any appropriate
narrative.
The review panels must be able to thoroughly evaluate the projects being submitted based
on the information provided. Applicants must ensure they provide an appropriate level of
detail within the detailed budget worksheet to clarify intent as to what is being purchased.
Applicants should also complete all budget questions (see Appendix D – FY 2016 PSGP
Sample Budget Detail Worksheet). This worksheet may be used as a guide to assist
applicants in the preparation of the budget and budget narrative.
Applications that do not include a narrative detailed budget will not be considered for
funding. Detailed budgets often assist reviewers in determining what type of equipment
or service is being purchased, which may assist in determining the effectiveness of a
project. Additionally, the detailed budget must demonstrate the required cost share,
either cash or in-kind. Applications failing to demonstrate the required cost share will
not be considered for funding.
The detailed budget must demonstrate the required cost share, either cash or inkind. Applications failing to demonstrate the required cost share will not be
considered for funding. Cash and in-kind matches must consist of eligible costs (i.e.,
same allowability as the federal share) and must be identified as part of the submitted
detailed budget worksheet. A cash-match includes cash spent for project-related costs
while an in-kind match includes the valuation of in-kind services. The cost match
requirement for the PSGP award may not be met by costs borne by another federal grant
or assistance program. Likewise, in-kind matches used to meet the matching
requirement for the PSGP award may not be used to meet matching requirements
for any other Federal grant program. Please see 2 CFR § 200.306, as applicable, for
further guidance regarding cost matching.

Page 15 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Memorandum of Understanding/Memorandum of Agreement (MOU/MOA)
Requirement
State and local agencies are eligible applicants and are not required to provide a MOU or
MOA if the direct security provider, along with their assets and resources, are listed in
the respective AMSP and confirmed by the COTP. If a security services provider is
providing these services directly to a MTSA-regulated facility and does not have an
existing agreement addressed in the regulated entities’ security plans, a copy of a signed
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 ND Grants.
The MOU/MOA must address the following points:
 The nature of the security service 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
Maritime Security (MARSEC) levels;
 An acknowledgement by the facility that the applicant is part of their facility
security plan; and
 Acknowledgment that the applicant will provide semi-annual progress reports on
project status to the local applicable AMSC and/or COTP.
If applicable, the signed MOU/MOA for state or local law enforcement agencies
providing direct security services to regulated entities must be submitted with the grant
application as a file attachment within ND Grants (https://portal.fema.gov). A sample
MOU/MOA can be found in Appendix E – FY 2016 PSGP Sample MOU/MOA
Template.
Applicants must use the following file naming convention for FY 2016 MOUs and
MOAs:
COTP Zone Abbreviation_Port Area_Name of Applicant_MOU
(Example: Hous_Galveston_Harris County_MOU)
Sensitive Security Information (SSI) Requirements
A portion of the information routinely submitted in the course of applying for funding or
reporting under certain programs or provided in the course of an entity’s grant
management activities under those programs which is under Federal control is subjected
to protection under SSI, and must be properly identified and marked. SSI is a control
designation used by DHS/FEMA to protect transportation security related information. It
is applied to information about security programs, vulnerability and threat assessments,
screening processes, technical specifications of certain screening equipment and objects
used to test screening equipment, and equipment used for communicating security
information relating to air, land, or maritime transportation. Further information can be

Page 16 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

located in Title 49, Part 1520, Section 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations (49 C.F.R. §
1520.7).
For the purposes of the PSGP, and due to the high-frequency of SSI found in IJs, all IJs
shall be considered SSI and treated as such until they have been subject to review for SSI
by DHS/FEMA. This means that applicants shall label documents as SSI in accordance
with 49 C.F.R. § 1520.13.
The subject line of the email should identify:
 Applicant name
 Application number
The body of the e-mail should clearly identify:
 Applicant name
 IJ number and/or summary description
 COTP area
 POC information
E. Application Review Information
Application Evaluation Criteria
Prior to making a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency is required by 31 U.S.C. § 3321
and 41 U.S.C. § 2313 to review information available through any OMB-designated repositories
of government-wide eligibility qualification or financial integrity information. Therefore
application evaluation criteria may include the following risk based considerations of the
applicant: (1) financial stability; (2) quality of management systems and ability to meet
management standards; (3) history of performance in managing federal award; (4) reports and
findings from audits; and (5) ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other
requirements.
FY 2016 PSGP applications will be evaluated through a three-part review and selection process.
There are four core PSGP criteria applied throughout the process including:
1. Projects that support development and sustainment of the core capabilities in the Goal and
align to PSGP funding priorities identified in Appendix A – FY 2016 PSGP Program
Priorities.
 PSGP Priorities are ranked and weighted based on alignment with Core Capabilities (CC)
across the five mission areas of the Goal. Each IJ should be given a score based on how
well it addresses each of the PSGP Priorities. The following scale point shall be used:
0=None; 1=Minimal; 3=Moderate; 9-Significant/Gap Filled.
2. Projects that address priorities outlined in the applicable AMSP, FSP, and Vessel Security
Plan (VSP), as mandated under the MTSA or the Port-Wide Risk Mitigation Plans (PRMP).

Page 17 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP



AMSP Priorities are the top three Transportation Security Incidents (TSI) (46 USC Sec
70101(6) ranked and correspondingly weighted. Each IJ should be given a score (using
same scale as National Priorities module) based on how well it addresses one or more
TSI within the context of the five mission areas of the Goal: Prevention, Protection,
Mitigation, Response, and Recovery. The following scale shall be used:
0=None; 1=Minimal; 3=Moderate; 9-Significant/Gap Filled.

3. Projects that address additional maritime security priorities based on the COTP’s expertise
and experience of the COTP within the specific Port Area.
 The final COTP rankings should mirror the composite score ranking; however, there may
be unique circumstances where the COTP may override the composite rankings by
ranking a project higher or lower on the composite ranking. This should be a rare
exception and may be a cause for increased scrutiny. Such overrides should be carefully
documented in the COTP recommendations.
4. Projects that are eligible and feasible based on the priorities of the program, outlined in
applicable AMSPs, FSPs, VSPs, or PRMP and available period of performance. In addition,
a recipient’s past performance demonstrating competent stewardship of Federal funds may
influence funding decisions.
 Investment justifications should justify the scope, breadth, and cost of a project, as well
as a timeline for completing the project as required within this NOFO. Projects failing to
demonstrate these minimum funding considerations may result in being denied funding.
The following scale shall be used: 0=No Funding Recommended; 1=Funding
Recommended
Review and Selection Process
During the initial screening and field review applications are evaluated for eligibility,
completeness, adherence to programmatic guidelines, and the anticipated effectiveness of
investments being proposed. Following the field review, a National Review Panel (NRP) will
identify a ranked list of eligible projects.
Grant projects must be: 1) both feasible and effective at reducing the risks for which the project
was designed; and 2) able to be fully completed within the thirty-six (36) month period of
performance.
FEMA will use the information provided in the application, as well as any supporting
documentation, to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of the grant project. Information
that would assist in the feasibility and effectiveness determination includes the following:
 Scope of work (purpose and objectives of the project, identification of what is being
protected)
 Desired outcomes, including expected long-term impact where applicable
 Summary of status of planning and design accomplished to date (e.g. included in a capital
improvement plan)
 Project schedule
 The PSGP Specific Priorities (weighted equally) found in Appendix A.
Page 18 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Recipients are expected to conform, as applicable, with accepted engineering practices,
established codes, standards, modeling techniques, and best practices.
Prior to making a Federal award with a total amount of Federal share greater than the simplified
acquisition threshold, DHS/FEMA is required to review and consider any information about the
applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM
(currently FAPIIS).
An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance
systems accessible through SAM and comment on any information about itself that a Federal
awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance
system accessible through SAM.
DHS will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the
designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant’s
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the
review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR §200.205 Federal awarding agency
review of risk posed by applicants.
i. Initial Screening
FEMA will conduct an initial review of all FY 2016 PSGP applications to verify applicant
eligibility and to ensure each application is complete. All eligible and complete applications will
be provided to the applicable COTP for further review.
FEMA staff will review the following during initial screening:
 Initial application was submitted into Grants.gov
 Application is submitted into ND Grants
 Applicant is associated with an organization within ND Grants
 Applicant has submitted all required assurances and standard forms
 Application includes an Investment Justification
 Application includes a detailed budget worksheet
 Application labeled as SSI
Incomplete applications will not be processed for further review and will not be considered for
funding.
ii. Field Review
Field reviews will be managed by the applicable COTP in coordination with the Gateway
Directors of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Maritime Administration
(MARAD) and appropriate personnel from the AMSC or AMSC Regional Subcommittee where
established, to include owner/operators of MTSA regulated facilities and vessels, as well as
Federal, state, and local agencies, as identified by the COTP.
AMSC members representing state and local agencies should coordinate the field review results
with the applicable State Administrative Agency (SAA) and State Homeland Security Advisor
Page 19 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

(HSA) to support coordination and regionalization of proposed maritime security projects with
the state and urban area homeland security strategies, as well as other state and local security
plans. Although coordination with the SAA is not required during the field review, periodic
coordination throughout the year is encouraged.
Field reviews for all ports occur immediately following the initial screening by FEMA. Each
project is scored for compliance with Application Review Criteria outlined above. The project
scores help determine project rank within each port area. In addition, the COTP/MARAD will
provide a prioritized list of maritime security projects recommended for funding within each Port
Area based on the scoring results. See Appendix A – FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities and
Appendix B – FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines for additional details.
After completing field reviews, COTPs will submit the project scores, associated comments, and
prioritized lists to DHS/FEMA in advance of the national review panel process.
iii. Application Selection Process
Following the COTP field review, a NRP, comprised of subject matter experts drawn from DHS
and DOT components, will convene and conduct a national review.
The purpose of the NRP 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 COTPs to ensure that the proposed projects will accomplish intended risk
mitigation goals. The NRP will validate the COTP Field Review’s Project Priority List and
provide a master list of prioritized projects by Port Area.
The NRP will score projects based on the criteria addressing PSGP priorities. When appropriate,
the NRP may normalize nationwide scoring of certain project types based on details of common
projects. For example, a CBRNE Vessel project may receive a score of “1” by one COTP and
the same project scored a “9” by another COTP; the NRP may normalize both projects with a
criteria score of “3” for the National Review. Project details demonstrating varying levels of
capability may increase or decrease the score of the project addressing the PSGP priorities. The
NRP may score a project “0” if the project addresses PSGP priorities but is not recommended for
funding by the COTP or may recommend not funding due to a deficient detailed budget and
projects that appear to provide minimal support of PSGP priorities.
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 2016 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, PSGP has placed a high priority on providing full project
funding rather than partial funding.

Page 20 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Independent of the field and NRP reviews, a risk score will be calculated for each Port Area
submitting an application. As required by the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended, a
Port Area risk score will be calculated on the “relative threat, vulnerability, and consequences
from acts of terrorism.” The DHS/FEMA risk methodology is focused on three elements:
 Threat – likelihood of an attack being attempted by an adversary;
 Vulnerability – likelihood that an attack is successful, given that it is attempted; and
 Consequence – effect of an event, incident or occurrence.
The risk methodology determines the relative risk of terrorism faced by a given area taking into
account the potential risk of terrorism to people, critical infrastructure, economic security, and
national security missions. The analysis includes threats from domestic violent extremists,
international terrorist groups, and individuals inspired by terrorists abroad.
A risk and effectiveness prioritization will then be applied to the NRP’s recommended list for
each Port Area. This analysis 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 (all
priorities are of equal weight);
 Relationship of the project to the local port security priorities;
 COTP ranking (based on each COTP’s prioritized list of projects and associated
recommendations);
 Risk level of the Port Area in which the project would be located (based on the
comprehensive the DHS/FEMA risk methodology); and
 Effectiveness and feasibility of project to be completed in support of above priorities
during the period of performance.
The NRP will be asked to validate and submit their funding recommendations to DHS/FEMA.
DHS/FEMA will use the final results of its analysis to make funding recommendations to the
Secretary of Homeland Security. All final funding determinations will be made by the Secretary
of Homeland Security, who retains the discretion to consider other factors and information in
addition to DHS/FEMA’s funding recommendations.

F. Federal Award Administration Information
Notice of Award
Notification of award approval is made through the ND Grants system through an automatic email to the awardee point of contact (the “authorized official”) listed in the initial application.
The “award date” for PSGP will be the date that DHS/FEMA approves the award. The awardee
should follow the directions in the notification to confirm acceptance of the award.
Recipients must accept their awards no later than 90 days from the award date. The recipient
shall notify the awarding agency of its intent to accept and proceed with work under the award
Page 21 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

through the ND Grants system. For instructions on how to accept or decline and award in the
ND Grants system, please refer to the ND Grants Grantee Training Manual.
Funds will remain on hold until the recipient accepts the award through the ND Grants system
and all other conditions of award have been satisfied, or the award is otherwise rescinded.
Failure to accept the grant award within the 90 day timeframe may result in a loss of funds.
Administrative and National Policy Requirements
All successful applicants for all DHS/FEMA grant and cooperative agreements are required to
comply with DHS Standard Administrative Terms and Conditions, which are available online at:
DHS Standard Terms and Conditions.
The applicable DHS Standard Administrative Terms and Conditions will be those in effect at the
time in which the award was made.
Before accepting the award the authorized official should carefully read the award package. The
award package contains instructions on administering the grant award, as well as terms and
conditions with which the recipient must comply. Recipients must accept all the conditions in
this NOFO as well as any Special Terms and Conditions in the Notice of Award to receive an
award under this program.
Reporting
Recipients are required to submit various financial and programmatic reports as a condition of
their award acceptance. Future awards and funds drawdown may be withheld if these reports are
delinquent.
Federal Financial Reporting Requirements
Federal Financial Report (FFR)
Recipients must report obligations and expenditures ported on a quarterly basis through
the FFR (SF-425) to FEMA. Recipients must file the FFR electronically using the
Payment and Reporting System (PARS). A FFR must be submitted quarterly throughout
the period of performance, including partial calendar quarters, as well as for periods
where no grant award activity occurs. Future awards and fund drawdowns may be
withheld if these reports are delinquent, demonstrate lack of progress, or are insufficient
in detail.
Recipients may review the Federal Financial Reporting Form (FFR) (SF-425) here:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/grants/approved_forms/SF-425.pdf,
SF-425 OMB #00348-0061.
Financial Reporting Periods and Due Dates
The following reporting periods and due dates apply for the FFR:
Reporting Period
October 1 – December 31

Report Due Date
January 30

Page 22 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Reporting Period
January 1 – March 31
April 1 – June 30
July 1 – September 30

Report Due Date
April 30
July 30
October 30

Financial and Compliance Audit Report
For audits of fiscal years beginning on or after December 26, 2014, recipients that expend
$750,000 or more from all Federal funding sources during their fiscal year are required to
submit an organization-wide financial and compliance audit report. The audit must be
performed in accordance with the requirements of U.S. Government Accountability
Office’s (GAO) Government Auditing Standards, located at
http://www.gao.gov/govaud/ybk01.htm, and the requirements of Subpart F of 2 C.F.R.
Part 200, located at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?SID=876f827f6fae2c4bce610e9427a6d229&node=sp2.1.200.f&rgn=div6.
For audits of fiscal years beginning prior to December 26, 2014, recipients that expend
$500,000 or more from all Federal funding sources during their fiscal year are required to
submit an organization-wide 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_compliance_supplement_2012.
Program Performance Reporting Requirements
Performance Progress Reports (SF-PPR)
Recipients are responsible for providing updated performance reports using the SF-PPR
on a biannual basis. Recipients must submit the cover page of the SF-PPR as an
attachment in the ND Grants system. The SF-PPR can be accessed online at
http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fap/SF-PPR_Cover%20Sheet.pdf.
The SF-PPR should document accomplishments as they relate to the approved investment
justification(s), milestones achieved, overall project status, and any potential issues that
may affect project completion.
Program Performance Reporting Periods and Due Dates
The following reporting periods and due dates apply for the PPR:
Reporting Period
January 1 – June 30
July 1 – December 31

Report Due Date
July 30
January 30

Closeout Reporting Requirements
DHS/FEMA will close out the grant award when it determines that all applicable administrative
actions and all required work of the PSGP award have been completed by the recipient. This
section summarizes the actions that the recipient must take to complete the closeout process in
Page 23 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

accordance with 2 C.F.R. § 200.343 at the end of the grant’s period of performance or the
issuance of a Grant Amendment Notice issued to close out the grant.
Within 90 days after the end of the period of performance, or after an amendment has been
issued to close out a grant, whichever comes first, recipients must submit a final FFR and final
progress report detailing all accomplishments and a qualitative summary of the impact of those
accomplishments throughout the period of performance, as well as the following documentation:
1) Final request for payment, if applicable;
2) SF-425 –Final FFR;
3) SF-PPR – Final Performance Progress Report detailing project accomplishments
throughout the period of performance with ties back to the original gaps laid out in the
investment justification(s);
4) A qualitative summary of the impact of accomplishments throughout the entire period of
performance. The summary is submitted to the respective FEMA HQ Program Analyst
in a Word document; and
5) Other documents required by program guidance or terms and conditions of the award.
If applicable, an inventory of all construction projects that used funds from this program has to
be reported using the Real Property Status Report (Standard Form SF 429) available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/grants/approved_forms/sf-429.pdf.
Additionally, the recipient must liquidate all obligations incurred under the PSGP award no later
than 90 calendar days after the end date of the period of performance or issuance of a Grant
Amendment Notice that closes out the award, whichever comes first. Recipients who do not
liquidate their obligations within this time period may have the costs of their unliquidated
obligations disallowed. Recipients are also responsible for promptly returning to DHS/FEMA
the balance of any funds that have been drawn down, but remain unliquidated.
After these reports have been reviewed and approved by DHS/FEMA, a close-out notice will be
completed to close out the grant. The notice will indicate the period of performance as closed,
list any remaining funds the recipient has not drawn down that will be deobligated, and address
requirements for record retention, and disposition and reporting requirements for any equipment
or real property purchased using PSGP grant funding.
If DHS/FEMA has made reasonable attempts through multiple contacts to close out awards
within the required 180 days, DHS/FEMA may waive the requirement for a particular report and
administratively close the award. If this action is taken, consideration for subsequent awards to
the recipient may be impacted or restricted.
G. DHS Awarding Agency Contact Information
Contact and Resource Information
Centralized Scheduling and Information Desk (CSID)

Page 24 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

CSID is a non-emergency comprehensive management and information resource
developed by DHS/FEMA for grant 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. When necessary,
recipients will be directed to a Federal point of contact who can answer specific
programmatic questions or concerns. CSID can be reached by phone at (800)368-6498 or
by e-mail at [email protected], Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. EST.
GPD Grant Operations Division
GPD’s Grant Operations Division Business Office provides support regarding financial
matters and budgetary technical assistance. Additional guidance and information can be
obtained by contacting the FEMA Call Center at (866) 927-5646 or via e-mail to [email protected].
FEMA Regions
FEMA Regions may also provide fiscal support, including pre- and post-award
administration and technical assistance such as conducting cash analysis, financial
monitoring, and audit resolution to the grant programs included in this solicitation. GPD
will provide programmatic support and technical assistance. A list of contacts in FEMA
Regions is available online.
Systems Information
Grants.gov. For technical assistance with Grants.gov, please call the customer support
hotline at (800)518-4726.
Non-Disaster (ND) Grants. For technical assistance with the ND Grants system, please
contact [email protected] or (800)865-4076.
GPD Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (GPD EHP)
The FEMA GPD EHP Team provides guidance and information about the EHP review
process to recipients. All inquiries and communications about GPD projects or the EHP
review process, including the submittal of EHP review materials, should be sent to
[email protected]. EHP Technical Assistance, the EHP Screening Form, can be
found at http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1806-250452839/gpd_ehp_screening_form_omb_1660_0115_june_2011.pdf.
H. Additional Information
National Preparedness
DHS/FEMA coordinates with local, state, tribal, and territorial governments as well as the
private and non-profit sectors to facilitate a whole community, risk driven, and capabilities-based
approach to preparedness. This approach is grounded in the identification and assessment of risk
through the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA). For additional
information on THIRA, please refer to the following website: http://www.fema.gov/threat-andhazard-identification-and-risk-assessment. PSGP stakeholders are encouraged to participate in
Page 25 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

the THIRA process by coordinating with the appropriate State Administrative Agency (SAA) or
Urban Area Working Group. Information on the National Preparedness System can be found in
the National Preparedness System Description at http://www.fema.gov/national-preparednesssystem. Additional details regarding the National Preparedness System and how it is supported
by the PSGP can be found in Appendix A – FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities.
Port-Wide Risk Management Plans (PRMPs)
Port Areas with existing PRMPs are encouraged to maintain their PRMPs and to use them to
identify projects that will serve to address remaining maritime security vulnerabilities. These
ports are also highly encouraged to develop or maintain a Business Continuity/Resumption of
Trade Plan (BCRTP). For purposes of regional strategic and tactical planning, these plans must
take into consideration all Port Areas covered by their AMSP.
The PRMP and BCRTP must align with and support the Port Areas’ AMSP, considering the
entire port system strategically as a whole, and will identify a series of actions designed to
effectively mitigate security risks associated with the system’s maritime critical infrastructure
and key resources. See “Port Resiliency and Recovery” in Appendix A – FY 2016 PSGP
Program Priorities for more information on planning.
Strengthening Governance Integration
DHS/FEMA preparedness grant programs are intended to build and sustain an integrated
network of national capabilities across all levels of government and the whole community. With
declining Federal funds available to support these capabilities, disparate governance structures
must be integrated and refined to ensure resources are targeted to support the most critical needs
of a community based on risk driven, capabilities-based planning. Strong and inclusive
governance systems better ensure that disparate funding streams are coordinated and applied for
maximum impact. Eligible port entities are encouraged to actively participate with the
surrounding Urban Area Working Groups (UAWG), applicable Regional Transit Security
Working Groups, and other established ad hoc security working groups in addition to their
AMSC meetings.
DHS/FEMA requires that all governance processes that guide the allocation of preparedness
grant funds adhere to the following guiding principles:






Coordination of Investments – resources must be allocated to address the most critical
capability needs.
Transparency – stakeholders must be provided visibility on how preparedness grant
funds are allocated and distributed, and for what purpose.
Substantive Local Involvement – the tools and processes that are used to inform the
critical priorities, which DHS/FEMA grants support must include local government
representatives. At the state and regional levels, local risk assessments must be included
in the overarching analysis to ensure that the threats and hazards of primary concern to
the jurisdiction are accounted for.
Flexibility with Accountability – recognition of unique preparedness gaps at the local
level, as well as maintaining and sustaining existing capabilities.
Page 26 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP



Support of Regional Coordination – recognition of inter/intra-state partnerships and
dependencies at the state and regional levels, and within metropolitan areas.

Payment
DHS/FEMA utilizes the FEMA PARS for financial reporting, invoicing and tracking payments.
DHS/FEMA uses the Direct Deposit/Electronic Funds Transfer (DD/EFT) method of payment to
recipients. To enroll in the DD/EFT, the recipients must complete a Standard Form 1199A,
Direct Deposit Form.
Monitoring
Recipients will be monitored on an annual and as needed basis 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.
Monitoring may be accomplished through either a desk-based review or on-site monitoring
visits, or both. DHS/FEMA will inform the USCG Captain of the Port of any grant monitoring
site visits. Monitoring will involve the review and analysis of the financial, programmatic,
performance, compliance and administrative processes, policies, activities, and other attributes of
each Federal assistance award and will identify areas where technical assistance, corrective
actions and other support may be needed.
Conflict of Interest
To eliminate and reduce the impact of conflicts of interest in the subaward process, recipients
and pass-through entities must follow their own policies and procedures regarding the
elimination or reduction of conflicts of interest when making subawards. Recipients and passthrough entities also are required to follow any applicable state, local, or tribal statutes or
regulations governing conflicts of interest in the making of subawards.
The recipient or pass-through entity must disclose to FEMA, in writing, any real or potential
conflict of interest as defined by the federal, state, local, or tribal statutes or regulations or their
own existing policies that may arise during the administration of the federal award. Recipients
and must disclose any real or potential conflicts to their Program Analyst within five days of
learning of the conflict of interest.
Conflicts of interest may arise during the process of FEMA making a Federal award in situations
where an employee, officer, or agent, any members of his or her immediate family, his or her
partner has a close personal relationship, a business relationship, or a professional relationship,
with an applicant, recipient, or FEMA employees.
Extensions
Extensions to this program are allowed. Extensions to the initial period of performance
identified in the award will only be considered through formal, written requests to the recipient’s
respective Program Analyst and must contain specific and compelling justifications as to why an
extension is required. All extension requests must address the following:
1) Grant program, fiscal year, and award number;
Page 27 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

2) Reason for delay – this must include details of the legal, policy, or
operational challenges being experienced that prevent the final outlay of awarded
funds by the applicable deadline;
3) Current status of the activity/activities;
4) Approved period of performance termination date and new project completion date;
5) Amount of funds drawn down to date;
6) Remaining available funds, both Federal and non-federal;
7) Budget outlining how remaining Federal and non-federal funds will be expended;
8) Plan for completion, including milestones and timeframes for achieving each
milestone and the position/person responsible for implementing the plan for
completion; and
9) Certification that the activity/activities will be completed within the extended period
of performance without any modification to the original Statement of Work, as
described in the investment justification and approved by DHS/FEMA.
Extension requests will be granted only due to compelling legal, policy, or operational
challenges. Extension requests will only be considered for the following reasons:





Contractual commitments by the grant recipient with vendors or sub-recipients prevent
completion of the project within the existing period of performance;
The project must undergo a complex environmental review that cannot be completed
within this timeframe;
Projects are long-term by design and therefore acceleration would compromise core
programmatic goals; and
Where other special circumstances exist.

Recipients must submit all proposed extension requests to DHS/FEMA for review and approval
no later than 120 days prior to the end of the period of performance. In accordance with GPD
policy, extensions are typically granted for no more than a six month time period.

Page 28 of 58
FY 2016 PSGP

Appendix A – FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities
Alignment of PSGP to the National Preparedness System
The Nation utilizes the National Preparedness System to build, sustain, and deliver core
capabilities in order to achieve the National Preparedness Goal (the Goal). The Goal is “a secure
and resilient Nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent,
protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the
greatest risk.” The core capabilities, outlined in the National Preparedness Goal, are essential for
the execution of critical tasks in the National Planning Frameworks for the Prevention,
Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery mission areas outlined in the Goal. The
objective of the National Preparedness System is to facilitate an integrated, whole community,
risk informed, and capabilities-based approach to preparedness. The guidance, programs,
processes, and systems that support each component of the National Preparedness System enable
a collaborative, whole community approach to national preparedness that engages individuals,
families, communities, private and nonprofit sectors, faith-based organizations, and all levels of
government (http://www.fema.gov/whole-community).
Delivering core capabilities requires the combined effort of the whole community, rather than the
exclusive effort of any single organization or level of government. PSGP’s allowable costs
support efforts to build and sustain core capabilities across the five mission areas.
To support building, sustaining, and delivering these core capabilities recipients will use the
components of the National Preparedness System. The components of the National Preparedness
System are: Identifying and Assessing Risk; Estimating Capability Requirements; Building and
Sustaining Capabilities; Planning to Deliver Capabilities; Validating Capabilities; and Reviewing
and Updating. For more information on each component, read the National Preparedness System
Description available at http://www.fema.gov/national-preparedness-system.
Sustaining PSGP Capabilities
PSGP recipients should ensure that grant funding is utilized to sustain core capabilities within the
Goal that were funded by past PSGP funding cycles. New capabilities should not be built at the
expense of maintaining current, essential capabilities. However, if funding for new capabilities
is being sought, recipients must ensure that the capabilities have a clear linkage to one or more
core capabilities in the Goal.
Overarching Funding Priorities
The funding priorities for the PSGP reflect the Department’s overall investment strategy, in
which two priorities have been paramount: risk-informed funding and regional security
cooperation.
DHS/FEMA places a high priority on ensuring that all PSGP applications reflect robust regional
coordination and an investment strategy that institutionalizes and integrates a regional maritime
security risk mitigation strategy. This priority is a core component in the department’s statewide
grant programs and complements the goals of the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant
program.
Page 29 of 58
Appendix A - FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities

PSGP will continue to fund those eligible projects that close or mitigate maritime security risk
vulnerabilities gaps as identified in the AMSP, FSP, VSP, and Alternative Security Programs.
These projects will enhance business continuity and resumption of trade. Applicants are
reminded of the thirty-six (36) month period of performance and should consider project
completion time needed prior to submitting applications.
PSGP Specific Priorities
In addition to these two overarching priorities, the Department has identified the following six
(6) priorities as its selection criteria for all PSGP applicants. These priorities also align to the
five (5) mission areas and the associated core capabilities of the Goal. See Appendix B – FY
2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines for more information on funding requirements of each priority.
1. Enhancing Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA). Port Areas should seek to enhance their
MDA through projects that address knowledge capabilities within the maritime domain. This
effort could include access control/standardized credentialing, command and control,
interoperable communications, and enhanced intelligence sharing and analysis. This effort
may also include construction or infrastructure improvement projects to close maritime
security risk vulnerabilities that are identified in the AMSPs, FSPs, and/or VSPs.
Construction and enhancement of Interagency Operations Centers (IOCs) for port security
should be considered a priority for promoting MDA and unity of effort.
2. Port Resilience and Recovery Capabilities.
One of the core missions of Homeland Security, as outlined in the Quadrennial Homeland
Security Review (QHSR) Report, is “strengthen national preparedness and resilience.” A
major goal in support of this mission is to “enhance national preparedness” (Goal 5.1) and
“enable rapid recovery” (Goal 5.4). A main objective of this goal is to sustain critical
capabilities and restore essential services in a timely manner. PSGP funds are intended to
assist “risk owners” in addressing maritime security vulnerabilities.
3. Training and Exercises.
Port Areas should assess their training and qualification requirements, coordinate training
needs and qualification requirements of incident response personnel, and regularly test these
capabilities through emergency exercises and drills. Exercises must follow the Area
Maritime Security Training Exercise Program (AMSTEP) 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.
AMSTEP or I-STEP exercises will follow the latest change in requirements contained in the
Navigation and Inspection Circular (NVIC) 09-02. Exercises should be consistent with the
Homeland Security Exercise Evaluation Program (HSEEP).
The National Exercise Program (NEP) is critical to our Nation’s ability to test and validate
core capabilities. To this end, grant recipients are highly encouraged to nominate exercises
into the NEP. For additional information on the NEP, please refer to
http://www.fema.gov/national-exercise-program.

Page 30 of 58
Appendix A - FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities

4. Improving Cybersecurity Capabilities
When requesting funds for cybersecurity, applicants are encouraged to propose projects that
would aid in implementation of all or part of the Framework for Improving Critical
Infrastructure Cybersecurity (“The Framework”) developed by the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST). The Framework gathers existing international standards
and practices to help organizations understand, communicate, and manage their cyber risks.
For organizations that do not know where to start with developing a cybersecurity program,
the Framework provides initial guidance. For organizations with more advanced practices,
the Framework offers a way to improve their programs, such as better communication with
their leadership and suppliers about management of cyber risks.
The Department of Homeland Security's Critical Infrastructure Cyber Community C³
Voluntary Program also provides resources to critical infrastructure owners and operators to
assist in adoption of the Framework and managing cyber risks. Additional information on
the Critical Infrastructure Cyber Community C³ Voluntary Program can be found at
www.dhs.gov/ccubedvp.
The Department of Homeland Security’s Enhanced Cybersecurity Services (ECS) program is
an example of a resource that assists in protecting U.S.-based public and private entities and
combines key elements of capabilities under the “Detect” and “Protect” functions to deliver
an impactful solution relative to the outcomes of the Cybersecurity Framework. Specifically,
ECS offers intrusion prevention and analysis services that help U.S.-based companies and
state, local, tribal, and territorial governments defend their computer systems against
unauthorized access, exploitation, and data exfiltration. ECS works by sourcing timely,
actionable cyber threat indicators from sensitive and classified Government Furnished
Information (GFI). DHS then shares those indicators with accredited Commercial Service
Providers (CSPs). Those CSPs in turn use the indicators to block certain types of malicious
traffic from entering a company’s networks. Groups interested in subscribing to ECS must
contract directly with a CSP in order to receive services. Please visit
http://www.dhs.gov/enhanced-cybersecurity-servicesfor a current list of ECS CSP points of
contact.
5. Enhancing IED and CBRNE Prevention, Protection, Response and Supporting
Recovery Capabilities. Port Areas should continue to enhance their capabilities to prevent,
detect, respond to and recover from terrorist attacks employing IEDs, CBRNE devices, and
other non-conventional weapons. Please refer to the DHS Small Vessel Security Strategy
April 2008 document, available at
http://www.dhs.gov/files/publications/gc_1209408805402.shtm.
6. Equipment Associated with Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)
Implementation. 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. See FEMA GPD IB 343, titled “Interim Guidance for Ports, Facilities and Vessels
on Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Projects Funded through the Port
Security Grant Program (PSGP) and the Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP),”
Page 31 of 58
Appendix A - FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities

(https://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/bulletins/info343.pdf) for further information
on the TWIC program and guidance for executing PSGP-funded TWIC
projects. Infrastructure and installation projects that support TWIC implementation (e.g.,
cabling, Information Technology [IT], limited construction) is allowable.
PSGP DHS Program Management: Roles and Responsibilities
Effective management of the PSGP entails a collaborative effort and partnership within
DHS/FEMA, the dynamics of which require continuing outreach, coordination, and
interfacing. For the PSGP, FEMA is responsible for designing and operating the administrative
mechanisms needed to implement and manage the grant program. The U.S. Coast Guard
provides programmatic subject matter expertise for the maritime industry and in maritime
security risk mitigation. Together, these two agencies, with additional assistance and
cooperation from TSA and MARAD determine the primary security architecture of PSGP.

Page 32 of 58
Appendix A - FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities

Appendix B – FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines
Allowable Costs
This section provides guidance on allowable costs for the PSGP. The allowable costs should not
be viewed as all-inclusive, and recipients with specific questions should coordinate with their
Program Analyst.
Any project (submitted by an eligible applicant) that meets the PSGP priorities and is an
allowable activity as stated in 46 U.S.C. § 70107(b), and can be shown to offer a direct and
primary maritime security risk mitigation benefit will be considered for funding. However, those
costs that are specifically noted as unallowable or ineligible will not be funded.
Cost Match
The following cost-match requirements apply for the FY 2016 PSGP (including ferry systems):
All PSGP Recipients must provide a non-federal match (cash or in-kind) supporting 25 percent
of the total project cost for each proposed project. Every project request (with the exception of
training law enforcement agency personnel in the enforcement of security zones as defined by 46
U.S.C. § 70132 and or in assisting in the enforcement of such security zones) must demonstrate a
25 percent cost share.
The non-federal share can be cash or in-kind, with the exception of construction activities, which
must be a cash-match (hard).
Cash and in-kind matches must consist of eligible costs (i.e., same allowability as the federal
share) and must be identified as part of the submitted detailed budget worksheet. A cash-match
includes cash spent for project-related costs while an in-kind match includes the valuation of inkind services. The cost match requirement for the PSGP award may not be met by costs borne
by another federal grant or assistance program. Likewise, in-kind matches used to meet the
matching requirement for the PSGP award may not be used to meet matching requirements for
any other Federal grant program. Additionally, normal routine operational costs cannot be used
as cost match unless a completely new capability is being awarded. Please see 2 CFR § 200.306,
as applicable, for further guidance regarding cost matching.
Exceptions to Cost Match
The following exceptions to the cost-match requirement may apply:
 There is no matching requirement for grant awards where the total project cost for all
projects under the award is $25,000 or less (with the exception of national and regional
corporations submitting 11 or more projects throughout their system[s]).
 There is no matching requirement for grants to train law enforcement agency personnel in
the enforcement of security zones as defined by 46 U.S.C. § 70132 and or in assisting in
the enforcement of such security zones. An example of training exempt from a matching
requirement is the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators (NASBLA)
Boat Operators Search and Rescue Training Course.
Page 33 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines





If the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that a proposed project merits support
and cannot be undertaken without a higher rate of federal support, the Secretary may
approve grants with a matching requirement other than that specified above in accordance
with 46 U.S.C. § 70107(c). Cost-match waivers under 46 U.S.C. § 70107(c)(2)(B) may
be granted only if the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that (1) a proposed
project merits support in light of the overall grant purpose and mission goals; and (2) that
the project cannot be undertaken without a higher rate of federal support. See FEMA
GPD Information Bulletin 376, titled, “Update to Port Security Grant Program (PSGP)
Cost-Share Waiver Process,” for further information on the PSGP cost-match waiver
process (http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/bulletins/info376.pdf).
Requests for cost-match waivers will be reviewed for successful applicants only after
awards have been made. Applicants must have demonstrated the ability to comply with
the cost match requirement at the time of application and since being awarded the grant,
have experienced significant financial constraints as outlined in FEMA GPD Information
Bulletin 376, (i.e., specific economic issues preclude provision of the cost-share
identified in the original grant application). Cost-share waiver requests that do not
demonstrate new, post-award difficulties and cost-share waivers submitted at the time of
application will not be considered.

Limitations of Funding
As part of the FY 2016 PSGP application process, applicants must develop a formal IJ that
addresses each initiative being proposed for funding. A separate IJ should be submitted for each
proposed project which should represent the complete scope of work and materials required to
achieve a single overall capability. For example, a project could be to procure a boat specifically
designed and equipped as CBRNE detection, prevention, response, and/or recovery platform.
The IJ for this project should include the CBRNE equipment in the same IJ as the vessel.
In accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 70107(b)(2), PSGP funding for projects for the cost of
acquisition, operation, and maintenance of security equipment or facilities to be used for security
monitoring and recording, security gates and fencing, marine barriers for designated security
zones, security-related lighting systems, remote surveillance, concealed video systems, security
vessels, and other security-related infrastructure or equipment that contributes to the overall
security of passengers, cargo, or crewmembers cannot exceed $1,000,000 Federal share per
project. Using the example above, if an IJ exceeded $1,000,000 which included two CBRNE
vessels, each vessel would be viewed as a separate project.
The Secretary of Homeland Security may approve a greater amount of per-project funding, so
long as that greater amount does not exceed 10 percent of total amount of PSGP funding
provided to the recipient.
Note that the $1,000,000 per project limitation applies only to those projects funded under 46
U.S.C. § 70107(b)(2) and does not apply to projects funded under other provisions of Section
70107. Projects that are specifically not covered by the $1,000,000 per project limitation
include projects for the acquisition of screening equipment funded under 46 U.S.C. §
70107(b)(3), and projects for the acquisition of equipment required to receive, transmit, handle,
and store classified information funded under 46 U.S.C. § 70107(b)(7).
Page 34 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

Management and Administration (M&A)
M&A activities are defined as those directly relating to the management and administration of
PSGP funds, such as financial management and monitoring. The amount of allowable M&A is
specified in each year’s Notice of Funding Opportunity. PSGP M&A funds may be used for the
following M&A costs:



Hiring of full-time or part-time personnel, contractors or consultants responsible for
M&A activities, including those related to compliance with grant reporting, including
data calls
Travel expenses, if directly related to the administration of the grant

Operational Costs
PSGP funding may be used to cover costs associated with new and ongoing maritime security
operations in support of PSGP national priorities and one or more core capabilities in the
Goal. All such operational activities must be focused on maritime security and coordinated with
the local COTP.
This funding is intended to support an immediate need for personnel that will be directly
engaged in maritime security activities. This funding will be limited to the costs of hiring of new
personnel to operate vessels acquired with DHS/FEMA preparedness grant funds and to staff the
maritime security related components of IOCs and other interagency coordination centers having
a maritime security nexus. Funding for operational costs will only be available for the 36-month
period of performance of the award. This will allow sufficient time for local government
agencies (and, in some cases, private entities) to plan and budget for sustaining personnel related
costs beyond the 36-month period of performance.
Allowable operational costs include:







Hiring of new, full-time first response agency personnel to operate maritime security
patrol vessels acquired with DHS/FEMA preparedness grant funds;
Hiring of additional full-time personnel to staff a new or expanded interagency maritime
security operation centers (including IOCs, maritime command and control centers, port
security operations centers, etc.);
Hiring of new, full-time first response agency personnel to support maritime security /
counter-terrorism efforts in the local Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) center;
Overtime costs for existing personnel to operate patrol vessels acquired with DHS/FEMA
preparedness grant funds in support of pre-planned, mission critical activities, as
identified by the local COTP;
Personnel or contracted costs for maintaining port security equipment acquired with
DHS/FEMA preparedness grant funds; and
Hiring of new or additional personnel in credentialing centers that support TWIC and
access to a MTSA facility.

Operational costs will only be funded in cases where a new or expanded capability is added to
address port (or facility) security needs. PSGP funding for permanent operational personnel will
not exceed the 36-month period of performance.
Page 35 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

Applicants must provide reasonable assurance that the personnel costs associated with the
required operational capability can be sustained beyond the 36-month award period. A
sustainment plan must be submitted with the applicant’s IJ to address the 12-month period
beyond the period of performance of the award.
Equipment for new personnel, such as uniforms and personnel protective equipment, is an
allowable expense. Weapons and equipment associated with weapons maintenance/security
(i.e., firearms, ammunition, gun lockers) are not allowable.
1. Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA)
Funds may be used for the following types of MDA projects in support of one or more
core capabilities in the Goal:







Deployment of detection and security surveillance equipment;
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) and to facilitate incident management;
Video surveillance systems that specifically address and enhance maritime security
(these systems must have plug and play capabilities with a DHS Interagency
Operations Center (IOC) or other local or federal operations center); and
Interoperable communications equipment for direct maritime security providers
(equipment is limited to portable equipment used by the port authority in support of
MTSA facilities and MTSA vessels).

Applicants are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the National Strategy for Maritime
Security, National Plan to Achieve Maritime Domain Awareness, available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/national_maritime_domain_awareness_pl
an.pdf.
2. Port Resiliency and Recovery
PSGP funds may be used for the following resiliency and recovery activities with an
emphasis on planning in support of one or more of the core capabilities in the Goal:


Development or updating of port-wide risk mitigation plan, to include the conduct of
port security vulnerability assessments as necessary to support plan
update/development.
o Ports that already have completed plans should pursue PSGP funds to address
their identified risks and vulnerabilities, including any projects that would help
enable continuity of port operations and rapid recovery of the port following a
major incident.
Page 36 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines














o Ports that have not completed plans are highly encouraged to complete them and
may apply for PSGP funding to facilitate that effort.
o Specific questions on developing or updating a port-wide risk mitigation plan
should be directed to the respective FEMA Program Analyst.
Public education and outreach (e.g., the “If You See Something, Say Something™”
campaign, Transit Watch, America’s PrepareAthon!). Such activities should be
coordinated with local Citizen Corps Council(s), and local U.S. Coast Guard Reserves
and/or USCG Auxiliary
Public alert and warning systems and security education efforts in conjunction with
Transit Watch or similar public education or outreach programs addressing maritime
security
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) within the maritime
transportation system realm
Development and enhancement of security plans and protocols within the AMSP,
PRMP, and the BCRTP in support of maritime security planning and maritime
security risk mitigation
Hiring of part-time temporary personnel and contractors or consultants to assist with
planning activities (not for the purpose of hiring public safety personnel)
Overtime costs associated with eligible planning activities
Materials required to conduct the aforementioned planning activities
Travel and per diem related to the professional planning activities noted in this
section
Equipment in support of resiliency such as interoperable communications, intrusion
prevention/detection, physical security enhancements, and software and equipment
needed to support essential functions during a continuity situation
Other port-wide project planning activities, which emphasize the ability to adapt to
changing conditions and be prepared to withstand, and recover from, disruptions due
to emergencies with prior approval from DHS/FEMA

3. Training and Exercises
Training
Funding for personnel training will generally be limited to those courses that have been
listed in the FEMA approved course catalog by the FEMA National Training and
Education Division (NTED) or the USCG. Approved courses are listed in the following
catalogs maintained by NTED: NTED Course Catalog; Federal Sponsored Course
Catalog; and the State-Sponsored Course Catalog. The catalogs may be viewed at
http://www.firstrespondertraining.gov.
Funding for other training courses may be permitted on a case-by-case basis depending
on the specific maritime security risk mitigation training needs of the eligible PSGP
applicant. In such case, the applicant will be required to explain in the Investment
Justification why none of the approved courses referenced above satisfy the identified
Page 37 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

training need and must submit detailed course information for review and consideration
by the local COTP field review team and the Nation Review Panel.
For additional information on training course review and approval requirements please
refer to DHS/FEMA Grant Programs Directorate Policy FP 207-008-064-1, Review and
Approval Requirements for Training Courses Funded Through Preparedness Grants,
issued on September 9, 2013. The Policy can be accessed at
http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/34856.
Exercises
Funding used for exercises will only be permitted for those exercises that are in direct
support of a MTSA-regulated facility or Port Area’s MTSA required exercises (see 33
C.F.R. 105.220 for a facility and 33 C.F.R. 103.515 for the AMSP). These exercises
must be coordinated with the COTP and AMSC and be consistent with Homeland
Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). More information on HSEEP may
be found at https://www.fema.gov/exercise.
Grant recipients should submit an After Action Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP) for
each exercise to [email protected], and the appropriate local COTP no later than 90
days after completion of the exercise conducted within the PSGP Period of Performance,
In accordance with HSEEP guidance, grant recipients are reminded of the importance of
implementing corrective actions iteratively throughout the progressive exercise cycle.
Grant recipients are encouraged to use the HSEEP AAR/IP template located at
https://www.fema.gov/exercise and utilize the Corrective Action Program (CAP) System
at https://hseep.dhs.gov/caps, as a means to track the implementation of corrective actions
listed in the AAR/IP.
PSGP funds may be used for the following training and exercise activities:




Hiring of Full or Part-Time Personnel or Contractors/Consultants
To support training and/or maritime security exercise-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
under the personnel cap for program management personnel expenses, which must
not exceed 15 percent (15%) of the recipient’s total award allocation. Dual
compensation is not 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.
Overtime and Backfill
The entire amount of overtime costs, including payments related to backfilling
personnel, which are the direct result of attendance at DHS/FEMA approved training
courses and programs and/or maritime security exercise-related activities are
allowable. Reimbursement of these costs should follow the policies of the state or
Page 38 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines













local unit(s) of government or the awarding agency, whichever is applicable. Dual
compensation is not 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.
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
and exercises.
Training workshops
Grant funds may be used to plan and conduct training workshops to include costs
related to planning, meeting space and other meeting costs, facilitation costs,
materials and supplies, travel, and training plan development.
Funds used to deliver training
Including costs related to administering the training, planning, scheduling, facilities,
materials and supplies, reproduction of materials, and equipment. Training should
provide the opportunity to demonstrate and validate skills learned.
Funds used to design, develop, conduct, and evaluate a maritime security
exercise
Includes costs related to planning, meeting space and other meeting costs, facilitation
costs, materials and supplies, travel, and documentation. Recipients are encouraged
to use free public space/locations/facilities, whenever available, prior to the rental of
space/locations/facilities. Exercises should provide the opportunity to demonstrate
and validate skills learned.
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 nonsterile masks).
Other items
These costs may include the rental of space/locations for exercise planning and
conducting approved training courses, rental of equipment, etc. For PSGP funded
courses, the cost of fuel may be allowed in cases where the participating entity must
provide its own equipment (such as boats, response vehicles, etc.). For maritime
security exercises, the cost of fuel, exercise signs, badges, etc. may be allowed.

Unauthorized exercise-related costs include:



Reimbursement for the maintenance and wear and tear costs of general use vehicles
(e.g., construction vehicles) and emergency response apparatus (e.g., fire trucks,
ambulances, repair or cleaning of Personal Protection Equipment (PPE), etc.).
Equipment that is purchased for permanent installation and use, beyond the scope of
exercise conduct (e.g., electronic messaging signs).

Approved exercise program:


Area Maritime Security Training and Exercise Program (AMSTEP)
Page 39 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines



AMSTEP is the Coast Guard developed mechanism by which AMSCs and Federal
Maritime Security Coordinators will continuously improve security preparedness in
the port community.
Intermodal Security Training Exercise Program (I-STEP)
I-STEP was established by TSA to enhance the preparedness of our Nation’s surfacetransportation 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.

4. Cybersecurity
Cybersecurity projects should address risks to the marine transportation system and/or
TSIs outlined in the applicable AMSP or priorities prescribed under applicable FSP or
VSP, as mandated under the MTSA or the PRMPs. At the port level, examples of
cybersecurity projects include (but are not limited to) projects that enhance the
cybersecurity of access control; sensors; security cameras; badge/ID readers;
ICS/SCADA systems; process monitors and controls (such as those that monitor flow
rates, valve positions, tank levels, etc.); security/safety of the ship-to-port-to-facility-tointermodal interface, and systems that control vital cargo machinery at the ship/shore
interface (such as cranes, manifolds, loading arms, etc.); and passenger/vehicle/cargo
security screening equipment.
Vulnerability assessments are generally not funded under PSGP. However, considering
the evolving malicious cyberactivity, the relative newness of Cybersecurity as a priority
within the program and the need to adopt best practices included in the voluntary
Cybersecurity Framework, vulnerability assessments may be funded as contracted costs.
Personnel costs (other than M&A) are not an allowable expense for conducting these
assessments.
NEW: Copies of completed cybersecurity assessments funded under the Port Security
Grant Program that impact the maritime transportation system, lead to a “transportation
security incident” (as that term is defined under 46 U.S.C. § 70101(6)), or are otherwise
related to systems, personnel, and procedures addressed by the facility and vessel plan
shall be made available to FEMA GPD and/or the local COTP upon request. The results
of these cybersecurity assessments may be designated as Sensitive Security Information
and may be used to inform national maritime cybersecurity assessments.
Where a vulnerability assessment has been completed either through contracts or
qualified personnel to identify existing gaps and required mitigation efforts, mitigating
projects may be funded that include purchase of equipment, software, and infrastructure
designed to harden cybersecurity. Specific questions on conducting vulnerability
assessments should be referred to the respective FEMA Program Analyst.
5. IED and CBRNE Prevention, Protection, Response, Recovery Capabilities
Page 40 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

To develop or sustain one or more core capabilities in the Goal, eligible port facilities,
vessels, and police/fire rescue agencies may receive funding for the following types of
IED and CBRNE capabilities:
Port Facilities regulated under 33 C.F.R. Part 105 and Police/Fire agencies that
respond to these facilities
 CBRNE detection, prevention, response, and recovery equipment
 Explosives Detection Canine Teams (EDCTs)
 Small boats that are specifically designed and equipped as CBRNE detection,
prevention, response, and/or recovery platforms for eligible maritime law
enforcement and fire departments (CBRNE equipment must be requested in the
same investment justification used to request a vessel, to include a CBRNE
equipment list and be specifically identified in the detailed budget worksheet).
Vessels failing to identify CBRNE capabilities may be considered for funding
under exceptional circumstances verified by the COTP. For a vessel to be
considered a CBRNE platform, it must include one or more of the general
equipment noted below:
o Radioisotope Identification Device (RIID)
o Radiation detection backpack(s)
o Boat-mounted Radiation detection system
o Personal Radiation Detector (PRD) in conjunction with a RIID, backpack, or
vessel mounted system.
 Improved lighting to meet maritime security risk mitigation needs
 Hardened security gates and vehicle barriers
 Floating protective barriers designed to stop a small vessel threat
 Underwater intrusion detection systems
 Reconfiguring of dock access areas to prevent intrusion via small boat or
swimmer/diver access
Vessels regulated under 33 C.F.R. Part 104
 Restricted area protection (cipher locks, hardened doors, closed-circuit television
(CCTV) for bridges and engineering spaces)
 Interoperable communications equipment
 Canines for explosives detection
 Access control and TWIC standardized credentialing
 Floating protective barriers
6. 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. Fees
associated with the application for, and issuance of the TWIC cards themselves are
ineligible for award funding consideration.

Page 41 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

Allowable costs under this section include those projects that will ensure the safe and
secure transit of foreign seafarers and shore personnel/support [who are not eligible for
TWIC] to and from the vessel while at MTSA regulated facilities. For additional
information, see FEMA GPD IB 346, titled “Port Security Grant Program Allowable
Costs for Seafarers and Shore Staff/Support.” Applicants are encouraged to utilize the
Qualified Technologies List to identify TWIC equipment:
https://universalenroll.dhs.gov/permalinks/static/twic-reader-qtl.
Equipment Acquisition
PSGP funds may be used for the following types of equipment provided it will be used in direct
support of maritime security risk mitigation and it supports developing or sustaining one or more
core capabilities in the Goal:
















Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) for maritime security providers
Explosive device response and remediation equipment for maritime security providers
CBRNE detection equipped patrol watercraft vessel/small boat used to directly support
maritime security for a facility or within a Port Area on a routine basis (CBRNE
detection equipment must be requested with the watercraft/small boat in the IJ to include
CBRNE equipment list and detailed budget). Limited exceptions may be considered for
non-CBRNE equipped vessels.
Information sharing technology; components or equipment designed to share maritime
security risk information and maritime all hazards risk information with other agencies
(equipment must be compatible with generally used equipment)
Maritime security risk mitigation interoperable communications equipment
CBRNE decontamination equipment for direct maritime security providers and MTSAregulated industry
Terrorism incident prevention and response equipment for maritime security risk
mitigation
Physical security enhancement equipment (e.g., fences, blast resistant glass, turnstiles,
hardened doors and vehicle gates)
Equipment such as portable fencing, CCTVs, passenger vans, mini-buses, etc. to support
secure passage of vessel crewmembers through a MTSA regulated facility
CBRNE detection equipped patrol vehicles/vessels, provided they will be used primarily
for port/facility security and/or response operations.
Marine firefighting vessels, provided they are outfitted with CBRNE detection equipment
and are designed and equipped to meet NFPA 1925: Standard on Marine Fire-Fighting
Vessels
Firefighting foam and Purple-K Power (PKP) may be purchased by public fire
departments, which have jurisdictions in a Port Area and would respond to an incident at
an MTSA regulated facility. MTSA facilities may also receive funding for this purpose.
Funding will be limited to a one-time purchase based on a worst-case incident at the
facility or facilities
Equipment such as telecommunications, computers, and systems to support state and
local agency participation in IOCs for port security to include virtual IOC capabilities
(this equipment must be compatible with generally used equipment, requiring no
interface equipment or software other than cabling, wires, or fiber optics)
Page 42 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines



Generators with appropriate capability (size) to provide back-up systems and equipment
that support Maritime Domain Awareness;
1. Access control equipment and systems
2. Detection and security surveillance equipment
3. Enhancement of Command and Control facilities

A comprehensive listing of allowable equipment categories and types is found in the DHS
Authorized Equipment List (AEL).
Controlled Equipment
Grant funds may be used for the purchase of controlled equipment, however, because of the
nature of the equipment and the potential impact on the community, there are additional and
specific requirements in order to acquire this equipment.
Refer to Information Bulletin 407 Use of Grant Funds for Controlled Equipment for the
complete Controlled Equipment List, information regarding the Controlled Equipment Request
Form, and a description of the specific requirements for acquiring controlled equipment with
DHS/FEMA grant funds. For additional information on controlled equipment refer to Executive
Order (EO) 13688 Federal Support for Local Law Enforcement Equipment Acquisition, and the
Recommendations Pursuant to Executive Order 13688.
Requirements for Small Unmanned Aircraft System
All requests to purchase Small Unmanned Aircraft System (SUAS) with FEMA grant funding
must also include the policies and procedures in place to safeguard individuals’ privacy, civil
rights, and civil liberties of the jurisdiction that will purchase, take title to, or otherwise use the
SUAS equipment, see Presidential Memorandum: Promoting Economic Competitiveness While
Safeguarding Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, in Domestic Use of Unmanned Aircraft
Systems, issued February 20, 2015.
Specific Guidance on Sonar Devices
The four types of allowable sonar devices are: imaging sonar, scanning sonar, side scan sonar,
and three-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 a shell and towed behind a vessel. Side scan sonar
produces strip-like images from both sides of the device.
 Three-Dimensional Sonar: Produces 3-dimensional imagery of objects using an array
receiver.
Page 43 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

Other Allowable Costs:
Maintenance and Sustainment
The use of DHS/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. With the exception of maintenance plans purchased incidental to the
original purchase of the equipment (i.e. at the time of purchase, the equipment comes with a 5
year warranty), the period covered by maintenance or warranty plan must not exceed the period
of performance of the specific grant funds used to purchase the plan or warranty. Additional
guidance is provided in FEMA Policy FP 205-402-125-1, Maintenance Contracts and Warranty
Coverage Funded by Preparedness Grants, located at: http://www.fema.gov/medialibrary/assets/documents/32474.
Specific Guidance on Construction and Renovation Projects
Recipients must obtain written approval from DHS/FEMA prior to the use of any PSGP funds
for construction or renovation projects. Additionally, PSGP funding may not be used to
construct buildings or other physical facilities that are not constructed under terms and
conditions consistent with the requirements of section 611(j)(9) of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5196(j)(9)) (the Stafford Act)1, which
requires compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq.) for PSGP funded
projects. Grant recipients must ensure that their contractors or subcontractors for construction
projects pay workers no less than the prevailing wages for laborers and mechanics employed on
projects of a character similar to the contract work in the civil subdivision of the state in which
the work is to be performed. Additional information regarding compliance with the Davis-Bacon
Act, including Department of Labor wage determinations, is available at
http://www.dol.gov/whd/govcontracts/dbra.htm.
The following types of construction and renovation projects are allowable under the PSGP
provided they address a specific vulnerability or need identified in AMSP or otherwise support
the maintenance/sustainment of capabilities and equipment acquired through PSGP funding:








Maritime Command and Control Centers
IOCs for maritime security
Port Security Emergency Communications Centers
Buildings to house generators that support maritime security risk mitigation
Maritime security risk mitigation facilities (e.g., dock house, ramps, and docks for
existing port security assets)
Hardened security fences/barriers at access points
Any other building or physical facility that enhances access control to the port/MTSA
facility area

1

While the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, as amended, requires that such activities are carried out
consistent with Section 611(j)(8) of the Stafford Act, a subsequent amendment to the Stafford Act by Pub. L. No.
109-308 in 2006 redesignated the text of Section 611(j)(8) to 611(j)(9). The cross-reference in the Maritime
Transportation Security Act of 2002 has never been updated.

Page 44 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines



Certain areas throughout the Nation may require a barge that can be permanently
anchored or moored in certain areas to support maritime security risk mitigation activities
(PSGP funding may be used to purchase and/or upgrade a barge to support a staging area
for maritime/port security patrols or maritime security risk mitigation responses)

To be considered eligible for funding, fusion centers, operations centers, and communications
centers must offer a port-wide benefit and support information sharing and coordination of
operations among regional interagency and other port security partners. Applicants are reminded
that the period of performance for FY 2016 is thirty-six (36) months.
Eligible costs for construction or renovation projects may not exceed the greater of $1,000,000
(Federal-share) per project or such greater amount as may be approved by the Secretary, which
may not exceed ten percent of the total amount of the award, as stated in 46 U.S.C. §
70107(b)(2)(A) and (B) (Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, Pub.
L. 107-295, Nov. 25, 2002).
Grant recipients are not permitted to use 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 maritime security risk mitigation enhancements.
When applying for construction funds, including communications towers, at the time of
application, recipients must submit evidence of approved zoning ordinances, architectural plans,
any other locally required planning permits, and a notice of federal interest. Additionally,
recipients are required to submit a SF-424C Budget and budget detail worksheet citing the
project costs.
All construction projects require an EHP review. EHP review materials should be sent to
[email protected].
Specific Guidance on Explosives Detection Canine Teams (EDCT)
USCG has identified canine (K-9) explosive detection as the most effective solution for the
detection of vehicle borne IEDs. 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. EDCTs are a proven, reliable resource to detect explosives and are a key component
in a balanced counter-sabotage program.
Eligibility for funding of EDCTs is restricted to:




U.S. Ferry Systems regulated under 33 C.F.R. Parts 101, 103, 104, and the passenger
terminals these specific ferries service under 33 C.F.R. Part 105
MTSA regulated facilities
Port authorities, port police and local law enforcement agencies that provide direct
layered security for these U. S. Ferry Systems and MTSA regulated facilities and are
defined in the AMSP, FSP, or VSP

Page 45 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

Applicants may apply for up to $450,000 ($150,000/year for three years) per award to support
this endeavor. At the end of the grant period (36 months), recipients will be responsible for
maintaining the heightened level of capability provided by the EDCT.
EDCT Eligible Costs
Funds for these EDCTs may not be used to fund drug detection and apprehension technique
training. Only explosives detection training for EDCTs will be funded. The PSGP EDCT funds
may only be used for new capabilities/programs and cannot be used to pay for existing
capabilities/programs (e.g., K-9 teams) already supported by the Port Area. Maintenance and
sustainment of existing EDCT equipment is allowed.
Eligible costs include:







Contracted K-9 and handler providing services in accordance with PSGP guidance
Salary and fringe benefits of new full or part-time K-9 handler positions
Training and certifications (travel costs associated with training for full or part time
agency handlers, and canines are allowable)
K-9 and handler equipment costs
Purchase and train a K-9 and handler for CBRNE detection
K-9 maintenance costs (K-9 costs include but are not limited to: veterinary, housing, and
feeding costs)

Ineligible EDCT costs (include but are not limited to):




Hiring costs
Meals and incidentals associated with travel for initial certification
Vehicles modified to be used solely to transport canines

EDCT Certification
Each EDCT, composed of one dog and one handler, must be certified by an appropriate,
qualified organization. K-9 and handler 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 (K-9 and handler 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. Certifications and training records
will be kept on file with the recipient and made available to DHS/FEMA upon request.
EDCT Submission Requirements
Successful applicants will be required to submit an amendment to their approved VSP or FSP per
33 C.F.R. Parts 104 and/or 105 detailing the inclusion of a K-9 explosive detection program into
their security measures.
The recipient will ensure that a written plan or standard operating procedure (SOP) exists that
describes EDCT deployment policy to include visible and unpredictable deterrent efforts and onPage 46 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

call EDCTs rapid response times as dictated by the agency’s FSP or VSP. The plan must be
made available to DHS/FEMA and USCG upon request.
The recipient will comply with requirements for the proper storage, handling and transportation
of all explosive training aids in accordance with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives’ Publication 5400.7 (ATF P 5400.7) (09/00), Federal Explosive Law and Regulation.
Additional EDCT Resources Available for K-9 Costs
The PSGP, while providing the ability to defray some start-up costs, does not cover any
recurring costs associated with EDCT programs. DHS/FEMA strongly encourages applicants to
investigate their eligibility, and potential exclusions, for these resources when developing their
K-9 programs.
Unallowable Costs
In general, any project that does not provide a compelling maritime security benefit or have a
direct nexus toward maritime security risk mitigation. For example, projects that are primarily
for economic or safety benefit (as opposed to having a direct maritime security risk mitigation
benefit) are ineligible for PSGP funding. In addition, projects that provide a broad homeland
security benefit (for example, a communication system or fusion center for an entire city, county,
state, etc.) as opposed to providing primary benefit to the port are ineligible for PSGP funding
since these projects should be eligible for funding through other preparedness grant programs.
The following projects and costs are considered ineligible for award consideration:











Prohibited Equipment: grant funds may not be used for the purchase of Prohibited
Equipment. Refer to Information Bulletin 407 Use of Grant Funds for Controlled
Equipment for the complete Prohibited Equipment List. For additional information on
Prohibited Equipment see Executive Order (EO) 13688 Federal Support for Local Law
Enforcement Equipment Acquisition, and the Recommendations Pursuant to Executive
Order 13688.
The development of risk/vulnerability assessment models and methodologies except as
required to update PRMPs, vulnerability assessments following established models are
allowed.
Projects in which federal agencies are the primary beneficiary or that enhance federal
property, including voluntary sub-components of a Federal agency
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
Development of training
Projects that duplicate capabilities being provided by the Federal Government (e.g.,
vessel traffic systems)
Business operating expenses (certain security-related operational and maintenance costs
are allowable – see “Maintenance and Sustainment” and “Operational Costs” for further
guidance)
TWIC card fees
Page 47 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines














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, TVs, stereos, entertainment satellite systems, Entertainment cable systems and
other such entertainment media, unless sufficient justification is provided
Weapons and associated equipment (i.e., holsters, optical sights, and scopes), including,
but not limited to: non-lethal or less than lethal weaponry including firearms,
ammunition, and weapons affixed to facilities, vessels, or other structures
Expenditures for items such as general-use software, 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:
o Land acquisitions and right of way purchases
o Funding for standard operations vehicles utilized for routine duties, such as patrol
cars and fire trucks
o Fuel costs (except as permitted for training and exercises)
Exercise(s) that do not support maritime security preparedness efforts
Patrol Vehicles and Fire Fighting Apparatus, other than those CBRNE detection equipped
vehicles for Port Area and/or facility patrol or response purposes
Providing protection training to public police agencies or private security services to
support protecting VIPs or dignitaries
Aircraft pilot training

Page 48 of 58
Appendix B - FY 2016 PSGP Funding Guidelines

Appendix C – FY 2016 PSGP 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/FEMA for rating individual investment proposals.
I. Provide an overview of the Port Area, MTSA regulated facility, or MTSA regulated
vessel
Response Type
Narrative
Page Limit
Not to exceed 1 page
Response Instructions  Area of Operations:
- Identify COTP Zone
- Identify eligible Port Area
- Identify exact location of project site (i.e., physical address of facility
being enhanced)
- Identify who the infrastructure (project site) is owned or operated by,
if not by the applicant’s own organization
 Point(s) of contact for the organization (include contact information):
- Identify the organization’s Authorizing Official for entering into the
grant agreement, including contact information
- Identify the organization’s primary point of contact for management
of the project(s)
 Ownership or Operation:
- Identify whether the applicant is a private entity or a state or local
agency
 Role in providing layered protection of regulated entities (applicable to
state or local agencies only):
- Describe the organization’s specific roles, responsibilities and
activities in delivering layered protection
 Important features:
- Describe any operational issues important to the consideration of the
application (e.g., interrelationship of the organization’s operations
with other eligible high-risk ports, etc.)
 Ferry systems required data:
 Infrastructure
 Ridership data
 Number of passenger miles
 Number of vehicles per vessel, if any
 Types of service and other important features

Page 49 of 58
Appendix C - FY 2016 PSGP Investment Justification Template

 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.
Response Type
Narrative
Page Limit
Not to exceed 1/2 page
Response Instructions Provide a succinct statement summarizing this investment.
 What is the organization requesting the funding to purchase?
 What capabilities does the project provide?
 What existing capabilities already exist in the Port Area similar to this
project’s capabilities?
 Why is this project needed and how does it contribute to achieving a more
secure and resilient Port Area?
Response
II.B. Describe how the investment will address one or more of the PSGP priorities and/or the
Goal core capabilities within the Area Maritime Security Plan, facility security plan, vessel
security plan, or alternate security program plan
Response Type
Narrative
Page Limit
Not to exceed 1/2 page
Response Instructions Describe how, and the extent to which, the investment addresses:
 Enhancement of Maritime Domain Awareness
 Enhancement of IED and CBRNE prevention, protection, response and
recovery capabilities
 Port resilience and recovery capabilities
 Enhancing Cybersecurity capabilities
 Training and exercises
 Efforts supporting the implementation of TWIC
 Describe how the investment builds or sustains one or more of the Goal
core capabilities
 List the plan and/or supporting documents that identifies the gap or
deficiency this project addresses?
 How will the project close the identified gap or deficiency in one of more of
the core capabilities?
 Area Maritime Security Plan and/or Captain of the Port Priorities
Response

Page 50 of 58
Appendix C - FY 2016 PSGP Investment Justification Template

III. Impact
III.A. Describe how the project offers the highest risk reduction potential at the least cost
Response Type
Narrative
Page Limit
Not to exceed 1/2 page
Response Instructions  Discuss how the project will reduce risk in a cost effective manner
 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
Response Type
Narrative
Page Limit
Not to exceed 1/2 page
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

IV. Implementation Plan
IV.A. 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.
Response Type
Narrative
Page Limit
Not to exceed 1 page
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 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 36 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

Page 51 of 58
Appendix C - FY 2016 PSGP Investment Justification Template

Appendix D – FY 2016 PSGP 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. Applicants may submit the budget and budget
narrative using this form or in the format of their choice (plain sheets, the applicant’s 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 the project budget may be deleted.
Below is an example for reference purposes.
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
John Doe, Widget Producer

Computation
$30,000 annually x 50% effort
Total Personnel

Cost
$ 15,000
$ 15,000

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
John Doe, Widget Producer

Computation
15,000 x 50% of salary
Total Fringe Benefits

Cost
$ 7,500
$ 7,500

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
three-day 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
FLETC Training

Location
Washington, DC

Item
Hotel

Computation
150 x 3 nights
Total Travel

Cost
$ 450
$ 450

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).
Identify the Authorized Equipment List number (AEL #) for items requested. 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. For CBRNE
Page 52 of 58
Appendix D - FY 2016 PSGP Sample Budget Detail Worksheet

Vessels or Vehicles, list the specific CBRNE equipment that will be installed on the vessel or
vehicle, including equipment already owned by the applicant.
Budget Narrative: A narrative budget justification must be provided for each of the budget
items identified.
Item
Harness

Computation
10 x $100

Cost
$ 1,000
$ 1,000

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
Paper

Computation
10 reams x $30

Cost
$ 300
$ 300

Total Supplies

F. Consultants/Contracts. Indicate whether applicant’s procurement policy follows standards
found in 2 C.F.R. § 200.318(a).
Consultant Fees: For each consultant enter the name, if known, service to be provided,
reasonable daily or hourly (8-hour day), and estimated time on the project to include M&A.
Budget Narrative: A narrative budget justification must be provided for each of the budget
items identified.
Name of Consultant
John Doe Consultant

Service Provided
Training Consultant

Computation
$100/hr. x 100 hours
Subtotal – Consultant Fees

Cost
$ 10,000
$ 10,000

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: A narrative budget justification must be provided for each of the budget
items identified.
Item
John Doe Consultant

Location
Phoenix, AZ

Computation
Hotel 150 x 3nights
Subtotal – Consultant Expenses

Cost
$ 450
$ 450

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. Any sole source contracts must follow the requirements set forth in in
applicable state and local laws and regulations, as well as applicable Federal regulations at 2
CFR Part 200.
Page 53 of 58
Appendix D - FY 2016 PSGP Sample Budget Detail Worksheet

Budget Narrative: A narrative budget justification must be provided for each of the budget
items identified.
Item
Jane Doe Contractor – Engine Maintenance, 36 months

Cost
$ 30,000
Subtotal – Contracts

$

Total Consultants/Contracts

$

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
Total Other

Cost
$
$

H. Indirect Costs. Indirect costs are allowable only as described in 2 C.F.R. § 200.414. With
the exception of recipients who have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate as described
in 2 C.F.R. § 200.414(f), recipients must have an approved indirect cost rate agreement with their
cognizant Federal agency to charge indirect costs to this award. A copy of the approved rate (a
fully executed, agreement negotiated with the applicant’s cognizant Federal agency) must be
attached.
Description

Computation
Total Indirect Costs

Cost
$
$

Page 54 of 58
Appendix D - FY 2016 PSGP Sample Budget Detail Worksheet

Budget Summary - When the budget detail worksheet has been completed, applicants
should transfer the total 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
$ 11,250
$ 5,625
$ 337.50
$ 750
$ 225
$ 30,337
$0
$0

Non-Federal Amount
$ 3,750
$ 1,875
$ 112.50
$ 250
$ 75
$ 10,112
$0
$0

Total Requested
Total Non-Federal Amount
Federal Amount
$ 48,525.50
$ 16,175.50
Combined Total Project Costs
$ 64,700

Page 55 of 58
Appendix D - FY 2016 PSGP Sample Budget Detail Worksheet

Appendix E – FY 2016 PSGP 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 (AMSC) 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 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.

Page 56 of 58
Appendix E - FY 2016 PSGP Sample MOU/MOA Template

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

Page 57 of 58
Appendix E - FY 2016 PSGP Sample MOU/MOA Template

Appendix F - FY 2016 PSGP Helpful Hints for Applicants













Are the following components included in the application package?
 SF-424, SF-424A, SF-424B, SF-LLL
 IJs for projects
 Detailed budgets containing only allowable costs and demonstrating cost share
 Vulnerability assessments/security plan certification (if applicable)
Are the following items addressed within the IJ narratives and detailed budgets?
 Do the IJ and the detailed budget only include 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 IJ as it pertains to the overall security program.)
 Does the information in the detailed budget align with the budget summary in the
IJ narrative?
 Are planning and design costs clearly delineated in the budget, as separate from
implementation/installation costs? (Planning and design costs may be released
before implementation/installation costs, as planning and design costs do not
require extensive EHP review.)
Does the IJ clearly explain how the projects fit into a funding priority area (as identified
in Appendix A – FY 2016 PSGP Program Priorities)?
Does the IJ align with one or more core capabilities in the Goal?
Does the IJ discuss how this investment will specifically address one or more of the
project effectiveness groups identified in the current year’s NOFO?
Does the IJ discuss how this investment will decrease or mitigate risk?
Is the cost effectiveness of the project clearly explained in the IJ? How does this project
provide a high security return on investment?
Are timelines realistic and detailed?
Are possible hurdles clearly and concisely addressed?
Does the M&A total more than five percent (5%) of the total award?

Page 58 of 58
Appendix F - FY 2016 PSGP Helpful Hints for Applicants