PUBLIC NOTICE: Programmatic Final Public Notice

Friday, June 26, 2026 | 04:05pm

PROGRAMMATIC 8-STEP FOR FEMA’S FLOODPLAIN AND WETLAND REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE GENERATOR PROJECTS

Purpose

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has determined the use of a programmatic process for review of generator projects for Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grant-funded mitigation projects located in the floodplain would streamline agency coordination and create a substantial reduction in the overall time required for the Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) review.

This Programmatic 8-Step documents for specific mitigation grant project types administered by the HMA and is consistent with Executive Order(s) 11988 Floodplain Management (EO 11988), 11990 Protection of Wetlands (EO 11990), and 44 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9, Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands (44 CFR § 9).

Background

The goals of EO 11988 and EO 11990 are to reduce the risk of flood loss; minimize the impacts of floods on safety, health, and welfare; avoid adverse impacts on floodplains and wetlands; and preserve and restore natural values of floodplains and wetlands. FEMA’s procedures for implementing EO 11988 and EO 11990 are found within 44 CFR § 9. 44 CFR § 9.6 andincludes an 8-step process that decision-makers must use when considering projects that involve potential impacts to floodplains or wetlands.1 The intent of the 8-step process is to identify whether a proposed project is in or affects designated floodplain or wetlands, and if so, evaluate whether the project location is the best location for the federal investment in terms of floodplain function and occupation. Additionally, to seek practicable alternative sites outside of the floodplain or wetland for the proposed action. If no practicable alternative site or action exists, minimization measures will be applied to lessen potential impacts to floodplains and wetlands.

In an effort to streamline reviews and obligate funds more quickly, FEMA reviewed commonly funded generator projects to determine whether a programmatic review process may be appropriate. Evaluation of past project reviews indicate that these project activities funded by HMA grants would neither adversely impact floodplain or wetland values nor place property or people at an increased risk.

HMA provides funding for eligible mitigation solutions that reduce or eliminate the impact of future disasters. The grants covered by this Programmatic 8-Step Process² include:

Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) – Annually offered
Flood Mitigation Assistance - Swift Current
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) – Presidentially Approved during Disaster Declarations
Legislative Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (LPDM)

Project Activity Description

The purpose of generator projects is to allow subrecipients to use HMA funds to purchase and install generators to provide backup power to public facilities in their communities to ensure continuity of operations during and after extreme storm events. These facilities are often deemed critical as they serve an essential function to the community. These facilities often include hospitals, fire stations, and sanitary sewer lift stations. Generators may be permanently fixed on-site, or they may be mobile portable generators that will be deployed to the locations as needed after a storm event. Installation of generators may also include associated equipment such as hookups and transfer switches.

8-Step Process

The following is the 8-Step Process for the covered activities listed above, following the guidance of 44 CFR § 9.6. These steps involve: (1) a determination that the action is in the 1% annual chance floodplain or the 0.2% annual chance floodplain; (6) reevaluation of alternatives; (7) publication of findings and public explanation; and (8) implementation of the action.

STEP 1 - Determine whether the activities are located in a wetland and/or the 1.0% annual chance floodplain (0.2% annual chance floodplain for critical action [44 CFR 9.4]) or whether they have the potential to affect or be affected by a floodplain or a wetland (44 CFR § 9.7).

Floodplain and wetland determinations must be made using “best available data” consistent with FEMA Policy 104-008-2: Guidance on the Use of Available Flood Hazard Information (10/11/16). For most activities, this will be Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Mapper. Where FIRMs are not available, a floodplain determination will be made consistent with FEMA policy by seeking additional information from Federal, State, or local sources, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Geological Survey, state departments of Transportation or Natural Resources, or Flood Control Districts, and will be noted in the Record of Environmental Consideration.

If the generator is supporting a critical facility, then it must be reviewed against the 500-year floodplain requirement. Minimization measures shall be identified and placed as a condition on the project. This will be fully evaluated in Step 5: Minimize Impacts and then implemented in Step 8: Implementation.

X_ Applicable

STEP 2 - Notify the public at the earliest possible time of the intent to carry out an action in the floodplain or wetland and involve the affected and interested public in the decision- making process (see 44 CFR § 9.8).

X_ Applicable

Notice has been provided by: Tennessee Emergency Management Agency

State Specific Initial and Final Public Notices were published on the State emergency management agency’s webpage and/or the local county’s government webpage. A copy of these notices has been saved to the administrative record, and will be included as a part of individual project document in FEMA EHP’s system of record, ARTEMIS

STEP 3 - Identify and evaluate practicable alternatives to locating the activity in a floodplain or wetland (including alternative sites, actions, and the “No Action” option) [see 44 CFR § 9.9]. If a practicable alternative exists outside of the floodplain or wetland, FEMA must locate the action at the alternative site.

X_ Applicable

No practicable alternative locations outside the floodplain for the activities listed above were identified. The activity elements described in this document were chosen as they are the most practicably and economically feasible to provide backup power to facilities.

The “no action alternative” would not allow continuity of operations of facilities and communities would remain vulnerable to the loss of essential services. The “no action” alternative would not meet the purpose and need of the grant program and would not remove or reduce risk to communities.

In cases where the covered activities are part of a larger action or connected to a larger action, such as construction of new facilities, regional environmental staff will work with FEMA program staff, grant recipients, and subrecipients to identify additional compliance requirements for the activity, as appropriate. A full 8-Step would be required to analyze any impact to floodplains and/or wetlands from these construction activities.

44 CFR §9.9(c)(3) requires FEMA to analyze economic aspects of a proposed action. For projects proposed under HMA funding, economic practicability is vetted by a benefit-cost-analysis (BCA) to demonstrate they are cost effective. Additionally, technical feasibility is assessed through an engineering review.

STEP 4 - Identify the full range of potential direct or indirect impacts associated with the occupancy or modification of floodplains and wetlands and the potential direct and indirect support of floodplain and wetland development that could result from the activity (see 44 CFR § 9.10).

X_ Applicable

The activities listed above do not adversely alter floodplain characteristics or function. The generators are providing backup power for existing facilities; therefore, these activities are relatively small-scale and limited to a small footprint. It is unlikely the base flood elevation will increase or cause unintended flood hazards to other properties or structures. Construction associated with the listed activities may create short term adverse impact to erosion and increased sedimentation due to installation and ground disturbance activities. If the site is near water then there is the potential to adversely impact the waterbody through fine sedimentation which may affect temperature, dissolved oxygen, as well as introduce pollutants into the waterGenerators may be supporting a functionally dependent facility operating within a floodway, such as

Any short-term impacts to floodplains or wetlands are to be mitigated with the use of Best Management Practices such as, all equipment must be staged outside floodplain or wetland, and no work should occur within the wetland without necessary permitting.

This will not result in increases in transportation capacity, future growth, or increased development in the floodplain. Continued occupancy of the floodplain around the applicable activity will occur regardless of the covered activity.

STEP 5 - Minimize the potential adverse impacts to or within floodplains and minimize support of floodplain and wetland development identified under Step # 4. Restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains and preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values served by wetlands (see 44 CFR § 9.11).

X_ Applicable

Per 44 CFR § 9.11, the following condition shall be placed on the project if it supports critical action to ensure the minimization measures are applied:

EO 11988 CONDITION: The generator and electrical components are supporting a critical action and must be protected to the 500-year (0.2% annual chance) flood elevation. The subrecipient must submit documentation to the State and FEMA documenting compliance with this condition.

Additionally, the activities listed above shall be carried out in accordance with local floodplain ordinances and applicable codes and standards which may include further minimization measures.

STEP 6 - Re-evaluate the activity to determine first, if it is still practicable in light of its exposure to flood hazards, the extent to which it will aggravate the hazards to others and its potential to disrupt floodplain and wetland values, and second, if alternatives preliminarily rejected at Step #3 are practicable in light of the information gained in Steps #4 and #5. FEMA shall not act in a floodplain or wetland unless it is the only practicable location.

X_ Applicable

In re-evaluation of alternatives and consideration of potential impacts and minimization measures, the proposed activities are still practicable at sites in the floodplain. Minimization of harm will be achieved by applying the 500-year flood elevation condition listed in Steps 5 and 8. Additionally, the activities listed above shall be carried out in accordance with local floodplain ordinances and applicable codes and standards which may include further minimization measures. There is no potential to limit the action to increase the practicability of non-floodplain sites as the goal of these project activities is to provide backup power to existing facilities that may be located in floodplains.

The no action alternative is not practicable because it will not meet the purpose and need to eliminate or reduce harm or risk to communities. The public benefits of the project as well as the low impact nature of the covered activities and existing development clearly outweigh the requirement of EO 11988 to avoid direct or indirect support of floodplain development; reduce the risk of flood loss; minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health and welfare.

STEP 7 –Prepare and provide the public with a finding and public explanation of any final decision that the floodplain or wetland is the only practicable alternative (see 44 CFR § 9.12).

X_ Applicable

State Specific Initial and Final Public Notices were published on the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency’s webpage. A copy of these notices has been saved to the administrative record, and will be included as a part of individual project document in FEMA EHP’s system of record, ARTEMIS

STEP 8 –Review the implementation and post-implementation phases of the activity to ensure the requirements of § 9.11 are fully implemented. Oversight responsibility shall be integrated into the existing process.

X_ Applicable

Implementation and oversight responsibility shall be integrated into existing regional HMA and EHP processes for project grant review, award, award administration and closeout. All grants will be conditioned on compliance with applicable floodplain ordinances, codes and standards. as well as protection of wetlands.

Per 44 CFR § 9.11, the following condition shall be placed on the project if it supports a critical action to ensure the minimization measures are applied: