Many mitigation measures that do not meet either the 15% or 100% rule prove to be cost-effective based on a Benefit-Cost Analysis. The Applicant must demonstrate through an acceptable benefit-cost analysis methodology that the benefits of the mitigation measure exceed the cost of implementing it.

A Benefit-Cost Analysis is based on a comparison of the total eligible cost for the mitigation measure to the total value of expected benefits to society.

Benefits include reductions in:

• Damage to the facility and its contents
• The need for Emergency Protective Measures
• The need for temporary facilities
• Loss of function
• Casualties (typically included only for earthquake, tornado, and wildfire mitigation)