Damage to Applicant Owned Equipment

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1577-DR
ApplicantSanta Barbara County
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#083-99083-00
PW ID#2538
Date Signed2006-09-26T04:00:00

Citation:

FEMA-1577-DR-CA; County of Santa Barbara, PW 2538, Applicant Owned Equipment Damages

Cross-reference:

Eligible Work

Summary:

Between December 27 and January 11, 2005, the County of Santa Barbara (Applicant) experienced flooding from severe winter storms.

On January 9, 2005, a County Deputy Sheriff was patrolling in the heavy rain and flood conditions. At 3:00 a.m. the deputy was overwhelmed by floodwaters, lost control of the vehicle, and ended up in a ditch. Project Worksheet (PW) #2538 was written for $6,660.05 for the repairs to the vehicle. The PW was determined to be ineligible by FEMA’s initial and final reviewers stating that the damage to equipment was not related to eligible work and was due to a traffic accident, both of which are ineligible in accordance with FEMA Policy 9525.8, Damage to Applicant Owned Equipment, Part E, Section 7, item number 3. The Applicant’s first appeal contends the deputy was performing eligible duties to protect public health and safety. It was during this time that the patrol vehicle encountered the flooded freeway causing the accident. The Applicant states that low visibility and freeway conditions made the floodwater in the freeway unavoidable. Region IX denied this appeal in accordance with Policy 9525.8 stating the vehicle was not performing eligible work and was damaged due to a traffic accident. The Applicant’s second appeal dated March 7, 2006, submits insurance documentation demonstrating that the vehicle was not covered by insurance and the deputy’s statement that he was performing eligible work at the time of the damage. The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services supports the Applicant’s appeal for $6,935.62.

Issues:

Are applicant owned equipment repair costs eligible when the equipment is damaged by the disaster?

Findings:

Yes.

Rationale:

44 CFR § 206.223(a)(1); Recovery Policy 9525.8, Damage to Applicant Owned Equipment.

Appeal Letter

September 26, 2006

Mr. Paul Jacks
Governor’s Authorized Representative
Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
3650 Schriever Avenue
Mather, California 95655

Re: Second Appeal – Santa Barbara County, PA ID# 083-99083-00, Damage to Applicant Owned Equipment, FEMA-1577-DR-CA, Project Worksheet 2538

Dear Mr. Jacks:

This is in response to your letter dated April 25, 2006, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of Santa Barbara County (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) decision to deny reimbursement of $6,953.62 for the Applicant’s cost to repair a Deputy Sheriff’s patrol car.

From December 27 through January 11, 2005, the Applicant experienced flooding from heavy winter storms. A County Deputy Sheriff was patrolling a flooded highway to identify hazards, rescue stranded motorists, and respond to calls from the dispatchers when he was overwhelmed by a “wall of water caused by flooding on the roadway.” The deputy lost control of the vehicle and came to rest in a drainage ditch.

The Applicant incurred costs of $6,953.62 for repairs to the vehicle. The FEMA Project Officer determined that the cost of $293.47 to replace the alternator and battery was not eligible because those items did not appear to be damaged by the accident. Accordingly, FEMA prepared Project Worksheet (PW) #2538 for $6,660.05. Following an internal review of the PW, FEMA determined that the entire cost was not eligible for funding because the damage to the equipment was not related to eligible work and was caused by a traffic accident. This decision was made in accordance with FEMA Policy 9525.8, Damage to Applicant-Owned Equipment, Part E, Section 7, item number 3.

The Applicant’s first appeal dated August 31, 2005, contends the deputy was performing eligible duties to protect public health and safety. It was during this time that the patrol vehicle encountered the flooded freeway causing the accident. The Applicant states that low visibility and freeway conditions created conditions where the water in the freeway was unavoidable. Region IX denied the appeal based on FEMA Policy 9525.8, Part E, Section 3, which states that one of the specific examples of ineligible damage to applicant owned equipment is for “Damage to equipment that is not related to performing eligible work, e.g., damages due to traffic accidents (even though en route to perform eligible emergency work), damage as the result of operator error, or vandalism.”

The Applicant’s second appeal dated March 7, 2006, submits insurance documentation as evidence that the vehicle was not covered by insurance and the deputy’s statement that he was performing eligible work at the time of the damage. The Applicant contends the accident was not traffic related because there was no other vehicle involved. The Applicant further argues, “The result of the accident was caused by water and debris from adjacent creeks flooding over the freeway.” The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services supports the Applicant’s appeal for $6,935.62.

The Applicant has submitted the insurance policy for the sheriff department’s vehicles. All patrol cars have a deductible of $10,000 per vehicle. Since the damages to the subject vehicle are $6,953.62, the Applicant did not receive benefits from the insurance company.

The deputy sheriff was performing eligible work during a declared disaster and the accident was caused by water and debris generated from the disaster. Therefore, the damage is eligible for funding. By copy of this letter, I am requesting that the Regional Director prepare a PW for $6,935.62 for the repairs to the vehicle.

Please inform the Applicant of my decision. My determination constitutes the final decision on this matter as set forth in 44 CFR § 206.206.

Sincerely,

/ s /

John R. D’Araujo, Jr.
Director of Recovery

cc: Karen E. Armes
Acting Regional Director
FEMA Region IX

Last updated