I 
113TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 1859 
To revise the process by which the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
evaluates a request for major disaster assistance, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MAY 7, 2013 
Mr. SCHIFF (for himself and Ms. CHU) introduced the following bill; which 
was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
A BILL 
To revise the process by which the Federal Emergency Man-
agement Agency evaluates a request for major disaster 
assistance, and for other purposes. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Disaster Declaration 
Improvement Act of 2013’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following: 
(1) The process that the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA) uses to determine 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:14 May 09, 2013
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1859.IH
H1859
pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
whether major disaster assistance should be rec-
ommended to the President is badly flawed. 
(2) The Government Accountability Office’s 
2012 report on the FEMA disaster assistance proc-
ess stated that according ‘‘to FEMA and state emer-
gency management officials, FEMA has primarily 
relied on a single indicator, the statewide per capita 
damage indicator, to determine whether to rec-
ommend that a jurisdiction receive [Public Assist-
ance] funding’’. 
(3) The Government Accountability Office’s 
2012 report on the FEMA disaster assistance proc-
ess also stated that 244 of 246 approved disaster 
declarations during fiscal years 2008 through 2011 
had damage estimates that met or exceeded the 
Public Assistance per capita indicator. 
(4) Federal regulations do not prioritize the 
factors to be considered in recommending a major 
disaster declaration, but FEMA clearly does, as 99 
percent of disasters in fiscal years 2008 through 
2011 that satisfied FEMA’s statewide per capita 
damage threshold received a disaster declaration. 
(5) FEMA should give, in its future evaluation 
of Governor-submitted requests for major disaster 
assistance, equal consideration to all of the factors 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:14 May 09, 2013
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1859.IH
H1859
pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
described in section 206.48(a) of title 44, Code of 
Federal Regulations, so that the process for recom-
mending major disaster assistance will work as origi-
nally intended. 
(6) Another flaw in FEMA’s process, that com-
munities within large States and counties are un-
fairly disadvantaged, must also be addressed. 
(7) Evaluation of Governor-submitted requests 
for major disaster assistance on the basis of a state-
wide per capita damage threshold, and occasionally 
a countywide per capita damage threshold, estab-
lishes a higher threshold for States and counties 
with large populations to receive major disaster as-
sistance, even though there is no indication that they 
have a greater fiscal capacity to respond to disas-
ters. 
(8) The inequity described in paragraphs (6) 
and (7) means that communities can suffer high lev-
els of disaster-related damage but not receive the as-
sistance they need to quickly recover from the dis-
aster. 
(9) FEMA should consider more than just the 
statewide and countywide per capita damage thresh-
olds in evaluating a request for major disaster as-
sistance, so that communities in large population 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:14 May 09, 2013
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1859.IH
H1859
pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
counties in large population States do not face an 
unreasonably high barrier to receiving assistance fol-
lowing a disaster. 
SEC. 3. CONSIDERATION OF MAJOR DISASTER ASSISTANCE 
REQUESTS. 
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency shall issue regulations to ensure 
that— 
(1) in any review of a request for major dis-
aster assistance conducted by the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency, the factor described in 
section 206.48(a)(1) of title 44, Code of Federal 
Regulations (relating to the estimated cost of assist-
ance), is provided consideration that is equal to the 
consideration provided to each of the other factors 
described in section 206.48(a) of such title; and 
(2) a request for major disaster assistance by a 
State is considered by the Federal Emergency Man-
agement Agency for recommendation to the Presi-
dent, without regard to any per capita damage 
threshold (other than a threshold described in this 
paragraph), in any case in which a disaster occurs 
with respect to a city or unincorporated jurisdic-
tion— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:14 May 09, 2013
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1859.IH
H1859
pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(A) with a population of less than 250,000; 
(B) located in a county with a population 
of more than 1,000,000 and a State with a pop-
ulation of more than 5,000,000; and 
(C) with respect to which the financial 
damage relating to the disaster exceeds— 
(i) in the case of a city, 10 percent of 
the city’s general fund; or 
(ii) in the case of an unincorporated 
jurisdiction, $100 per capita. 
Æ 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:14 May 09, 2013
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H1859.IH
H1859
pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS