REPORTING REQUIREMENT. Section 119(k) of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Authorization Act of 1994,¹ now codified at 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq, subsection 5116(k), requires the Secretary of Transportation to submit a report to Congress covering the training grants program administered by the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) for fiscal years 1993-1996:

"...Such report shall identify the ultimate recipients of training grants and include a detailed accounting of all grant expenditures by grant recipients, the number of persons trained under the grant programs, and an evaluation of the efficacy of training programs carried out."

Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) grant awards were first made in FY 1993. A report covering the first year's planning and training grants was submitted to Congress in March 1994. It addressed grants awarded to 47 States, the District of Columbia, 3 Territories and 7 Indian tribes. This report covers fiscal years 1993-1996 and references grants awarded to all 50 States, the District of Columbia, 5 Territories, and 23 Indian tribes.

GRANTS PROGRAM SCOPE. The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 1990, the first major reauthorization of the 1974 Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, established the HMEP grants program. It was intended that these grants: enhance implementation of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA)²; encourage a comprehensive approach to planning and training for emergency response situations; and increase State, local, Territorial, and Indian tribal effectiveness in safely and efficiently handling hazardous materials (hazmat) incidents.

HMEP grant awards are made for both planning and training; approximately 40 percent of funds are for planning and 60 percent for training. All grants go initially to the "grantee," i.e., one of the approximately eighty States, Territories, or Indian tribes who receive the funds. As provided by law, at least 75 percent of planning grant money must be passed through to Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), and 75 percent of training funds must benefit local firefighter, police, or other public responder groups. During the four fiscal years 1993-1996, approximately $26 million in total grant funds were awarded, with approximately $10 million for planning and approximately $16 million for training.

The HMEP grant program intentionally provides grantees considerable flexibility in choosing eligible funding activities, and in reporting their planning, training, and grant use data. This flexibility helps grantees focus on planning and training activities best suited to their needs, while minimizing resources spent on reporting. Since this successful allocation environment can result in non-comparable statistics among grantees, RSPA has in some cases extrapolated from reported data to estimate comparable statistics for all grantees.

The HMEP grant funds are appropriated by Congress, but they are offset through registration fees paid to the Department of Transportation (DOT) by shippers and carriers of certain hazardous materials. In FY 1996, approximately 26,000 shippers and carriers submitted a $250 registration fee to support the program.

KEY PROGRAM PROVISIONS. Government Agency Coordination--Federal Level. A key element of the HMEP grants program is coordination with Federal partners with interests in emergency preparedness. Initially conducted through the HMEP Interagency Coordination Group (ICG), coordination is now accomplished through the National Response Team (NRT) Training/Curriculum Subcommittee. The Subcommittee, chaired by DOT, develops and updates the training curriculum used by grantees. Curriculum Guidelines and the list of assessed courses encourage grantees to draw upon nationally recognized manuals and information sources for their planning and training instruction.

DOT and its interagency partners also developed allocation formulas for awarding planning and training grants to States, Territories, and Indian tribes. The formulas contain both fixed and variable components. Three percent (3%) of all available funds are allocated to Indian tribes. To ensure minimum levels of funding even for grantees with small populations, a base amount (adjusted annually for registration fee collections) is distributed to each State and Territory. Remaining funds are allocated on the basis of risk-related factors that include population, highway miles, hazmat truck miles, and hazmat fixed facilities within a grantee's jurisdiction.

Government Agency Coordination--State and Local Level. At the State and local level, an important element of planning and training activities involves deciding the extent to which emergency response should be undertaken as a regional effort. If, for example, LEPCs choose to plan, train, and prepare emergency response on a coordinated regional basis, that decision shapes preparedness planning and training strategies. The HMEP program encourages grantees to determine the regional response strategies best suited to their purposes.

Technical Assistance. The HMEP program provides important technical assistance to grantees and final grant recipients. For example, in the planning area, emergency preparedness includes properly assessing risks posed by the presence of hazardous materials, and the HMEP program provides guidance to grant recipients on how to conduct hazmat flow studies. In the training area, a comprehensive and updated course curriculum helps grantees design and select courses that maximize training effectiveness. Finally, various training, response, and technical manuals are made available to responders and LEPC members. DOT's Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG), in particular, is designed for responder use in actual incidents.

[NOTE: Figure 1: RESPONDERS TRAINED can be viewed on page  5 of the PDF to the right.]

Target Audience. Approximately 3.2 million firefighters, police, and other responders comprise the nation's emergency response community training need. The majority of these individuals are volunteers. Each year, the HMEP grants program helps train an estimated 120,000-130,000 responders, with a total of approximately 456,000 having received training during fiscal years 1993-1995. Figures for 1996 and 1997 are also expected to show an estimated 120,000 - 130,000 responders trained in each of those years. Summary Figure 1 shows major categories of personnel trained.³ Given turnover in the response community, plus the need to periodically retrain current members, efforts to expand responder coverage continue.

PROMISING SAFETY RESULTS. The numbers of prepared communities and trained response officials are two indications of HMEP grants program effectiveness. Another critical measure is how well local emergency response capability has actually improved. It is difficult to separate the results of Federally funded programs from those attributable to a community's overall planning, training, and financial efforts. Still, it is possible to identify situations where benefits such as reduced response time, injuries, or evacuation costs appear strongly related to the receipt and use of Federal grants. Various examples involving incidents from different parts of the country and different kinds of hazardous materials can be cited. One was a 1996 train derailment in Weyauwega, Wisconsin--a potentially disastrous incident in a community of 1,700 people who were forced to endure extended evacuation and delay costs but suffered no deaths or injuries. A bad situation was deftly managed and prevented from becoming worse. The report covers this and other examples.

CONTINUING DOT SUPPORT. Given the reach and success of the program to date and the unsatisfied hazmat emergency responder training need of over 3 million (Appendix F), the Department of Transportation has sought reauthorization to support the HMEP grants program. The Department continues to explore funding options that may narrow the gap between hazardous materials emergency preparedness needs and resources available at the Federal level.

² EPCRA is intended to ensure that communities throughout the U.S. are informed of chemical hazards facing them. (42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq.) EPCRA led to the formation of State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs) and more numerous Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs). HMEP grant monies for planning are channeled to the governor-appointed grantee (usually the State's emergency management agency or the SERC itself) and through to the various LEPCs.

³ The 456,000 figure covers FY 93-95, including 200,000 responders trained in FY 93 due to the availability of two years' funding in that single year. Annual figures for the various training categories, by State, Territory and Indian tribe appear in Appendix C of this report.

[NOTE: The attached documents are in PDF format, you can download a free viewer.  If you have problems accessing the PDFs or the information, report your problem for further assistance.]