Appeal Summary | Appeal Letter | Back
Second Appeal Summary
PA ID# 083-69070; City of Santa Barbara
DSR ID# 39763; Permanent restoration of pavement and sidewalk
Citation: Appeal Brief; Second Appeal; City of Santa Barbara; FEMA-1044-DR-CA; PA 083-69070
Cross-Reference: DSR 39763; Permanent Restoration; Lower East Side; Pavement Repair
Summary: Following the winter storms of 1995, in the City of Santa Barbara (City), FEMA prepared DSR 39763 for $50,933, which was reduced to $44,694, to provide funding for the permanent restoration of damaged pavement and sidewalk on the lower eastside of the City. The City claimed that the damage occurred when heavy equipment drove over saturated pavement subbase to remove debris from the storm. Upon review, it was determined that the damaged site is located a on road/street functionally classified as either a minor collector or a local road/street. Furthermore, it was determined that the damage to the pavement and the sidewalk was pre-existing and ineligible and the DSR was reduced to $0, pursuant to Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), section 206.223 (a)(1). On July 19, 1996, the State submitted the first appeal. The basis of the first appeal was that the damage was a result of heavy traffic during emergency response efforts, that the roads are not Federal-aid routes, and that the damage is eligible for FEMA funding. The Regional Director determined that the roads/streets were in fact non Federal-aid routes. However, the Regional Director denied the first appeal on December 17, 1996, because the original documentation supporting the DSR indicated that the damages were characteristic of long-term damage and not a direct result of the disaster, pursuant to 44 CFR 206.223 (a)(1). The State submitted the second appeal on March 24, 1997, again requesting full funding for DSR 39763. The basis of the second appeal is that the road/street damage was a direct result of necessary and prudent emergency debris removal work, required as a result of the disaster. In support of the appeal, the applicant refers to another 1044-disaster DSR, which was prepared for similar damages, and funded. Documentation provided in support of the original DSR indicates the damages were characteristic of long-term damages.
Issue: Were the damages to the pavement and the sidewalk solely a direct result of the disaster?
Finding: No. Documentation provided in support of the original DSR indicates that the damages, such as road patch failures and small "alligator" cracking, are characteristic of long-term exposure to the elements, combined with heavy traffic.
Rationale: According to 44 CFR 206.223 (a)(1), to be eligible for financial assistance, an item of work must be required as the direct result of a major disaster event.