DOVER, N.H. – New rules for distributing federal homeland security grants are expected to mean less money for northern New England.

The new system distributes grants based more on risk and need than on guaranteed minimums or population. The change follows several years of criticism that states have wasted some of their money and cities such as New York and Washington have gotten short shrift.

Sen. Judd Gregg, chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on homeland security, supports the change, even though it is likely to cut grants to New Hampshire.

“There is a serious need to concentrate the bulk of federal resources on the areas most at risk of a possible act of terrorism,” Gregg, R-N.H., said in a statement.

But some colleagues are disappointed, including Maine Republican Susan Collins, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Collins is worried about funds for first responders.

Under the previous system, every state received a guaranteed minimum. The rest was distributed based on population.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said a formula he wrote means states still will get a minimum share of funding for first responders. That said, police, fire and rescue agencies in the state will get less, partly because of President Bush’s budget, Leahy said.

“The new Bush budget not only downgrades the needs of our police, fire and rescue squads but also those of our National Guard units,” Leahy said. “It’s a mismatch for the real needs of our communities.

“Last year we successfully fought the much deeper cuts the White House wanted to take from first responders, and we’ll have our hands full again as we debate next year’s budget.”

In the past under the old formula, New Hampshire and Maine consistently ranked at or near the top 10 states for most grant dollars per capita.