Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness, Office for Domestic Preparedness; Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, 48170-48176 [05-16309]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
48170
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
This process is conducted in accordance
with 5 CFR 1320.10.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number DHS–
2005–0054, by one of the following
methods:
• EPA Federal Partner EDOCKET
Web Site: https://www.epa.gov/
feddocket. Follow instructions for
submitting comments on the Web site.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Committee Name: Substance Abuse and
• E-mail: tom.harrington@dhs.gov.
Mental Health Services Administration,
Include docket number DHS–2005–0054
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
in the subject line of the message.
National Advisory Council.
• Mail: Office of State and Local
Meeting Date: September 7, 2005.
Government Coordination and
Place: 1 Choke Cherry Road, 5th Floor
Preparedness, Grants Program Office,
Conference Room, Rockville, MD 20857.
Type: Closed: September 7, 2005—2–4 p.m. 810 7th Street, NW., Washington, DC
Contact: Cynthia Graham, M.S., NAC
20531.
Executive Secretary, SAMHSA/CSAT
Instructions: All submissions received
National Advisory Council, 1 Choke Cherry
must include the agency name and
Road, Room 5–1036, Rockville, MD 20857,
docket number DHS–2005–0054 for this
Telephone: (240) 276–1692, FAX: (240) 276–
Information Collection Request. All
1690, E-mail:
comments received will be posted
cynthia.graham@samhsa.hhs.gov.
without changed to https://www.epa.gov/
Dated: August 9, 2005.
feddocket, including any personal
Toian Vaughn,
information provided. For detailed
Committee Management Officer, Substance
instructions on submitting comments
Abuse and Mental Health Services
and additional information on the
Administration.
rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public
[FR Doc. 05–16166 Filed 8–15–05; 8:45 am]
Participation’’ heading of the
BILLING CODE 4162–20–P
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
comments received, go to https://
SECURITY
www.epa.gov/feddocket. You may also
[DHS–2005–0054]
access the Federal eRulemaking Portal
at https://www.regulations.gov.
Office of State and Local Government
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom
Coordination and Preparedness;
Harrington 202–786–9791 (this is not a
SAFER Grant Program
toll free number).
AGENCY: Office of State and Local
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Government Coordination and
Public Participation
Preparedness, DHS.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
Interested persons are invited to
participate in this Information
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland
Collection Request by submitting
Security (DHS), as part of its continuing written data, views, or arguments on all
effort to reduce paperwork and
aspects of the proposed Information
respondents’ burden, invites the general Collection Request. OSLGCP also invites
public to take this opportunity to
comments that relate to the economic,
comment on this proposed information
environmental, or federalism affects that
collection as required by the Paperwork might result from this Information
Reduction Act 1995, Public Law 104–13 Collection Request. Comments that will
(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). Currently, the
provide the most assistance to the
Office of State and Local Government
OSLGCP in developing these procedures
Coordination and Preparedness
will reference a specific portion of the
(OOSLGCP) is soliciting comments
Information Collection Request, explain
concerning a proposed new collection,
the reason for any recommended
Staffing for Adequate Fire and
change, and include data, information,
Emergency Response (SAFER) Grant
or authority that support such
Application.
recommended change. See ADDRESS
above for information on how to submit
DATES: Comments are encouraged and
will be accepted until October 17, 2005. comments.
applications reviewed by IRGs.
Therefore, the meeting will be closed to
the public as determined by the
SAMHSA Administrator, in accordance
with Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6) and 5
U.S.C. App. 2, 10(d).
Substantive program information and
a roster of Council members may be
obtained by accessing the SAMHSA
Advisory Council Web site (https://
www.samhsa.gov), or by communicating
with the contact who name and
telephone number are listed below.
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Analysis
Agency: Department of Homeland
Security, Office of State and Local
Government Coordination and
Preparedness.
Title: Staffing for Adequate Fire and
Emergency Response (SAFER) Grant
Application.
OMB Control Number: NEW.
Frequency: Quarterly.
Affected Public: State, local or tribal
government.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
7,000.
Estimated Time Per Response: 17
hours per response.
Total Burden Hours: 149,000.
Total Cost Burden: None.
Description: The SAFER Act Program
provides for $65 million in grant
funding to be distributed directly to
individual fire departments on a
competitive basis. The law allows DHS
to fund fire department staff and
benefits on a decreasing cumulative
value over the span of five years. The
information collected through the
program’s application is the minimum
necessary to evaluate grant applications
authorized under the SAFER Grant
Program or is necessary for DHS to
comply with mandates delineated in the
law.
Scott Charbo,
Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 05–16209 Filed 8–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–10–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Office of State and Local Government
Coordination and Preparedness, Office
for Domestic Preparedness;
Assistance to Firefighters Grant
Program
Office for Domestic
Preparedness, Office of State and Local
Government Coordination and
Preparedness, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of guidance.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland
Security is publishing this Notice to
provide details and guidance regarding
the 2005 program year Assistance to
Firefighters Grant Program. The program
makes grants directly to fire
departments and nonaffiliated
emergency medical services
organizations for the purpose of
enhancing first-responders’ ability to
protect the health and safety of the
public as well as that of first-responder
personnel facing fire and fire-related
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
hazards. As in prior years, this year’s
grants will be awarded on a competitive
basis to the applicants that best meet the
program’s criteria. This notice contains
the guidance and competitive process
descriptions that have been provided to
applicants and also provides
information on where and why the
Department deviated from
recommendations of the criteria
development panel.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2229, 2229a.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Cowan, Director, Fire Grants
Program Office, Office of State and
Local Government Coordination and
Preparedness, 810 Seventh Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20531.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Appropriations
For fiscal year 2005, Congress
appropriated $650,000,000 to carry out
the activities of the Assistance to
Firefighters Grant Program (AFG
program). The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) is authorized to spend
up to $32,500,000 for administration of
the AFG program (five percent of the
appropriated amount). In addition, DHS
has set aside no less than $32,500,000
of the funds (five percent of the
appropriation) for the Fire Prevention
and Safety Grant Program in order to
make grants to, or enter into contracts or
cooperative agreements with, national,
State, local or community organizations
or agencies, including fire departments,
for the purpose of carrying out fire
prevention and injury prevention
programs. This leaves approximately
$585,000,000 for competitive grants to
fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS
organizations, with nonaffiliated
emergency medical service (EMS)
organizations’ awards limited to two
percent of the appropriation or
$13,000,000.
Background
The purpose of the AFG program is to
award grants directly to fire
departments and nonaffiliated EMS
organizations to enhance their ability to
protect the health and safety of the
public, as well as that of first-responder
personnel, with respect to fire and fire
related hazards. DHS will award the
grants on a competitive basis to the
applicants that first address the AFG
program’s priorities then provide the
best narrative. Applicants whose
requests best address the program’s
priorities will be reviewed by a panel
made up of fire service personnel. The
panel will review the narrative and
assess the application with respect to
the clarity of the project to be funded,
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
the organization’s financial need, the
benefit to be derived from their project,
and the extent to which the grant would
enhance the applicant’s daily operations
and/or how the grant would positively
impact the applicant’s ability to protect
life and property.
The AFG Program for fiscal year 2005
generally mirrors previous years’
programs with two significant changes.
See https://www.firegrantsupport.com/
docs/2004AFGNOFA.pdf (2004 Notice
of Funds Availability). See also 68 FR
12533 (March 14, 2003) (Notice of
Funds Availability, FY2003 guidance).
See generally 68 FR 12544 (March 14,
2003) (final rule). The first significant
change, as noted above, is the allowance
of nonaffiliated EMS organizations (i.e.,
non-fire based EMS organizations) as
eligible applicants for as much as two
percent of the appropriated funds. The
other change is the segregation of the
Fire Prevention and Safety Grant (FP&S)
program from the AFG. DHS will have
a separate application period devoted
solely to Fire Prevention and Safety in
the 4th Quarter of Fiscal Year 2005. The
AFG Web site (https://
www.firegrantsupport.com) will provide
updated information on this program.
Nonaffiliated EMS organizations will
not be eligible for the FP&S program.
There are limits as to the amount of
funding that a grantee may be awarded
from the Assistance to Firefighters Grant
Program in any fiscal year. These limits
are based on population served. A
grantee that serves jurisdiction with
500,000 people or less may not receive
grant funding in excess of $1,000,000 in
any fiscal year. A grantee that serves a
jurisdiction with more than 500,000 but
not more than 1,000,000 people may not
receive grants in excess of $1,750,000 in
any fiscal year. A grantee that serves a
jurisdiction with more than 1,000,000
people may not receive grants in excess
of $2,750,000 in any fiscal year. DHS
may waive these established limits to
any grantee serving a jurisdiction of
1,000,000 or less if DHS determines that
extraordinary need for assistance
warrants the waiver; however, no
grantee, under any circumstance, may
receive in excess of $2,750,000 in any
fiscal year.
Grantees must share in the costs of the
projects funded under this grant
program. Fire departments and
nonaffiliated EMS organizations that
serve populations of less than 20,000
must match the Federal grant funds
with an amount of non-Federal funds
equal to five (5) percent of the total
project cost. Fire departments and
nonaffiliated EMS organizations serving
areas with a population between 20,000
and 50,000, inclusive, must match the
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48171
Federal grant funds with an amount of
non-Federal funds equal to ten (10)
percent of the total project cost. Fire
departments and nonaffiliated EMS
organizations that serve populations of
over 50,000 must match the Federal
grant funds with an amount on nonFederal funds equal to twenty (20)
percent of the total project costs. All
non-Federal funds must be in cash, i.e.,
in-kind contributions are not eligible.
No waivers of this requirement will be
granted except for applicants located in
Insular Areas as provided for in 48
U.S.C. 1469a.
Under the provisions of 15 U.S.C.
2229a, DHS must ensure that fire
departments that have either allvolunteer forces of firefighting
personnel or combined forces of
volunteer and career firefighting
personnel receive a portion of the total
grant funding that is not less than the
proportion of the United States
population that those departments
protect. According to a 2004 survey by
the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA), volunteer and combination
departments protect 55 percent of the
population of the United States and
career departments protect 45 percent of
the population. Therefore, DHS will
ensure that no less than 55 percent of
the funding available for grants will be
awarded to volunteer and combination
departments. Assuring this minimum
level of funding for volunteer and
combination departments has not been
a problem in the past as over 90 percent
of applicants are volunteer or
combination departments. There is no
minimum funding level for career
departments.
After the panel evaluation’s
preliminary determination, DHS will
make award decisions using rank order.
DHS may deviate from rank order and
make funding decisions based on the
type of department (career,
combination, or volunteer), and the size
and character of the community the
applicant serves (urban, suburban, or
rural).
Fire Prevention and Safety Grant
Program
In addition to the grants available to
fire departments in fiscal year 2005
through the competitive grant program,
DHS will set aside no less than
$32,500,000 of the funds available
under the Assistance to Firefighter
Grant Program in order to make grants
to, or enter into contracts or cooperative
agreements with, national, State, local
or community organizations or agencies,
including fire departments, for the
purpose of carrying out fire prevention
and injury prevention programs.
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
48172
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
In accordance with the statutory
requirement to fund fire prevention
activities, support to Fire Prevention
and Safety Grant activities will
concentrate on organizations that focus
on the prevention of injuries to children
from fire. In addition to this priority,
DHS is also placing an emphasis on
funding innovative projects that focus
on protecting children under fourteen,
seniors over sixty-five, and firefighters.
Since the victims of burns experience
both short- and long-term physical and
psychological effects, DHS is also
placing a priority on programs that
focus on reducing the immediate and
long-range effects of fire and burn
injuries, and primarily those affecting
children.
A Notice of Funds Availability will be
issued to announce the pertinent details
of the Fire Prevention and Safety Grant
portion of this program.
Application Process
The application period for the AFG
grants opened on March 7, 2005, and
closed on April 8, 2005. Approximately
20,972 applications were received.
These applications were evaluated in
the preliminary screening process to
determine which applications best
addressed the program’s established
priorities. This preliminary screening
was based on the applicants’ answers to
the activity-specific questions. Each
activity within an application was
scored and applications that had
multiple activities will have had the
scores prorated based on the amount of
funding requested for each activity.
The best applications as determined
in the preliminary step were deemed to
be in the ‘‘competitive range.’’ All
applications in the competitive range
were subject to a second level review by
a technical evaluation panel made up of
individuals from the fire service
including, but not limited to,
firefighters, fire marshals, and fire
training instructors. The panelists
assessed the application’s merits with
respect to the clarity and detail
provided in the narrative about the
project, the applicant’s financial need,
and the project’s purported benefit to be
derived from the cost.
Using the evaluation criteria included
herein, the panelists independently
scored each application before them and
then discussed the merits and
shortcomings of the application in an
effort to reconcile any major
discrepancies. A consensus on the score
was not required. The assigned score
reflects the degree to which the
applicant: Clearly related their proposed
project including the project’s budget;
demonstrated financial need; detailed a
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
high benefit to cost value of the
proposed activities; and demonstrated
significant enhancements to the daily
operation of the organization and/or
how the grant would positively impact
the applicant’s ability to protect life and
property. The highest scoring
applications resulting from this second
level of review were then considered for
award.
DHS will select a sufficient number of
awardees from this one application
period to obligate all of the available
grant funding. Awards will be
announced over several months as the
decisions are made. Applicants that are
not to receive funding will be notified
as soon as feasible throughout the
process. Awards will not be made in
any specified order, i.e., not by State, or
by program, or any other characteristic.
Criteria Development Process
Each year, the appropriate office in
the Department of Homeland Security
conducts a criteria development
meeting to develop the program’s
priorities for the coming year. DHS
brings together a panel of fire service
professionals representing nine major
fire service organizations. The
organizations that are represented
include the International Association of
Fire Chiefs (IAFC), the International
Association of Firefighters (IAFF), the
National Volunteer Fire Council
(NVFC), the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA), the National
Association of State Fire Marshals
(NASFM), the International Association
of Arson Investigators (IAAI), the North
American Fire Training Directors
(NAFTD), and the Congressional Fire
Service Institute (CFSI). The criteria
development panel is charged with
making recommendations to the grants
program office regarding the creation
and/or modification of program
priorities as well as development of
criteria and definitions as necessary.
The 2005 reauthorization of the AFG
requires that the program office publish
each year in the Federal Register the
guidelines that describe the process for
applying for grants and the criteria for
awarding grants. DHS must also include
an explanation of any differences
between the published guidelines and
the recommendations made by the
criteria development panel. The
guidelines and the statement on the
differences between the guidelines and
the criteria development panel
recommendations must be published in
the Federal Register prior to making any
grants under the program. Public Law
108–375, sec. 3602, 118 Stat. 2195 (Oct.
28, 2004). We first present below the
specific recommendations not
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
incorporated into the formal rating
criteria, followed by the rating criteria
the Department will use.
DHS modified or did not adopt the
criteria development panel’s
recommendations as follows:
• In the vehicle acquisition program,
DHS disagreed with recommendations
made by the criteria development panel
for the 2005 program, and kept the
panel’s input from the 2004 program in
place. DHS believes the recommended
changes for the 2005 program would
have been too restrictive in that they did
not offer enough latitude and diversity
in the selections of vehicles. DHS
believes that the recommended
priorities downplayed the diversified
needs of urban and suburban
departments while favoring the needs of
rural departments.
• For the ‘‘modifications to facilities’’
activity, the criteria development panel
provided DHS with a directory of
initiatives that they would like DHS to
consider as eligible under this activity.
DHS has elected to stay with a relatively
shorter list of eligible initiatives (vehicle
exhaust extraction systems, sprinkler
systems, smoke/fire alarm systems, and
emergency generators). DHS has limited
the number of initiatives to those
focused on protection and safety for the
firefighting and emergency responders,
versus providing a more comfortable
working environment. DHS has limited
the number of eligible initiatives
because certain modifications to
facilities may have to undergo a historic
and/or environmental review and DHS
is in the process of establishing
procedures to assure that all Federal
regulations are followed in this respect.
• DHS placed more value on projects
that affect regional benefits than the
criteria development panel
recommended. If, for example, two
projects achieved similar scores, but one
represented a regional effort, DHS
would be more likely to fund that
project, to further encourage regional
efforts, as such efforts tend to improve
interoperability.
• Wherever the program priorities
took call volume into consideration,
DHS elected to develop and use its own
matrix, rather than the criteria panels, to
provide more diversity in the possible
scoring levels.
• The criteria panel wanted to require
training as a pre-requisite for any grant.
DHS determined that this requirement
would be impracticable, as there was no
guidance from the criteria panel as to
what types(s) of training would satisfy
each and every eligible use of funds
under this broad program.
• The criteria panel recommended
that DHS double the number of thermal
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
imaging cameras that departments may
apply for. DHS has declined to
implement this recommendation
because there are no empirical data to
indicate that the current allowance is
insufficient.
Review Considerations
Fire Department Priorities
Specific rating criteria for each of the
eligible programs and activities follow
below. These rating criteria will provide
an understanding of the grant program’s
priorities and the expected cost
effectiveness of any proposed projects.
(1) Operations and Firefighter Safety
Program.
(i) Training Activities. DHS believes
that the most benefit is derived from
training that is instructor-led, hands-on,
and leads to a nationally sanctioned or
State certification. Training requests
that include Web-based home study or
distance learning and the purchase of
training materials, equipment, or props
are a lower priority. Therefore,
applications focused on national or
State certification training, including
train-the-trainer initiatives, will receive
a higher competitive rating. Training
that involves instructors, in which
students must demonstrate their grasp
of knowledge of the training material via
testing and is integral to achieving a
certification will receive a high
competitive rating, but not to the extent
of training that would lead to State or
national certification. Neither training
that is instructor-led but does not lead
to a certification nor self-taught courses
will be afforded a high priority.
Applications were rated more highly
for those proposed programs that benefit
the highest percentage of applicable
personnel within a fire department or
those proposed programs that will be
open to other departments in the region.
Training that brings the department into
statutory (e.g., OSHA) compliance will
receive the highest consideration.
Training that brings a department into
voluntary compliance with national
standards will also receive a high
competitive rating, but not as high as
the training that brings a department
into statutory compliance. Training that
does not help to achieve statutory
compliance or voluntary compliance
with a national standard will receive a
low competitive rating.
Due to the inherent differences
between urban, suburban, and rural
firefighting characteristics, DHS has
developed different priorities in the
training activity for departments that
service these different types of
communities. However, chemical /
biological / radiological / nuclear /
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
explosives (CBRNE) awareness training
has a high benefit and will receive the
highest consideration regardless of the
type of community served.
For fire departments serving rural
communities, DHS believes that funding
basic, operational-level firefighting
training, operational-level rescue
training, driver training, or firstresponder EMS, EMT–B, and EMT–I
training (i.e., training in basic
firefighting and rescue duties) has
greater benefit than funding officer
training, safety officer training, or
incident-command training. In rural
communities, after basic training, there
is a greater cost-benefit to officer
training than for other specialized types
of training such as mass casualty,
HazMat, advance rescue and EMT, or
inspector training for rural departments.
Conversely, for departments that are
serving urban or suburban communities,
DHS believes there is a higher benefit to
be gained by funding specialized
training, such as mass casualty, HazMat,
advance rescue and EMS, or inspector
training than the funding of officer
training, safety officer training, or
operations training, which in turn has a
higher benefit than basic-, operational-,
or awareness-level activities. Training
designated to enhance multijurisdictional capabilities will be
afforded a slightly higher rating.
(ii) Wellness and Fitness Activities.
DHS believes that to have an effective
wellness/fitness program, fire
departments must offer periodic health
screenings, entry physical examinations,
and an immunization program.
Accordingly, applicants for grants in
this category must currently offer or
plan to offer with grant funds all three
benefits to receive consideration and
funding for any other initiatives in this
activity. After entry-level physicals,
annual physicals, and immunizations,
high priority is given to formal fitness
and injury prevention programs. Lower
priority is given to stress management,
injury/illness rehabilitation, and
employee assistance.
DHS believes the greatest benefit will
be realized by supporting new wellness
and fitness programs, and therefore,
applications that reflected them were
accorded higher competitive ratings
than those applicants that already
employ a wellness/fitness program.
Finally, since participation is critical to
achieving any benefits from a wellness
or fitness program, applications that
include them are given higher
competitive ratings to departments
whose wellness and fitness programs
mandate or provide incentives for
participation.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48173
(iii) Equipment Acquisition. As
appropriated by Congress, the stated
purpose of this grant program is to
protect the health and safety of
firefighters and the public from fire and
fire-related hazards. As such, DHS
believes that this grant program will
achieve the greatest benefits by
providing funds to fire departments
purchasing basic firefighting equipment
before any other non-firefighting
equipment. Equipment that has a direct
effect on firefighters’ health and safety
will receive a higher competitive rating
than equipment that has no such effect.
Equipment that promotes
interoperability with neighboring
jurisdictions may receive additional
consideration in the cost-benefit
assessment if the application makes it
into the competitive range.
DHS believes this grant program will
achieve the greatest benefits if DHS
provides funds to fire departments
purchasing basic firefighting, rescue,
EMS, and CBRNE preparedness
equipment that they have never owned
prior to the grant or to replace used or
obsolete firefighting equipment. The
second priority will be to fund
departments that are seeking to expand
into new mission areas, and therefore
those departments will receive a lower
competitive rating than departments
seeking reserve equipment.
Additionally, among departments that
serve similar types of communities,
those that have high call volumes will
be afforded a higher competitive rating
than those that have low call volumes;
in other words, those departments that
are required to respond more often will
receive a higher competitive rating then
those that respond infrequently.
The purchase of equipment that
brings the department into statutory
(e.g., OSHA) compliance will provide
the highest benefit and therefore will
receive the highest consideration. The
purchase of equipment that brings a
department into voluntary compliance
with national standards will also receive
a high competitive rating, but it will not
be as high as for the training that brings
a department into statutory compliance.
Equipment that does not have an effect
on statutory compliance or voluntary
compliance with a national standard
will receive a lower competitive rating.
(iv) Personal Protective Equipment
Acquisition. One of the stated purposes
of this grant program is to protect the
health and safety of firefighters and the
public. To achieve this goal and
maximize the benefit to the firefighting
community, DHS believes that it must
fund those applicants needing to
provide personal protective equipment
(PPE) to a high percentage of their
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
48174
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
personnel. Accordingly, the highest
competitive rating in this category is
given to fire departments where a large
percentage of their active firefighting
staff does not have any PPE. A high
competitive rating is given to
departments that wish to purchase
enough PPE to equip 100 percent of
their active firefighting staff, or 100
percent of their on-duty staff, as
appropriate. Also, a high competitive
rating is given to departments that are
purchasing the equipment for the first
time as opposed to departments
replacing obsolete or substandard
equipment (e.g., equipment that does
not meet current NFPA and OSHA
standards), or purchasing equipment for
a new mission. For those departments
that are replacing obsolete or
substandard equipment, the condition
of the equipment to be replaced will be
factored into the score with a higher
priority given to replacing equipment
that is damaged, torn, and/or
contaminated.
Due to safety benefits afforded
firefighters, for applications that include
a request for personal alert safety system
(PASS) devices, DHS will only consider
funding applications that are requesting
equipment that meets current national
standards, i.e., integrated and/or
automatic or automatic-on PASS.
Finally, the number of fire response
calls that a department makes in a year
will be considered with the higher
priority going to departments with
higher call volumes, while applications
from departments with low call volumes
will be afforded lower competitive
ratings. The call volume of rural
departments will be compared only to
other rural departments, suburban
departments will be compared only to
other suburban departments, and urban
departments will be compared only to
other urban departments.
(v) Modifications to Fire Stations and
Facilities. The stated purpose of this
grant program is to protect the health
and safety of firefighters and the public.
As such, eligible projects under this
activity are designed to directly protect
the health and safety of firefighters. DHS
believes that more benefit would be
derived from modifying fire stations
than would be realized by modifying
fire-training facilities or other firerelated facilities. Facilities that would
be open for broad usage and have a high
occupancy capacity would receive a
higher competitive rating than facilities
that have limited use and/or low
occupancy capacity. The frequency of
use would also have a bearing on the
benefits to be derived from grant funds.
The frequency and duration of a
facility’s occupancy have a direct
relationship to the benefits to be
realized from funding in this activity.
As such, facilities that are occupied or
otherwise in use 24-hours-per-day/
seven-days-a-week would receive a
higher competitive rating than facilities
used on a part-time or irregular basis.
(2) Firefighting Vehicle Acquisition
Program. Due to the inherent differences
between urban, suburban, and rural
firefighting conventions, DHS has
developed different priorities in the
vehicle program for departments that
service different types of communities.
The following chart delineates the
priorities in this program area for each
type of community.
VEHICLE PROGRAM PRIORITIES
Priority
Urban communities
Suburban communities
Rural communities
Priority One ............
Aerial, Quint (Aerial < 76′), Quaint
(Aerial 76′ or >), Fire Boat Rescue.
Pumper, Brush/Attack, Tanker/Tender,
Quint (Aerial < 76′)
Priority Two ............
Command, HazMat, Light/Air, Rehab ...
Priority Three .........
Foam Truck, ARFFV, Brush/Attack,
Tanker/Tender, Ambulance.
Pumper, Aerial Quint (Aerial < 76′),
Quint (Aerial 76′ or >), Fire Boat,
Brush/Attack.
Command, HazMat, Rescue, Tanker/
Tanker.
Foam Truck, ARFFV, Rehab, Light/Air,
Ambulance.
Regardless of the type of community
served, DHS believes that there is more
benefit to be realized by funding fire
departments that own few or no
vehicles of the type they are seeking
than there would be by providing
vehicle funding to a department with
numerous vehicles of that same type.
When assessing the number of vehicles
a department has within a particular
class, all vehicles with similar functions
are included. For example, the
following can be classified in the
‘‘pumper’’ category: pumpers, engines,
pumper/tankers, (with less than 1,250
gallon capacity), rescue-pumpers, quints
(with aerials less than 76 feet in length),
and urban interface vehicles such as
Type I, II or III. Pumpers with water
capacity in excess of 1,250 gallons
would be considered a tanker/tender.
A higher competitive rating in the
apparatus category is given to fire
departments that own few or no
firefighting vehicles relative to other
departments serving similar types of
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
communities. Also a higher competitive
rating is given to departments that have
an aged fleet of firefighting vehicles, and
to those with old, high-mileage vehicles.
A higher competitive rating is also given
to departments that respond to a
significant number of incidents relative
to other departments servicing similar
communities.
No competitive advantage has been
assigned to the purchase of standard
model commercial vehicles versus
custom vehicles, or the purchase of used
vehicles versus new vehicles in the
preliminary evaluation of applications.
It has been noted that depending on the
type and size of department, the
technical evaluation panelists often
prefer low-cost vehicles when
evaluating the cost-benefit section of the
project narratives. Panelists may be
provided with guidance for use in their
evaluation of the reasonableness of
vehicle costs. DHS reserves the right to
instill funding limits on requests for
vehicles whose costs DHS deems
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
HazMat, Rescue, Light/Air, Aerial, Fire
Boat, Quint (Aerial 76′ or >)
Foam Truck, ARFFV, Rehab, Command, Ambulance
excessive or otherwise not in the best
interest of the program. Finally, DHS
will allow each fire department to apply
for only one vehicle per year.
(3) Administrative Costs. Panelists
assess the reasonableness of the
administrative costs requested in each
application and determine if it is
reasonable and in the best interest of the
program.
Nonaffiliated EMS Organization
Priorities
DHS may make grants for the purpose
of enhancing the provision of
emergency medical services for
nonaffiliated EMS organizations.
Funding for these organizations is
limited to no more than two percent
(2%) of the appropriated amount. DHS
believes that it is more cost-effective to
enhance or expand an existing
emergency medical service organization
by providing training and/or equipment
than it would be to create a new service.
As such, communities that do not
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
currently offer emergency medical
services but are turning to this grant
program to initiate such a service will
receive the lowest competitive rating
because DHS does not believe there is
sufficient benefit to be derived from
such an investment in communities that
do not currently support such a service.
Specific rating criteria and priorities for
each of the grant categories are provided
below following the descriptions of this
year’s eligible programs. The rating
criteria, in conjunction with the
program description, provides an
understanding of what standards are
used for evaluation.
(1) EMS Operations and Safety
Program.
There are five different activities
available for funding under this program
area: EMS training, EMS equipment,
EMS personal protective equipment,
wellness and fitness, and modifications
to facilities. Requests for equipment and
training to prepare for response to
incidents involving CBRNE are available
under the applicable equipment and
training activities.
(i) Training Activities. DHS believes
that the most benefit would be realized
by upgrading a service that currently
meets a basic life support capacity to a
higher level of life support. Therefore, a
higher competitive rating is given to
nonaffiliated EMS organizations that are
planning on going from first responder
to EMT–B level. Since training is a prerequisite to the effective use of EMS
equipment, organizations whose request
is more focused on training activities
will receive a higher competitive rating
than organizations whose request is
more focused on equipment. The second
priority is to elevate emergency
responders’ capabilities from EMT–B to
EMT–I or higher.
(ii) EMS equipment acquisition. Since
training is a pre-requisite to the effective
use of EMS equipment, organizations
whose request is more focused on
training activities will receive a higher
competitive rating than organizations
whose request is more focused on
equipment. Organizations who are
requesting equipment to the EMT–B
level and are requesting the basic
support equipment will receive a higher
priority. The second priority is requests
seeking assistance to purchase
equipment to support advance level
EMS services. Items that are eligible but
a lower priority include tents, shelters,
generators, lights, and heating and
cooling units.
(iii) EMS personal protective
equipment. One of the stated purposes
of this grant program is to protect the
health and safety of the public and of
first responders. To achieve this goal
and maximize the benefit to the EMS
community, DHS believes that it must
fund those applicants needing to
provide PPE to a high percentage of
their personnel. Accordingly, the
highest competitive rating is given in
this category to organizations where a
large percentage of their active EMS
staff does not have adequate PPE. A
high competitive rating is given to
organizations that wish to purchase
enough PPE to equip 100 percent of
their active EMS staff, or 100 percent of
their on-duty staff, as appropriate. A
high competitive rating is given to
organizations that are purchasing the
PPE for the first time as opposed to
organizations replacing obsolete or
substandard equipment (e.g., equipment
that does not meet current NFPA and
OSHA standards), or purchasing
equipment for a new mission. For those
organizations that are replacing obsolete
or substandard equipment, the
condition of the equipment to be
replaced will be factored into the score,
with a higher priority given to replacing
equipment that is damaged, torn, and/or
contaminated.
(iv) Wellness and Fitness Activities.
DHS believes that to have an effective
wellness/fitness program, nonaffiliated
EMS organizations must offer periodic
health screenings, entry physical
examinations, and an immunization
program. Accordingly, applicants for
grants in this category must currently
offer or plan to offer with grant funds all
three benefits to receive consideration
48175
and funding for any other initiatives in
this activity. After entry-level physicals,
annual physicals, and immunizations,
high priority is given to formal fitness
and injury prevention programs. Lower
priority is given to stress management,
injury/illness rehabilitation, and
employee assistance.
(v) Modification to EMS stations and
facilities. DHS believes that more
benefit would be derived from
modifying an EMS station than would
be realized by modifying an EMStraining facility or other EMS facility.
Requests involving facilities that would
be open for broad usage and have a high
occupancy capacity would receive a
higher competitive rating than those
involving facilities that have limited use
and/or low occupancy capacity. The
frequency of use would also have a
bearing on the benefits to be derived
from grant funds. The frequency and
duration of a facility’s occupancy have
a direct relationship to the benefits to be
realized from funding in this activity.
As such, facilities that are occupied or
otherwise in use 24 hours per day, 7
days per week will receive a higher
competitive rating than facilities used
on an irregular or part-time basis.
(2) EMS Vehicle Acquisition Program.
Due to the inherent benefits of an
ambulance or any transport vehicle to
an EMS service provider, DHS deems
these types of vehicles to be the highest
priority. Due to the costs associated
with obtaining and outfitting nontransport rescue vehicles, DHS believes
non-transport rescue vehicles should
have a lower competitive rating than
transport vehicles. Vehicles that have a
very narrow function, such as aircraft,
boats, and all-terrain vehicles, will
receive the lowest competitive rating.
Due to the very limited funding for EMS
vehicle awards, DHS anticipates that
this program will be very competitive.
As such, it is unlikely that DHS will
fund any vehicles that are not listed as
a ‘‘Priority One’’ this year. The
following chart delineates the priorities
in this program area.
EMS VEHICLE PRIORITIES
Priority one
Priority two
Ambulance or transport unit to support EMT–B
needs and functions.
First responder non-transport vehicles ............
Special operations vehicles .............................
Helicopters/planes
Command vehicles
Rescue boats (over 13 feet in length)
Hovercraft
Other special access vehicles
While there are many inherent
differences between urban, suburban,
and rural communities, DHS has not
differentiated priorities in this year’s
EMS vehicle program for different types
of communities.
Along with the priorities illustrated
above, DHS believes that there is more
benefit to be realized by funding
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Priority three
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
48176
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
applicants that own few or no vehicles
of the type they are seeking than there
would be by providing vehicle funding
to an organization with numerous
vehicles of that same type. When
assessment of the number of vehicles an
organization has within a particular
class is done, it will include all vehicles
with similar functions. For example,
transport vehicles would be considered
the same as ambulances. A higher
competitive rating is given to applicants
that have an aged fleet of emergency
vehicles, and to those with old, highmileage vehicles. A higher competitive
rating is given to applicants that
respond to a significant number of
incidents relative to other organizations
servicing similar communities.
(3) Administrative Costs. Panelists
will assess the reasonableness of the
administrative costs requested in each
application and determine if it is
reasonable and in the best interest of the
program.
Dated: August 12, 2005.
Matt A. Mayer,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 05–16309 Filed 8–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–10–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services
[CIS No. 2357–05]
RIN 1615–ZA26
Extension of the Designation of Liberia
for Temporary Protected Status
The designation of Liberia for
Temporary Protected Status (TPS) will
expire on October 1, 2005. This Notice
extends the designation of Liberia for 12
months, until October 1, 2006, and sets
forth procedures necessary for nationals
of Liberia and aliens having no
nationality who last habitually resided
in Liberia with TPS to re-register and to
apply for an extension of their
employment authorization documents
(EADs) for the additional 12-month
period. Re-registration is limited to
persons who registered under the
current designation (which was
announced on August 25, 2004). Certain
nationals of Liberia (or aliens having no
nationality who last habitually resided
in Liberia) who previously have not
applied for TPS under the current
designation may be eligible to apply
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
The extension of TPS for Liberia
is effective October 1, 2005, and will
remain in effect until October 1, 2006.
The 60-day re-registration period begins
August 16, 2005 and will remain in
effect until October 17, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Colleen Cook, Residence and Status
Services, Office of Programs and
Regulations Development, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services,
Department of Homeland Security, 111
Massachusetts Avenue, NW., 3rd Floor,
Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202)
514–4754.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This
Document
Act—Immigration and Nationality Act
ASC—USCIS Application Support
Center
DHS—Department of Homeland
Security
DOS—Department of State
EAD—Employment Authorization
Document
GDP—Gross Domestic Product
IDP—Internally Displaced Person
NGO—Non-Governmental Organization
NTGL—National Transitional
Government of Liberia
RIC—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, Resource Information
Center
TPS—Temporary Protected Status
UNHCR—United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees
USCIS—U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services
What Authority Does the Secretary of
Homeland Security Have To Extend the
Designation of Liberia for TPS?
U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
under the late initial registration
provisions.
Under section 244 of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (Act), 8 U.S.C.
1254a, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, after consultation with
appropriate agencies of the Government,
is authorized to designate a foreign state
(or part thereof) for TPS. 8 U.S.C.
1254a(b)(1). The Secretary of Homeland
Security may then grant TPS to eligible
nationals of that foreign state (or aliens
having no nationality who last
habitually resided in that state). 8 U.S.C.
1254a(a)(1).
At least 60 days before the expiration
of the TPS designation or any extension
thereof, section 244(b)(3)(A) of the Act
requires the Secretary of Homeland
Security to review, after consultation
with appropriate agencies of the
Government, the conditions in a foreign
state designated for TPS to determine
whether the conditions for a TPS
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
designation continue to be met and, if
so, the length of an extension of the TPS
designation. 8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(3)(A). If
the Secretary of Homeland Security
determines that the foreign state no
longer meets the conditions for the TPS
designation, he shall terminate the
designation, as provided in section
244(b)(3)(B) of the Act. 8 U.S.C.
1254a(b)(3)(B). Finally, section
244(b)(3)(C) of the Act provides for the
extension of TPS for an additional
period of 6 months (or, in the discretion
of the Secretary, a period of 12 or 18
months) unless the Secretary
determines, at least 60 days before the
designation or extension is due to end,
that a foreign state (or part thereof) no
longer meets the conditions for
designation. 8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(3)(C).
Why Did the Secretary of Homeland
Security Decide To Extend the TPS
Designation for Liberia?
On August 25, 2004, the Secretary of
Homeland Security published a Notice
in the Federal Register changing the
justification for the TPS designation.
This Notice terminated the TPS
designation for Liberia due to the
ongoing, armed conflict because the
armed conflict had ceased. The Notice
also re-designated Liberia for TPS due to
‘‘extraordinary and temporary
conditions’’ caused by the past armed
conflict. 69 FR 52297.
Over the past year, DHS and DOS
have continued to review conditions in
Liberia. Based on this review, the
Department of Homeland Security has
determined that a 12-month extension is
warranted because the extraordinary
and temporary conditions that
prompted designation still persist.
Further, DHS has determined that it is
not contrary to the national interest of
the United States to permit aliens who
are eligible for TPS based on the
designation of Liberia to remain
temporarily in the United States. 8
U.S.C. 1254a(b)(1)(C).
On June 16, 2005, DOS recommended
(DOS Recommendation) an extension of
Liberia for TPS for 12-months. Although
disarmament and demobilization of the
warring factions has been completed
with the disarmament of over 100,000
ex-combatants, funding shortfalls and a
lack of sufficient rehabilitation and
reintegration programs have the
potential to destabilize the security
situation in Liberia, and have led to
riots among ex-combatants in Ganta. Id.
In one area, ex-combatants briefly held
NGO workers captive to protest the lack
of rehabilitation and reintegration
programs. Id.
The assisted and spontaneous return
of refugees and internally displaced
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48170-48176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16309]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Office of State and Local Government Coordination and
Preparedness, Office for Domestic Preparedness; Assistance to
Firefighters Grant Program
AGENCY: Office for Domestic Preparedness, Office of State and Local
Government Coordination and Preparedness, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of guidance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security is publishing this Notice
to provide details and guidance regarding the 2005 program year
Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. The program makes grants
directly to fire departments and nonaffiliated emergency medical
services organizations for the purpose of enhancing first-responders'
ability to protect the health and safety of the public as well as that
of first-responder personnel facing fire and fire-related
[[Page 48171]]
hazards. As in prior years, this year's grants will be awarded on a
competitive basis to the applicants that best meet the program's
criteria. This notice contains the guidance and competitive process
descriptions that have been provided to applicants and also provides
information on where and why the Department deviated from
recommendations of the criteria development panel.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2229, 2229a.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Cowan, Director, Fire Grants
Program Office, Office of State and Local Government Coordination and
Preparedness, 810 Seventh Street, NW., Washington, DC 20531.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Appropriations
For fiscal year 2005, Congress appropriated $650,000,000 to carry
out the activities of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program (AFG
program). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is authorized to
spend up to $32,500,000 for administration of the AFG program (five
percent of the appropriated amount). In addition, DHS has set aside no
less than $32,500,000 of the funds (five percent of the appropriation)
for the Fire Prevention and Safety Grant Program in order to make
grants to, or enter into contracts or cooperative agreements with,
national, State, local or community organizations or agencies,
including fire departments, for the purpose of carrying out fire
prevention and injury prevention programs. This leaves approximately
$585,000,000 for competitive grants to fire departments and
nonaffiliated EMS organizations, with nonaffiliated emergency medical
service (EMS) organizations' awards limited to two percent of the
appropriation or $13,000,000.
Background
The purpose of the AFG program is to award grants directly to fire
departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations to enhance their
ability to protect the health and safety of the public, as well as that
of first-responder personnel, with respect to fire and fire related
hazards. DHS will award the grants on a competitive basis to the
applicants that first address the AFG program's priorities then provide
the best narrative. Applicants whose requests best address the
program's priorities will be reviewed by a panel made up of fire
service personnel. The panel will review the narrative and assess the
application with respect to the clarity of the project to be funded,
the organization's financial need, the benefit to be derived from their
project, and the extent to which the grant would enhance the
applicant's daily operations and/or how the grant would positively
impact the applicant's ability to protect life and property.
The AFG Program for fiscal year 2005 generally mirrors previous
years' programs with two significant changes. See https://
www.firegrantsupport.com/docs/2004AFGNOFA.pdf (2004 Notice of Funds
Availability). See also 68 FR 12533 (March 14, 2003) (Notice of Funds
Availability, FY2003 guidance). See generally 68 FR 12544 (March 14,
2003) (final rule). The first significant change, as noted above, is
the allowance of nonaffiliated EMS organizations (i.e., non-fire based
EMS organizations) as eligible applicants for as much as two percent of
the appropriated funds. The other change is the segregation of the Fire
Prevention and Safety Grant (FP&S) program from the AFG. DHS will have
a separate application period devoted solely to Fire Prevention and
Safety in the 4th Quarter of Fiscal Year 2005. The AFG Web site (http:/
/www.firegrantsupport.com) will provide updated information on this
program. Nonaffiliated EMS organizations will not be eligible for the
FP&S program.
There are limits as to the amount of funding that a grantee may be
awarded from the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program in any fiscal
year. These limits are based on population served. A grantee that
serves jurisdiction with 500,000 people or less may not receive grant
funding in excess of $1,000,000 in any fiscal year. A grantee that
serves a jurisdiction with more than 500,000 but not more than
1,000,000 people may not receive grants in excess of $1,750,000 in any
fiscal year. A grantee that serves a jurisdiction with more than
1,000,000 people may not receive grants in excess of $2,750,000 in any
fiscal year. DHS may waive these established limits to any grantee
serving a jurisdiction of 1,000,000 or less if DHS determines that
extraordinary need for assistance warrants the waiver; however, no
grantee, under any circumstance, may receive in excess of $2,750,000 in
any fiscal year.
Grantees must share in the costs of the projects funded under this
grant program. Fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations
that serve populations of less than 20,000 must match the Federal grant
funds with an amount of non-Federal funds equal to five (5) percent of
the total project cost. Fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS
organizations serving areas with a population between 20,000 and
50,000, inclusive, must match the Federal grant funds with an amount of
non-Federal funds equal to ten (10) percent of the total project cost.
Fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations that serve
populations of over 50,000 must match the Federal grant funds with an
amount on non-Federal funds equal to twenty (20) percent of the total
project costs. All non-Federal funds must be in cash, i.e., in-kind
contributions are not eligible. No waivers of this requirement will be
granted except for applicants located in Insular Areas as provided for
in 48 U.S.C. 1469a.
Under the provisions of 15 U.S.C. 2229a, DHS must ensure that fire
departments that have either all-volunteer forces of firefighting
personnel or combined forces of volunteer and career firefighting
personnel receive a portion of the total grant funding that is not less
than the proportion of the United States population that those
departments protect. According to a 2004 survey by the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA), volunteer and combination departments
protect 55 percent of the population of the United States and career
departments protect 45 percent of the population. Therefore, DHS will
ensure that no less than 55 percent of the funding available for grants
will be awarded to volunteer and combination departments. Assuring this
minimum level of funding for volunteer and combination departments has
not been a problem in the past as over 90 percent of applicants are
volunteer or combination departments. There is no minimum funding level
for career departments.
After the panel evaluation's preliminary determination, DHS will
make award decisions using rank order. DHS may deviate from rank order
and make funding decisions based on the type of department (career,
combination, or volunteer), and the size and character of the community
the applicant serves (urban, suburban, or rural).
Fire Prevention and Safety Grant Program
In addition to the grants available to fire departments in fiscal
year 2005 through the competitive grant program, DHS will set aside no
less than $32,500,000 of the funds available under the Assistance to
Firefighter Grant Program in order to make grants to, or enter into
contracts or cooperative agreements with, national, State, local or
community organizations or agencies, including fire departments, for
the purpose of carrying out fire prevention and injury prevention
programs.
[[Page 48172]]
In accordance with the statutory requirement to fund fire
prevention activities, support to Fire Prevention and Safety Grant
activities will concentrate on organizations that focus on the
prevention of injuries to children from fire. In addition to this
priority, DHS is also placing an emphasis on funding innovative
projects that focus on protecting children under fourteen, seniors over
sixty-five, and firefighters. Since the victims of burns experience
both short- and long-term physical and psychological effects, DHS is
also placing a priority on programs that focus on reducing the
immediate and long-range effects of fire and burn injuries, and
primarily those affecting children.
A Notice of Funds Availability will be issued to announce the
pertinent details of the Fire Prevention and Safety Grant portion of
this program.
Application Process
The application period for the AFG grants opened on March 7, 2005,
and closed on April 8, 2005. Approximately 20,972 applications were
received. These applications were evaluated in the preliminary
screening process to determine which applications best addressed the
program's established priorities. This preliminary screening was based
on the applicants' answers to the activity-specific questions. Each
activity within an application was scored and applications that had
multiple activities will have had the scores prorated based on the
amount of funding requested for each activity.
The best applications as determined in the preliminary step were
deemed to be in the ``competitive range.'' All applications in the
competitive range were subject to a second level review by a technical
evaluation panel made up of individuals from the fire service
including, but not limited to, firefighters, fire marshals, and fire
training instructors. The panelists assessed the application's merits
with respect to the clarity and detail provided in the narrative about
the project, the applicant's financial need, and the project's
purported benefit to be derived from the cost.
Using the evaluation criteria included herein, the panelists
independently scored each application before them and then discussed
the merits and shortcomings of the application in an effort to
reconcile any major discrepancies. A consensus on the score was not
required. The assigned score reflects the degree to which the
applicant: Clearly related their proposed project including the
project's budget; demonstrated financial need; detailed a high benefit
to cost value of the proposed activities; and demonstrated significant
enhancements to the daily operation of the organization and/or how the
grant would positively impact the applicant's ability to protect life
and property. The highest scoring applications resulting from this
second level of review were then considered for award.
DHS will select a sufficient number of awardees from this one
application period to obligate all of the available grant funding.
Awards will be announced over several months as the decisions are made.
Applicants that are not to receive funding will be notified as soon as
feasible throughout the process. Awards will not be made in any
specified order, i.e., not by State, or by program, or any other
characteristic.
Criteria Development Process
Each year, the appropriate office in the Department of Homeland
Security conducts a criteria development meeting to develop the
program's priorities for the coming year. DHS brings together a panel
of fire service professionals representing nine major fire service
organizations. The organizations that are represented include the
International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), the International
Association of Firefighters (IAFF), the National Volunteer Fire Council
(NVFC), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the National
Association of State Fire Marshals (NASFM), the International
Association of Arson Investigators (IAAI), the North American Fire
Training Directors (NAFTD), and the Congressional Fire Service
Institute (CFSI). The criteria development panel is charged with making
recommendations to the grants program office regarding the creation
and/or modification of program priorities as well as development of
criteria and definitions as necessary.
The 2005 reauthorization of the AFG requires that the program
office publish each year in the Federal Register the guidelines that
describe the process for applying for grants and the criteria for
awarding grants. DHS must also include an explanation of any
differences between the published guidelines and the recommendations
made by the criteria development panel. The guidelines and the
statement on the differences between the guidelines and the criteria
development panel recommendations must be published in the Federal
Register prior to making any grants under the program. Public Law 108-
375, sec. 3602, 118 Stat. 2195 (Oct. 28, 2004). We first present below
the specific recommendations not incorporated into the formal rating
criteria, followed by the rating criteria the Department will use.
DHS modified or did not adopt the criteria development panel's
recommendations as follows:
In the vehicle acquisition program, DHS disagreed with
recommendations made by the criteria development panel for the 2005
program, and kept the panel's input from the 2004 program in place. DHS
believes the recommended changes for the 2005 program would have been
too restrictive in that they did not offer enough latitude and
diversity in the selections of vehicles. DHS believes that the
recommended priorities downplayed the diversified needs of urban and
suburban departments while favoring the needs of rural departments.
For the ``modifications to facilities'' activity, the
criteria development panel provided DHS with a directory of initiatives
that they would like DHS to consider as eligible under this activity.
DHS has elected to stay with a relatively shorter list of eligible
initiatives (vehicle exhaust extraction systems, sprinkler systems,
smoke/fire alarm systems, and emergency generators). DHS has limited
the number of initiatives to those focused on protection and safety for
the firefighting and emergency responders, versus providing a more
comfortable working environment. DHS has limited the number of eligible
initiatives because certain modifications to facilities may have to
undergo a historic and/or environmental review and DHS is in the
process of establishing procedures to assure that all Federal
regulations are followed in this respect.
DHS placed more value on projects that affect regional
benefits than the criteria development panel recommended. If, for
example, two projects achieved similar scores, but one represented a
regional effort, DHS would be more likely to fund that project, to
further encourage regional efforts, as such efforts tend to improve
interoperability.
Wherever the program priorities took call volume into
consideration, DHS elected to develop and use its own matrix, rather
than the criteria panels, to provide more diversity in the possible
scoring levels.
The criteria panel wanted to require training as a pre-
requisite for any grant. DHS determined that this requirement would be
impracticable, as there was no guidance from the criteria panel as to
what types(s) of training would satisfy each and every eligible use of
funds under this broad program.
The criteria panel recommended that DHS double the number
of thermal
[[Page 48173]]
imaging cameras that departments may apply for. DHS has declined to
implement this recommendation because there are no empirical data to
indicate that the current allowance is insufficient.
Review Considerations
Fire Department Priorities
Specific rating criteria for each of the eligible programs and
activities follow below. These rating criteria will provide an
understanding of the grant program's priorities and the expected cost
effectiveness of any proposed projects.
(1) Operations and Firefighter Safety Program.
(i) Training Activities. DHS believes that the most benefit is
derived from training that is instructor-led, hands-on, and leads to a
nationally sanctioned or State certification. Training requests that
include Web-based home study or distance learning and the purchase of
training materials, equipment, or props are a lower priority.
Therefore, applications focused on national or State certification
training, including train-the-trainer initiatives, will receive a
higher competitive rating. Training that involves instructors, in which
students must demonstrate their grasp of knowledge of the training
material via testing and is integral to achieving a certification will
receive a high competitive rating, but not to the extent of training
that would lead to State or national certification. Neither training
that is instructor-led but does not lead to a certification nor self-
taught courses will be afforded a high priority.
Applications were rated more highly for those proposed programs
that benefit the highest percentage of applicable personnel within a
fire department or those proposed programs that will be open to other
departments in the region. Training that brings the department into
statutory (e.g., OSHA) compliance will receive the highest
consideration. Training that brings a department into voluntary
compliance with national standards will also receive a high competitive
rating, but not as high as the training that brings a department into
statutory compliance. Training that does not help to achieve statutory
compliance or voluntary compliance with a national standard will
receive a low competitive rating.
Due to the inherent differences between urban, suburban, and rural
firefighting characteristics, DHS has developed different priorities in
the training activity for departments that service these different
types of communities. However, chemical / biological / radiological /
nuclear / explosives (CBRNE) awareness training has a high benefit and
will receive the highest consideration regardless of the type of
community served.
For fire departments serving rural communities, DHS believes that
funding basic, operational-level firefighting training, operational-
level rescue training, driver training, or first-responder EMS, EMT-B,
and EMT-I training (i.e., training in basic firefighting and rescue
duties) has greater benefit than funding officer training, safety
officer training, or incident-command training. In rural communities,
after basic training, there is a greater cost-benefit to officer
training than for other specialized types of training such as mass
casualty, HazMat, advance rescue and EMT, or inspector training for
rural departments.
Conversely, for departments that are serving urban or suburban
communities, DHS believes there is a higher benefit to be gained by
funding specialized training, such as mass casualty, HazMat, advance
rescue and EMS, or inspector training than the funding of officer
training, safety officer training, or operations training, which in
turn has a higher benefit than basic-, operational-, or awareness-level
activities. Training designated to enhance multi-jurisdictional
capabilities will be afforded a slightly higher rating.
(ii) Wellness and Fitness Activities. DHS believes that to have an
effective wellness/fitness program, fire departments must offer
periodic health screenings, entry physical examinations, and an
immunization program. Accordingly, applicants for grants in this
category must currently offer or plan to offer with grant funds all
three benefits to receive consideration and funding for any other
initiatives in this activity. After entry-level physicals, annual
physicals, and immunizations, high priority is given to formal fitness
and injury prevention programs. Lower priority is given to stress
management, injury/illness rehabilitation, and employee assistance.
DHS believes the greatest benefit will be realized by supporting
new wellness and fitness programs, and therefore, applications that
reflected them were accorded higher competitive ratings than those
applicants that already employ a wellness/fitness program. Finally,
since participation is critical to achieving any benefits from a
wellness or fitness program, applications that include them are given
higher competitive ratings to departments whose wellness and fitness
programs mandate or provide incentives for participation.
(iii) Equipment Acquisition. As appropriated by Congress, the
stated purpose of this grant program is to protect the health and
safety of firefighters and the public from fire and fire-related
hazards. As such, DHS believes that this grant program will achieve the
greatest benefits by providing funds to fire departments purchasing
basic firefighting equipment before any other non-firefighting
equipment. Equipment that has a direct effect on firefighters' health
and safety will receive a higher competitive rating than equipment that
has no such effect. Equipment that promotes interoperability with
neighboring jurisdictions may receive additional consideration in the
cost-benefit assessment if the application makes it into the
competitive range.
DHS believes this grant program will achieve the greatest benefits
if DHS provides funds to fire departments purchasing basic
firefighting, rescue, EMS, and CBRNE preparedness equipment that they
have never owned prior to the grant or to replace used or obsolete
firefighting equipment. The second priority will be to fund departments
that are seeking to expand into new mission areas, and therefore those
departments will receive a lower competitive rating than departments
seeking reserve equipment. Additionally, among departments that serve
similar types of communities, those that have high call volumes will be
afforded a higher competitive rating than those that have low call
volumes; in other words, those departments that are required to respond
more often will receive a higher competitive rating then those that
respond infrequently.
The purchase of equipment that brings the department into statutory
(e.g., OSHA) compliance will provide the highest benefit and therefore
will receive the highest consideration. The purchase of equipment that
brings a department into voluntary compliance with national standards
will also receive a high competitive rating, but it will not be as high
as for the training that brings a department into statutory compliance.
Equipment that does not have an effect on statutory compliance or
voluntary compliance with a national standard will receive a lower
competitive rating.
(iv) Personal Protective Equipment Acquisition. One of the stated
purposes of this grant program is to protect the health and safety of
firefighters and the public. To achieve this goal and maximize the
benefit to the firefighting community, DHS believes that it must fund
those applicants needing to provide personal protective equipment (PPE)
to a high percentage of their
[[Page 48174]]
personnel. Accordingly, the highest competitive rating in this category
is given to fire departments where a large percentage of their active
firefighting staff does not have any PPE. A high competitive rating is
given to departments that wish to purchase enough PPE to equip 100
percent of their active firefighting staff, or 100 percent of their on-
duty staff, as appropriate. Also, a high competitive rating is given to
departments that are purchasing the equipment for the first time as
opposed to departments replacing obsolete or substandard equipment
(e.g., equipment that does not meet current NFPA and OSHA standards),
or purchasing equipment for a new mission. For those departments that
are replacing obsolete or substandard equipment, the condition of the
equipment to be replaced will be factored into the score with a higher
priority given to replacing equipment that is damaged, torn, and/or
contaminated.
Due to safety benefits afforded firefighters, for applications that
include a request for personal alert safety system (PASS) devices, DHS
will only consider funding applications that are requesting equipment
that meets current national standards, i.e., integrated and/or
automatic or automatic-on PASS. Finally, the number of fire response
calls that a department makes in a year will be considered with the
higher priority going to departments with higher call volumes, while
applications from departments with low call volumes will be afforded
lower competitive ratings. The call volume of rural departments will be
compared only to other rural departments, suburban departments will be
compared only to other suburban departments, and urban departments will
be compared only to other urban departments.
(v) Modifications to Fire Stations and Facilities. The stated
purpose of this grant program is to protect the health and safety of
firefighters and the public. As such, eligible projects under this
activity are designed to directly protect the health and safety of
firefighters. DHS believes that more benefit would be derived from
modifying fire stations than would be realized by modifying fire-
training facilities or other fire-related facilities. Facilities that
would be open for broad usage and have a high occupancy capacity would
receive a higher competitive rating than facilities that have limited
use and/or low occupancy capacity. The frequency of use would also have
a bearing on the benefits to be derived from grant funds. The frequency
and duration of a facility's occupancy have a direct relationship to
the benefits to be realized from funding in this activity. As such,
facilities that are occupied or otherwise in use 24-hours-per-day/
seven-days-a-week would receive a higher competitive rating than
facilities used on a part-time or irregular basis.
(2) Firefighting Vehicle Acquisition Program. Due to the inherent
differences between urban, suburban, and rural firefighting
conventions, DHS has developed different priorities in the vehicle
program for departments that service different types of communities.
The following chart delineates the priorities in this program area for
each type of community.
Vehicle Program Priorities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority Urban communities Suburban communities Rural communities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority One......................... Aerial, Quint (Aerial Pumper, Aerial Quint Pumper, Brush/Attack,
< 76'), Quaint (Aerial (Aerial < 76'), Quint Tanker/Tender, Quint
76' or >), Fire Boat (Aerial 76' or >), (Aerial < 76')
Rescue. Fire Boat, Brush/
Attack.
Priority Two......................... Command, HazMat, Light/ Command, HazMat, HazMat, Rescue, Light/
Air, Rehab. Rescue, Tanker/Tanker. Air, Aerial, Fire
Boat, Quint (Aerial
76' or >)
Priority Three....................... Foam Truck, ARFFV, Foam Truck, ARFFV, Foam Truck, ARFFV,
Brush/Attack, Tanker/ Rehab, Light/Air, Rehab, Command,
Tender, Ambulance. Ambulance. Ambulance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless of the type of community served, DHS believes that there
is more benefit to be realized by funding fire departments that own few
or no vehicles of the type they are seeking than there would be by
providing vehicle funding to a department with numerous vehicles of
that same type. When assessing the number of vehicles a department has
within a particular class, all vehicles with similar functions are
included. For example, the following can be classified in the
``pumper'' category: pumpers, engines, pumper/tankers, (with less than
1,250 gallon capacity), rescue-pumpers, quints (with aerials less than
76 feet in length), and urban interface vehicles such as Type I, II or
III. Pumpers with water capacity in excess of 1,250 gallons would be
considered a tanker/tender.
A higher competitive rating in the apparatus category is given to
fire departments that own few or no firefighting vehicles relative to
other departments serving similar types of communities. Also a higher
competitive rating is given to departments that have an aged fleet of
firefighting vehicles, and to those with old, high-mileage vehicles. A
higher competitive rating is also given to departments that respond to
a significant number of incidents relative to other departments
servicing similar communities.
No competitive advantage has been assigned to the purchase of
standard model commercial vehicles versus custom vehicles, or the
purchase of used vehicles versus new vehicles in the preliminary
evaluation of applications. It has been noted that depending on the
type and size of department, the technical evaluation panelists often
prefer low-cost vehicles when evaluating the cost-benefit section of
the project narratives. Panelists may be provided with guidance for use
in their evaluation of the reasonableness of vehicle costs. DHS
reserves the right to instill funding limits on requests for vehicles
whose costs DHS deems excessive or otherwise not in the best interest
of the program. Finally, DHS will allow each fire department to apply
for only one vehicle per year.
(3) Administrative Costs. Panelists assess the reasonableness of
the administrative costs requested in each application and determine if
it is reasonable and in the best interest of the program.
Nonaffiliated EMS Organization Priorities
DHS may make grants for the purpose of enhancing the provision of
emergency medical services for nonaffiliated EMS organizations. Funding
for these organizations is limited to no more than two percent (2%) of
the appropriated amount. DHS believes that it is more cost-effective to
enhance or expand an existing emergency medical service organization by
providing training and/or equipment than it would be to create a new
service. As such, communities that do not
[[Page 48175]]
currently offer emergency medical services but are turning to this
grant program to initiate such a service will receive the lowest
competitive rating because DHS does not believe there is sufficient
benefit to be derived from such an investment in communities that do
not currently support such a service. Specific rating criteria and
priorities for each of the grant categories are provided below
following the descriptions of this year's eligible programs. The rating
criteria, in conjunction with the program description, provides an
understanding of what standards are used for evaluation.
(1) EMS Operations and Safety Program.
There are five different activities available for funding under
this program area: EMS training, EMS equipment, EMS personal protective
equipment, wellness and fitness, and modifications to facilities.
Requests for equipment and training to prepare for response to
incidents involving CBRNE are available under the applicable equipment
and training activities.
(i) Training Activities. DHS believes that the most benefit would
be realized by upgrading a service that currently meets a basic life
support capacity to a higher level of life support. Therefore, a higher
competitive rating is given to nonaffiliated EMS organizations that are
planning on going from first responder to EMT-B level. Since training
is a pre-requisite to the effective use of EMS equipment, organizations
whose request is more focused on training activities will receive a
higher competitive rating than organizations whose request is more
focused on equipment. The second priority is to elevate emergency
responders' capabilities from EMT-B to EMT-I or higher.
(ii) EMS equipment acquisition. Since training is a pre-requisite
to the effective use of EMS equipment, organizations whose request is
more focused on training activities will receive a higher competitive
rating than organizations whose request is more focused on equipment.
Organizations who are requesting equipment to the EMT-B level and are
requesting the basic support equipment will receive a higher priority.
The second priority is requests seeking assistance to purchase
equipment to support advance level EMS services. Items that are
eligible but a lower priority include tents, shelters, generators,
lights, and heating and cooling units.
(iii) EMS personal protective equipment. One of the stated purposes
of this grant program is to protect the health and safety of the public
and of first responders. To achieve this goal and maximize the benefit
to the EMS community, DHS believes that it must fund those applicants
needing to provide PPE to a high percentage of their personnel.
Accordingly, the highest competitive rating is given in this category
to organizations where a large percentage of their active EMS staff
does not have adequate PPE. A high competitive rating is given to
organizations that wish to purchase enough PPE to equip 100 percent of
their active EMS staff, or 100 percent of their on-duty staff, as
appropriate. A high competitive rating is given to organizations that
are purchasing the PPE for the first time as opposed to organizations
replacing obsolete or substandard equipment (e.g., equipment that does
not meet current NFPA and OSHA standards), or purchasing equipment for
a new mission. For those organizations that are replacing obsolete or
substandard equipment, the condition of the equipment to be replaced
will be factored into the score, with a higher priority given to
replacing equipment that is damaged, torn, and/or contaminated.
(iv) Wellness and Fitness Activities. DHS believes that to have an
effective wellness/fitness program, nonaffiliated EMS organizations
must offer periodic health screenings, entry physical examinations, and
an immunization program. Accordingly, applicants for grants in this
category must currently offer or plan to offer with grant funds all
three benefits to receive consideration and funding for any other
initiatives in this activity. After entry-level physicals, annual
physicals, and immunizations, high priority is given to formal fitness
and injury prevention programs. Lower priority is given to stress
management, injury/illness rehabilitation, and employee assistance.
(v) Modification to EMS stations and facilities. DHS believes that
more benefit would be derived from modifying an EMS station than would
be realized by modifying an EMS-training facility or other EMS
facility. Requests involving facilities that would be open for broad
usage and have a high occupancy capacity would receive a higher
competitive rating than those involving facilities that have limited
use and/or low occupancy capacity. The frequency of use would also have
a bearing on the benefits to be derived from grant funds. The frequency
and duration of a facility's occupancy have a direct relationship to
the benefits to be realized from funding in this activity. As such,
facilities that are occupied or otherwise in use 24 hours per day, 7
days per week will receive a higher competitive rating than facilities
used on an irregular or part-time basis.
(2) EMS Vehicle Acquisition Program.
Due to the inherent benefits of an ambulance or any transport
vehicle to an EMS service provider, DHS deems these types of vehicles
to be the highest priority. Due to the costs associated with obtaining
and outfitting non-transport rescue vehicles, DHS believes non-
transport rescue vehicles should have a lower competitive rating than
transport vehicles. Vehicles that have a very narrow function, such as
aircraft, boats, and all-terrain vehicles, will receive the lowest
competitive rating. Due to the very limited funding for EMS vehicle
awards, DHS anticipates that this program will be very competitive. As
such, it is unlikely that DHS will fund any vehicles that are not
listed as a ``Priority One'' this year. The following chart delineates
the priorities in this program area.
EMS Vehicle Priorities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority one Priority two Priority three
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambulance or transport unit to First responder Helicopters/planes
support EMT-B needs and non-transport Command vehicles
functions. vehicles. Rescue boats (over
Special operations 13 feet in
vehicles. length)
Hovercraft
Other special
access vehicles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
While there are many inherent differences between urban, suburban,
and rural communities, DHS has not differentiated priorities in this
year's EMS vehicle program for different types of communities.
Along with the priorities illustrated above, DHS believes that
there is more benefit to be realized by funding
[[Page 48176]]
applicants that own few or no vehicles of the type they are seeking
than there would be by providing vehicle funding to an organization
with numerous vehicles of that same type. When assessment of the number
of vehicles an organization has within a particular class is done, it
will include all vehicles with similar functions. For example,
transport vehicles would be considered the same as ambulances. A higher
competitive rating is given to applicants that have an aged fleet of
emergency vehicles, and to those with old, high-mileage vehicles. A
higher competitive rating is given to applicants that respond to a
significant number of incidents relative to other organizations
servicing similar communities.
(3) Administrative Costs. Panelists will assess the reasonableness
of the administrative costs requested in each application and determine
if it is reasonable and in the best interest of the program.
Dated: August 12, 2005.
Matt A. Mayer,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 05-16309 Filed 8-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
