PA ID# 067-51300-00; City of Olympia
PW ID# 934; Emergency Protective Measures
Citation: Appeal Brief; Two Second Appeals; City of Olympia; PA ID #067-51300-00; FEMA-1361-DR-WA
Cross-reference: PW 934; Versions 1 and 2; Emergency Protective Measures, Emergency Work; Emergency Response; City of Olympia; Fire and Medical; Immediate Threat
Summary: Emergency fire and medical service is normally provided to West Olympia from the Kenyon Street Station, with a second engine company responding from the headquarters station located near downtown Olympia. Following the Nisqually Earthquake, the City established a second fire engine company at the West Olympia Kenyon Station because of the loss of the 4th Avenue Bridge and Deschutes Parkway which reduced the response time for back-up responder support deployed from the headquarters station in East Olympia to West Olympia. The City determined that the augmented level of staffing on the west side of the City was needed to maintain the second responder level of fire protection and emergency medical service within the response times established before the earthquake. The City asserts that staffing the extra engine company and upgrading the paramedic unit conforms to FEMA policy for emergency protective measures and FEMA has allowed similar work to be eligible in the past. The State recommends that the temporary relocation costs of critical fire and medical services should qualify for reimbursement under FEMA Policy 9523.3. The City of Olympia (City) is requesting FEMA Section 403, Essential Assistance, reimbursement subsequent to the February 28, 2001, Nisqually Earthquake. The primary issue of both appeals is whether the secondary fire- and medical-responder units were required to meet immediate threats to life and property resulting from the earthquake.
Issues: 1. Is the overtime labor cost of operating secondary fire and medical response units eligible for funding?
2. Is the cost to upgrade the single paramedic non-transport unit eligible for funding?
Findings: 1. Yes. The City has demonstrated that an immediate threat existed to life, health, safety, or improved public or private property, as a direct result of the declared event.
2. No. The City has not demonstrated that the costs were incurred responding to immediate threats resulting from the earthquake.
Rationale: Section 403(a) of the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. § 5170b); 44 CFR §206.201(b); §206.225 (a)(3).