Per the PA Guide, at 34, a code or standard cannot be merely a recommendation, or allow for variances subject to discretionary enforcement by officials. Here, the Applicant argues the culvert upgrade is necessary to obtain permits. However, FEMA finds NWP conditions are subjective and allow for significant discretion in implementation. FEMA policy provides three ways that the Agency may deem HM measures cost-effective. Here, the HM measures do not satisfy any of the cost-effective prongs, as the proposed work is more than 100 percent of the repair cost estimate, and the Applicant has not provided a benefit cost analysis with a benefit cost ratio of 1.0 or greater.

The Applicant has not demonstrated that its requested change in SOW is required by codes or standards, or is eligible for Public Assistance funding as HM. Accordingly, this appeal is denied.

Stafford Act § 406(e)(1)(A). 44 C.F.R. § 206.226. PA Guide, at 34, 40, 125-126. DAP 9527.4, Construction Codes and Standards, at 2; DAP 9526.1, Hazard Mitigation Funding Under Section 406, at 1-3, Appendix A; BCA Reference Guide, at 2-5. Pawnee (Cty.), FEMA-4225-DR-NE, at 3; Town of Warwick, FEMA-4020-DR-NY, at 6; Pulaski Cty., FEMA-4144-DR-MO, at 6.