BTW, this disaster WAS declared an 'Incident of National Significance.'
ALL "catastophic events" are Incidents of National Significance.
Your cite to page 43 et seq (is the 61st page of the PDF - darn annexes start new page numbering scheme, ugh) basically summarize the implementaion of the Annex, which I cited.
Neither the summary not the annex provides for a federal override of state control, where state control is in place.
Page 52 (PDF page 70), third paragraph in the first column, recites "In certain emergencies involving Federal primary responsibility, the Stafford Act allows the President to provide emergency assistance without a Governor's request. Appendix 5 provides an overview of the request process under the Stafford Act."
Appendix 5 starts at page 91 (PDF page 109). It contains no support for the principle of wresting control from the governor.
All that being said, the legal framework is complex enough, and loaded with enough terms, that the DEMs will spin spin spin - but they cannot spin away the fact that they (the governor) have proactively DEFENDED their control over the relief effort. They can't defend what they don't have, ergo they have control, and wanted to keep it.
The net result of the proposition you advance would be that these same whiners could now whine that "The President had the power to take control away from us, and he should have." Hardly a mark of competence, eh?
If you want to more specifically support your point, perhaps you would cite the phrases in and application of the Stafford Act that clarify the meaning of, "In certain emergencies involving Federal primary responsibility, the Stafford Act allows the President to provide emergency assistance without a Governor's request." Does than mean he can send money? Can take over police power without a governor request when the governor is capable of communicating a request? What excatly does that phrase mean?
I apologize for asserting that. I didn't read the whole thread, and only picked up your response to my post.
Here is another description of the process, also on the DHS National Response Plan website.
Emphasis on Local ResponseAll incidents are handled at the lowest possible organizational and jurisdictional level. Police, fire, public health and medical, emergency management, and other personnel are responsible for incident management at the local level. For those events that rise to the level of an Incident of National Significance, the Department of Homeland Security provides operational and/or resource coordination for Federal support to on-scene incident command structures.
Proactive Federal Response to Catastrophic Events
The National Response Plan provides mechanisms for expedited and proactive Federal support to ensure critical life-saving assistance and incident containment capabilities are in place to respond quickly and efficiently to catastrophic incidents. These are high-impact, low-probability incidents, including natural disasters and terrorist attacks that result in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the population, infrastructure, environment, economy, national morale, and/or government functions.
I note the use of the word "support" in "expedited and proactive Federal support," and not the word "takeover."